NewzIntel.com

Category: Fisheries

  • MIL-OSI Global: Money laundering plays a key role in every part of the illegal drugs industry – here’s how it works

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Mark Berry, Lecturer In Criminology, Bournemouth University

    R Mendoza/Shutterstock

    The global illicit drugs trade is estimated to be worth at least half a trillion US dollars each year. Drugs such as cocaine, methamphetamine and heroin generate large revenues all along their supply chains, from where the products (and precursor materials) are grown or made – principally Colombia and Bolivia, China, Afghanistan, and the “golden triangle” of Myanmar, Laos and Thailand – to wherever the finished drugs are consumed.

    Earnings in the illicit drug trade are variable. Few people will make the kind of money that once put the Mexican former cartel boss Joaquín “El Chapo” Guzmán on the Forbes list of global billionaires. But while drug “kingpins” are the industry’s biggest individual earners, they do not hold the majority of the drug money that is generated throughout the global supply chain.

    Despite their frequent glamorisation in film and TV portrayals, drug cartels are basically international logistics companies. They work with distributors in different countries who deliver the drugs to regional wholesalers, who in turn supply the local retailers (dealers) who sell drugs to individuals.

    Everyone along the supply chain takes their cut, with most people making much more modest incomes than the millionaire drug traffickers of narcocorrido lore. In our interviews with illicit drug entrepreneurs in the US and UK, we routinely spoke to sellers whose incomes ranged from pocket money to providing a moderately comfortable life.


    Illicit drug use is damaging large parts of the world socially, politically and environmentally. Patterns of supply and demand are changing rapidly. In our longform series Addicted, leading experts bring you the latest insights on drug use and production as we ask: is it time to declare a planetary emergency?

    Around 70% to 80% of the overall revenue generated by illicit drugs is shared among the many wholesale and street-level dealers in destination countries such as the UK and US, where the price per gram is at its highest. How this money moves and is used to sustain the illicit drug trade should be an important part of any worthwhile counter-narcotics strategy. But it rarely is.

    Professional money launderers

    The people and organisations responsible for laundering drug revenues – that is, transforming them into untraceable money that can easily be spent, or into assets that can be held or sold – often exist under the radar of law enforcement and the media.

    Yet the ways illicit drug money is laundered are hardly a mystery. Techniques include wire transfers to offshore bank accounts, investments in shell companies or deposits in cash businesses, and buying foreign currencies or (to a small extent) cryptocurrencies. In addition, the straightforward physical transportation of cash across national borders is an often-used method known as a “bulk cash transfer”.

    The largest players in the illicit drugs industry, such as international cartels, national distributors and large-scale wholesalers, often use professional money launderers – some of whom have seemingly reputable jobs in the financial sector. In one recent case, US financial regulators fined TD Bank US$3 billion (£2.4 billion) – a record penalty for a bank – for facilitating the laundering of millions of dollars of drug cartel money.

    Over six years, more than 90% of the bank’s transactions went unmonitored, enabling “three money laundering networks to collectively transfer more than US$670 million through TD Bank accounts”. Then-US attorney general Merrick Garland commented: “By making its services convenient for criminals, [TD Bank] became one.”

    Video: CBC News.

    Some money laundering networks are as global as the drug supply chains they service. In June 2024, the US Department of Justice’s (DoJ) multi-year “Operation Fortune Runner” investigation saw LA-based associates of Mexico’s Sinaloa drug cartel charged with conspiring with money-laundering groups linked to a Chinese underground banking network. According to the IRS’s head of criminal investigation, Guy Ficco:

    Drug traffickers generate immense amounts of cash through their illicit operations. This case is a prime example of Chinese money launderers working hand-in-hand with drug traffickers to try to legitimise profits generated by drug activities.

    According to the DoJ, “many wealthy Chinese nationals” barred from transferring large amounts to the US by the Chinese government’s capital flight restrictions seek informal alternatives to the conventional banking system – including via schemes to launder illicit drug money. The DoJ explained how this works:

    The China-based investor contacts an individual who has US dollars available to sell in the United States. This seller of US dollars provides identifying information for a bank account in China, with instructions for the investor to deposit Chinese currency (renminbi) in that account. Once the owner of the account sees the deposit, an equivalent amount of US dollars is released to the buyer in the United States.

    These arrangements are not unique to Chinese actors. Similar arrangements occur throughout the world, including schemes to leverage the black market peso exchange and the Hawala international money transfer system.

    Professional launderers are both creating and exploiting vulnerabilities in the global financial system. Such corruption allows suspicious transactions to occur without proper checks or oversight. This not only reduces transparency in the financial system but erodes public trust in it.

    How cartels launder their money

    International drug cartels and national wholesalers have a smaller markup on their transactions, compared with retailers. But because they are responsible for moving enormous quantities of illicit drugs, they still generate millions of dollars worth of revenue.

    The most prolific known drug distributors in US history, Margarito Flores Jr and his twin brother Pedro, delivered billions of dollars worth of cocaine, heroin and methamphetamines to their US and Canadian wholesale clients between 1998 and 2009. They were working for Guzmán and Ismeal “El Mayo” Zambada García, then leaders of the Sinaloa cartel, as well as the Mexican Beltrán Leyva brothers whose cartel bore their surname.

    Today, Margarito Flores Jr trains law enforcement across the US in the methods he and his brother used to traffic drugs and run their business. In January 2015, both men were sentenced to 14 years for drug trafficking – Margarito Flores Jr would later reach out to one of this article’s authors (R.V. Gundur) after reading his book, Trying to Make It: The Enterprises, Gangs, and People of the American Drug Trade, which includes a comprehensive account of the Flores crew’s activities.

    In a subsequent interview, he told us: “My brother and I estimate that, if we added up all of the money we sent back to Mexico over the decade we sold drugs, it was probably more than US$3.5 billion.”

    The billions they remitted to Mexico were used by Guzmán, Zambada and the Beltrán Levya brothers not only to expand their drug businesses, but to corrupt powerful figures such as Mexico’s former secretary of public security, Genaro García Luna.

    García Luna, who was Mexico’s highest-ranking law enforcement official from 2006 to 2012, was sentenced to nearly 40 years in prison in October 2024 after being found guilty of taking millions of dollars in bribes from the Sinaloa cartel, as well as enabling the trafficking of more than a million kilograms of cocaine into the US. Flores explained to us:

    It’s important to understand that corruption impacts people at all levels of government. Our payoffs included local police and other people in the community, up to higher-positioned people in government. Lots of that money ended up funding the violent conflicts between cartels.

    While there has been widespread coverage of cartel drug money being laundered through high-profile businesses and banks such as Wachovia and HSBC, Flores suggested that “the money involved in the drug trade is a lot more than anybody really can understand”. The reason for this, he said, is that it’s very hard to track the flow of hard cash via lorries, boats, planes and even drones. Flores told us:

    It’s a misconception that everyone who makes a lot of money in drugs or other illegal business makes an effort to launder their money. My brother and I held much of what we earned in cash. We knew the government could eventually take everything [else].

    The twins were right: in time, that’s exactly what the US government did.

    ‘Everyday’ money laundering

    In our study of money laundering strategies used by people involved in the illicit drug trade in the UK and US, we found that street dealers do not typically undertake sophisticated laundering processes. Rather, they spend their cash on food and other routine living expenses. One independent UK drug dealer, whose experience was typical of many, used the money earned from his cocaine sales to buy groceries and pay bills for himself and his daughter.

    Spending money, even small amounts, gained through illegal activities is a money laundering offence – albeit one that is seldom prosecuted. As a result, these everyday activities that return illicit drug money to the legal economy are not well accounted for – even though the street value of drugs drives global market value estimates.

    Business-savvy street dealers can earn gross revenues that approach the earnings of high-paid white-collar workers. But they must disguise their earnings’ origins before they can spend them, of course, and various tactics are used to do this.

    Some dealers solicit close friends or family members to act as “strawmen”. These are people willing to put assets paid for by illicit drug money – such as cars, properties or even businesses – in their names on behalf of the dealer. Idris Elba’s character Stringer Bell in HBO’s The Wire was an accurate portrayal of someone investing in legal enterprises using illicit drug money.

    A guide to Stringer Bell’s character in The Wire. Video: Just an Observation.

    These strategies occur wherever illegal enterprise exists, and have done for well over a century. In the US, we interviewed wholesalers who had used family members to own houses and other properties on their behalf. This is done to mitigate against the risk of asset forfeiture should they be convicted of a crime. If an illicit enterprise can create a plausible beneficial owner who is not involved in crime, then the asset is harder to seize. This is why the Donald Trump administration’s recent suspension of beneficial owner oversight is problematic from a drug enforcement perspective.

    In liberal democracies, governments cannot investigate someone’s finances simply because they are related to criminals. The dirty money that is put into their accounts can also be disguised as legitimate income making it difficult to identify, although thorough investigations may uncover it.

    In the UK, we also talked to successful drug retailers who had set up local businesses in their own names. The EU’s law enforcement agency, Europol, has reported similar activities throughout Europe.

    Legal businesses are a common – and often hard-to-detect – vehicle to launder drug money. Bars, clubs, gyms, and hair, nail and tanning salons can be readily set up with drug money, as large cash infusions to establish a business are often not well scrutinised. These businesses are comparatively easy to run with significant cash flows, providing suitable cover for dirty money.

    For example, a beauty salon, especially one that offers high-value boutique services, could easily incorporate drug revenue into its financial accounts by reporting sales that do not occur. Tanning salons can be set up with little expense since they require only sunbeds and the rental of a property.

    Along with bars, clubs and salons, construction companies and restaurants stand out as other cash-intensive businesses with high volumes of transactions – characteristics that make good fronts for laundering money.

    It’s hard to spot a ‘dirty’ business

    There is no surefire way to tell whether a business is a laundering front. While some may look like enterprises struggling to stay afloat, others develop into viable operations that eventually no longer need dirty money to sustain them.

    Some drug dealers incorporate laundering practices within their legitimate jobs. Tradespeople such as electricians or plumbers, for example, can launder money by generating invoices for fake jobs, then reporting the income on their tax returns.

    In both the UK and US, tax authorities are not charged with evaluating the veracity of the funds reported, and are generally satisfied once tax is paid. In other words, they generally trust declared income as proof of legal business activity. Moreover, they, along with the police, lack the resources to investigate these businesses for money laundering.

    Through their legal businesses, many drug dealers pay significant taxes on their illegal revenue, and thus contribute to the economy.

    Paying income tax effectively renders this income laundered. It can be invested and used to set up other businesses, or to purchase cars and properties without suspicion. It can also bolster credit ratings, and improve access to legal financial services such as bank loans.

    Many small-time drug dealers start legal businesses in order to exit the illicit drug trade. We interviewed one cocaine dealer who had used his drug money to set up a retail electronics store; once it was successful, he stopped dealing. Similarly, the person behind a semi-legitimate nitrous oxide enterprise used his proceeds to set up a legitimate alcohol delivery service.

    Through self-laundering, these modest drug dealers transform their proceeds of crime into spendable cash – and may eventually leave criminality behind altogether.

    The (losing) battle against laundered money

    Across the world, anti-money laundering efforts against organised criminal gangs are notoriously ineffective.

    The Financial Action Task Force (FATF) – an intergovernmental organisation formed in 1999 to combat money laundering and the financing of terrorism – assesses financial regulators’ anti-money laundering controls all over the world. Countries designated as a risk that require monitoring are placed on the task force’s “grey list”, while severe, high-risk countries go on its “black list”. Being put on these lists can result in a withdrawal of international investment and implementation of sanctions by other countries.

    Although developing countries have often scored badly in their assessments, there has been some progress. While Kenya remained on the grey list in 2024, for example, it was found to have strengthened its measures to tackle both money laundering and terrorist financing. In the same year, though, Lebanon was added to the grey list over concerns on both counts.

    The FATF’s evaluation processes are designed to provide an objective assessment of whether a country has implemented its anti-money laundering and counter-terrorist financing recommendations. However, the success of the FATF’s anti-money laundering controls remains unclear.

    Video: The Financial Action Task Force.

    Often lost in the criminal financing narrative is the role of bulk cash transfers. Even in a world that is moving to cashless transactions, cash generally remains the primary currency of both the illicit drug trade and corruption.

    The biggest and most successful drug traffickers have significant cash reserves which are used to pay workers, replace drugs that are lost or seized, accrue assets, and bribe key officials.

    Reflecting on his former illicit enterprise, Margarito Flores observed: “For every kilo of cocaine or heroin or methamphetamine we sold in the US, at least a kilo of cash went back to Mexico.” For deals in Europe, Flores said: “Given the markup the further away you trade, the amount of cash sent back could be even higher – I would estimate it to be a kilo and a half.”

    Flores described the ineptitude of law enforcement in policing cash that was leaving the US:

    No matter how careful we were, my brother and I lost a handful of loads of drugs heading north [from Mexico into the US]. Heading south was different: we just had the money put on tractor trailers and had it driven it across the border. We never lost a dollar. That’s where politicians don’t pay enough attention. That cash lets traffickers keep doing business.

    Focus on the money as well as the drugs

    So long as demand for illicit drugs exists, the industry will continue – and the revenue it generates will be laundered.

    We believe that to curb the drugs trade, enforcement strategies need to go beyond simply capturing drugs and focus much more on capturing the money. Governments should go after reserves held not only by drug cartels but high-level distributors, such as those who replaced the Flores twins, and also wholesalers. People like these – comparatively high earners in destination countries – are the backbone of the illicit drugs trade.

    Transnational law enforcement should prioritise detecting and seizing bulk cash transfers. These high-volume proceeds underwrite the wellbeing of drug trafficking organisations. Digital tools, such as machine learning and artificial intelligence, can be developed to create new techniques to track and trace suspicious transactions, although they alone won’t solve all laundering problems.

    Corruption of officials also remains a problem. Governments need to ensure their officials are well paid and sufficiently monitored in their roles – be they working in government, border control, banks, police departments or prisons. Unfortunately, the US has shirked its leadership in global anti-corruption efforts with the recent halting of the enforcement of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, which bans the bribing of foreign officials.



    Read more:
    Mexico’s drug corruption has more to do with US demand than crooked politicians

    Anti-money laundering efforts need to be consistently supported and required. Lamentably, the US has undermined its anti-money laundering toolkit by suspending the enforcement of beneficial ownership information reporting requirements. Establishing beneficial ownership helps financial institutions to identify parties that are hiding their financial interests, which can be an indication of money laundering or other criminal activity.

    Similarly, foreign investment in producer countries can strengthen their capacity to counter laundering by supporting intelligence infrastructure and improved training. Recent cuts to USAid and the reduction of US State Department efforts in these areas is another indication that the US will no longer lead in these domains.

    As cash businesses provide an easy mechanism for cleaning money, moving to a cashless society that uses digital transactions may help ensure that money is traceable. At the same time, cryptomarkets provide a minor, but potentially increasing, pathway to hiding dirty money digitally.

    Ultimately, we should recognise the decades-long “war on drugs” for what it is: a policy costing trillions of dollars that combined mass incarceration with insufficient public health investment, and which has harmed the very communities the illicit drug trade affects the most. It is a difficult balance, but the pathway forward needs to reorient the objectives regarding drugs: invest in people, then go after the money that keeps the cartels, distributors and wholesalers afloat.

    For you: more from our Insights series:

    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.

    Mark Berry received funding from the Dawes Trust for a prestigious PhD scholarship to undertake work that informs the contents of this article.

    R.V. Gundur received funding from the Economic and Social Research Council to undertake work that informs the contents of this article. He is also a professional member of the International Compliance Association.

    The authors wish to thank Margarito Flores Jr (kingpintoeducator.com) for his help with this article.

    – ref. Money laundering plays a key role in every part of the illegal drugs industry – here’s how it works – https://theconversation.com/money-laundering-plays-a-key-role-in-every-part-of-the-illegal-drugs-industry-heres-how-it-works-251288

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Wyden, Merkley Reintroduce Legislation to Help Recreation and Wildfire Prevention Work in SW Oregon and Near Molalla River

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator Ron Wyden (D-Ore)
    March 06, 2025
    Washington D.C.— – U.S. Senators Ron Wyden and Jeff Merkley today reintroduced their legislation that would boost recreation opportunities in Southwestern Oregon and on the Molalla River in Clackamas County, while ensuring wildfire prevention work in both regions.
    The senators’ Oregon Recreation Enhancement (ORE) Act would create the Rogue Canyon Recreation Area and the Molalla Recreation Area, expand the Wild Rogue Wilderness Area, and prohibit destructive mining on pristine rivers in Southwestern Oregon.
    “Protecting our beautiful outdoor areas is central to Oregonians’ identities. By acting as good stewards to our public lands, we can both expand jobs in rural communities and preserve precious natural resources,” said Wyden. “This legislation is essential to boosting wildfire prevention and conservation projects that help the fight against the climate crisis.”
    “These areas are among Oregon’s most breathtaking landscapes and are vital in supporting the state’s economy and in addressing climate chaos,” Merkley said. “Protecting these natural areas not only fuels a robust outdoor recreation economy, but is also a part of who we are as Oregonians. It is our responsibility to protect these lands and headwaters from degradation and mining, increasingly intense wildfires, and other damaging impacts. Our lands and waters are our greatest resource, and it’s on us to ensure they are passed down to future generations in good shape.”?
    The ORE Act would make the following three designations:

    Molalla Recreation Area: Establish a 30,000-acre recreation area on the banks of the Molalla River in Clackamas County next to the Table Rock Wilderness Area.

    Rogue Canyon Recreation Area: Establish a 98,000-acre recreation area on the banks of the Rogue River in Southwestern Oregon next to the Wild Rogue Wilderness Area.

    Wild Rogue Wilderness Expansion: Expand the existing Wild Rogue Wilderness Area by about 60,000 acres. The federal land included within this expansion has been identified by federal land managers as land that should be protected and conserved.

    Each of these three proposed recreation and wilderness designations would require forest health, wildfire resiliency, and other wildfire prevention strategies in the region to continue.
    The ORE Act also would permanently prevent irresponsible mining on more than 100,000 acres of Forest Service land near the existing Kalmiopsis Wilderness Area. These areas are at the headwaters of several National Wild and Scenic Rivers, and support clean drinking water for thousands of Oregonians. After much public input and local consensus, the Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management issued a 20-year mineral withdrawal for this area in 2016. 
    A one-pager of the legislation is here.
    “As the owner of a recreation-based business, I appreciate Senator Wyden and Merkley’s leadership in reintroducing the Oregon Recreation Enhancement Act to protect the headwaters of our region’s finest rivers.” said Dave Lacey owner of South Coast Tours in Gold Beach. “My community—and my business—depends on the clean water, salmon, and thriving ecosystems that earn our place its reputation as ‘America’s Wild Rivers Coast.’”
    “Across the State from the Gold Beach to Canby the drinking water for the vast majority of Oregonians comes from our public lands,” said David Moryc of American Rivers. “By championing these common sense, locally supported conservation measures Senators Wyden and Merkley are ensuring that the water we drink will remain clean and low-cost for future generations.”
    “My outfitting business offers four-day rafting trips on the Wild and Scenic Illinois and Rogue Rivers—two of the most extraordinary river experiences in the country. These trips not only provide visitors with unforgettable outdoor adventures but also drive significant economic support to local hotels, restaurants, and shops. The Rogue River watershed is a cornerstone of Southern Oregon’s economy, and preserving its pristine headwaters is essential for the future of these iconic river journeys.” said Zach Collier of Northwest Rafting Company. “I commend Senator Wyden and Senator Merkley for their dedication to protecting Southwest Oregon’s rivers and for championing the Oregon Recreation Enhancement Act to ensure these remarkable waterways remain safeguarded for generations to come.”
    “Our entire team is extremely appreciative of Senator Wyden’s and Merkley’s ongoing efforts to conserve and protect the remarkable wild steelhead and salmon-bearing rivers of southern Oregon,” said Ken Morrish of Fly Water Travel. “As international fly fishing travel experts deeply involved with the world’s premier anadromous fisheries, we know from experience that Southwest Oregon’s rivers are world class and just how worthy of protection they are.”
    “As an outfitter on the Rogue, we believe the river is unmeasurable. Wild rivers are crucial in providing not only healthy communities but also prosperous economics for these communities,” said Kait Bailey of Humble Heron Fly Fishing. “These rivers allow an experience for people to care for the outdoors and pass it on to future generations. The ORE Act will help spread tourism, income for businesses, outdoor school opportunities, family fun filled activities, and most importantly it will help bring people to OREGON. Humble Heron Fly Fishing thanks Senators Ron Wyden and Jeff Merkley for standing with their constituents and re-introducing legislation to protect the wild Rogue River.”
    “Southwestern Oregon has an extraordinary cast of National Wild and Scenic Rivers, including the Rogue, the Illinois, and the Smith,” said Tim Palmer, author of Field Guide to Oregon Rivers and America’s Wild and Scenic Rivers. “These are absolutely some of our nation’s finest rivers, and so protecting their headwaters is key to conserving their outstanding values—from crystal clean water, to robust salmon runs, to some of the very best recreation our region has to offer, including swimming, fishing, camping, and boating. I appreciate that Senators Wyden and Merkley have been strong leaders in conserving Oregon’s treasured rivers so that future generations can enjoy the waterways that make our state so special.”
    “Southwest Oregon’s Wild and Scenic rivers are truly national treasures,” said Ann Vileisis, President, Kalmiopsis Audubon Society, Port Orford. “They provide not only clean drinking water for local communities but also salmon runs that draw anglers from afar and many other outstanding recreation opportunities. We are grateful for Senator Wyden’s and Merkley’s leadership and longstanding efforts to conserve and protect the cherished wild rivers of our ‘Wild Rivers Coast.’”
    “The botanically-rich Rough and Ready Creek watershed is truly unique and beloved by all who know it—it’s also the headwaters of the exceptional National Wild and Scenic Illinois and Rogue rivers,” said Barbara Ullian, resident of Grants Pass, Oregon since 1947. “We’re thankful that Senator Wyden and Senator Merkley are working to protect our region’s very special rivers and the clean drinking water they provide to downstream communities.”
    “Growing up in rural Josephine County, I spent a lot of time on the Rogue and Illinois Rivers as a kid, and now my son is enjoying these rivers, too. They are amazing places where people can swim, boat, fish or just sit and watch the beautiful clear waters flow” said Allee Gustafson, Klamath Siskiyou Wildlands Center, Central Point. “Rivers are central to the social and economic fabric of rural communities in southern Oregon. Thanks to Senator Wyden and Senator Merkley for their leadership to protect these renowned but threatened watersheds and the amazing outdoor experiences that they provide.”
    The full text of the bill is here.

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: 03.06.2025 Senate Approves Coast Guard Authorization Act Unanimously

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Texas Ted Cruz

    WASHINGTON, D.C. – U.S. Senator Ted Cruz (R-Texas), Chairman of the Senate Commerce Committee, Ranking Member Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.), and Sens. Dan Sullivan (R-Alaska) and Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.), introduced the Coast Guard Authorization Act of 2025, and it passed the Senate by unanimous consent. The bipartisan measure was agreed to at the end of last year by leaders of both the Senate Commerce Committee and House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, but the session ended before final passage could occur. The bill authorizes funding to strengthen the Coast Guard’s ability to protect our borders, facilitate maritime commerce, unleash American energy, bolster deterrence efforts, and improve support for Coast Guard personnel and their families.
    Sen. Cruz delivered the following remarks on the Senate floor regarding the Coast Guard Authorization Act of 2025:
    “The United States Coast Guard is essential to protecting our Nation’s maritime borders from threats like illegal drugs, illegal immigration, and transnational crime.  The Coast Guard saves American lives and ensures that commerce flows smoothly at our ports.  
    “The Coast Guard Authorization Act of 2025 is bipartisan legislation that Senator Cantwell and I negotiated and agreed to with House Transportation & Infrastructure Committee Chairman Sam Graves and Ranking Member Rick Larsen.  It authorizes funding to bolster the Coast Guard’s critical missions of border security, facilitating maritime commerce, and enforcing the rule of law in domestic and international waters.
    “I want to draw attention to several key provisions in this bill.
    “Last year, the Coast Guard seized over 106 metric tons of cocaine.  Unfortunately, cartels are now using technology like miniature, remote-controlled drone ships to smuggle drugs across our maritime border.  Without this legislation, the Coast Guard would remain unable to prosecute criminals using these remote-controlled, autonomous vessels.  
    “The Coast Guard Authorization Act of 2025 expands the Coast Guard’s and Customs and Border Protection’s use of cutting-edge tools like Tactical Maritime Surveillance Systems, which are blimp-based radar systems—to find and interdict drug runners, poachers, and human traffickers at the Texas-Mexico border in the Gulf of America, in San Diego, Key West, and San Juan Puerto Rico.  
    “I ask my colleagues to stand with me and support President Trump’s vision of protecting our borders from drugs and illegal immigrants and of building ships to revitalize the Coast Guard’s fleet.  I urge my colleagues to support the Coast Guard Authorization Act.”
    Read the bill text here.
    BACKGROUND
    The Coast Guard Authorization Act of 2025 makes several enhancements to the Coast Guard’s operations by:

    Expanding efforts to interdict and prosecute illicit drug trafficking. The Maritime Drug Law Enforcement Act will now ensure the United States can prosecute drug traffickers who utilize remote-controlled or autonomous vessels to smuggle illegal narcotics.

    Protecting personnel from illicit drug exposure. All Coast Guard installations will be required to maintain a supply of medication to treat opioid overdoses, including fentanyl.

    Upgrading icebreaker fleet. The bill directs the Coast Guard to establish a replacement plan for aging icebreaking tug fleets and expedite the delivery of new icebreakers.

    Addressing grossly negligent operations of vessels. With the steady rise of vessel traffic on U.S. waterways, individuals who operate a vessel in a grossly negligent manner and cause serious bodily injury will be held accountable with appropriate criminal penalties.

    Mapping Arctic maritime routes. The Arctic Circle has strategic economic and military significance for the United States. This provision would promote American interests in the region and improve emergency response capabilities and infrastructure needed to support vessel traffic.

    Increasing the Coast Guard’s deterrence capabilities. With increased instances of illegal fishing operations and illicit drug trafficking in the South China Sea, it is critical that the United States Coast Guard and Taiwan Coast Guard Administration conduct joint and integrated maritime operational and leadership training to combat violations of maritime law and threats to our national security.

    Improving the livelihoods of Coast Guard families. The Coast Guard will grant a cash allowance to pregnant officers to purchase maternity-related uniform items, allow the Coast Guard to acquire more housing, and identify Coast Guard duty locations in which there is a misalignment between the basic allowance for housing and prevailing housing costs.

    Refining procedures to prevent and respond to sexual assaults. The Coast Guard will establish confidential reporting for sexual harassment, strengthen protective orders for victims, and provide access to the Department of Defense’s Defense Sexual Assault Incident Database. The bill also overhauls the transfer process for victims and allows victims of sex-related offenses to request temporary separation.

    Requiring the Coast Guard Academy to study its safety infrastructure. The Coast Guard Academy will be required to modify policy related to sexual assault matters, install electronic locking mechanisms to secure cadet rooms and common spaces, and update the Academy’s Board of Visitors to ensure better Congressional oversight and engagement.

    Adding units to the Coast Guard’s Junior Reserve Officers’ Training Corps (JROTC) program. The bill will increase the number of units from 14 to 20 to better recruit and retain a robust and well-qualified Coast Guard officer corps.

    With about 2,000 Coast Guard personnel stationed in Texas, the Service’s men and women have contributed significantly to Texas’s border security and economy. The Coast Guard Authorization Act of 2025 will specifically help Texans by:

    Allowing the Coast Guard to use a proven, performance-driven approach for inspecting foreign flag tank vessels.An overwhelming majority of the Coast Guard’s gas carrier compliance exams are conducted in Texas. Performance-driven examinations will allow the Coast Guard to work more efficiently and advance President Trump’s direction to ‘Unleash American Energy.’

    Establishing safety zones for space activities and offshore energy development activities. Texas is home to a robust commercial space and energy industry, and this authority allows the Coast Guard to establish safety zones in support of space launches and recovery, as well as offshore energy development activities, ensuring more job growth and greater energy security.

    Streamlining the process of data sharing between the Coast Guard and U.S. Customs and Border Protection.Tactical maritime surveillance systems (TMSS) at the Coast Guard Station on South Padre Island will be used for the purposes of data integration and information sharing with U.S. Customs and Border Protection to aid in the detection and interdiction of illegal aliens and fish poachers.

    Upgrading Coast Guard facilities to support border security operations and future aviation missions. The bill specifically requires studies on improving Texas-based Coast Guard Stations on South Padre Island, Port Aransas, and Port O’Connor, as well as the Coast Guard Air Station in Corpus Christi.

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI Security: Federal Jury Finds Owner and Captain of Southern Comfort Guilty of Seaman’s Manslaughter and Fraud

    Source: Office of United States Attorneys

    MIAMI – This week, a federal jury in Fort Pierce found Dustin Sean McCabe, 49, of Ocala, Florida, guilty of seaman’s manslaughter (both in his capacity as boat owner and boat captain of the vessel named Southern Comfort), lying to the Coast Guard, and committing Covid-19 pandemic relief fraud.

    South Florida Assistant U.S. Attorneys presented the following evidence at trial: In early March 2020, McCabe purchased a 48-foot boat, named it Southern Comfort, and falsely claimed on Coast Guard forms that he intended to use the boat recreationally. The truth was that McCabe planned to use the Southern Comfort to run paid scuba charters. He refitted the boat for that purpose by removing the vessel’s main deck engine controls, among other things. 

    On March 28, 2020, McCabe took paying passengers on a scuba trip aboard the Southern Comfort, but things did not go well. During the day’s two scuba dives, the Southern Comfort experienced significant mechanical malfunctions that included one of the vessel’s propellers activating unexpectedly, the loss of steering, and the vessel running aground. One of the incidents involved the port side propeller engaging when the vessel was in neutral during the pickup of a diver, which led to the diver being sucked toward the propeller and narrowly escaping.     

    Despite the close calls, McCabe took more paying divers out the next day, on March 29, 2020, without reporting the prior day’s incidents to the Coast Guard, warning his passengers of what had occurred, or fixing the boat. Again, the port side propeller engaged while the boat was sitting in neutral over a dive spot. As the victim diver and her spouse boarded the vessel, the propeller sucked the victim towards it – as it had done to a diver the day before. This time, unfortunately, there was no narrow escape, only tragedy: The propeller sucked the victim into it, mangling and cutting her. It twisted her leg up in its shaft, holding her under water. A medical examiner testified that while the victim’s many deep chop wounds and leg fractures were not fatal on their own, they caused serious pain that contributed to the victim’s death by drowning.

    As a result of the March 29 death, McCabe was prohibited from operating the Southern Comfort. He was never again seen working at the marina. As federal prosecutors proved during trial, this did not stop McCabe from applying for two loans from the Covid-19 era Paycheck Protection Program (PPP) – a federal relief program meant to help small businesses financially survive the pandemic. To secure the loans (and later their forgiveness), McCabe falsely claimed in the applications that his business was operational and submitted fraudulent payroll information and fake tax documents to support the lie.

    Sentencing is scheduled for June 12 at 10 a.m. before U.S. District Judge Aileen M. Cannon. McCabe faces up to 10 years in prison for seaman’s manslaughter, up to five years for making false statements, and up to 20 years for wire fraud.

    United States Attorney Hayden P. O’Byrne for the Southern District of Florida and Special Agent in Charge Josh W. Packer of the Coast Guard Investigative Service (“CGIS”) Southeast Field Office made the announcement.

    CGIS Southeast Field Office investigated the case, with assistance from U.S. Coast Guard Marine Safety Unit Lake Worth and the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission Office of Law Enforcement.

    Assistant U.S. Attorney Zachary A. Keller, Coast Guard Special Assistant U.S. Attorney Tanner Stiehl, and Assistant U.S. Attorney Jacob Koffsky are prosecuting this case.

    You may find a copy of this press release (and any updates) on the website of the United States Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of Florida at www.justice.gov/usao-sdfl.

    Related court documents and information may be found on the website of the District Court for the Southern District of Florida at www.flsd.uscourts.gov or on http://pacer.flsd.uscourts.gov under case number 24-cr-80103.

    ###

    MIL Security OSI –

  • MIL-Evening Report: Trudeau’s record may be spotty, but his biggest accomplishment was a national child-care program

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Naomi Lightman, Associate Professor of Sociology, Toronto Metropolitan University

    As Canada prepares to close the book on the Justin Trudeau era, some will be happy to watch him go. But in Canada’s haste to see him out the door, let’s not forget his government’s significant achievements.

    His strong performance in the ongoing showdown with United States President Donald Trump, for example, may have led Canadians to view him in a distinctly more positive light.

    But what’s undoubtedly been his single greatest achievement — prodded in no small part by the NDP — was the introduction of a national child-care program: The Canada-Wide Early Learning and Child Care (CWELCC) system, colloquially known as $10-a-day child care.

    As scholars of social policy — as well as a mother and grandfather — we believe this program is the biggest improvement to Canada’s welfare state since the initial implementation of medicare in 1966-67, updated via the Canada Health Act in 1984.

    Somehow, however, amid all the negative Trudeau headlines, this major contribution has been seemingly forgotten.

    Gender equality

    Trudeau’s child-care program is a massive advancement for gender equality and should be celebrated by all women, parents and — more broadly — people who care about reducing social inequalities.

    By freeing parents — mostly women — from the need to stay home with their children or from having to rely on ageing and often frail grandparents, evidence suggests Canada will experience substantial benefits to children, parents and society as a whole.

    The program allows highly skilled and motivated workers to join the paid labour force and could also affect fertility decisions in some cases if, for example, families decide to have more children due to reduced child-care costs.

    Just as importantly, formal child care benefits children developmentally, particularly in the case of disadvantaged and single-parent households.

    In purely fiscal terms, study after study shows that a dollar invested in child care yields a greater financial return over a lifetime than any other expenditure of public funds.

    Massive uptake rates

    The CWELCC program committed more than $30 billion federally to support early learning and child care, with specific funds dedicated to Indigenous child care.

    To date, it has created 150,000 new spaces, with a goal of creating an additional 100,000 new spaces by March 2026. All provinces and territories have participated, with uptake rates among child-care centres starting at 92 per cent in Ontario and rising higher elsewhere across the country.

    Notably, the road to implementing national child care in Canada has neither been short or easy.

    In 2004, Liberal Prime Minister Paul Martin was unable to bring national child care to fruition, despite gaining bilateral child-care agreements with all 10 provinces.

    When Stephen Harper replaced Martin in 2006, among the first acts of his Conservative government was to cancel these agreements. Instead, he offered the Universal Childcare Benefit that delivered $100 per child to parents monthly, but did nothing to address the lack of available child-care spaces.

    It did, however, ensure that a rhetoric of “choice” and cash in hand for in-home care for children was prioritized over women’s equal participation in the labour market. Internationally, there is consistent evidence that care allowances offered in lieu of a publicly funded child-care services reinforce traditional gendered divisions of labour and reduce female employment rates.

    All provinces/territories signed up

    By contrast — and no small feat in terms of negotiation skills — Trudeau’s team was able to persuade each and every province and territory to sign an Early Learning and Child Care Agreement.

    Major reductions in child-care fees for eligible families followed, with all territories and four provinces at $10-a-day as of 2024 (with New Brunswick and Alberta only slightly higher, while Nova Scotia] will be at $10-a-day as of March 1, 2026.)

    Even in Ontario, where rates are higher, costs now average about $23 a day.

    Trudeau managed to carry out this program by starting his efforts early in his tenure, unlike with the dental and pharmacare initiatives, and building consensus across a diverse and often contentious Canadian landscape.

    Supply issues

    It’s not all roses, of course. Some Canadians are frustrated about the slow expansion of subsidized child-care spaces. And the program remains plagued by serious supply (availability) issues, especially in rural and remote communities.

    Early childhood educators still do not receive fair pay for the essential work they do, and staff retention is a serious issue.

    But as we look towards the next federal election, Conservative Leader Pierre Polievre has had little to say about the national child-care program except for vague references to “flexibility” and a suggestion about replacing it with tax credits. This should set alarm bells ringing across the country.



    Read more:
    The baffling indifference of Canadian voters to child-care proposals

    Fortunately, Trudeau has set up a framework that will be difficult to dismantle in the future. There has been massive buy-in from users, providers, funders and much of the general public.

    We urge whoever replaces Trudeau as prime minister to highlight what’s been accomplished in child care over the last few years, and to prioritize the further expansion of the program in the years ahead.

    This would be Trudeau’s proudest legacy.

    The authors 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.

    – ref. Trudeau’s record may be spotty, but his biggest accomplishment was a national child-care program – https://theconversation.com/trudeaus-record-may-be-spotty-but-his-biggest-accomplishment-was-a-national-child-care-program-251318

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-OSI Security: Countries unite to identify illegal fishing vessel via INTERPOL

    Source: Interpol (news and events)

    LYON, France – A joint effort by New Zealand, Australia and Norway to find a vessel suspected of illegal fishing has led to the publication of an INTERPOL Purple Notice to assist in identifying its location.

    An INTERPOL Purple Notice has been issued to find a vessel suspected of illegal fishing. Pictured is ‘Thunder’ as Wuhan N 4 in Singapore, October 2012.

    Thunder as Wuhan N 4 – bow view – Singapore October 2012

    Circulated to all 190 INTERPOL member countries the Notice, requested by New Zealand supported by the Australian Fisheries Management Authority (AFMA) and the Norwegian Directorate of Fisheries, also seeks information about the individuals and networks which own, operate and profit from the suspected illegal activities of the vessel, currently believed to be called ‘Thunder’.

    During the past two years, the vessel has operated under at least three different names and under several flags, in order to avoid detection of illegal fishing activities.

    In July 2012, Mongolian registration papers for a vessel called ‘Wuhan 4’ were issued; however in August 2012 the vessel was sighted in the North Indian Ocean under the name ‘Kuko’. In October 2012, the vessel was spotted at a Singapore shipyard under the name ‘Wuhan N 4’ and under a Mongolian flag.

    In April 2013, the same vessel requested access to a port in Malaysia under the name ‘Wuhan 4’ but when inspected a few days later in Indonesia, it was using the name ‘Thunder’ and with the Nigerian flag.

    “Thunder has been operating under a number of names and flags over several years and we believe this is being done to avoid been caught violating international laws and conventions,” said Gary Orr, Manager, Operational Coordination with New Zealand’s Ministry for Primary Industries.

    “Fisheries crime is not constrained by borders and is commonly carried out by transnational organized networks. Norway is deeply concerned about its global effects. We need an international, coordinated response to effectively tackle these networks, and I welcome the good cooperation we have established with Australia and New Zealand via INTERPOL,” said Norway’s Minister of Fisheries, Elisabeth Aspaker.

    AFMA’s Fisheries Operations General Manager Peter Venslovas said illegal fishing activities seriously undermine the sustainability of fisheries: “Ongoing cooperation between countries across the globe to combat illegal fishing is having a real impact and making it harder for these operators to make a profit.”

    It is possible that the owners of ‘Thunder’ have earned more than USD 60 million from its illegal fishing activities since it was blacklisted by the Commission for the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources (CCAMLR) in February 2006.

    The vessel is currently believed to be operating in the Southern Ocean around Antarctica where it may be fishing illegally for Patagonian toothfish, also known as Chilean Sea Bass, a highly sought after protected species.

    This is the third INTERPOL Purple Notice issued in connection with illegal fishing activities, with the first published in September this year at the request of Norwegian authorities for a vessel named ‘Snake’.

    INTERPOL’s Purple Notices are used to seek or provide information on modi operandi, objects, devices and concealment methods used by criminals.

    MIL Security OSI –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Cantwell-Led Coast Guard Reauthorization Bill Unanimously Passes Senate

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Washington Maria Cantwell
    03.06.25
    Cantwell-Led Coast Guard Reauthorization Bill Unanimously Passes Senate
    Bill would authorize USCG “Whale Desk” for additional 2 years to help ships steer clear of Puget Sound Orcas and other whales; Legislation would establish first-ever tribal advisor to increase collaboration with WA state tribes on native issues and conservation efforts
    WASHINGTON, D.C. – Today, the United States Senate unanimously passed the Coast Guard Reauthorization Act of 2025 that would reauthorize $30.45 billion for the U.S. Coast Guard for Fiscal Years 2025 and 2026. The bill was introduced last month by U.S. Senator Maria Cantwell (D-WA), ranking member of the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation and senior member of the Senate Finance Committee.
    The bill now heads to the House of Representatives for consideration.
    Ahead of the bill’s passage, Sen. Cantwell delivered a speech on the Senate floor:
    “The Coast Guard Authorization Act of 2025 provides the tools that our Coast Guard needs now to protect our shores, keep our maritime [industry] moving,” said Sen. Cantwell. “It includes [investments] in Base Seattle, the home port to our nation’s current icebreakers, the future of our heavy icebreaker fleet […] The bill also reauthorizes the Puget Sound Whale Desk for another two years, [which] helps ship steer clear of our cherished orca and whale populations, and it also increases collaboration between Washington tribes and the Coast Guard. And the bill invests in critical safety programs.”
    “Moving forward, we have more to do to support the Coast Guard. They needed our help with their assets, and they need access to shipyards,” she said.
    Among many important provisions, the legislation includes historic protections for service members from sexual assault and harassment, boosts workforce development programs and availability of affordable housing, increases funding to help the U.S. Coast Guard deliver on critical priorities such as icebreakers and 52-foot heavy-weather lifeboats, raises penalties for abandoned and derelict vessels, and encourages more collaboration with tribes.
    The legislation authorizes $14.93 billion for FY25 and $15.51 billion for FY26. The full bill text of the bipartisan U.S. Coast Guard Authorization Act of 2025 is available HERE. 
    Sen. Cantwell secured language for programs critical to Washington state in the legislation. Among those provisions, her bipartisan legislation:
    Expands Affordable Housing Opportunities: Allows the Coast Guard to acquire housing that is available both on the market and in new housing construction programs. This is particularly important in coastal areas — like Cape Disappointment, Grays Harbor, and Port Angeles — where Coast Guard families face a difficult time accessing affordable, quality housing due to competition with seasonal rentals and other challenges associated with remote units. This bill also expands the Coast Guard’s ability to enter into long-term leases for medical facilities, child development centers, and training facilities to expand access to services for Coast Guard families while reducing administrative overhead expenses and allowing for additional improvements to these facilities.
    Increases Federal Funding to Deliver on Icebreakers and Heavy Weather Lifeboats: The legislation increases authorized funding by 30% compared to 2024 appropriated funding levels, which will help the Coast Guard deliver on critical priorities such as polar icebreakers, 52-foot heavy-weather lifeboats, and other priority acquisition programs.
    Seattle will be home for the Coast Guard’s fleet of 3 polar icebreakers.
    Sen. Cantwell recently toured U.S. Coast Guard Station Disappointment, where the future fleet of heavy-weather lifeboats will be homeported to support search and rescue missions, which is critical to safety of people working in the fishing and maritime sector in Pacific and Grays Harbor counties. In 2023, Sen. Cantwell secured a downpayment of $12 million to replace the heavy-weather boats in the 2023 Appropriations Act.
    Creates the First-Ever Tribal Advisor: Creates a new senior position within the Coast Guard to advise the Commandant and other Coast Guard leaders on how the Coast Guard can work more closely with tribes. The new Special Advisor would also be charged with ensuring the Coast Guard upholds trust responsibilities to tribal governments, improving tribal engagement and consultation activities, and ensuring that tribes have a voice on Coast Guard programs that impact tribes including oil spill preparedness and response, fisheries oversight, and the protection of natural resources.
    Boosts Local Tribal Partnerships to Improve Conservation: Provides the Coast Guard with new authorities to support habitat conservation and other resilience projects with state, local, and tribal governments. This important new authority would ensure tribes and other organizations can partner with the Coast Guard to protect treaty fishing rights and maintain access to cultural and natural resources.
    Reauthorizes the Whale Desk: Extends the Whale Desk at Coast Guard Sector Puget Sound by two years, through FY2028. Authored by Senator Cantwell in the Coast Guard Reauthorization Act of 2022, the “Whale Desk” at Sector Puget Sound gives vessel operators and mariners near real-time data about the location of whales to reduce encounters that disturb whales, including noise pollution and ship strikes. The pilot program also includes a “hotline” where callers can report whale sightings in real time. The data collected will be valuable for researchers who track whale migration patterns.
    According to the Coast Guard, 75 whale sightings have been reported to the Sector Puget Sound Whale Desk since its opening in December 2023.
    Sen. Cantwell helped celebrate the launch of the Whale Desk in February 2024. Photos and videos are available HERE and HERE.
    Supports the Commercial Fishing and Maritime Industries: Continues to authorize the use of a satellite tracking system to mark fishing gear locations, which ensures gear is not lost and avoids potential damage by derelict gear. It also supports fishing vessels engaging in temporary towing operations as part of salmon hatchery development in Alaska.  The bill also creates new training and credentialing opportunities for qualified mariners, veterans, and the general public seeking to become mariners. It also expedites processing times for merchant mariner licensing documents to help close this critical workforce gap.
    Maps Arctic Maritime Routes: The Bering Sea is expected to see increased fishing, commercial, and other vessel traffic over the coming decades. As a key international trade and maritime route, this bill requires an analysis of projected traffic in the Bering Strait, and the emergency response capabilities and infrastructure needed to support this increased vessel traffic and prevent oil spills in the Bering Sea and the Arctic.
    Boosts International Pacific Cooperation: Requires the Coast Guard to develop a plan to increase international training opportunities in the Pacific, including with the Taiwan Coast Guard. This coordination will strengthen American relations, combat illegal fishing, and boost international security in the Pacific.
    Cracks Down on Abandoned Vessels: Improves oversight of derelict and abandoned vessels by requiring the Coast Guard to develop and maintain an inventory list of these vessels to improve tracking, management, and coordination between federal, state, tribal, and other relevant entities. It authorizes a new federal penalty of $500 a day for abandoning vessels.
    Abandoned and derelict vessels pose unique and costly threats to coastal communities and ecosystems by leaking pollutants and imperiling marine traffic. According to the WA Department of Natural Resources, DNR removed 319 derelict and abandoned boats from Washington state waterways between 2021 and 2023.
    Protects Personnel from Illicit Drug/Fentanyl Exposure: As the Coast Guard carries out important drug interdiction missions to stop the flow of illegal drugs, this bill requires all installations to maintain a supply of naloxone or similar medication to treat opioid or fentanyl overdoses or exposure by Coast Guard members and the public in search and rescue or response calls.
    Requires Stronger Sexual Assault and Sexual Harassment (SASH) Prevention and Response: The bill would establish or update numerous Coast Guard and Academy authorities and programs to improve reporting, oversight, prevention, and accountability related to sexual misconduct. These provisions were drafted in response to Operation Fouled Anchor, which revealed gross mishandling of sexual assault and sexual harassment cases of U.S. Coast Guard personnel.
    A full breakdown of these protections is available HERE.
    Supports Coast Guard Families Stationed in Washington:
    Creates the First Vice Admiral of Personnel: To support the more than 40,000 active service members, the bill establishes a new Vice Admiral leadership position solely focused on supporting the needs of personnel and their families, from housing to health care, investments in childcare, and improving recruitment and training programs.
    Jump Starts Hiring of Health and Family Service Providers Across Entire Service: Provides direct hiring authority to swiftly fill more than a hundred vacancies, including behavioral and mental health professionals, medical specialists, childcare service providers, housing supervisors, criminal investigators, and other positions to protect the health and wellbeing of Coast Guard members and their families. It also adds two new telemedicine rooms at the Coast Guard Academy.
    Improves College-to-Service Career Pathways: Updates the College Student Pre-Commissioning Program to allow more colleges and universities to participate and to increase recruitment of students interested in commissioning into a Coast Guard career. 
    Prepares Tsunami Evacuation Plans: Requires the development of tsunami evacuation and preparedness plans for Coast Guard units in tsunami zones, including across the West Coast and Pacific Northwest. It also requires the Coast Guard to consider vertical evacuation as a lifesaving option for Coast Guard members.
    Bolsters National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)
    Supports NOAA Corps Officers: To support the hundreds of NOAA’s commissioned officers, the bill makes improvements to personnel management, education assistance programs, pilot recruitment programs, and more. NOAA Corps members help manage maritime research, support disaster response, and monitor weather forecasting including hurricanes and atmospheric rivers, as well as performing other cutting-edge weather forecast and research needs.
    Modernizes NOAA Vessel Fleet: Authorizes replacement and modernization of the NOAA research vessel fleet and improves oversight of the fleet, which helps maintain our nation’s weather and scientific buoy network, conducts fisheries research, maps the ocean floor including in the Arctic, and supports other important oceanographic and conservation priorities.
    Removes Aging NOAA Vessels: Allows NOAA to use the proceeds of obsolete vessel sales to support the acquisition or repair of other NOAA vessels to help make the fleet more resilient in the future.
    Video of Sen. Cantwell’s speech on the Senate floor today is HERE; audio is HERE; and a transcript is HERE.

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI United Nations: FAO, IFAD and WFP Join Forces to Celebrate International Women’s Day 2025

    Source: World Food Programme

    Rome – The Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), the International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD) and the World Food Programme (WFP) together marked International Women’s Day 2025 at an event today, reiterating their strong commitment to the empowerment of women and girls, particularly in the context of the fight against hunger.

    The three UN Rome-based agencies met under this year’s theme, “For ALL Women and Girls: Rights. Equality. Empowerment” to underscore the importance of ensuring meaningful change and support that allows every person around the world to thrive. 

     

    International Women’s Day is a global day to commemorate and uphold women’s achievements and raise awareness about the challenges they face. This year marks the 30th anniversary of the Beijing Declaration and Platform for Action, the most widely endorsed blueprint for women’s and girls’ rights worldwide. 

     

    Since 1995, the world has seen progress for women and girls, notably the establishment of legal reforms that protect women from violence and discrimination, an increase in women’s representation in political and decision-making positions, strides towards women’s financial inclusion, and improved access to education and health facilities. 

     

    However, the global prevalence of food insecurity remains consistently higher among women than among men and the world is not on track to reach any of the global nutrition targets by 2030. 

     

    The Rome-based agencies come together annually for the International Women’s Day event to demonstrate their joint commitment to promoting equality and women’s empowerment which is crucial when it comes to tackling poverty and food insecurity, and building resilient and sustainable agrifood systems that benefit everyone. 

     

    “Women play a critical role in agrifood systems, yet they face persistent barriers to accessing resources, technology and opportunities. At FAO, we strongly believe that closing these gaps is not just a matter of fairness, but an economic imperative,” said FAO Assistant Director-General and Chief Scientist ad interim, Beth Crawford.

     

    “Women’s economic empowerment is crucial for a broad array of development goals and for ensuring their own resilience, the resilience of their communities, and more sustainable food systems,” said Gérardine Mukeshimana, IFAD’s Vice-President. “Investing in women is not just the right thing to do; it is an essential element for improving food security, reducing poverty, and achieving prosperity in rural communities.”

     

    “Women and girls are disproportionately affected by conflict and disasters,” said Valerie Guarnieri, WFP Assistant Executive Director. “WFP works to ensure they have access to nutritious food and to build their resilience to withstand future shocks. When we invest in women and girls, we nurture families and communities.  We can win the battle against hunger and malnutrition by supporting women to take the lead.”

     

    Ahead of International Women’s Day on 8 March, FAO, IFAD and WFP reaffirm their commitment to empowering women and girls worldwide with the objective of building a more resilient, and sustainable future for all. 

     

    FAO leads international efforts to defeat hunger and improve nutrition and food security. FAO provides policy and technical assistance to developing countries and countries in transition to modernize and improve agriculture, forestry, and fisheries practices. 

     

    IFAD invests in rural people, empowering them to enhance their livelihoods and strengthen their communities. By expanding market access, building resilience and fostering inclusive rural economies, IFAD aims to transform agriculture and food systems, enabling rural populations to overcome poverty and achieve sustainable development.

    WFP is the world’s largest humanitarian organization, saving lives in emergencies and using food assistance to build a pathway to peace, stability and prosperity for people recovering from conflict, disasters, and the impact of climate change. 

    MIL OSI United Nations News –

  • MIL-OSI Global: Trudeau’s record may be spotty, but his biggest accomplishment was a national child-care program

    Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Naomi Lightman, Associate Professor of Sociology, Toronto Metropolitan University

    As Canada prepares to close the book on the Justin Trudeau era, some will be happy to watch him go. But in Canada’s haste to see him out the door, let’s not forget his government’s significant achievements.

    His strong performance in the ongoing showdown with United States President Donald Trump, for example, may have led Canadians to view him in a distinctly more positive light.

    But what’s undoubtedly been his single greatest achievement — prodded in no small part by the NDP — was the introduction of a national child-care program: The Canada-Wide Early Learning and Child Care (CWELCC) system, colloquially known as $10-a-day child care.

    As scholars of social policy — as well as a mother and grandfather — we believe this program is the biggest improvement to Canada’s welfare state since the initial implementation of medicare in 1966-67, updated via the Canada Health Act in 1984.

    Somehow, however, amid all the negative Trudeau headlines, this major contribution has been seemingly forgotten.

    Gender equality

    Trudeau’s child-care program is a massive advancement for gender equality and should be celebrated by all women, parents and — more broadly — people who care about reducing social inequalities.

    By freeing parents — mostly women — from the need to stay home with their children or from having to rely on ageing and often frail grandparents, evidence suggests Canada will experience substantial benefits to children, parents and society as a whole.

    The program allows highly skilled and motivated workers to join the paid labour force and could also affect fertility decisions in some cases if, for example, families decide to have more children due to reduced child-care costs.

    Just as importantly, formal child care benefits children developmentally, particularly in the case of disadvantaged and single-parent households.

    In purely fiscal terms, study after study shows that a dollar invested in child care yields a greater financial return over a lifetime than any other expenditure of public funds.

    Massive uptake rates

    The CWELCC program committed more than $30 billion federally to support early learning and child care, with specific funds dedicated to Indigenous child care.

    To date, it has created 150,000 new spaces, with a goal of creating an additional 100,000 new spaces by March 2026. All provinces and territories have participated, with uptake rates among child-care centres starting at 92 per cent in Ontario and rising higher elsewhere across the country.

    Notably, the road to implementing national child care in Canada has neither been short or easy.

    In 2004, Liberal Prime Minister Paul Martin was unable to bring national child care to fruition, despite gaining bilateral child-care agreements with all 10 provinces.

    When Stephen Harper replaced Martin in 2006, among the first acts of his Conservative government was to cancel these agreements. Instead, he offered the Universal Childcare Benefit that delivered $100 per child to parents monthly, but did nothing to address the lack of available child-care spaces.

    It did, however, ensure that a rhetoric of “choice” and cash in hand for in-home care for children was prioritized over women’s equal participation in the labour market. Internationally, there is consistent evidence that care allowances offered in lieu of a publicly funded child-care services reinforce traditional gendered divisions of labour and reduce female employment rates.

    All provinces/territories signed up

    By contrast — and no small feat in terms of negotiation skills — Trudeau’s team was able to persuade each and every province and territory to sign an Early Learning and Child Care Agreement.

    Major reductions in child-care fees for eligible families followed, with all territories and four provinces at $10-a-day as of 2024 (with New Brunswick and Alberta only slightly higher, while Nova Scotia] will be at $10-a-day as of March 1, 2026.)

    Even in Ontario, where rates are higher, costs now average about $23 a day.

    Trudeau managed to carry out this program by starting his efforts early in his tenure, unlike with the dental and pharmacare initiatives, and building consensus across a diverse and often contentious Canadian landscape.

    Supply issues

    It’s not all roses, of course. Some Canadians are frustrated about the slow expansion of subsidized child-care spaces. And the program remains plagued by serious supply (availability) issues, especially in rural and remote communities.

    Early childhood educators still do not receive fair pay for the essential work they do, and staff retention is a serious issue.

    But as we look towards the next federal election, Conservative Leader Pierre Polievre has had little to say about the national child-care program except for vague references to “flexibility” and a suggestion about replacing it with tax credits. This should set alarm bells ringing across the country.



    Read more:
    The baffling indifference of Canadian voters to child-care proposals

    Fortunately, Trudeau has set up a framework that will be difficult to dismantle in the future. There has been massive buy-in from users, providers, funders and much of the general public.

    We urge whoever replaces Trudeau as prime minister to highlight what’s been accomplished in child care over the last few years, and to prioritize the further expansion of the program in the years ahead.

    This would be Trudeau’s proudest legacy.

    The authors 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.

    – ref. Trudeau’s record may be spotty, but his biggest accomplishment was a national child-care program – https://theconversation.com/trudeaus-record-may-be-spotty-but-his-biggest-accomplishment-was-a-national-child-care-program-251318

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Russia: “Our course is like a construction kit. We provide all the components for successful work in the Asian world”

    Translartion. Region: Russians Fedetion –

    Source: State University Higher School of Economics – State University Higher School of Economics –

    The new course Business and Management in Global Context: China and Asia began at ICEF in the second semester of this year. Doctor of Historical Sciences, Professor, Director of the Institute of Asian and African Countries at Moscow State University Alexey Aleksandrovich Maslov talks about the features of the course, the reasons for its creation and the practical focus of the classes.

    – Today, several courses dedicated to the modern development of Asia and the economy of China are taught at various faculties at the HSE. Alexey Alexandrovich, what is special about your course, what are its features?

    First, it is important to note that having multiple courses covering Asia from different perspectives is the right approach. One of the main problems with the modern education system is that most educational programs are traditionally Western-oriented. This applies not only to history, philosophy and culture, but also to practical disciplines such as business, entrepreneurship and law.

    Historically, educational trajectories have been built with an emphasis on interaction with Western markets. This vector is formed in school and continues at university. However, when faced with the need for intensive interaction with China and Asia as a whole, we were not quite ready for this. A large-scale restructuring of approaches to teaching is required, which is impossible within the framework of one course or even one university. Now the entire Russian education system is working on this task – after all, it is important to understand where the personnel comes from.

    That’s why it’s especially valuable that there are several different courses, each offering its own perspective on the issue. My course is about business and entrepreneurship in Asian countries. We look at purely practical aspects: we put ourselves in the shoes of someone who comes to China, India or Southeast Asia and tries to set up a business, both large and small. Together with the students, we go through all the stages: from cultural differences and the negotiation process to checking partners, investing and withdrawing investments from China or India. The course is based not only on theoretical observations, but also on solving practical problems.

    An important element of the course is the analysis of real cases of Russian and Western companies operating in the Chinese and Asian markets. We study both successful examples and cases of failures with multi-billion dollar losses in order to understand the reasons for successes and mistakes.

    The third key aspect is the development of practical recommendations for yourself and potential employers. After all, entering the Asian market is a long-term process that requires an assessment of the dynamics of the region’s development for years and decades to come. Perhaps, not China, but India, or, conversely, Vietnam, will be more promising.

    Our course is unique precisely because of this practical approach. It is not a business school in the classical sense, but combines case analysis with fundamental knowledge. Here, oriental studies expertise is integrated with practical issues of business and entrepreneurship.

    – ICEF is actively implementing a dual degree program with the Chinese university SWUFE, one of the largest Chinese universities specializing in training specialists in finance and business analytics. What is the most important thing a student should be prepared for when coming to study at a Chinese university? What recommendations and advice can you give to ICEF students who will go to study at SWUFE?

    It should be taken into account that despite the openness of Chinese universities to cooperation, many of them focus on ideological aspects. Students may find that lectures include presentation of Xi Jinping’s ideas. This is certainly important, but does not always provide the practical skills for which foreign students come. Therefore, the key task of every student who goes to study at a Chinese university is to learn how to extract the maximum useful information and not limit themselves to the official program.

    Secondly, you need to prepare yourself psychologically for studying in China. At first glance, everything looks perfect: modern campuses, comfortable dormitories, open teachers who speak good English. This creates the feeling that the learning process is going smoothly. However, in practice, some students note that they were sometimes more entertained than taught. This is a feature of the system: Chinese universities strive first and foremost to create a comfortable environment for foreigners, but do not always overload them with academic requirements.

    Therefore, it is important to take the initiative: actively participate in discussions, ask questions, find opportunities to communicate with Chinese students and entrepreneurs. Chinese education provides many opportunities, but a student must be able to use them. First of all, you need to consider studying at a Chinese university as gaining practical knowledge and making connections.

    You have to understand that China is a country that, on the one hand, is quite comfortable while you are studying there, but on the other hand, it is very strict in its disciplinary rules. And not only can you not skip classes, but you have to prepare, you have to understand that behind the Chinese friendliness there is a rather pragmatic approach. I know many cases when not only our Russian students, but also Western students were expelled from universities.

    The third point I want to emphasize is that in China, students have access to a huge amount of data that is inaccessible in Russia for various reasons.

    These are statistical databases, business databases, the ability to check Chinese partners, and so on. Take advantage of this to learn how to work with a large array of information. Unlike Western business schools, where after graduation your connections with the educational office are maintained – including access to the library – in China, unfortunately, this is not the case.

    Another important point. If you are going to work with Asia in the future (not necessarily with China), you can continue your studies there in a master’s degree, in postgraduate studies. If you have such an intention, then pay attention to the universities of Hong Kong, Macau and others of this Asian world.

    – How will this course help ICEF graduates navigate their careers? At our regular meetings with potential employers, we constantly hear that “specialists in Asia or the East are needed.” But this sounds too vague and abstract.

    30-40 years ago, the main interest in Asia was shown mainly by historians, philologists, writers, cultural scientists, philosophers. This interest continues today.

    But employers need people with practical skills. This primarily concerns the economic block: here our potential employers are the Ministry of Industry and Trade, the Ministry of Economic Development, various large financial and investment corporations. They want to get not just a person with knowledge of an oriental language or oriental culture, they want to get a person who understands how to make a project, how to build a deal, how to get out of a serious business situation.

    This specialist should not complete his studies later, having come to these organizations, but he himself should offer his ideas. Secondly, in addition to large organizations and corporations, we communicate with the middle level of business, which works with Asia on individual projects. For example, these are projects related to science, education, IT technology, artificial intelligence, which is rapidly developing in Asia.

    Building relationships, checking partners is also an important part of career prospects. And one more thing. You have to understand that you can’t “teach Asia” or “teach China”.

    To work, you need to know a very large set of knowledge from economics and history to culture and entrepreneurship. In this sense, we are trying to provide many useful components on the course – like a Lego constructor, from which the graduate’s potential career will be assembled. The main point that this program is set up for is early orientation to the market, to the employer.

    Upon completion of the program, graduates will have a clear idea of what and where they can do professionally.

    – The program is aimed at training specialists to work with the markets of China and Asia. Hundreds of Russian companies have already rushed there today. To what extent is the Russian market generally ready for such cooperation?

    We see a huge wave of interest in training specialists in Asian countries, in the broadest sense of the word, but, first of all, in China. About a dozen, if not more, such programs have now started on the Russian higher education market – from Moscow to the Far East. It is not difficult to create a program, it is difficult to find specialists who really know how to work with this region and build all the components.

    It is not enough to simply show, say, economic models or investment methods. It is important to show how to negotiate, how to conduct negotiations, what real difficulties a person may face in a country in the region. This follows exclusively from practical experience.

    One of the paradoxes that we see now is that despite the huge interest in working with Asian business, we do not have a single systematic textbook on business culture in Asia. Also, you will not find any serious developments on recommendations, for example, on creating enterprises in Asia, etc. In this aspect, despite the activity, the Russian market is only just forming.

    That is why our program is one of the pioneer programs.

    – So, the prospects for ICEF graduates, financiers and economists, in relation to Russian-Chinese business are opening up great? And not only in terms of our graduates going to work in China or India, but we are talking about working in joint intercountry enterprises and projects?

    Yes, that’s right. We need to know what difficulties real business faces and how we can solve them in this sense.

    The first difficulty is misunderstanding each other. It is not about language, linguistic understanding – Chinese or Vietnamese can be learned with some difficulty. This misunderstanding is psychological. That is why it is so important, first of all, to be able to establish contacts, communicate, tell the stories that our Asian partners are ready to hear, to be able to joke, to be able to get out of difficult situations with dignity. When you work in Asia, it is always a challenge, always a test. A test of psychological stability.

    Secondly, it is the ability to establish contacts at the enterprise or organization level. After all, very often – and this is the biggest problem – Russian business offers the Chinese to work in those areas and in the form in which China does not work: there is no such tradition, or the legislation does not allow it. In the same way, Chinese or Indian businessmen, when they come to Russia, offer things in the paradigm in which Russia does not work.

    Our task is to prepare a new generation of people who, on the one hand, can bring Russian business to Asia, serve it not only financially, not only economically, but also politically, and on the other hand, create joint projects with Asian partners, bringing them, on the contrary, to Russia and offering those options that are acceptable and understandable for Asian partners.

    In this sense, we sometimes really just talk from scratch about how the thinking of the Chinese, Indians or Vietnamese is generally structured.

    – Please give a couple of such examples of a complete discrepancy between a hypothetical Russian entrepreneur and an entrepreneur from India or China.

    Just recently, a large Russian company involved in biopharmacology entered China with a very good product. And the Chinese market was very happy to accept this product. But the company, following some of its own ideas, opens its headquarters in Shanghai, a very expensive and, of course, developed city in China, and hires a large staff. And suddenly it turns out that the cost of maintaining the business is such that, as they say, the game is not worth the candle. Because all the promised special conditions for reducing taxes, improving conditions and even additional financing from the Chinese side are valid in completely different zones, and not in Shanghai.

    All they had to do was study which zones in China make sense to open this type of company. Instead of growing and developing, this company spent almost a year re-registering in another tax jurisdiction, in another city, transferring its facilities and renegotiating the terms. This is a serious loss of market share.

    Another example. One of the Far Eastern Russian regions has repeatedly offered Chinese companies to come to their region and set up their enterprises there. The Russian side promised to allocate a site and capacities, and expected the Chinese partners to build a plant and a shopping center. At the same time, they relied on the right political trends – a turn to the East, interaction between the countries.

    For almost two years, all these proposals rained down on the Chinese, but nothing happened until we explained: China never comes to an empty site. China always comes to where there is already production, where there is already a market.

    China is ready to provide additional financing, if necessary – to buy out shares of companies, but China never creates its own production from scratch, even in the rarest cases. And as soon as we explained this point, it turned out that there is a small operating plant in the region with which it was possible to create a joint venture. Which was done – and at the beginning of 2025 this Russian-Chinese enterprise started working.

    There are examples when Russian companies, entering a country like India, seemingly very positively disposed towards Russia, without understanding the intricacies of Indian politics, without understanding what clans are operating there, lost literally millions and even billions of dollars. Clan and regional structures are very strong in India – and in this sense, without being part of these regional structures, it is dangerous to simply bring money there.

    – You teach how to look at each country in the Asian region separately, you analyze country specifics. But is China the largest market for Russian business or is there an alternative?

    It would be more correct to talk not about an alternative to China, but about a number of opportunities. China is indeed the largest market, but India has a larger population now and this market is more profitable for us. Other factors need to be taken into account – in particular, the product you want to launch.

    China, for example, is good at highly integrated manufacturing, where you need to produce everything from the first screw to the car. China has excellent logistics: it is convenient to export everything you need from there to any country in the world, but you pay the corresponding prices for this. China is far from the cheapest country. But you get not only a well-organized market, but also well-organized business processes.

    If, for example, we are talking about simpler production, less high-tech products, then Vietnam, Malaysia or Indonesia often produce the same as China, but at significantly lower prices. India is a region within which there are many Indias. And when discussing whether it is good or bad to cooperate with India, you need to understand which state, which tax jurisdiction you will be cooperating with.

    Tech startups and financial hubs are Hong Kong, Singapore, Malaysia. Complex manufacturing, microchips – China and Malaysia. Steel production, ship manufacturing, heavy metallurgy – this is partly China, partly Vietnam. If we are talking about where to supply, say, food products – and Russian food products are very popular – this is China, Indonesia, etc.

    Of course, this is not an alternative to China. No other country, or even a combination of countries, can compete with China in the mass of goods. But our entrepreneurs should understand that we do not live by China alone. Often, we have to create complex integrated production: part of the business is in China, part in Russia, and part, for example, in Malaysia.

    You need to have a matrix of these countries in your head. We teach that for each type of business, there is, to put it simply, its own country in Asia. Therefore, we need to look at Asia as one big market.

    I would also like to remind you that the countries of Southeast and East Asia are most often a free trade zone, a single tax-free zone, so it does not matter where you produce your products. For example, there is a small Russian liqueur production facility. Some of the liqueurs are produced in Thailand and the Philippines and supplied to China. It would seem, why not produce everything at once in China? Because it turned out that it is more profitable to make the drink in terms of production, in terms of the original components, not in China, but only to supply it there for sale.

    – Russia and China today focus on the development of new technologies, both in education, science and production. Can there be a technology transfer in this area and does it make sense to bring Russian technologies to the Chinese market?

    In fact, this is what is very much needed now. Because on the one hand, we have Russian-Chinese trade at different speeds, but it is developing, and last year we reached more than 245 billion dollars in trade turnover, which, it would seem, is not bad. But basically, the trade turnover is formed due to trade in oil, gas, food products, wood, wood processing. That is, as they say, first-stage products.

    It is very important for us to deepen the scientific, technical and high-tech component. And this is a big question. On the one hand, we really have brains and technology, on the other hand, China – and not only China, but many other countries – stubbornly do not want to go for what is called institutional cooperation. It is easier for them to invite a Russian specialist, a young guy from a regional research institute to China, give him a good salary, and he will work within the framework of the Chinese system.

    The development of institutional partnerships – when products are manufactured both in Russia and in China – is the first thing that needs to be done now. For example, Chinese laboratory equipment and Russian “brains”, and then all this is jointly brought to the market, including the market of third countries.

    It is also necessary to clearly understand that everything must be protected by patents and trademark protection. In China, there is a principle that is usually called first to file in English, that is, the first one to fill out the documents. Therefore, even if you have a patent registration in Russia, and you will bring this technology to the Chinese market, someone there can register it for themselves. Then you will not be able to use this patent or your trademark on the Chinese market. Patent protection, protection of technological inventions, secrets is another very important point.

    I don’t know of a single case where Russian inventors have managed to bring their technologies to China directly. But it often happens differently. A joint Russian-Chinese enterprise is created, for example, in a high-tech zone, and in a year or two all this is developed to an industrial model, and then Russian and Chinese colleagues jointly bring it to the Chinese market.

    We did not invent this. Both Americans and Europeans acted this way in the Chinese market. Therefore, we must abandon all thoughts about being able to single-handedly push through the Chinese market and make a technological transfer, this is almost impossible. The same is true in the opposite direction.

    I have not yet seen any real examples of high-tech transfer from China coming to Russia and being implemented. And this is really necessary.

    For example, the Chinese auto industry, which is present in Russia today. Behind the Chinese auto industry, no matter how you feel about it, there are huge technological developments. From artificial intelligence to assembly of units. And theoretically, it is more profitable for us not to buy ready-made cars, but to create production on Russian territory, so that Russian engineers, Russian workers, and business process specialists can be trained, so that, ultimately, we can gain some unique technological experience.

    So far, as we see, China is not going for this on a large scale. And this is precisely the serious shortcoming. I think there are two reasons for this.

    The first reason is that if you can sell the product, why sell the patent, China believes. And in this sense, it is right. And the second point, it seems to me, is that we also lack specialists who could seriously work on the Asian market, specifically in the field of science and technology.

    – Alexey Alexandrovich, thank you very much for the conversation. We are confident that the course “Business and Management in a Global Context: China and Asia” will be in demand and will bring real benefits to both ICEF graduates in terms of careers and the country’s economy as a whole.

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

    MIL OSI Russia News –

  • MIL-OSI United Kingdom: UKAEA and F-REI sign collaboration in robotics research

    Source: United Kingdom – Executive Government & Departments

    Press release

    UKAEA and F-REI sign collaboration in robotics research

    A memorandum of cooperation has been signed by UK Atomic Energy Authority (UKAEA) and the Fukushima Institute for Research, Education and Innovation (F-REI).

    Dr Koetsu Yamazaki (F-REI) and Prof. Rob Buckingham (UKAEA) at MOC signing – Image Credit United Kingdom Atomic Energy Authority

    The United Kingdom Atomic Energy Authority (UKAEA) and the Fukushima Institute for Research, Education and Innovation (F-REI) have signed a memorandum of cooperation (MOC) on joint research in robotics and autonomous systems. 

    The MOC fosters UK-Japan collaboration between the government-funded organisations, enhancing joint research opportunities and advancing science and innovation in key technical areas, such as: 

    • Robotics and autonomous systems: supporting nuclear decommissioning, operations in challenging environments and advanced manufacturing 

    • Facility management and collaboration: sharing best practices in research facilities, harnessing a culture of innovation and commercialisation 

    • Talent and skills: initiatives to drive partnerships and support talent and skills development. 

    UKAEA’s Executive Director, Prof. Rob Buckingham, commented: “We are delighted to collaborate with F-REI, as both organisations share a strong commitment to advancing science and innovation in key technical areas, including robotics and autonomous systems. UKAEA has established robust partnerships with leading Japanese organisations, and this collaboration marks an exciting opportunity to expand those connections. By leveraging our shared experience and expertise, I am confident we can further strengthen UK-Japan engagement across government, industry, and academia, driving cutting-edge advancements with real-world impact.” 

    F-REI’s President, Dr. Koetsu Yamazaki, remarked: “F-REI and UKAEA share complementary objectives in research, innovation, education, and commercialisation. The UKAEA’s extensive experience in developing productive research programmes, educational initiatives, innovation and commercialisation pipelines, and collaborative research facilities offers valuable lessons that can significantly benefit F-REI’s startup goals. We are also excited to enhance Japan’s scientific and technological capabilities and industrial competitiveness through this international collaboration.” 

    UKAEA’s mission is to lead the delivery of sustainable fusion energy and maximise the scientific and economic benefit. Established in 2014, UKAEA’s world-class robotics centre, RACE (Remote Applications in Challenging Environments), has been at the forefront of research and development in the deployment of robotics within extreme industrial environments where human intervention is challenging. Among RACE’s recent achievements is the successful development of next-generation robotics technologies for decommissioning through the LongOps project, funded by the UK’s Nuclear Decommissioning Authority (NDA), UK Research and Innovation (UKRI) and Japan’s Tokyo Electric Power Company (TEPCO). 

    UKAEA is a member of the Robotics and Artificial Intelligence Collaboration (RAICo) alongside the NDA, Sellafield Ltd and the University of Manchester. The collaboration accelerates deployment of robotics and AI to solve shared nuclear decommissioning and fusion engineering challenges. 

    F-REI, established by the Government of Japan in April 2023 under the Act on Special Measures for the Reconstruction and Revitalization of Fukushima, is dedicated to becoming a world-class core centre for creative reconstruction. F-REI embodies the dreams and aspirations of Fukushima and other parts of the Tohoku region, aiming to drive Japan’s scientific and technological capabilities and industrial competitiveness. The institute conducts research and development in the following five key areas:

    • Robotics
    • Agriculture, forestry, and fisheries
    • Energy
    • Radiation science, medicine, drug development, and industrial applications for radiation
    • The collection and dissemination of data and knowledge on nuclear disasters.

    The MOC was signed by Koetsu Yamazaki and Rob Buckingham on 4 March 2025 at UKAEA’s Culham Campus, UK.

    Updates to this page

    Published 6 March 2025

    MIL OSI United Kingdom –

  • MIL-OSI Global: What’s that microplastic? Advances in machine learning are making identifying plastics in the environment more reliable

    Source: The Conversation – USA – By Ambuj Tewari, Professor of Statistics, University of Michigan

    Microplastics are tiny bits of plastic that show up in the environment. Svetlozar Hristov/iStock via Getty Images Plus

    Microplastics – the tiny particles of plastic shed when litter breaks down – are everywhere, from the deep sea to Mount Everest, and many researchers worry that they could harm human health.

    I am a machine learning researcher. With a team of scientists, I have developed a tool to make identification of microplastics using their unique chemical fingerprint more reliable. We hope that this work will help us learn about the types of microplastics floating through the air in our study area, Michigan.

    Microplastics – a global problem

    The term plastic refers to a wide variety of artificially created polymers. Polyethylene, or PET, is used for making bottles; polypropylene, or PP, is used in food containers; and polyvinyl chloride, or PVC, is used in pipes and tubes.

    Microplastics are small plastic particles that range in size from 1 micrometer to 5 millimeters. The width of a human hair, for comparison, ranges from 20 to 200 micrometers.

    Most scientific studies focus on microplastics in water. However, microplastics are also found in the air. Scientists know much less about microplastics in the atmosphere.

    When scientists collect samples from the environment to study microplastics, they usually want to know more about the chemical identities of the microplastic particles found in the samples.

    Plastic bottles are often made of polyethylene, while food containers usually containe polypropylene.
    Anton Petrus/Moment via Getty Images

    Fingerprinting microplastics

    Just as fingerprinting uniquely identifies a person, scientists use spectroscopy to determine the chemical identity of microplastics. In spectroscopy, a substance either absorbs or scatters light, depending on how its molecules vibrate. The absorbed or scattered light creates a unique pattern called the spectrum, which is effectively the substance’s fingerprint.

    Spectroscopy can match a substance with its unique fingerprint.
    VectorMine/iStock via Getty Images Plus

    Just like a forensic analyst can match an unknown fingerprint against a fingerprint database to identify the person, researchers can match the spectrum of an unknown microplastic particle against a database of known spectra.

    However, forensic analysts can get false matches in fingerprint matching. Similarly, spectral matching against a database isn’t foolproof. Many plastic polymers have similar structures, so two different polymers can have similar spectra. This overlap can lead to ambiguity in the identification process.

    So, an identification method for polymers should provide a measure of uncertainty in its output. That way, the user can know how much to trust the polymer fingerprint match. Unfortunately, current methods don’t usually provide an uncertainty measure.

    Data from microplastic analyses can inform health recommendations and policy decisions, so it’s important for the people making those calls to know how reliable the analysis is.

    Conformal prediction

    Machine learning is one tool researchers have started using for microplastic identification.

    First, researchers collect a large dataset of spectra whose identities are known. Then, they use this dataset to train a machine learning algorithm that learns to predict a substance’s chemical identity from its spectrum.

    Sophisticated algorithms whose inner workings can be opaque make these predictions, so the lack of an uncertainty measure becomes an even greater problem when machine learning is involved.

    Our recent work addresses this issue by creating a tool with an uncertainty quantification for microplastic identification. We use a machine learning technique called conformal prediction.

    Conformal prediction is like a wrapper around an existing, already trained machine learning algorithm that adds an uncertainty quantification. It does not require the user of the machine learning algorithm to have any detailed knowledge of the algorithm or its training data. The user just needs to be able to run the prediction algorithm on a new set of spectra.

    To set up conformal prediction, researchers collect a calibration set containing spectra and their true identities. The calibration set is often much smaller than the training data required for training machine learning algorithms. Usually just a few hundred spectra are enough for calibration.

    Then, conformal prediction analyzes the discrepancies between the predictions and correct answers in the calibration set. Using this analysis, it adds other plausible identities to the algorithm’s single output on a particular particle’s spectrum. Instead of outputting one, possibly incorrect, prediction like “this particle is polyethylene,” it now outputs a set of predictions – for example, “this particle could be polyethylene or polypropylene.”

    The prediction sets contain the true identity with a level of confidence that users can set themselves – say, 90%. Users can then rerun the conformal prediction with a higher confidence – say, 95%. But the higher the confidence level, the more polymer predictions given by the model in the output.

    It might seem that a method that outputs a set rather than a single identity isn’t as useful. But the size of the set serves as a way to assess uncertainty – a small set indicates less uncertainty.

    On the other hand, if the algorithm predicts that the sample could be many different polymers, there’s substantial uncertainty. In this case, you could bring in a human expert to examine the polymer closely.

    Testing the tool

    To run our conformal prediction, my team used libraries of microplastic spectra from the Rochman Lab at the University of Toronto as the calibration set.

    Once calibrated, we collected samples from a parking lot in Brighton, Michigan, obtained their spectra, and ran them through the algorithm. We also asked an expert to manually label the spectra with the correct polymer identities. We found that conformal prediction did produce sets that included the label the human expert gave it.

    Some spectra, such as polyethylene on the left and polypropylene on the right, look very similar and can easily be confused. That’s why having an uncertainty measure can be helpful.
    Ambuj Tewari

    Microplastics are an emerging concern worldwide. Some places such as California have begun to gather evidence for future legislation to help curb microplastic pollution.

    Evidence-based science can help researchers and policymakers fully understand the extent of microplastic pollution and the threats it poses to human welfare. Building and openly sharing machine learning-based tools is one way to help make that happen.

    Ambuj Tewari receives funding from NSF and NIH. The microplastics project is funded by the “Meet the Moment” initiative of the University of Michigan’s College of Literature, Science, and the Arts. This initiative focuses on impactful research on pressing societal issues.

    – ref. What’s that microplastic? Advances in machine learning are making identifying plastics in the environment more reliable – https://theconversation.com/whats-that-microplastic-advances-in-machine-learning-are-making-identifying-plastics-in-the-environment-more-reliable-249075

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI United Kingdom: Statement: Attorney General Mark Temple KC responds to JEP headline story on legal spend06 March 2025 ​​​The JEP’s recent reporting on the Law Officers’ Department is inaccurate, misleading and actively undermines the LOD staff who work so hard to enforce law and order and keep our Island safe. It is disappointing… Read more

    Source: Channel Islands – Jersey

    06 March 2025

    ​​​The JEP’s recent reporting on the Law Officers’ Department is inaccurate, misleading and actively undermines the LOD staff who work so hard to enforce law and order and keep our Island safe. It is disappointing that the JEP published a Weekend Essay, the Headline to the JEP Weekend Edition (Law officers’ ‘obscene’ £1.6 million spending revealed’) and the Editor’s Column on Saturday 1 March 2025, all without first obtaining comment from the Law Officers’ Department (LOD).

    The headline figure of £1.6 million from October 2023 to September 2024 represents all the LOD’s external legal spend in a particularly demanding year.  This includes the unprecedented large investigations relating to the gas explosion at Haut du Mont and the sinking of the L’Ecume II fishing vessel, specialist Civil cases, Safeguarding cases, Mutual Legal Assistance cases, external Crown Advocates in local Jersey law firms, and major international financial crime cases which are vital to safeguarding the Island’s reputation as a financial centre.

    The time period also coincides with a huge increase in the numbers of Royal Court trials, particularly for offences involving Violence Against Women and Girls.  The LOD is improving prosecution and conviction rates for such offences but needs input from external lawyers specialising in such cases to achieve this.

    ​The vast majority of the LOD’s cases are advised on by LOD lawyers and staff without any instruction of external lawyers.  It is only in exceptional cases where there is a particular need for additional support or training that an external lawyer is also instructed. They do not write scripts for LOD Advocates to read but, where they are instructed, they may comment on drafts produced by LOD Advocates. 

    The JEP articles omit any mention of the fact that monies spent on external lawyers can be recovered from the opposing side in litigation or from the defendant in criminal cases, through confiscation or forfeiture orders, or through costs orders.  The LOD has recovered many millions which have been paid into the Criminal Offences Confiscation Fund or the Civil Asset Recovery Fund where they can be used for the projects for the benefit of the Island.  For example, the first major confiscation under the 2018 Forfeiture of Assets (Civil Proceedings) Law resulted in US$10 million paid into the COCF in 2019, and in 2020 the Doraville case resulted in US$5 million being retained for the Island.

    It is also wrong to suggest that there is no scrutiny of spending on external lawyers.  All spending is in accordance with the procedures set out in the Public Finances Manual.  Discounted rates are obtained for the work, the work is spread between providers to ensure competitive prices, the quality of the work is monitored.  The Department is subject to audit by the C&AG. 

    The LOD has also been subject to an annual on-site inspection by Lexcel since 2019, which is an independent quality assurance standard and to independent oversight by an Audit Committee set up in accordance with a recommendation from the C&AG.  The most recent Lexcel inspection report stated:  “It is clear to the assessor that the Lexcel standard remains fully embedded in practice and the standard runs through the heart of every aspect of the department’s functions resulting in a well-managed, cohesive and risk averse department.”

    The LOD does not have a Press Officer and was contacted by the JEP with a series of questions via the General Enquiries email box less than three hours before a deadline on a day when the Practice Director was away from the office.  We replied that we were unable to respond within the tight deadline but would reply the next week when the Practice Director returned to the office.  In view of the inaccuracies summarised above it is regrettable that the JEP chose to publish without waiting for any comment or input from the LOD.

    MIL OSI United Kingdom –

  • MIL-OSI: More than Eight out of Ten Dating App Users Want Platforms to Verify Age, Recency of Photos and Location

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    CHICAGO, March 06, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — While consumers rely on dating apps to find romantic partners, the vast majority would like to feel more confident that other users are representing themselves accurately. A new report from TransUnion (NYSE: TRU) found that 85% of women and 87% of men believe that dating platforms should verify user information such as age, recency of photos, and location.

    Consumers cited inconsistencies with how people portray themselves on their profiles compared to how they appear in person. The most common complaint among men and women was that pictures were inaccurate or misleading. Women were twice as likely as men to say people lied about their age, while men were more likely to report being the victim of a bait and switch scheme.

    For these reasons, more than three quarters of users are willing to undergo background checks—a finding consistent across gender, age and geographic segments. These findings and more are available in TransUnion’s latest report, The Paradox of Online Dating: Convenience vs. Connection.

    “Consumers place a high value on trust when interacting online,” said Cecilia Seiden, VP of TransUnion’s Communities and Marketplaces business. “Dating platforms have an opportunity to provide that assurance to their users, while increasing user loyalty in the process.”

    What personal information users want platforms to verify

      Age Recency of Photos Location Employment Income
    Women 79% 64% 59% 33% 30%
    Men 81% 61% 58% 28% 23%
     

    About a quarter of respondents said they would be willing to pay for their own background check, while nearly 40% expressed a willingness to pay for background checks for both themselves and potential dates. Only a minority of users (18% of female and 15% of male respondents) said that background checks should be included in their membership fee. Implementing this kind of premium feature would increase users’ confidence in their matches and create an additional revenue stream for platforms.

    Romance scams remain an issue
    In addition to the more benign misrepresentations or exaggerations, the report found a prevalence of fraud in the online dating experience. Across all demographics, at least 70% of dating app users said they were somewhat or very concerned about scams, indicating enhanced demand for trust and safety.

    More than a quarter (28%) of dating app users reported being victimized by catfishing. More than one in five (21%) had been victimized by romance scammers asking for money and phishing schemes to obtain more personal information.

    “Dating makes people inherently vulnerable, more than any other online interaction or activity, because people want to form a genuine connection,” said Seiden. “Dating platforms have the ability to leverage robust identity data to verify that someone is who they say they are. Doing so would not only offer financial protection against scams but would make it easier for people to put themselves out there in good faith and make the connection they’re looking for.”

    Dating platforms can increase confidence among users by incorporating identity verification tools, like TransUnion’s TruValidate™ line of solutions.

    To read the full dating report, The Paradox of Online Dating: Convenience vs. Connection, click here.

    About TransUnion (NYSE: TRU)
    TransUnion is a global information and insights company with over 13,000 associates operating in more than 30 countries. We make trust possible by ensuring each person is reliably represented in the marketplace. We do this with a Tru™ picture of each person: an actionable view of consumers, stewarded with care. Through our acquisitions and technology investments we have developed innovative solutions that extend beyond our strong foundation in core credit into areas such as marketing, fraud, risk and advanced analytics. As a result, consumers and businesses can transact with confidence and achieve great things. We call this Information for Good® — and it leads to economic opportunity, great experiences and personal empowerment for millions of people around the world. http://www.transunion.com/business

    Contact   Dave Blumberg
    TransUnion
    E-mail   david.blumberg@transunion.com
    Telephone   312-972-6646

    The MIL Network –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Storm Brings a Potpourri of Hazards to the U.S.

    Source: NASA

    A powerful mid-latitude cyclone delivered a potpourri of weather hazards as it worked its way across the United States in March 2025. Beginning on March 3, the low-pressure system fanned wildfires and blinding dust storms in the Southwest, spawned severe thunderstorms and tornadoes in the Southeast, fueled blizzards in the Great Plains and Midwest, and dropped heavy rain in the Northeast.
    Thick plumes of dust streamed across West Texas in this image, captured on March 4, 2025, by the MODIS (Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer) on NASA’s Terra satellite. Clouds of dust appear to originate from arid landscapes in northern Mexico and West Texas, a region that spans the Chihuahuan Desert, cattle ranches and cotton farms, and gas and oil fields.
    Exceptional drought has gripped West Texas for the past several months, according to the U.S. Drought Monitor. The lack of rain has parched vegetation and dried the land surface, making the region particularly susceptible to erosion and dust storms.
    Fierce winds and thick plumes of blowing dust led to traffic accidents, flight disruptions, school closures, power outages, and red and orange skies throughout the state and region, according to news reports. One particularly severe dust storm on March 3 sharply reduced visibility and contributed to a 21-car accident near Roswell, New Mexico.
    “This is a large event, but dust storms are typical in this region at this time of year,” said Santiago Gassó, a University of Maryland atmospheric scientist based at NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center. “Unfortunately, we’re seeing longer droughts in the southwestern U.S. and northern Mexico, so we can expect more of this type of event.”
    Tools powered by NASA data and satellites are available to meteorologists, scientists, and others tracking the storm. The Worldview browser hosts timely data and imagery from several satellites. A data viewer from NASA’s Short-term Prediction Research and Transition Center (SPoRT) provides access to rainfall, lightning, air quality, and other data, and NASA’s Global Modeling and Assimilation Office has tools for real-time weather analysis and reanalysis.
    One of the newer data products comes from an experimental aerosol detection algorithm that NOAA’s AerosolWatch team is developing. The algorithm makes it easier to distinguish between dust and smoke, both of which were present in the hazy plume over Texas on March 4, by merging data collected by the TEMPO (Tropospheric Emissions: Monitoring of Pollution) mission with ABI (Advanced Baseline Imager) observations from the GOES-19 satellite.
     

    “The combination of TEMPO with GOES is very promising,” Gassó said. “Both satellites make multiple observations each day, and given their combined observations at several spectral channels, we’re able to fully characterize smoke or dust in time, space, and concentration for the first time.”
    NASA Earth Observatory image by Michala Garrison, using MODIS data from NASA EOSDIS LANCE and GIBS/Worldview. Story by Adam Voiland.

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI United Kingdom: King scallop temporary closure decision

    Source: United Kingdom – Executive Government & Departments

    News story

    King scallop temporary closure decision

    Marine Management Organisation (MMO) has today announced its decision on a temporary closure to fishing with dredges for king scallops in ICES areas 7d and Lyme Bay (7e) in 2025.

    The decision, designed to protect stocks during spawning, is based on extensive analysis of the latest scientific and economic evidence, responses to a consultation last year and wider engagement with stakeholders. 

    The decision is for a temporary closure in 2025 in: 

    • ICES division 7d for UK and EU vessels over 10 m in length from 1 July to 30 September 2025. 

    • Lyme Bay area of 7e (ICES rectangles 29E6, 29E7, 30E6 and 30E7) for UK and EU vessels over 12 m in length from 1 July to 30 September 2025. 

    The latest scientific analysis reveals that the population levels and health of king scallops in the closure area are in a improved state than in preceding years and could support a shorter closure period to support spawning. 

    The length of the closure this year has also been designed to reduce risks of king scallop fishers moving more of their fishing effort to other grounds which may not be able to support the increase in fishing without potentially harming sensitive species.  

    This closure length has sought to balance the environmental needs of the spawning stocks, with the socio-economic impacts expressed by stakeholders during the 2024 extended closure.  

    MMO has continued to permit under 10m vessels to fish in 7d and under 12m vessels to fish in the Lyme Bay area of 7e.  This decision is based on levels of scallop landings observed from these vessels, which at existing levels do not introduce significant risk to the aim of protecting stocks, whilst considering the importance of the inshore fleet to the local communities. 

    The closure will be enacted through a licence variation. Further information on a summary of responses received and reasoning behind the decision is available here.

    Stakeholders can send questions to MMO’s Fisheries Management Team at sustainablefisheries@marinemanagement.org.uk

    Updates to this page

    Published 6 March 2025

    MIL OSI United Kingdom –

  • MIL-OSI Australia: Affinity Intercultural Foundation NSW Parliamentary Iftar

    Source: Australian Human Rights Commission

    It is really special to be here tonight supporting the important work of the Affinity Intercultural Foundation and the wonderful Ahmet Polat.

    Thank you to Minister Steve Kamper and Shadow Minister Mark Coure for co-hosting this dinner and for the bipartisan support behind it and the support of all parties present.

    Good evening to all MPs and community leaders.

    A couple of weeks ago the ASIO Director General, Mike Burgess, in his annual threat assessment, painted this concerning picture:

    Many of the foundations that have underpinned Australia’s security, prosperity and democracy are being tested: social cohesion is eroding, trust in institutions is declining, intolerance is growing, even truth itself is being undermined by conspiracy, mis- and disinformation.

    I agree with him and tonight, I want to talk about what human rights has to say and do on some of these big issues.

    We are of course meeting on Aboriginal land.

    I acknowledge Gadigal Elders and Ancestors and the Gadigal people’s ongoing culture and connection to country. I acknowledge their Eora Nation neighbours and all First Nations people present.

    I spent two years working at the Yoorrook Justice Commission, the first truth telling inquiry looking at historical and ongoing injustice against First Nations people in Victoria.

    It was a privilege for me, a non-Aboriginal person, to do this work. It profoundly changed the way I look at the world.

    The truth telling work Yoorrook is doing, alongside the treaty work of the elected First Peoples Assembly, is changing Victoria for the better.

    Victoria is engaging with First Nations people as equals to build a better understanding of our shared history and to negotiate how we can create a better future together.

    A future where First Nations people have control over the issues that affect their lives.

    Where First Nations families have access to quality education, housing and healthcare.

    Where First Nations communities are prosperous, where country is healthy and where culture and language is thriving.

    The work at Yoorrook also gave me a better understanding of the successes and failures of the modern human rights movement and the role it has played in the struggle for equality.

    The modern human rights movement emerged out of the horrors of World War 2. The international community came together and said, “Never Again”.

    In a remarkable period of innovation between 1945 and 1951, a new framework of international law and institutions was established to promote global peace, development and prosperity.

    The UN Charter, the Nuremberg trials, the Genocide Convention, the Geneva Conventions, the Refugee Convention and most of all, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

    Australia was closely involved in the Universal Declaration. An Australian, William Hodgson, was one of just nine people on the drafting committee led by the extraordinary Eleanor Roosevelt.

    Out of the nadir of mass slaughter and human suffering, these drafters created a document that should rightly be celebrated as one of the pinnacles of human achievement.

    Australia’s Foreign Minister, Doc Evatt, strongly supported the Declaration and was President of the UN General Assembly when it was adopted.

    The Declaration is said to be the most translated document in human history.

    It lists 30 rights that are essential for all of us to live a decent dignified life, no matter who we are or where we are.

    The right to be safe, to vote, to stand for elections, to peacefully assemble and protest, to an education and to an adequate standard of living including food, health and housing and more.

    These rights are the key to a good life for all.

    The blueprint for the kind of society we all want to live in.

    They reflect values like equality, freedom, respect, dignity, kindness, thinking of others and looking out for each other.

    In this way they are similar to the golden rule running through most of the world’s religions – treat others as you would want to be treated.

    When human rights are respected, our lives are better and our communities are stronger, healthier, safer and more prosperous.

    How is this relevant today and what’s it got to do with the rising intolerance we are seeing?

    The first article of the UN Declaration proclaims that all human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights.

    These simple words say to every one of us, no matter who you are, or where you are – you have value, you matter and you deserve dignity – because of the mere fact that you are human.

    The words are grounded in our common humanity.

    Regardless of our differences, we all are human.

    No us and them.

    We all bleed the same. We all love. We all suffer. We all experience hope, sadness, wonder and joy.

    Alongside the human rights treaties that followed it, the Declaration has played a key role in smashing ideas that some humans are worth less than others – a corrosive prejudice that gave rise to slavery, colonisation, eugenics, genocide and more.

    The words born free and equal may seem unremarkable today. And this fact speaks to one of the great successes of human rights.

    The Declaration and the treaties that followed it sparked huge changes in equality and inclusion for people and communities. Racial equality. Religious equality. Gender equality. Equality for gay, lesbian, bisexual, trans and intersex people.

    Of course big challenges remain on all these fronts.

    On racism, we have made great progress in the past six decades, dismantling the White Australia policy, passing the Racial Discrimination Act, welcoming millions of migrants from around the world and building strong and consistent support for multiculturalism.

    But progress is fragile and cannot be taken for granted.

    Racism has been rising in recent years.

    First Nations communities have seen a spike in the volume and hostility of racism during and after the Voice referendum.

    The racial inequality affecting their families and communities is highlighted by the lack of progress on so many of the Closing the Gap targets including child removal and imprisonment.

    And since 7 October 2023, underlying and persistent prejudice against Jewish, Muslim, Arab and Palestinian communities in Australia has intensified and is having a profound impact on so many.

    The repeated antisemitic arson attacks and the discovery of a caravan filled with explosives highlight the gravity of the threats to the Jewish community.

    And for Muslim communities, we have seen the recent assault of two Muslim women in a Melbourne shopping centre and a violent online threat made this week against a Sydney mosque referencing the 2019 Christchurch mass shooting that claimed 51 lives.

    As Special Envoy Aftab Malik has said, Islamophobia is endemic, normalised and underacknowledged in Australia.

    Racism creates stigma, shame and fear.

    It dehumanises people and makes them shed their culture and identity in public life.

    It denies people full participation in life and harms health and wellbeing.

    It corrodes our society and left unchecked leads to violence.

    So how do we respond?

    Late last year the Australian Human Rights Commission launched our national anti-racism framework that outlines a comprehensive, whole of society approach for eliminating racism in Australia.

    The framework has 63 recommendations ranging from education, to law reform, to greater diversity in media and tackling mis and disinformation.

    We hope that governments, business and civil society get behind the framework.

    I want to end by going back to the beginning and talking about erosion of the foundations of Australia’s security, prosperity and democracy.

    The values at the heart of Australia’s successful liberal democracy are human rights values.

    Our citizenship booklet, which seeks to define what is to be Australian, talks about our shared values such as the dignity and freedom of each person, equal opportunity and freedom of speech, freedom of religion and freedom of association.

    These values unite us.

    Living these values is not about picking the suffering that bothers you most.

    It is not about selectively applying human rights standards.

    To address rising intolerance and prejudice we need leaders like the people gathered in this room to stand up, to stand together to uphold the commitment to human rights which is at the heart of the Universal Declaration.

    Ramadan is a time for reflection, for caring for those less fortunate and for spiritual renewal.

    Events like tonight’s Iftar and the work of Affinity show us the way forward.

    Coming together to listen and engage in dialogue so that we can collectively forge a pathway forward towards peace and respect for each other, grounded in our human rights and common humanity.

    Ramadan Mubarak.

    MIL OSI News –

  • MIL-OSI: Annual Financial Report

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    6 March 2025
    2024 Results Highlights

    Admiral Group reports excellent 2024 performance with strong growth in customers, turnover and profit and good strategic progress

      31 December 2024 31 December 2023 % change vs. 2023
    Group profit before tax £839.2m £442.8m +90%
    Earnings per share 216.6p 111.2p +95%
           
    Dividend per share 192.0p 103.0p +86%
    Return on equity1 56% 36% +20pts
           
    Group turnover¹ £6.15bn £4.81bn +28%
    Insurance revenue £4.78bn £3.49bn +37%
           
    Group customers¹ 11.10m 9.73m +14%
    UK insurance customers¹ 8.80m 7.39m +19%
    International insurance customers1 2.10m 2.17m -3%
    Admiral Money gross loan balances £1.17bn £0.96bn +23%
           
    Solvency ratio (post-dividend)¹ +203% +200% +3pts

    1 Alternative Performance Measures – refer to the end of the report for definition and explanation.

        
    Over 13,000 employees will each receive free share awards worth up to £3,600 under the employee share schemes based on the full year 2024 results.

    Comment from Milena Mondini de Focatiis, Group Chief Executive Officer:

    “2024 was a remarkable year. We delivered an excellent result with a 28 per cent increase in turnover and 90 per cent increase in profit as we welcomed an additional 1.4 million customers to the Group.

    “To remain one of the most competitive insurers for the largest number of people is a priority for us. We have emerged from several rather challenging years so when we saw conditions improve we were quick to respond. We were one of the first to reduce prices in response to easing inflation and cut rates the day after the favourable Ogden rate change announcement.

    “The main driver of our exceptional performance was our UK Motor business. However, it is great to see UK Household, Admiral Money, and our French and US Motor businesses all report a double-digit profit.

    “We are excited to be building on the synergies within our businesses and products. We recognise that there is more that we can do to meet even more of the needs of our growing customer base. We continue to focus on being a great choice for customers by leveraging our expertise in pricing, claims management and underwriting, and making continuous improvements in our service.

    “I was pleased to see our MSCI ESG score upgraded to AAA and to have our science-based targets officially approved. We have published our Net Zero Transition Plan and, as one of the leading insurers of electric vehicles in the UK, we are supporting the transition to greener vehicles.

    “Thanks to our incredible colleagues we have achieved so much this year and rewarded them with an additional bonus for their commitment.

    “As we enter into 2025, the market is softening, and the outlook is uncertain. Our priority is to stay efficient and agile so that we can adapt as needed and deliver long-term growth by building on our strong foundations and talented team.”

    Comment from Mike Rogers, Admiral Group Chair:

    “Admiral has had an excellent year, demonstrating, once again, how its unwavering focus on doing the right thing for customers can deliver growth and long-term value to all its stakeholders.

    “Admiral is now helping even more people to look after their future with its wider range of products. The Group’s commitment to continuous evolution and innovation means that it is using new technologies to better anticipate and meet customers’ needs and achieve greater efficiencies in how it operates.

    “Although inflation has eased, political, regulatory and economic uncertainty remains. Admiral’s prudent and disciplined approach will be key to ensuring that the Group continues to achieve long-term sustainable growth and can be there for its customers, colleagues and communities when they need it the most.”

    Final Dividend

    The Board has proposed a dividend of 121.0 pence per share (2023: 52.0 pence per share) representing a normal dividend (65% of post-tax profits) of 91.4 pence per share and a special dividend of 29.6 pence per share. The final dividend will be paid on 13 June 2025. The ex-dividend date is 15 May 2025, and the record date is 16 May 2025.

    Management presentation

    Analysts and investors will be able to access the Admiral Group management presentation which commences at 10.00 GMT on Thursday 6 March 2025 by registering at the following link to attend the presentation in person, or access the presentation live via webcast or conference call: https://admiralgroup.co.uk/events/event-details/2024-full-year-results. A copy of the presentation slides will be available at the following link: Results, reports and presentations | Admiral Group Plc (www.admiralgroup.co.uk)

    Investors and Analysts: Admiral Group plc
    Diane Michelberger                                Diane.Michelberger@admiralgroup.co.uk

    Media: Admiral Group plc    
    Addy Frederick                                Addy.Frederick@admiralgroup.co.uk
    +44 (0) 7500 171 810                       

    Media: FTI Consulting  
    Edward Berry                                        +44 (0) 7703 330 199
    Tom Blackwell                                        +44 (0) 7747 113 919

    Chair Statement

    Admiral Group performed very strongly in 2024 despite an unfavourable macroeconomic backdrop. The Group has achieved significant customer growth, while increasing customer satisfaction, and delivered an excellent UK Motor performance, supported by changes to the Ogden rate, with strong results in many other business lines. This has translated into profit before tax of £839.2 million and a proposed final dividend of 121.0 pence per share, making a total of 192.0 pence per share for the financial year.

    The Group’s impressive customer growth is a testament to its core value of doing what is right for customers. In the UK, due to better cycle management and in response to improved market conditions, Admiral reduced prices earlier than the market in early 2024.

    Delivering growth, digitisation and sustainability

    Defending and extending the competitive advantages of the UK motor business remains our number one priority, alongside our strategy of developing other franchises with the potential to drive future profitable growth. We have seen positive results across many of our newer franchises, with double-digit profit in the UK’s Household and Money businesses and our French business.

    The Group has made significant strides in enhancing its digital capabilities and unlocking the potential of new technologies to achieve a superior customer experience and greater productivity.

    Admiral continues to navigate a challenging regulatory landscape to ensure its resilience and sustainability in the long term. As one of the UK’s largest motor insurers, the business has been engaging with members of the motor insurance taskforce to identify solutions to tackle the current high costs of insurance.

    Admiral continues to support customers to adopt greener behaviours and is one of the leading UK electric vehicle insurers. The publication of Admiral’s Net Zero Transition Plan and the SBTi’s approval of its science-based targets demonstrates our commitment to responsible and sustainable business practices.

    Powered by our people

    Admiral colleagues’ expertise and dedication to supporting customers, colleagues and local communities is remarkable, so I was pleased that Admiral was, again, named one of the world’s best workplaces. Similarly, it was an honour to be at the London Stock Exchange to celebrate 20 years of Admiral being a listed business and delivering for customers and shareholders with colleagues who are custodians of the business’ incredible culture.

    I was sorry to say goodbye to Cristina Nestares who had successfully led the UK Insurance business since 2016. We all wish her the very best for the future. I’m pleased that, in line with the Group’s strong track record on succession planning, Alistair Hargreaves has been appointed UK Insurance CEO.

    We conducted an evaluation on the performance of the Board and its Committees. This process confirmed that these were operating effectively, that the business is managed for the long-term benefit of all stakeholders and provided a clear focus on areas for improvement for the forthcoming year.

    On behalf of the Board, I would like to thank Admiral colleagues for their ongoing commitment, and the management team for their excellent leadership and performance.

    While the external landscape remains uncertain, I believe that the Group’s competitive advantages, disciplined approach, and customer-first mindset will drive continued growth and shareholder value.

    Mike Rogers

    Group Chair

    5 March 2025

    Group Chief Executive Officer’s Review

    Overall, 2024 was a remarkable year for Admiral. It was not only a year of delivering excellent financial results but also one of continuous improvements in serving our customers and making solid progress on our strategy.

    Despite persisting economic, political, and regulatory uncertainty, motor insurance market conditions improved and this – combined with our historical discipline and agility across the insurance market cycle allowed us to achieve a great many successes. We have welcomed 1.4 million new customers, improved customer satisfaction, added £1.3 billion in turnover, and increased profits by 90 per cent.

    Our core business, UK Insurance, was the main driver of this success. It delivered just under £1 billion in profit, supported by the impact of the recent favourable Ogden Rate change, and strong growth across our other products. Our acquisition of the renewal rights for More Than completed in the first half of the year. The integration is progressing well with 7 months of renewals at the end of January and retention is in line with expectations.

    To remain one of the most competitive insurers for the largest number of people is a priority for us so, when we saw conditions improve, we were quick to reflect this in our pricing. We led on reducing rates, doing it earlier than most at the start of the year, as we saw inflation easing. We also cut rates the day after the favourable Ogden rate change announcement.

    Beyond UK motor, we have delivered double-digit profits within our UK Household, French and US Motor businesses and Admiral Money. We now serve over 11 million customers globally, with almost half of customer growth coming from other business lines across the Group.

    We are proud of the pleasing turnaround that the US team has achieved. As previously mentioned, we’re assessing the strategic options for our US business. We have made good progress and are in exclusive talks with a potential acquirer.

    Across our European franchises, we now insure more than half a million French customers and have seen an improved performance in our Spanish business. In Italy, the team is focused on turning the business around following a disappointing financial performance in a tough market in 2024.

    We are conscious that there is more to do to unlock the potential of these businesses. We have ambitious plans to build on our UK customer base, to further improve the customer experience and harness the advantage of automation and AI to achieve even greater efficiency.

    Taking a step back, our story has been one of continuous growth and, to celebrate 20 years as a listed company, colleagues joined Mike Rogers and I at the London Stock Exchange to close the market. This anniversary was a time for reflection on where the business has come from and, of course, where the business is going (and to celebrate Geraint who has been Group CFO for ten years – congratulations Mr Jones!).

    Our success has been underpinned by our pricing, underwriting and claims management expertise, all united by a culture that is truly unique. We put our customers and people first, and are data-driven, agile and entrepreneurial.

    We want to have a positive impact on society. We are one of the leading electric vehicle insurers and are proud of our commitment to improve road safety. In the UK, our Words to Live By campaign video was shown in cinemas nationwide.

    I am proud of how our colleagues have supported customers impacted by flooding and we are working cross-industry to ensure that homes are more flood resistant or resilient. Our colleagues want to play a positive role in the communities in which we live and work, and the number of volunteering hours more than doubled in 2024.

    We have published our Net Zero Transition Plan and are working hard to meet our sustainability goals. I was pleased to see our science-based targets officially approved and our MSCI ESG score upgraded to AAA.

    We know that if our people like what they do, they will do it better, and it is brilliant to be recognised, once again, as one of the World’s Best Workplaces. We focus on being an inclusive employer and maintaining our unique culture to attract and retain the talent we need to execute our strategy.

    I am so proud of everything that we have been able to achieve this year thanks to our incredible colleagues. Ever since we floated, colleagues have been given a stake in the business so that they can benefit from their hard work and customer focus. This year, we have given colleagues an additional bonus to reward their commitment.

    In October, we announced that Cristina Nestares was stepping down as CEO of our UK Insurance business to spend more time in her native Spain. We will miss Cristina’s passion and customer focus, which were key to building on the business’ position as a leading insurer. I was pleased to appoint Alistair Hargreaves as CEO. Alistair has significant leadership experience and extensive knowledge of our customers, colleagues, products and strategy, and I look forward to working even more closely with him as we continue to deliver for our growing customer base.

    We are emerging from four years of challenge from the pandemic and cost-of-living crisis to inflation spikes and regulatory changes. Although, no doubt, further challenges lie ahead, I am optimistic about the opportunities too. Our priority will be to stay agile, lean, and efficient so that we can adapt as needed, leveraging our strong foundations and talented team to deliver long-term growth.

    Milena Mondini de Focatiis

    Group Chief Executive Officer

    5 March 2025

    Group Chief Financial Officer’s Review

    I closed my 2023 statement by saying I looked forward to seeing improved underlying margins feeding into reported results for 2024. These results have duly delivered.

    There are many positives and milestones: customer numbers up by 1.37 million (record number and highest annual gain); turnover up £1.3 billion to £6.1 billion (same records as customers); highest ever investment return at £182 million; very strong solvency position (203%) maintained despite the significant 121.0p final dividend; some of the best results we have delivered in UK Motor (including a material boost from the review of the Personal Injury Discount Rate); and some encouraging results from businesses beyond UK Motor – over £70 million in aggregate from UK Household, Admiral Money, L’olivier Motor and Elephant US – each delivering their own record result.

    In UK Motor Insurance, after the very challenging 2021 and 2022 underwriting years (both of which experienced severe claims inflation), 2023 and 2024 have been more positive – with a notably larger business (5.7 million risks at year-end 2024 v 4.9 million at year-end 2023), much higher revenue and more positive combined ratios for both years (driven by quite large cumulative price increases since the start of 2023). These factors have contributed to materially higher reported profit in 2024.

    In terms of volumes, after very positive conditions in the market at the start of the year (very large new business volumes and very competitive Admiral prices), the environment became tougher from Q2 onwards, with prices drifting down quite steadily. Confidence in our loss ratios meant we were able to reduce prices around the start of 2024 (ahead of the market) and in H2 as well (partly to pass the benefits of the new discount rates to our customers), but inevitably our growth in the second half was lower than in H1.

    Personal Injury Discount Rates

    As we explain more fully later in the report, the Discount Rate for all parts of the UK changed during 2024, resulting in lower projected costs of large open claims. We estimate that in today’s money, the total (positive) impact on profit is around £150 million (emphasis on estimate) of which £100 million has been recognised in 2024.

    Investments

    Much larger balances (£5.2 billion at year-end ’24 v £4.2 billion year-end ’23) due to strong revenue growth combined with a higher yield (4.0% for 2024 v 3.3% for 2023 as the portfolio has been reinvested over the past couple of years) led to investment income for 2024 of £182 million, our highest ever.

    More details on the portfolio are set out later in the report, but there’s been no change in our approach and only small changes in the asset allocation. Obviously very subject to what happens to market interest rates and spreads, we’d expect the yield shown in the income statement to continue to increase but much more gradually in 2025.

    Italy

    In a generally very positive year, it’s fair to call out the ConTe result as a disappointment. ConTe has been steadily profitable since 2014, and the loss for the year (£23 million compared to a profit in 2023 of £7 million) was obviously not in our plan. The disappointing performance came about, partly, because of an update to the Milan Court tables (used to determine the cost of many injury claims), but also because of some adverse experience, notably from some business written in 2023.

    Our management team (along with pretty much the whole business) is very focused on restoring profitability through various actions as soon as possible, and I’m confident they’ll achieve this. It might well come at the cost of some volume in the very short term, though we’re still confident in ConTe’s prospects.

    At the risk of upsetting some of our terrific management teams, let me also call out a few other high points:

    • Partly benefiting from lower than budgeted weather cost in 2024 (but also see an improving attritional loss ratio), UK Household Insurance reported its largest profit of £34 million. The team has also been well focused on the migration of the acquired More Than renewal rights portfolio as well as organic growth as we close in fast on two million policies
    • After some quite bruising years in the US, huge credit goes to our team in Elephant Auto who have very much met their goal of materially improving the bottom line in 2024. The result swung impressively from a loss of £20 million to a profit of £14 million due to a much better loss ratio and a very solid expense outcome. And whilst acknowledging the portfolio has shrunk as a consequence, this is a pleasing turnaround and we’re very proud of the team’s work
    • Veygo (mainly offering short-term car insurance in the UK) is possibly the Group’s fastest growing business, reporting revenue of £64 million in 2024 (with a very healthy three-year CAGR of 45%) and also returned its first (albeit small in the Group context) profit
    • Our French motor insurer L’olivier reported its highest profit of £11 million (2023: £7 million). With turnover above €260 million and a solid combined ratio, we’re positive about the future in France
    • And finally – partly stretching timeframe of the report – I’m very happy that Admiral Money has, in early 2025, signed its first deal to use third-party capital to grow the personal loan business – we think this is an important part of the model for the future

    Internal capital model

    As part of the process to ultimately use our own capital model to calculate our capital requirement, Admiral entered the pre-application phase (focused on UK car insurance) with the two main prudential regulators in mid-2024. We received feedback late in the year and are working to address that as well as finalise the other aspects of the model before submitting our full application. Lots of hard work is continuing on this important but complex project and we’ll update on progress in due course.

    Looking ahead to 2025

    We move into the new year well-placed for continued positive results. There are one or two challenges for sure (a competitive market in UK motor and the need to restore profit in Italy to name two), but particularly noting the prudent claims reserves position in all lines of business at the end of 2024, we expect strong releases and profit to flow into 2025 and beyond. Subject to market conditions, we’re still hoping to grow in pretty much all our operations too.

    Big thanks to all Admiral colleagues for helping to achieve these great results!

    Geraint Jones

    Group Chief Financial Officer

    5 March 2025

    £m 2024 2023 Change vs 2023
    UK Insurance 977 597 +380
    UK Insurance (Ogden -0.25%) 877 597 +280
    Europe Insurance (20) 2 -22
    US Insurance 14 (20) +34
    Admiral Money 13 10 +3
    Share scheme cost (62) (54) -8
    Other costs including Admiral Pioneer (83) (92) +9
    Pre-tax profit 839 443 +396
    Pre-tax profit (Ogden -0.25%) 739 443 +296

    2024 Group overview

    £m 2024 2023 % change vs. 20234
    Group turnover (£bn)1 3 6.15 4.81 +28%
    Net insurance and investment result 798.7 363.1 +120%
    Net interest income from financial services 76.3 68.1 +12%
    Other income and expenses (9.3) 31.7 nm
    Operating profit 865.7 462.9 +87%
    Group profit before tax 839.2 442.8 +90%
           
    Analysis of profit      
    UK Insurance 976.7 596.5 +64%
    UK Insurance (Ogden -0.25%) 876.4 596.5 +47%
    International Insurance (5.3) (18.0) +71%
    International Insurance – European Motor (14.8) 6.1 nm
    International Insurance – US Motor 14.4 (19.6) nm
    International Insurance – Other (4.9) (4.5) -10%
    Admiral Money 13.0 10.2 +28%
    Other (145.2) (145.9) +1%
    Group profit before tax 839.2 442.8 +90%
    Group profit before tax (Ogden -0.25%) 738.9 442.8 +67%
           
    Key metrics      
    Reported Group loss ratio1 2 +55.4% +63.9% -9pts
    Reported Group expense ratio1 2 +22.0% +24.8% -3pts
    Reported Group combined ratio1 2 +77.4% +88.7% -11pts
    Reported Group combined ratio (Ogden -0.25%) +79.7% +88.7% -9pts
    Insurance service margin1 2 +16.2% +10.2% +6pts
    Customer numbers (million)1 11.10 9.73 +14%
           
    Earnings per share 216.6 111.2 +95%
    Earnings per share (Ogden -0.25%) 190.2 111.2 +71%
    Dividend per share 192.0 103.0 +86%
    Return on equity1 56% 36% +20pts
    Solvency ratio1 +203% +200% +3pts

    1 Alternative Performance Measures – refer to the end of the report for definition and explanation.

    2 Reported Group loss and expense ratios are calculated on a basis inclusive of all insurance revenue – this includes insurance premium revenue net of excess of loss reinsurance, plus revenue from underwritten ancillaries and an allocation of instalment and administration fees/related commissions. See glossary for an explanation of the ratios and Appendix 1a for a reconciliation of reported loss and expense ratios, and insurance service margin, to the financial statements.

    3 Alternative Performance Measures – refer to note 14 for explanation and reconciliation to statutory income statement measures.

    4 Definition: nm – not meaningful.

    Group highlights

    Admiral reports strong growth in turnover and customer numbers and significantly higher profits in 2024.

    • Group customer numbers increased by 14% and turnover was 28% higher, driven by UK Motor Insurance
    • Group pre-tax profit was £839 million, 90% higher than 2023 as a result of a significantly improved current year underwriting performance and continued significant prior period releases, notably in the UK Motor Insurance business. Excluding the impact of the change in Personal Injury (‘Ogden’) Discount Rate (see below), pre-tax profit would have been £739 million, 67% higher than 2023
    • Strong growth in UK Household pre-tax profit to £34 million (2023: £8 million). A relatively benign year for weather and an improved attritional loss year resulted in a favourable current year loss ratio
    • Completion of the acquisition of the More Than direct UK Household and Pet Insurance renewal rights; renewals started to transfer to Admiral in the second half of 2024
    • A lower overall loss in International Insurance (£5 million v £18 million), including a profit of £14 million in US motor, which was offset by a loss of £20 million in Europe
    • Continued growth in Admiral Money profit to £13 million (2023: £10 million) and gross loan balances (+23% year-on-year growth).

    Earnings per share

    Earnings per share for 2024 were 216.6 pence (2023: 111.2 pence). The increase from 2023 is higher than the increase in pre-tax profit above due to a slightly lower effective tax rate.

    Return on equity

    Return on equity was 56% for 2024, 20 percentage points higher than the 36% reported for 2023. The increase is the result of the significantly higher post-tax profits, partially offset by higher average equity.

    Dividends

    The Group’s dividend policy is to pay 65% of post-tax profits as a normal dividend and to pay a further special dividend comprising earnings not required to be held in the Group for solvency, buffers or purchasing shares for the Group’s employee share plans. No shares are expected to be purchased for the share plans until 2026.

    The Board has proposed a final dividend of 121.0 pence per share (approximately £366.6 million) splits as follows:

    • 91.4 pence per share normal dividend
    • A special dividend of 29.6 pence per share.

    The 2024 final dividend reflects a pay-out ratio of 87% of second half earnings per share. 121.0 pence per share is 133% higher than the final 2023 dividend (52.0 pence per share), in line with the growth in earnings per share.

    The 2024 final dividend payment date is 13 June 2025, ex-dividend date 15 May 2025, and record date 16 May 2025.

    Economic background

    Whilst remaining higher than its long-term average, the elevated inflation observed over the course of 2022 and 2023 started to reduce in 2024. Price increases implemented to mitigate the impact of the higher inflation in the Group’s main UK business in 2022 and 2023 have resulted in a strong current year underwriting performance compared to the prior year.

    Admiral continues to focus on medium-term profitability and has maintained a disciplined approach to business volumes. The Group’s customer base in UK Motor grew significantly at the start of 2024 as a result of price reductions ahead of the market, with market competition increasing in the second half. The Group continues to set claims reserves cautiously.

    Admiral Money has continued to grow its consumer loans book, with a cautious approach to growth and evolving underwriting criteria to reflect the macroeconomic environment and potential financial impact on consumers. The business continues to hold appropriately cautious provisions for credit losses.

    Change in UK personal injury discount rate (‘Ogden’)

    The discount rate, which is used in setting personal injury compensation (referred to throughout the report as ‘Ogden’), changed to +0.5% across the UK in H2 2024.

    In Scotland and NI, the discount rate changed from -0.75% to +0.5%, effective from September 2024. In England and Wales, it was announced in December 2024 that the discount rate would change to +0.5% from the existing -0.25% rate, effective from 11 January 2025. The +0.5% rate is expected to remain in place for up to the next five years.

    Given the announcements were made in 2024, the Group has updated its insurance contract liabilities to reflect the new rate. The impact of the change in rate is an increase in 2024 pre-tax profits of £100 million (with the ultimate profit impact estimated to be around £150 million).

    UK Insurance Review – Alistair Hargreaves, CEO UK Insurance

    It is a great privilege and responsibility to be appointed UK Insurance CEO and I’m fortunate that in writing this statement, I’m able to reflect on the UK Insurance teams’ many achievements in 2024, a very positive year. Our disciplined approach to managing uncertainty and the motor market cycle, alongside enhancements to propositions, pricing, claims and customer experience, helped us to welcome 1.4 million new customers, sustain our market-leading combined ratio and deliver £977 million profit before tax, while improving our Trustpilot customer rating to an industry-leading 4.6.

    In motor, price is the primary customer consideration. This was especially true in 2024 after the recent sustained period of elevated claims inflation drove market premiums up and motor insurance affordability made the headlines. Our discipline throughout 2022 and 2023, where we increased prices ahead of competitors and sacrificed growth, paid off in 2024. We were able to start reducing rates in early 2024, ahead of the market, and our competitive prices resulted in a 15% increase in motor policies to a record 5.7 million. This was achieved whilst maintaining strong service levels and repair times due to the strength of our repair network partners. UK Motor turnover grew by £1.1 billion in 2024 to £4.5 billion and profit before tax increased to £955 million, driven by our strong performance as well as a c.£100 million reserving benefit from the recent change to the Ogden discount rate, which impacts large personal injury claims. We passed the benefits from the new Ogden rate going forward to our customers by lowering prices accordingly the day after the announcement in December.

    Beyond Motor, our strong MultiCover proposition supported further growth in our Household insurance business, despite continued rate increases offsetting claims inflation. The integration of the ‘More Than’ Pet and Home renewal rights from Royal Sun Alliance (RSA) is going well. The customer migration runs over 12 months and started in the summer of 2024. This has given a boost to our Household business, which finished the year with just under two million customers, and led to a significant acceleration for Pet with more than 200,000 policies. The renewal process will continue through to the summer of 2025. Our Travel business grew both new business and renewals with strong underwriting discipline leading to a small but growing profit.

    We continue to invest to further improve customer journeys and maintain our market-leading insurance expertise. In 2024, we drove improvements in speed, both in feature development sprints and deploying machine-learning models across pricing, claims, and customer experience. This is supported by the fact that over 80% of our estate is now cloud-based. We are pleased with the continued growth of our digital experience, which enables customers to engage with us in the most convenient way for them. We give customers the choice to self-serve digitally, and half of mid-term changes and a third of claims notifications are now made this way. In Motor, our investment in customer proposition and claims is supporting strong growth in insured electric vehicles where we continue to be one of the industry leaders with a high teens market share.

    The driving force of our business is our culture and people, we were pleased to, again, have been listed in the Top 10 for both Great Places to Work and for Great Places to Work for Women. One element of our culture, which I’m particularly proud of, is our continued support of our communities. In 2024, our colleagues spent over 30,000 hours helping over a thousand people to secure work or to gain new skills with funding and support for our community partners.

    2024 has been a remarkable year for UK Insurance, and by delivering for our customers we’ve taken the opportunity to grow. Looking ahead, some uncertainty remains around near-term market dynamics, but our strong team and fundamentals give us a great platform to continue to provide value, ease and trust for customers and in doing so make the most of opportunities for sustainable profitable growth in 2025 and beyond.

    UK Insurance financial performance

    £m 2024 2023
    Turnover1 2 5,108.5 3,776.0
    Total premiums written1 4,745.2 3,502.6
    Insurance revenue 3,873.4 2,596.9
    Underwriting result1 764.4 383.4
    Net investment income 70.5 55.2
    Co-insurer profit commission and net other revenue 141.8 157.9
    UK Insurance profit before tax1 976.7 596.5

    Segment result: UK Insurance profit before tax1

    £m 2024 2023
    Motor 955.1 593.3
    Motor (Ogden -0.25%) 854.8 593.3
    Household 34.1 7.9
    Travel and Pet (12.5) (4.7)
    UK Insurance profit before tax 976.7 596.5
    UK Insurance profit before tax (Ogden -0.25%) 876.4 596.5

    Segment performance indicators1

      2024 2023
    Vehicles insured 5.69m 4.94m
    Households insured 1.97m 1.76m
    Travel and Pet policies 1.14m 0.69m
    Total UK Insurance customers 8.80m 7.39m

    1 Alternative Performance Measures – refer to the end of this report for definition and explanation.

    2 Alternative Performance Measures – refer to note 14 for explanation and reconciliation to statutory income statement measures.

    Highlights for the UK Insurance business include:

    • In UK Motor:
      • A 15% increase in customer numbers, driven by reducing prices ahead of the market around the start of the year, after a period of prices moving higher to address significant claims cost inflation in the past few years
      • The increase in customers, combined with higher premiums, resulted in a 33% rise in turnover, and a 50% rise in insurance revenue
      • Profit of £955 million was 61% higher than 2023, driven by the resulting improved current year combined ratio and continued positive reserve releases, as well as the favourable impact of the Ogden Discount Rate change. Excluding the Ogden change, profit would have been £855 million, 44% higher than 2023.
    • In UK Household:
      • An increase in customer numbers of 12% to 1.97 million (31 December 2023: 1.76 million). Growth continued, particularly in the second half of 2024 when rate increases in response to inflation eased, resulting in increased competitiveness
      • Profit grew strongly to £34 million (2023: £8 million) as a result of a positive current period combined ratio driven by higher earned premiums, a relatively benign year for severe weather, an improved attritional loss year plus continued prior period releases.
    • In UK Travel and Pet Insurance:
      • Both business lines continued to grow their customer base and turnover
      • Travel delivers second consecutive annual profit, whilst there was an increased loss in Pet due to both integration costs (primarily IT) in relation to the More Than acquisition of £6.3 million, and the premium written as a result of More Than renewals not yet earning through
    • More Than acquisition:
      • In March 2024, the Group successfully completed its first significant acquisition, of the direct UK Household and Pet insurance renewal rights of the More Than brand and the transfer of over 280 colleagues from RSA. Liabilities relating to existing policies and those up to renewal remain with RSA
    • The integration of the business is now largely complete, with renewals having commenced in July 2024 for Household and in August 2024 for Pet
    • The 2024 UK Insurance results, therefore, include an impact of £11.9 million of integration costs in relation to the acquired business. See note 13 to the financial statements for further details.

    UK Motor Insurance financial review

    UK Motor profit in 2024 was £955 million, 61% higher than 2023. Excluding the impact of the change in the Ogden Discount Rate, UK Motor profit was £855 million, 44% higher than 2023. This increase is the result of an improved current period combined ratio (driven by higher average premiums earning through), along with continued positive development of prior year claims, partly offset by recognising the reinsurer’s share of releases on underwriting years 2021-2023.

    In addition, favourable net investment income is driven by higher yields and investment balances.

    £m 2024 2023
    Turnover1 4,495.9 3,371.8
    Total premiums written1 2 4,157.7 3,118.2
    Insurance premium revenue1 3,160.5 2,115.4
    Other insurance revenue 209.0 134.8
    Insurance revenue 3,369.5 2,250.2
    Insurance revenue net of XoL2 4 3,271.4 2,188.6
    Insurance expenses1 2 3 (586.8) (451.2)
    Insurance claims incurred net of XoL2 4 (2,078.1) (1,729.0)
    Insurance claims releases net of XoL2 4 374.6 392.8
    Quota share reinsurance result2 3 (228.8) (16.8)
    Movement in onerous loss component net of reinsurance2 1.1 4.1
    Underwriting result2 753.4 388.5
    Investment income 150.0 111.8
    Net insurance finance expenses (83.4) (58.2)
    Net investment income 66.6 53.6
    Co-insurer profit commission 53.3 76.5
    Other net income 81.8 74.7
    UK Motor Insurance profit before tax1 955.1 593.3
    UK Motor Insurance profit before tax (Ogden -0.25%) 854.8 593.3

    Segment performance indicators

      2024 2023
    Reported Motor loss ratio1 2 5 52.1% 61.1%
    Reported Motor expense ratio1 2 5 17.9% 20.6%
    Reported Motor combined ratio1 2 5 70.0% 81.7%
    Reported Motor combined ratio (Ogden -0.25%)1 73.2% 81.7%
    Reported Motor Insurance service margin1 2 5 23.0% 17.7%
    Core motor loss ratio before releases1 2 6 69.2% 87.0%
    Core motor claims releases1 2 6 (12.7)% (20.2)%
    Core motor loss ratio1 2 6 56.5% 66.8%
    Core motor expense ratio1 2 6 18.2% 21.4%
    Core motor combined ratio1 6 74.7% 88.2%
    Core motor written expense ratio1 2 7 16.8% 17.8%
    Vehicles insured at period end1 2 5.69m 4.94m
    Other revenue per vehicle2 8 £76 £62

    1 Alternative Performance Measures – refer to the end of this report for definition and explanation.

    2 Alternative Performance Measures – refer to Appendix 1b for explanation and reconciliation to statutory income statement measures.

    3 Insurance expenses and quota share reinsurance result excludes gross and reinsurers’ share of share scheme charges respectively. Share scheme charges reported in Other Group Items.

    4 XoL refers to Excess of Loss (non-proportional) reinsurance; see glossary at end of report for further information.

    5 Reported Motor loss ratio, expense ratio and insurance service margin are all net of XoL, as defined in the glossary. Reconciliation in Appendix 1b.

    6 Core Motor loss ratio, expense ratio and combined ratio are all net of XoL, as defined in the glossary. Reconciliation in Appendix 1b.

    7 Core motor written expense ratio defined as insurance expenses divided by core product written insurance premium, net of excess of loss reinsurance.

    8 Other revenue per vehicle includes other revenue included within insurance revenue. See ‘Other Revenue’ section for explanation.

    Claims

    Claims inflation continues to show signs of gradually reducing, with Admiral’s current estimate of average claims cost inflation for full-year 2024 (compared to full-year 2023) being approximately in mid-to-high single-digits (2023: around 10%). Despite the significant growth in policy base, a small reduction in claims frequency has been observed.

    As usual, the longer-term impacts of inflation on bodily injury claims remain uncertain. Admiral did not observe material changes in inflation for bodily injury claims settled in 2024, when compared to 2023. We maintain a prudent allowance held in the best estimate reserve to reflect potential impacts of higher than historic levels of future wage inflation on certain elements of large bodily injury claims reserves.

    There is still uncertainty within motor claims across the market arising from inflation, and future developments relating to both whiplash reforms, and regulatory developments. As noted above, the new Ogden discount rate of +0.5%, as announced in December 2024, has been used within the best estimate reserves.

    In line with the FCA’s multi-firm review into total loss claims valuations, Admiral is conducting a review of its total loss and related processes, which considers current practice and customer outcomes in the recent past. The work is in the process of being finalised, with the conclusion that some action is required.

    Although uncertainty remains over the final position, when fully concluded, the cost is not expected to have a significant impact on the financial statements. Taking account of current information, appropriate amounts are included within insurance contract liabilities at 31 December.

    Admiral continues to hold a significant and prudent risk adjustment above best estimate reserves, with an increase in the confidence level to the 95th percentile (93rd percentile at 31 December 2023). When setting the level of risk adjustment due consideration has been given to the strong releases in the best estimate, inherent uncertainty in bodily injury claims, growth in the UK motor book along with an assessment of other external factors. There has been a slight reduction in the volatility of the reserve risk distribution from which the percentile is selected as a result of the strong reserve releases following the change in Ogden discount rate; otherwise it has not changed significantly since 2023.

    The core motor loss ratio has reduced to 56.5% (2023: 66.8%) with offsetting movements in the current period loss ratio and prior year reserve releases, as follows:

    Core Motor loss ratio1 2 Core motor loss ratio before releases Impact of claims reserve releases Core motor loss ratio
    FY 2023 87.0% (20.2)% 66.8%
    Change in current period loss ratio excluding Ogden (16.9)% —% (16.9)%
    Change in claims reserve release excluding Ogden —% 10.2% 10.2%
    Impact of Ogden discount rate change (0.9)% (2.7)% (3.6)%
    FY 2024 69.2% (12.7)% 56.5%

    1 Reported Motor loss ratio shown on a discounted basis, excluding unwind of finance expenses

    2 Alternative Performance Measures – refer to Appendix 1b for explanation and reconciliation to statutory income statement measures.

    The rate increases that were implemented over the course of 2022 and 2023, as well as favourable frequency in 2024, have driven a significant improvement in the current period loss ratio.

    The benefit from prior-period releases includes both the positive development of the best estimate reserve and the unwind of risk adjustment for prior-period claims. The absolute value of releases is consistent with 2023, with higher releases on the best estimate arising from significant favourable development, along with the benefit from the Ogden rate change, being offset by lower releases of risk adjustment given the increase in risk adjustment percentile. The lower release percentage is a result of significantly increased earned premiums.

    Quota share reinsurance

    Admiral’s quota share reinsurance result reflects the net movement on ceded premiums, reinsurer margins and expected recoveries (claims and expenses, excluding share scheme charges) for underwriting years on which quota share reinsurance is in place (2021 underwriting year onwards).

    The ‘Group capital structure’ section sets out further details on Admiral’s UK Motor quota share arrangements.

    Quota share reinsurance result1

    £m 2024 2023 Quota share claims asset
    31 December 2024
    2021 and prior (27.2) (55.3) 15.0
    2022 (84.0) 8.2 62.8
    2023 (81.0) 30.3 —
    2024 (36.6) — —
    Total (228.8) (16.8) 77.8

    1 Quota share result in underwriting year 2024 includes an £11.1 million re-charge for the reinsurer’s assumed share scheme recoveries, out of other Group costs in line with prior period (2023: £11.1 million)

    The significantly increased quota share charge in 2024 is the result of:

    • Favourable developments in the underlying loss ratios on underwriting years 2021-2023 resulting in the reversal of quota share recoveries previously recognised
    • A charge rather than credit on the most recent underwriting year (2024), as the booked combined ratio is below 100%, which means no quota share recoveries are recognised.

    Co-insurer profit commission

    Co-insurer profit commission of £53.3 million is lower than in 2023 (£76.5 million).

    In 2024, a significant proportion of claims releases are on underwriting years 2021 and 2022, which reduce the losses on those years but do not result in profit commission, given the years are not yet profitable with booked combined ratios of over 100%.

    In addition, the losses on those years are carried forward in line with contractual clauses, suppressing the recognition of profit commission on underwriting years 2023 and also, to a large extent, 2024.

    Net investment income

    Net investment income increased to £66.6 million from £53.6 million, benefiting from higher investment income, which was largely offset by increased net insurance finance expenses.

    Investment income grew by 34% to £150.0 million (2023: £111.8 million), as a result of increased investment balances (due to strong growth in premium collected) and higher average return. Further information on the Group’s investment portfolio and the income generated in the period is provided later in the report.

    Net insurance finance expense reflects the unwind of the discounting benefit recognised when claims are initially incurred. The expense has increased notably in 2024 (£83.4 million; 2023 £58.2 million) as a result of the unwind of discounting benefit recognised from early 2022 onwards, when there was a significant increase in risk-free interest rates. A significant proportion of the insurance finance expense in 2024 relates to claims incurred during 2022 and 2023.

    Other revenue

    Admiral generates other revenue from a portfolio of insurance products that complement the core motor insurance product, and also fees generated over the life of the policy. The most material contributors to other revenue continue to be:

    • Profit earned from Motor policy upgrade products underwritten by Admiral, including breakdown, car hire and personal injury covers
    • Revenue from other insurance products, not underwritten by Admiral
    • Fees such as administration and cancellation fees
    • Interest charged to customers paying for cover in instalments.

    Under IFRS 17, income from underwritten ancillaries and an allocation of instalment income and administration fees in line with Admiral’s gross share of the core motor product premium, are included within Insurance revenue in the underwriting result. The remaining income from instalment income and fees, as well as income from other non-underwritten ancillary products is presented in other net income.

    Overall contribution increased to £321.8 million (2023: £247.3 million), primarily due to the growth in customer numbers in the past year. In particular, more customers along with the increased proportion of customers choosing to pay via monthly payments in the prior period has resulted in higher earned instalment income.

    Other revenue was equivalent to £76 per vehicle (gross of costs), with net other revenue per vehicle at £61 per vehicle, both up compared to 2023 in line with the increased contribution.

    UK Motor Insurance Other revenue

    £m 2024
      Within underwriting result Other net income Total
    Premium and revenue from additional products and fees1 139.8 83.4 223.2
    Instalment income and administration fees2 209.0 45.7 254.7
    Other revenue 348.8 129.1 477.9
    Claims costs and allocated expenses3 (108.8) (47.3) (156.1)
    Net other revenue 240.0 81.8 321.8
    Other revenue per vehicle4     £76
    Other revenue per vehicle net of internal costs     £61
    £m 2023
      Within underwriting result Other net income Total
    Premium and revenue from additional products and fees1 107.8 89.4 197.2
    Instalment income and administration fees2 134.8 29.3 164.1
    Other revenue 242.6 118.7 361.3
    Claims costs and allocated expenses3 (70.0) (44.0) (114.0)
    Net other revenue 172.6 74.7 247.3
    Other revenue per vehicle4     £62
    Other revenue per vehicle net of internal costs     £52

    1 Premium from underwritten ancillaries is recognised within the insurance service result (underwriting result). Other income from non-underwritten products and fees is included within other net income, below the underwriting result but part of the insurance segment result.

    2 Instalment income and administration fees are recognised within insurance revenue (% aligned to Admiral’s share of premium, net of co-insurance) and other revenue (% aligned to co-insurance share of premium).

    3 Claims costs relating to underwritten ancillary products, along with an allocation of related expenses, are recognised within the insurance result. Expenses allocated to the generation of revenue from non-underwritten ancillaries are recognised within other net income.

    4 Other revenue per vehicle (before internal costs) divided by average active vehicles, rolling 12-month basis. Presented here based on all ancillary income.

    UK Household Insurance financial review

    £m 2024 2023
    Turnover1 475.4 338.6
    Total premiums written1 450.3 318.8
    Insurance revenue 399.6 292.8
    Insurance revenue net of XoL1 376.4 275.3
    Insurance expenses1 (102.9) (80.9)
    Insurance claims incurred net of XoL1 (225.7) (199.8)
    Insurance claims releases net of XoL1 37.0 6.4
    Underwriting result, net of XoL reinsurance1 84.8 1.0
    Quota share reinsurance result1 3 (61.2) (1.4)
    Underwriting result1 23.6 (0.4)
    Net insurance investment income 3.9 1.6
    Other income 6.6 6.7
    UK Household Insurance profit before tax1 34.1 7.9

    Segment performance indicators

      2024 2023
    Reported Household loss ratio1 2 50.1% 70.2%
    Reported Household expense ratio1 2 27.3% 29.4%
    Reported Household combined ratio1 2 77.4% 99.6%
    Household insurance service margin2 6.3%         (0.1%)
    Household loss ratio before releases2 60.0% 72.6%
    (Favourable) impact of weather on reported loss ratio vs budget4 (7.9%) (3.8%)
    Households insured at period end 1.97m 1.76m

    1 Alternative Performance Measures – refer to the end of this report for definition and explanation

    2 Alternative Performance Measures – refer to Appendix 1c for explanation and reconciliation to statutory income statement measures.

    3 Quota share reinsurance result within the segment result excludes reinsurers’ share of share scheme costs.

    4 Weather impact, being the combined impact of claims related to freeze, flood, storm and subsidence, is disclosed relative to a budget expectation. The 2023 impact has been restated to align.

    The UK Household Insurance business reported strong growth in turnover of 40% to £475.4 million (2023: £338.6 million). The number of homes insured increased by 12% to 1.97 million (31 December 2023: 1.76 million), despite price increases made by Admiral during 2024, in particular the first half, to reflect continued higher claims inflation. Competitors also increased prices, with Admiral’s competitiveness in price comparison (the main distribution channel for new policies) relatively unchanged.

    Profit before tax for the period was £34.1 million (2023: £7.9 million), the large increase arising as a result of:

    • Strong prior year reserve releases of £37.0 million (2023: £6.4 million), reducing the loss ratio by 9.9 percentage points (2023: 2.4 percentage points). These releases primarily reflect the unwind of best estimate reserves in relation to the freeze events in late 2022, along with some impact from the unwind of storm events in late 2023
    • A lower current period combined ratio, with both a lower loss ratio and expense ratio driven in large part by higher earned premiums.

    The reported loss ratio excluding releases decreased significantly to 60.0% (2023: 72.6%) as a result of the higher earned premiums, along with relatively benign weather and a reduction in claims frequency.

    Weather was relatively benign in both periods. While there was some impact of freeze, flood and storm events, this was considered below a budget expectation, creating a net benefit to the current period loss ratio of just under 8% (2023: 3.8%).

    Despite growth in absolute expenses during the year as the business grew, Admiral’s expense ratio improved to 27.3% (from 29.4%), benefiting from the larger portfolio and the earning through of higher average premiums. Customer growth leading to higher acquisition costs and IT integration costs relating to the More Than acquisition were the primary drivers of the increase in absolute costs.

    The quota share result for the period (a loss of £61.2 million compared to £1.4 million) arises as a result of the proportional sharing of the positive underlying underwriting result, with only a small amount of profit commission recognised to date on underwriting year 2024, due to a relatively cautious view of the written combined ratio.

    International Insurance

    International Insurance – Costantino Moretti – CEO, International Insurance

    In 2024 we continued to prioritise margin over growth, maintaining our pricing discipline which resulted in an improved performance in most of our markets.

    Market conditions improved in France and Spain, with premiums finally increasing to reflect continued claims inflation. Having increased prices ahead of competitors in 2023, the businesses saw their competitiveness improve resulting in an improved performance year-on-year.

    On 1st July, Julien Bouverot was appointed CEO of L’olivier which now insures 453,000 motorists and 83,000 homes. In 2024 the business has increased its turnover and delivered a double-digit profit. The team is also investing in its technological capabilities to make it easier to provide multiproduct propositions for its growing customer base.

    In Spain, Admiral Seguros is making good progress against its distribution diversification strategy which aims to make it easier for customers to access insurance through the channels that best suit them. This approach is yielding positive results with a lower expense ratio despite the investment into new channels.

    2024 was more challenging for ConTe, partly, driven by the update to the Milan Court tables which determine the cost of most bodily injury claims, inflation and because of some adverse experience, notably from some business written in 2023. The management team has already taken material pricing and other remediating actions to restore ConTe to profitability.

    Our team in the US has achieved a great turnaround. Elephant delivered a profit of £14 million due to management’s focus on improving the book mix and cost discipline. The business experienced a shrinkage of book size which is now stabilising.

    We are proud of the team’s hard work. As previously mentioned, we’ve been assessing the strategic options for Elephant. We have made good progress and are in exclusive talks with a potential acquirer.

    Our colleagues’ commitment and dedication to our customers and each other is unmatched, which is why we continue to see positive customer satisfaction scores across the board and our businesses are recognised as Great Places to Work. The combination of our colleagues and management teams’ strategic focus and expertise mean that we are well-placed for a positive 2025.

    International Insurance financial review

    £m 2024 2023
    Turnover1 840.0 894.9
    Total premiums written1 785.7 840.0
    Insurance revenue 829.5 842.6
    Insurance revenue net of XoL1 794.2 811.8
    Insurance expenses1 (236.5) (249.4)
    Insurance claims net of XoL1 (564.5) (565.2)
    Underwriting result, net of XoL1 (6.8) (2.8)
    Quota share reinsurance result1 3 (4.1) (22.1)
    Movement in net onerous loss component 0.4 0.6
    Underwriting result1 (10.5) (24.3)
    Net investment income 6.1 4.3
    Net other revenue (0.9) 2.0
    International Insurance loss before tax1 4 (5.3) (18.0)

    Segment performance indicators        

    £m 2024 2023
    Loss ratio1 2 71.1% 69.6%
    Expense ratio1 2 29.8% 30.7%
    Combined ratio¹ 100.9% 100.3%
    Insurance service margin1 2 (1.3%) (3.0%)
    Customers insured at period end1 2.10m 2.17m

    International Motor Insurance – Geographical analysis1

    2024 Spain Italy France US Total
    Vehicles insured at period end 0.45m 0.96m 0.45m 0.14m 2.00m
    Turnover (£m) 131.8 269.1 224.0 200.1 825.0
               
    2023 Spain Italy France US Total
    Vehicles insured at period end 0.45m 1.04m 0.42m 0.19m 2.10m
    Turnover (£m) 121.8 272.4 219.1 271.2 884.5

    Segment result: International Insurance result1

    £m 2024 2023
    European Motor (14.8) 6.1
    Spain Motor (3.1) (8.6)
    Italy Motor (22.8) 7.3
    France Motor 11.1 7.4
    US Motor 14.4 (19.6)
    Other (4.9) (4.5)
    International Insurance loss before tax (5.3) (18.0)

    1 Alternative Performance Measures – refer to the end of this report for definition and explanation.

    2 Alternative Performance Measures – refer to Appendix 1d for explanation and reconciliation to statutory income statement measures.

    3 Quota share reinsurance result within the segment result excludes reinsurers’ share of share scheme costs.

    4 Costs related to the settlement of a historic Italian tax matter during 2023 are excluded from the International Insurance result and presented within Group other costs, given that these are not reflective of the underlying trading performance of the International Insurance business.

    Admiral’s International insurance businesses reported a 3% reduction in customer numbers at 31 December 2024 to 2.10 million (31 December 2023: 2.17 million), as a result of a continued reduction in the US, and a reduction in Italy following pricing action taken to prioritise margin over growth. Turnover fell to £840.0 million (2023: £894.9 million), driven by a reduction in the US, partially offset by higher turnover in the European businesses as a result of higher average premiums.

    The combined result for the segment improved by around £13 million to a loss of £5.3 million (2023: loss of £18.0 million), driven by a significantly improved result in the US, which was partly offset by the disappointing Italian result.

    The combined ratio increased slightly to 100.9% (2023: 100.3%). An improved expense ratio (30% v 31%) was offset by a higher loss ratio, which was impacted by higher Italian and lower US and other European loss ratios.

    The European insurance operations in Spain, Italy and France insured 1.86 million vehicles at 31 December 2024 – 2% lower than a year earlier (31 December 2023: 1.91 million). Motor turnover was up 2% to £624.9 million (2023: £613.3 million), driven by continued price increases following continued focus on improving loss ratios.

    The combined European Motor loss was £14.8 million (2023: £6.1 million), with the combined ratio increasing to 105.0% (2023: 95.4%) largely a result of the loss of £22.8 million recognised in ConTe in Italy (2023: profit of £7.3 million).

    ConTe’s performance in 2024 was adversely impacted by both the significant increase to the settlement inflation rate for large bodily injury claims provided by the court of Milan (known as the Milan tables) which had an impact of approximately £16 million, and also the impact of continued inflation on claims settlement costs, particularly on business written in 2023. Action has been taken with strong price increases to improve the loss ratio and restore profitability. Vehicles insured decreased by 7% to 0.96 million (2023: 1.04 million) as a result of the pricing action, with turnover decreasing by 1% to £269.1 million (2023: £272.4 million).

    L’olivier assurance (France) continued to grow, with the customer base increasing by 8% to 0.45 million (31 December 2023: 0.42 million), and turnover increasing by 2% to £224.0 million (2023: £219.1 million). The business reported increased profits in 2024 (£11.1 million v £7.4 million) as a result of its focus over the past year on risk selection and loss ratio improvements, as well as cost reduction.

    In Admiral Seguros (Spain) customer numbers were flat at 0.45 million, due to increased prices to target loss and expense ratio improvements. The loss for the year was notably lower (£3.1 million v £8.6 million). Admiral Seguros continues to focus on sustainable growth through distribution diversification in the broker channel and other partnerships alongside its direct offering.

    In the US, Admiral underwrites motor insurance through its Elephant Auto business. Elephant delivered a significantly improved result in 2024 with a profit of £14.4 million (2023: loss of £19.6 million) due to strong management action on pricing, underwriting and expense control.

    In early March 2025, Admiral entered into a memorandum of understanding with a counterparty with a view to signing a purchase agreement to sell Elephant. The agreement, if signed, would be subject to regulatory approval.

    Admiral Money

    Scott Cargill – CEO, Admiral Money

    I’m pleased to be able to say it has been a positive 2024 for Admiral Money. Throughout the year we have retained a firm focus on prime lending and continued to prioritise a controlled and conservative approach to growth. Our book at the end of December stands at £1.17 billion, 23% growth since FY 2023.

    Our gross income of £112.5 million has grown 19% since FY 2023, reflecting the higher average balances through the year. Our book net interest margin finishes the year at a healthy 650bps and our credit performance has been more than satisfactory, with a full year of cost of risk of 2.5%. The outcome of this has been our third consecutive year of growing profits, achieved whilst maintaining an appropriately conservative provision to cover potential credit losses.

    Our NPS score of 75 and Trust Pilot score of 4.4 provide continued evidence that our focus on being an efficient customer-focussed prime lender, providing certainty and transparency to UK customers on their lending needs through offering guaranteed rate solutions, is a successful formula.

    In 2024 we have also continued our focus on being the lender of choice for Admiral Insurance customers. This is a key pillar of our strategy and where we have the most significant competitive advantage. Over 68% of our new customer flows in 2024 came from either current or recent Admiral Insurance customers.

    When we set out Admiral Money’s strategy in 2018, we identified four key ingredients for an ‘Admiral-like’ lender. Over seven years, we have clearly proven three: pricing excellence, expense efficiency, and product differentiation. I’m delighted to see us take our first step towards delivering the fourth, using third-party capital to enhance shareholder returns and manage risk. I’m pleased to confirm our first off-balance-sheet deal, a forward flow agreement consisting of £150 million back book and up to £300 million per annum, transferring loan risk off Admiral’s balance sheet in exchange for origination and servicing fees. This milestone enables future growth beyond the Group’s balance sheet and acts as a model for us to expand participation in consumer lending beyond the current asset classes.

    Looking to 2025, we enter with strong momentum. I expect to see continued growth towards the £1.3 billion on-balance sheet loans, with total loans under management towards £1.6 billion. I’d like to finish by thanking our customers and all of my colleagues and wish everyone the best for 2025.

    Admiral Money financial review

    £m 2024 2023
    Total interest income 112.5 94.7
    Interest expense¹ (43.2) (28.3)
    Net interest income 69.3 66.4
    Other income 0.5 0.1
    Total income 69.8 66.5
    Credit loss charge (26.9) (33.4)
    Expenses (29.9) (22.9)
    Admiral Money profit before tax² 13.0 10.2

    1 Includes £6.1 million intra-group interest expense (2023: £1.5 million).

    2 Alternative Performance Measures – refer to the end of this report for definition and explanation.

    Admiral Money distributes and underwrites unsecured personal loans and car finance products for UK consumers through the comparison channels, credit scoring applications, through car dealerships, and direct to consumers via the Admiral website. The aim of the proposition is to provide customers with affordable guaranteed rates, ensuring transparency and certainty.

    Admiral Money recorded a pre-tax profit of £13.0 million in 2024, improved from £10.2 million profit in 2023, continuing the positive trajectory of growth in both the loan book and profit.

    The business has continued to focus on writing high-quality loans, with the increase in profit largely driven by net interest income growth of 4% to £69.3 million (2023: £66.4 million), as well as a reduced provision charge driven by a focus on high-quality risk selection and positive loss performance. Increased interest expense is driven by market-linked funding instruments and continued investment to support the ongoing growth in the business, partially offset the increased net interest income and lower credit loss charge.

    Gross loans balances totaled £1,174.0 million at the end of the year (31 December 2023: £956.8 million), with a £84.3 million (31 December 2023: £81.7 million) expected credit loss provision. This leads to a net loans balance of £1,089.7 million (31 December 2023: £875.1 million)

    Credit loss models reflect the latest economic assumptions and appropriate post model adjustments remain in place to maintain an appropriately cautious level of provisioning. The provision to loans balance coverage ratio is lower at 7.2% (31 December 2023: 8.5%), with a £2.6 million increase in absolute provision size in the period to £84.3 million. The provision includes lower post model adjustments of £4.6 million (31 December 2023: £9.2 million) reflecting the improved UK economic outlook.

    Admiral Money is funded through a combination of internal and external funding sources. The external funding is secured against certain loans via a transfer of the rights to the cash flows to two special purpose entities (‘SPEs’). The securitisation and subsequent issue of notes via SPEs does not result in a significant transfer of risk from the Group.

    Other Group Items

    Other Group items financial review

    £m 2024 2023
    Share scheme charges (62.2) (54.4)
    Other central costs (51.2) (41.7)
    Admiral Pioneer result (11.3) (16.2)
    Business development costs (20.1) (15.3)
    Finance charges1 (26.4) (20.3)
    Compare.com loss before tax — (2.6)
    Sale of shares in Insurify 12.5 —
    Other interest and investment income 13.5 4.6
    Total (145.2) (145.9)

    1 Finance charges within other Group items include £1.8 million (2023: £1.7 million) that relate to intra-group arrangements,
    with the corresponding income presented within the UK Insurance result.

    Share scheme charges relate to the Group’s two employee share schemes. The increase in charge in the period is driven primarily by both higher vesting assumptions and increases in bonuses tied to dividends paid in the year.

    Other central costs consist of Group-related expenses and include an allocation of Group employee costs as well as the cost of a number of significant Group projects. In 2024, these include the cost of a one-off employee bonus of approximately £8 million, along with higher project costs for the internal capital model development and the strategic review of the US Insurance business. In addition, central Group employee expenses increased relative to 2023.

    Admiral launched Admiral Pioneer in 2020 to focus on new product diversification opportunities. Pioneer businesses include Veygo (short-term and learner driver car insurance in the UK) and Admiral Business (small business insurance in the UK). Pioneer’s businesses reported a lower loss of £11.3 million in 2024 (2023: £16.2 million). The 2023 result was impacted by adverse large claims experienced in Veygo (one large claim in particular); the improvement in 2024 arises from continued growth and better claims experience, with Veygo reporting its first profit. The overall loss in Admiral Pioneer reflects continued investment in the development of new products, including for example, the partnership with Insurtech fleet insurer Flock, entered into in 2024.

    Business development costs increased to £20.1 million (2023: £15.3 million), primarily as a result of non-recurring transaction and other costs of £6.5 million related to the More Than acquisition.

    Finance charges of £26.4 million (2023: £20.3 million) primarily related to interest on the £250 million subordinated notes issued in July 2023 at a rate of 8.5%, with the charge in 2023 based on the original £200 million subordinated loan notes issued in July 2014. The increase in finance charges is largely offset by the increase in other interest and investment income, which arises primarily from the higher interest rate environment, with 2023 also including a loss on disposal of £3.6 million.

    A loss of £2.6 million was attributed to compare.com in 2023 following its disposal. As part of the disposal, the Group received shares as a minority interest shareholder of the acquirer. In 2024, the Group sold those shares, realising a one-off gain of £12.5 million.

    Group capital structure and financial position

    The Group manages its capital to ensure that all entities are able to continue as going concerns and that regulated entities comfortably meet regulatory capital requirements. Surplus capital within subsidiaries is paid up to the Group holding company in the form of dividends.

    The Group’s regulatory capital is based on the Solvency II Standard Formula, with a capital add-on to reflect recognised limitations in the Standard Formula with respect to Admiral’s business, predominantly in respect of profit commission arrangements in co-insurance and reinsurance agreements.

    Admiral continues to develop its partial internal model to form the basis of calculating capital requirements post-approval. This programme is ongoing with regular engagement with the regulator on the application process and timing.

    The current approved capital add-on is £24 million.

    The estimated and unaudited Solvency ratio for the Group at the date of this report is as follows:

    Group capital position (estimated and unaudited)

    £bn 2024 2023
    Eligible Own Funds (post-dividend)1 1.74 1.42
    Solvency II capital requirement2 0.86 0.71
    Surplus over capital requirement 0.88 0.71
    Solvency ratio (post-dividend)3 203% 200%

    1 Own Funds include approximately £250 million of Tier 2 capital following the Group’s issue of ten-year subordinated loan notes.

    2 Solvency capital requirement includes updated, unapproved capital add-on.

    3 Solvency ratio calculated on a volatility adjusted basis.

    The Group’s solvency ratio is slightly improved compared with the closing position of 2023 at 203% (2023: 200%). Own funds increased following continued strong generation of economic capital in the core UK motor business as a result of the positive current period underwriting performance of UK Motor and prior period releases, including the impact of the change in Ogden discount rate, which offset a reduction of around 11 points of solvency ratio following the de-recognition of intangible assets recognised in the More Than acquisition due to Solvency II rules, and a higher foreseeable dividend.

    The SCR also increased over the year, though to a lesser extent. The increase of approximately £150 million was primarily due to the increase in premiums across all Group businesses and the associated impact on underwriting and operational risk elements of the capital requirement. The estimated solvency ratio including the fixed Group capital add-on of £24 million, that is calculated at the balance sheet date rather than the date of this report, and is expected to be reported in the Group’s 2024 Solvency and Financial Condition Report (SFCR) is as follows:

    Regulatory solvency ratio (estimated and unaudited) 2024 2023
    Solvency ratio as reported above 203% 200%
    Change in valuation date1 (9%) (11%)
    Other (including impact of updated, unapproved capital add-on) 4% (6%)
    Solvency ratio to be reported (SFCR) 198% 183%

    Solvency ratio sensitivities

      2024 2023
    UK Motor – incurred loss ratio +5% (26%) (11%)
    UK Motor – 1-in-200 catastrophe event (3%) (1%)
    UK Household – 1-in-200 catastrophe event (3%) (5%)
    Interest rate – yield curve up 100 bps (1%) (1%)
    Interest rate – yield curve down 100 bps —% 1%
    Credit spreads widen 100 bps (2%) (5%)
    Currency – 10% (2023: 25%) movement in euro and US dollar (2%) (3%)
    ASHE – long-term inflation assumption up 100 bps (6%) (3%)
    Loans – 100% weighting to ‘severe’ scenario2 (1%) (1%)

    1 The solvency ratio reported above includes additional own funds generated post-year-end up to the date of this report.

    2 Refer to note 7 to the financial statements for further information on the ‘severe’ scenario.

    The increased sensitivity of the incurred loss ratio stress is the result of the growth in premium exposure and relatively profitability of the most recent underwriting year, whilst the increased sensitivity to ASHE is due to both a slight increase in settled periodic payment orders (PPOs), and higher PPO propensity assumptions following the change in Ogden.

    Investments and cash

    Investment strategy

    Admiral Group’s investment strategy focuses on capital preservation and low volatility of returns relative to liabilities, and follows an asset liability matching strategy to control interest rate, inflation and currency risk. A prudent level of liquidity is held and the investment portfolio has a high-quality credit profile. In 2024, the focus remained on matching, and cashflows were invested into high-quality assets to take advantage of healthy risk-free rates, whilst being appropriately cautious on the credit outlook. The Group holds a range of government bonds, corporate bonds, alternative and private credit assets, alongside liquid holdings in cash and money market funds.

    A further aim of the strategy is to reduce the Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) related risks in the portfolio whilst continuing to achieve sustainable long-term returns. In 2024, the portfolio weighted average ESG score was upgraded to an MSCI AAA rating.

    Total investment income for 2024 was £175.6 million (2023: £126.7 million).

    The investment return on the Group’s investment portfolio (excluding unrealised gains and losses and the movement in provision for expected credit losses) was £182.1 million (2023: £124.4 million). The annualised rate of return was higher at 4.0% (2023: 3.3%) mainly as a result of higher investment yields, with the increased income driven by a combination of the higher yield and increased asset balances following the growth in the business.

    Investment return

    £m 2024 2023
    Underlying investment income yield 4.0% 3.3%
    Investment return 182.1 124.4
    Unrealised losses on derivatives (0.2) (0.2)
    Movement in provision for expected credit losses (6.3) 2.5
    Total investment return 175.6 126.7

    Cash and investments analysis

    £m 2024 2023
    Fixed income and debt securities 3,335.4 2,825.9
    Money market funds and other fair value through P&L investments 1,421.0 918.8
    Cash deposits 91.7 116.7
    Cash 313.6 353.1
    Total¹ 5,161.7 4,214.5

    1 Total Cash and Investments includes £354.5 million (2023: £278.2 million) of Level 3 investments. Refer to note 6d in the financial statements for further information.

    Cashflow

    £m 2024 2023
    Operating cashflow, before movements in investments 1,303.4 697.5
    Transfers to financial investments (810.3) (285.5)
    Operating cashflow 493.1 412.0
    Tax payments (124.1) (133.0)
    Investing cashflows (capital expenditure) (144.2) (75.9)
    Financing cashflows (436.0) (216.7)
    Loans funding through special purpose entity 178.1 44.9
    Foreign currency translation impact (6.4) 24.8
    Net cash movement (39.5) 56.1
    Unrealised gains on investments 11.4 98.1
    Movement in accrued interest, foreign exchange and unrealised gains on derivatives 165.0 69.0
    Net increase in cash and financial investments 947.2 508.7

    The main items contributing to the operating cash inflow are as follows:

    £m 2024 2023
    Profit after tax 662.9 337.2
    Change in net insurance contract liabilities 606.5 309.5
    Net change in trade receivables and liabilities 46.3 (42.3)
    Change in loans and advances to customers (231.4) (73.6)
    Non-cash Income Statement items 42.8 61.1
    Taxation expense 176.3 105.6
    Operating cashflow, before movements in investments 1,303.4 697.5

    The Group continues to generate significant amounts of cash, particularly notable during 2024, and its capital-efficient business model enables the distribution of the majority of post-tax profits as dividends. Total cash and investments at 31 December 2024 was £5,161.7 million (31 December 2023: £4,214.5 million), the increase reflecting the collections from higher written premium in UK Insurance.

    The net increase in cash and investments in the period is £947.2 million (2023: increase of £508.7 million).

    Taxation

    The tax charge for the period is £176.3 million (2023: £105.6 million), which equates to 21.0% (2023: 23.8%) of profit before tax. The tax rate in 2023 was impacted by the settlement of a non-recurring historic Italian tax matter. In addition, in 2024, a greater proportion of profits has arisen in the Group’s businesses outside the UK, leading to the lower effective tax rate. See note 10 to the financial statements for further details.

    Co-insurance and reinsurance

    Admiral makes significant use of proportional risk sharing agreements, where insurers outside the Group underwrite a majority of the risk generated, either through co-insurance or quota share reinsurance contracts. These arrangements include profit commission terms which allow Admiral to retain a significant portion of the profit generated.

    Although the primary focus and disclosure is in relation to the UK Motor Insurance book, similar longer-term arrangements are in place in the Group’s International Insurance operations and the UK Household and Van businesses.

    UK Motor Insurance

    Munich Re and its subsidiary entity, Great Lakes, currently underwrite 40% of the UK Car business. From 2022, 20% of this total is on a co-insurance basis (via Great Lakes) and will extend to 2029. The remaining 20% is on a quota share reinsurance basis and these arrangements now extend to 2026.

    The Group also has other quota share reinsurance arrangements confirmed to at least 2025 covering 38% of the business written.

    The nature of the co-insurance proportion underwritten by Munich Re (via Great Lakes) in the UK is such that 20% of all Car premium and claims accrue directly to Great Lakes and are not reflected in the Group’s financial statements. Similarly, Great Lakes reimburses the Group for its proportional share of expenses incurred in acquiring and administering this business.

    Admiral’s UK Motor quota share reinsurance arrangements result in all premiums, claims and expenses that are ceded to reinsurers being included within the quota share result in the Group’s financial statements, with a recovery recognised where years are not yet profitable.

    These agreements operate on a funds withheld basis with Admiral retaining ceded premium (net of the reinsurer margin), which then covers claims and expenses. If an underwriting year is not profitable, investment income is allocated to the withheld fund and used to delay the point at which cash recoveries are collected from the reinsurer. Other features of the arrangements include expense ratio caps and commutation options for Admiral that become available 24-36 months after the start of the underwriting year.

    Admiral tends to commute its UK Car Insurance quota share reinsurance contracts 24-36 months after inception of an underwriting year, assuming there is sufficient confidence in the profitability of the business covered by the reinsurance contract.

    In 2024, there were commutations of a small number of remaining contracts from underwriting years 2017-2020. All arrangements covering the 2020 and prior underwriting years have now been commuted. In addition, a majority of contracts from underwriting year 2021 have been commuted during 2024. There was no significant impact on profit before tax as a result of the commutations.

    UK Household Insurance

    The Group’s Household business is supported by long-term proportional reinsurance arrangements covering 70% of the risk, that runs to at least 2027. In addition, the Group has non-proportional reinsurance to cover the risk of catastrophes stemming from weather events.

    International Car Insurance

    In 2023 and 2024, Admiral retained 35% (Italy), 30% (France), 30% (Spain), and 40% (2023) and 60% (2024) (US) of the underwriting risk in each country, respectively. In 2025, Admiral will retain 60% of the underwriting risk in Italy and 100% of the underwriting risk in the US, with the retained share in France and Spain unchanged.

    Excess of loss reinsurance

    The Group also purchases excess of loss reinsurance to provide protection against large claims and reviews this cover annually. The UK Motor excess of loss cover in 2024 remained similar to prior years with cover starting at £10 million.

    Principal Risks and Uncertainties

    The Group’s 2024 Annual Report will contain an analysis of the Principal Risks and Uncertainties identified in the Group’s Enterprise Risk Management Framework, along with the impacts of those risks and actions taken to mitigate them.

    Disclaimer on forward-looking statements

    Certain statements made in this announcement are forward-looking statements. Such statements are based on current expectations and assumptions and are subject to a number of known and unknown risks and uncertainties that may cause actual events or results to differ materially from any expected future events or results expressed or implied in these forward-looking statements.

    Persons receiving this announcement should not place undue reliance on forward-looking statements. Unless otherwise required by applicable law, regulation or accounting standard, the Group does not undertake to update or revise any forward-looking statements, whether as a result of new information, future developments or otherwise.

    Consolidated Income Statement
    For the year ended 31 December 2024

        Year ended
      Note 31 December
    2024
    £m    		 31 December
    2023
    £m 1
           
    Insurance revenue 5 4,776.2 3,486.1
    Insurance service expenses 5 (3,547.5) (3,093.2)
    Insurance service result before reinsurance   1,228.7 392.9
    Net expense from reinsurance contracts held 5 (518.4) (87.1)
    Insurance service result   710.3 305.8
    Investment return – Effective interest rate 6 106.3 81.1
    Investment return – Other 6 74.6 41.8
    Investment return 6 180.9 122.9
    Finance expenses from insurance contracts issued 5 (128.4) (94.5)
    Finance income from reinsurance contracts held 5 35.9 28.9
    Net insurance finance expenses   (92.5) (65.6)
           
    Net insurance and investment result   798.7 363.1
           
    Interest income from financial services 7 113.5 94.9
    Interest expense related to financial services 7 (37.2) (26.8)
    Net interest income from financial services   76.3 68.1
           
    Other revenue and profit commission 8 189.6 205.7
    Other operating expenses 9 (293.6) (250.8)
    Other operating expenses recoverable from co-insurers 9 129.3 107.8
    Movement in expected credit loss provision and write-offs 6 (34.6) (31.0)
    Other income and expenses   (9.3) 31.7
           
    Operating profit   865.7 462.9
    Finance costs 6 (27.1) (20.5)
    Finance costs recoverable from coinsurers 6 0.6 0.4
    Net finance costs   (26.5) (20.1)
    Profit before tax   839.2 442.8
    Taxation expense 10 (176.3) (105.6)
    Profit after tax   662.9 337.2
    Profit after tax attributable to:      
    Equity holders of the parent   663.3 338.0
    Non-controlling interests (NCI)   (0.4) (0.8)
        662.9 337.2
    Earnings per share      
    Basic 12 216.6p 111.2p
    Diluted 12 216.6p 110.8p
           
    Dividends declared and paid (total) 12 369.8 307.1
    Dividends declared and paid (per share) 12 123.0p 103.0p

    1 The Consolidated Income Statement for the year ended 31 December 2023 has been re-presented to show the breakdown of Investment return between effective interest rate and investment return relating to other transactions, this having been provided within note 6a to the 2023 financial statements. For further detail, see note 6a to the financial statements.

    Consolidated Statement of Comprehensive Income
    For the year ended 31 December 2024

      Year ended
      31 December
    2024
    £m    		 31 December
    2023
    £m1
    Profit for the period 662.9 337.2
    Other comprehensive income    
    Items that are or may be reclassified to profit or loss    
    Movements in fair value reserve 11.3 98.1
    Deferred tax charge in relation to movement in fair value reserve 2.4 (5.7)
    Movements in insurance finance reserve – insurance contracts 7.9 (128.1)
    Deferred tax in relation to movement in insurance finance reserve – insurance contracts (5.1) 14.5
    Movements in insurance finance reserve – reinsurance contracts 3.3 49.2
    Deferred tax in relation to movement in insurance finance reserve – reinsurance contracts 1.3 (4.8)
    Exchange differences on translation of foreign operations (4.2) 3.7
    Movement in hedging reserve (4.1) (18.1)
    Deferred tax charge in relation to movement in hedging reserve 1.0 4.5
    Other comprehensive income for the period, net of income tax 13.8 13.3
    Total comprehensive income for the period 676.7 350.5
    Total comprehensive income for the period attributable to:    
    Equity holders of the parent 677.1 351.3
    Non-controlling interests (0.4) (0.8)
      676.7 350.5

    1Represented: see note 1 to the financial statements.

    Consolidated Statement of Financial Position

    As at 31 December 2024

        As at
      Note 31 December
    2024
    £m    		 31 December
    2023
    £m
    ASSETS      
    Property and equipment 11 87.8 90.1
    Intangible assets 11 321.0 242.9
    Deferred tax asset 10 19.8 46.1
    Corporation tax asset   18.1 20.4
    Reinsurance contract assets 5 988.6 1,191.9
    Loans and advances to customers 7 1,106.9 879.4
    Other receivables 6 225.2 409.9
    Financial investments 6 4,863.2 3,862.4
    Cash and cash equivalents 6 313.6 353.1
    Total assets   7,944.2 7,096.2
    EQUITY      
    Share capital 12 0.3 0.3
    Share premium account   13.1 13.1
    Other reserves 12 (26.7) (40.5)
    Retained earnings   1,383.4 1,018.9
    Total equity attributable to equity holders of the parent   1,370.1 991.8
    Non-controlling interests   0.6 1.0
    Total equity   1,370.7 992.8
    LIABILITIES      
    Lease liabilities 6 79.6 81.2
    Subordinated and other financial liabilities 6 1,322.2 1,129.8
    Corporation tax liabilities   35.0 4.9
    Insurance contracts liabilities 5 4,961.4 4,581.7
    Trade and other payables 6, 11 175.3 305.8
    Total liabilities   6,573.5 6,103.4
    Total equity and total liabilities   7,944.2 7,096.2

    The accompanying notes form part of these financial statements. These financial statements were approved by the Board of Directors on 5 March 2025 and were signed on its behalf by:

    Geraint Jones

    Chief Financial Officer

    Admiral Group plc

    Company Number: 03849958

    Consolidated Cashflow Statement
    For the year ended 31 December 2024

        Year ended
      Note 31 December
    2024
    £m    		 31 December
    2023
    £m1
    Profit after tax   662.9 337.2
    Adjustments for non-cash items:      
    – Depreciation of property, plant and equipment and right-of-use assets   18.8 18.2
    – Impairment/ disposal of property, plant and equipment and right-of-use assets   9.1 (4.0)
    – Amortisation and impairment of intangible assets 11 66.7 40.5
    – Movement in expected credit loss provision   10.3 15.7
    – Share scheme charges   67.8 63.3
    – Interest expense on funding for loans and advances to customers   32.3 26.2
    – Investment return 6 (177.4) (119.3)
    – Profit on disposal of Insurify share option 9 (12.5) –
    – Finance costs, including unwinding of discounts on lease liabilities 6 27.7 20.5
    – Taxation expense 10 176.3 105.6
    Change in gross insurance contract liabilities 5 421.6 451.3
    Change in reinsurance assets 5 184.9 (141.8)
    Change in insurance and other receivables 6 182.4 (94.7)
    Change in gross loans and advances to customers 7 (231.4) (73.6)
    Change in trade and other payables, including tax and social security 11 (136.1) 52.4
    Cash flows from operating activities, before movements in investments   1,303.4 697.5
    Purchases of financial instruments   (8,083.3) (3,538.4)
    Proceeds on disposal/ maturity of financial instruments   7,182.4 3,176.1
    Interest and investment income received   90.6 76.8
    Cash flows from operating activities, net of movements in investments   493.1 412.0
    Taxation payments   (124.1) (133.0)
    Net cash flow from operating activities   369.0 279.0
    Cash flows from investing activities:      
    Purchases of property, equipment and software   (61.7) (75.9)
    Intangible assets acquired through business combinations   (82.5) –
    Net cash used in investing activities   (144.2) (75.9)
    Cash flows from financing activities:      
    Proceeds on issue of loan backed securities   372.2 291.7
    Repayment of loan backed securities   (194.1) (246.8)
    Proceeds from other financial liabilities   177.7 428.4
    Repayment of other financial liabilities   (170.1) (292.2)
    Finance costs paid, including interest expense paid on funding for loans   (76.7) (52.8)
    Proceeds/(repayments) on hedging derivatives   15.6 17.7
    Repayment of lease liabilities   (12.7) (10.7)
    Equity dividends paid 12 (369.8) (307.1)
    Net cash used in financing activities   (257.9) (171.8)
    Net increase in cash and cash equivalents   (33.1) 31.3
    Cash and cash equivalents at 1 January   353.1 297.0
    Effects of changes in foreign exchange rates   (6.4) 24.8
    Cash and cash equivalents at 31 December   313.6 353.1

    1. Represented: see note 1 to the financial statements.

    Consolidated Statement of Changes in Equity
    For the year ended 31 December 2024

      Attributable to the owners of the Company
     

    Note

    		 Share
    Capital
    £m    		 Share premium account
    £m    		 Fair value reserve £m Hedging reserve
    £m    		 Foreign exchange reserve
    £m    		 Insurance finance reserve
    £m    		 Retained profit
    and loss
    £m    		 Total
    £m    		 Non-controlling interests
    £m    		 Total equity
    £m
    At 1 January 2023   0.3 13.1 (205.9) 21.1 0.1 134.5 922.6 885.8 1.2 887.0
    Profit/(loss) for the period   — — — — — — 338.0 338.0 (0.8) 337.2
    Other comprehensive income   — — 92.4 (13.6) 3.7 (69.2) — 13.3 — 13.3
    Total comprehensive income for the period — — 92.4 (13.6) 3.7 (69.2) 338.0 351.3 (0.8) 350.5
    Transactions with equity holders                      
    Dividends 12 — — — — — — (307.1) (307.1) — (307.1)
    Share scheme credit   — — — — — — 63.3 63.3 — 63.3
    Deferred tax on share scheme credit   — — — — — — 2.1 2.1 — 2.1
    Transfer to loss on disposal of assets held for sale   — — — — (3.6) — — (3.6) 0.6 (3.0)
    Total transactions with equity holders — — — — (3.6) — (241.7) (245.3) 0.6 (244.7)
    As at 31 December 2023   0.3 13.1 (113.5) 7.5 0.2 65.3 1,018.9 991.8 1.0 992.8

    Consolidated Statement of Changes in Equity (continued)

      Attributable to the owners of the Company
     

    Note

    		 Share
    Capital
    £m    		 Share premium account
    £m    		 Fair value reserve £m Hedging reserve
    £m    		 Foreign exchange reserve
    £m    		 Insurance finance reserve
    £m    		 Retained profit
    and loss
    £m    		 Total
    £m    		 Non-controlling interests
    £m    		 Total equity
    £m
    At 1 January 2024   0.3 13.1 (113.5) 7.5 0.2 65.3 1,018.9 991.8 1.0 992.8
    Profit/(loss) for the period   — — — — — — 663.3 663.3 (0.4) 662.9
    Other comprehensive income   — — 13.7 (3.1) (4.2) 7.4 — 13.8 — 13.8
    Total comprehensive income for the period — — 13.7 (3.1) (4.2) 7.4 663.3 677.1 (0.4) 676.7
    Transactions with equity holders                      
    Dividends 12 — — — — — — (369.8) (369.8) — (369.8)
    Share scheme credit   — — — — — — 67.8 67.8 — 67.8
    Deferred tax on share scheme credit   — — — — — — 3.2 3.2 — 3.2
    Transfer to loss on disposal of assets held for sale   — — — — — — — — — —
    Total transactions with equity holders — — — — — — (298.8) (298.8) — (298.8)
    As at 31 December 2024   0.3 13.1 (99.8) 4.4 (4.0) 72.7 1,383.4 1,370.1 0.6 1,370.7

    Notes to the consolidated financial statements

    General information

    Admiral Group plc is a public limited Company incorporated in England and Wales. Its registered office is at Tŷ Admiral, David Street, Cardiff, CF10 2EH and its shares are listed on the London Stock Exchange.

    The consolidated financial statements have been prepared and approved by the Directors in accordance with United Kingdom adopted international accounting standards in conformity with the requirements of the Companies Act 2006.

    The financial information included in this preliminary announcement has been prepared in accordance with the recognition and measurement criteria of International Financial Reporting Standards (‘IFRS’) as adopted by the UK. The financial information set out in this preliminary results announcement does not constitute the statutory accounts for the year ended 31 December 2024. The financial information is derived from the statutory accounts, which comply with IFRS, within the Group’s Annual Report & Accounts 2024. These accounts were signed on 5 March 2025 and are expected to be published in March 2025 and delivered to the Registrar of Companies following the Annual General Meeting to be held on 9 May 2025. The independent Auditor’s report on the Group accounts for the year ended 31 December 2024 was signed on 5 March 2025, is unqualified, does not draw attention to any matters by way of emphasis and does not include a statement under S498(2) or (3) of the Companies Act 2006. This audit opinion excludes disclosures surrounding capital adequacy calculated under the Solvency II regime as these are outside of the audit scope.

    1. Basis of preparation

    The consolidated financial statements have been prepared on a going concern basis. In considering this requirement, the Directors have taken into account the following:

    • The Group’s profit projections, including:
      • Changes in premium rates and projected policy volumes across the Group’s insurance businesses
      • Projected cost of settling claims across all of the Group’s insurance businesses, including the impact of continuing, albeit reducing, high levels of inflation
      • Projected trends in motor claims frequency
      • Projected trends in other revenue generated by the Group’s insurance business from fees and the sale of ancillary products
      • Projected contributions to profit from businesses other than the UK Motor insurance business
      • Expected trends in unemployment in the context of credit risks and the growth of the Group’s consumer lending business
      • The impact of the More Than acquisition, which completed in the first half of 2024, with renewals starting in the second half of 2024.
    • The Group’s solvency position, which continues to be closely monitored. The Group continues to maintain a strong solvency position above target levels
    • The adequacy of the Group’s liquidity position after considering all the factors noted above
    • The results of business plan scenarios and stress tests on the projected profitability, solvency and liquidity positions including the impact of severe downside scenarios that assume severe adverse economic, credit and trading stresses
    • The regulatory environment, focusing on regulatory guidance issued by the FCA and the PRA in the UK and regular communications between management and regulators
    • A review of the Company’s principal risks and uncertainties and the assessment of emerging risks, including climate-related risks.

    The accounting policies set out in the notes to the financial statements have, unless otherwise stated, been applied consistently to all periods presented in these Group financial statements. The financial statements are prepared on the historical cost basis, except for the revaluation of financial assets classified as fair value through profit or loss or as fair value through other comprehensive income, and insurance and reinsurance contract assets and liabilities which are measured at their fulfilment value in accordance with IFRS 17 Insurance Contracts.

    The Group and Company financial statements are presented in pounds sterling, rounded to the nearest £0.1 million.

    Adoption of new and revised standards

    The Group has adopted the following IFRSs and interpretations during the year, which have been issued and endorsed:

    • Amendments to IAS 7 Statement of Cashflows and IFRS 7 Financial Instruments: Disclosures: Supplier Finance Arrangements (effective 1 January 2024)
    • Amendments to IAS 1 Presentation of Financial Statements: Classification of liabilities as Current or Non-current (effective 1 January 2024)
    • Amendments to IFRS 16 Leases: Lease Liability in a Sale and Leaseback (effective 1 January 2024).

    The application of the amendments listed above has not had a material impact on the Group’s results, financial position and cashflows.

    Representation of Consolidated Cashflow Statement

    The 2023 Consolidated Cashflow Statement has been re-presented to reflect the gross cashflows relating to the subordinated loan note, loan backed securities and other borrowings which were previously all presented on a net basis within the financial statement line items ‘proceeds from other financial liabilities’ and ‘proceeds on issue of loan backed securities’. This has resulted in £292.2 million additional cash outflows within ‘repayment of other financial liabilities’ and the same inflow within ‘proceeds from other financial liabilities’ and £246.8 million additional cash outflows within ‘repayment of loan backed securities’ and the same inflow within ‘proceeds on issue of loan backed securities’. There is no overall impact on resulting cash, or the Consolidated Statement of Financial Position, Consolidated Income Statement or the Earnings per share calculations within.

    Representation of Consolidated Statement of Comprehensive Income

    The 2023 Consolidated Statement of Comprehensive Income has been re-presented to show the breakdown of the movements in the insurance finance reserve between that attributed to insurance contracts and that attributed to reinsurance contracts. The resulting deferred tax movement has also been re-presented. The movements in the insurance finance reserve are included within the Insurance finance reserve within the Statement of Changes in Equity. For the breakdown of the insurance finance reserve between insurance contracts and reinsurance contracts, see note 5e to the financial statements.

    2. Critical accounting judgements and estimates

    In applying the Group’s accounting policies as described in the notes to the financial statements, the Directors are required to make judgements (other than those involving estimations) that have a significant impact on the amounts recognised and to make estimates and assumptions about the carrying amounts of assets and liabilities that are not readily apparent from other sources.

    The estimates and associated assumptions are based on historical experience and various other factors that are believed to be reasonable under the circumstances, the results of which form the basis of making the judgements about carrying values of assets and liabilities that are not readily apparent from other sources.

    The estimates and underlying assumptions are reviewed on an ongoing basis. Revisions to accounting estimates are recognised in the year in which the estimate is reviewed. To the extent that a change in an accounting estimate gives rise to changes in assets and liabilities, the movement is recognised by adjusting the carrying amount of the related asset or liability in the period in which the change occurs.

    3. Financial risk

    3a. Insurance risk sensitivity analysis

    The following sensitivity analysis shows the impact on profit for reasonably possible movements in key assumptions with all other assumptions held constant. The correlation of assumptions will have a significant effect in determining the ultimate impacts, but to demonstrate the impact due to changes in each assumption, assumptions have been changed on an individual basis. It should be noted that movements in these assumptions are non-linear.

    The sensitivities are shown for UK motor only, being the line of business where such sensitivities could have a material impact at a Group level. The sensitivities are shown on a gross and net of quota share reinsurance basis to illustrate the impacts on shareholder profit and equity before and after risk mitigation from quota share reinsurance. The sensitivities (both gross and net) include the impacts of movements in co-insurance profit commission, given that underwriting year loss ratios including risk adjustment, are a direct input to the calculation of profit commission. Refer to note 8 to these financial statements for the accounting policy for co-insurance profit commission.

    Risk adjustment

    The sensitivities reflect the impact on profit before tax in 2024 and equity as at the end of 2024 for changes in the selection of the UK motor risk adjustment confidence level at 31 December 2024, with all other assumptions remaining unchanged.

            2024
    £m Impact on profit before tax gross of reinsurance Impact on profit before tax net of reinsurance Impact on equity gross of reinsurance Impact on equity net
    of reinsurance
    Risk adjustment decrease to 90th percentile 123.5 112.2 100.8 91.4
    Risk adjustment decrease to 85th percentile 199.3 180.8 162.5 147.2

    Undiscounted loss ratios, including risk adjustment

    The sensitivities reflect the impact on profit before tax in 2024 and equity as at the end of 2024, of a change in in the booked loss ratios for individual underwriting years (UWY) as at 31 December 2024, with all other assumptions remaining unchanged.   

    £m UWY 2021 impact on: UWY 2022 impact on: UWY 2023 impact on: UWY 2024 impact on:
      PBT Equity PBT Equity PBT Equity PBT Equity
                     
    Increase of 1%: gross of reinsurance (14.8) (11.2) (15.8) (13.1) (21.0) (17.8) (16.4) (13.8)
    Increase of 5%: gross of reinsurance (67.5) (51.2) (72.4) (60.2) (98.5) (83.8) (75.4) (63.9)
    Increase of 10%: gross of reinsurance (133.3) (101.1) (143.2) (119.2) (195.3) (166.3) (149.2) (126.6)
                     
    Decrease of 1%: gross of reinsurance 16.7 12.7 16.1 13.3 22.5 18.9 16.8 14.0
    Decrease of 5%: gross of reinsurance 76.7 58.1 85.7 70.2 118.7 98.9 88.8 73.9
    Decrease of 10%: gross of reinsurance 164.5 124.5 171.8 140.7 232.3 194.1 180.9 150.3
                     
    Increase of 1%: net of reinsurance (11.7) (8.8) (9.0) (7.2) (21.0) (17.8) (16.4) (13.8)
    Increase of 5%: net of reinsurance (51.9) (38.8) (37.6) (30.8) (79.8) (67.7) (69.8) (59.0)
    Increase of 10%: net of reinsurance (102.1) (76.3) (73.5) (60.3) (124.7) (105.4) (111.7) (94.2)
                     
    Decrease of 1%: net of reinsurance 13.6 10.2 9.1 7.3 22.5 18.9 16.8 14.0
    Decrease of 5%: net of reinsurance 63.1 47.2 54.0 43.4 118.7 98.9 88.8 73.9
    Decrease of 10%: net of reinsurance 148.3 111.6 118.0 95.2 232.3 194.1 180.9 150.3

    ‘Booked’ loss ratios are undiscounted underwriting year loss ratios, including risk adjustment.

    3b. Financial risk: Interest rate sensitivity analysis

    The impact on profit (before tax) and equity arising from the impact of 100 basis point and 200 basis point increases and decreases in interest rates on insurance contract liabilities and reinsurance contract assets as at 31 December 2024, is as follows:

      31 December 2024
    £m Impact on profit before tax gross of reinsurance Impact on profit before tax net of reinsurance Impact on equity gross of reinsurance Impact on equity net of reinsurance
    Increase of 100 basis points — — 60.8 58.3
    Decrease of 100 basis points — — (69.7) (67.1)
    Increase of 200 basis points — — 115.1 110.3
    Decrease of 200 basis points — — (152.2) (146.9)

    The impact on profit (before tax) and equity arising from the impact of 100 basis point and 200 basis point increases and decreases in interest rates on investments and cash as at 31 December 2024, is as follows:

        31 December 2024
    £m Impact on profit before tax Impact on equity
    Increase of 100 basis points — (83.4)
    Decrease of 100 basis points — 90.4
    Increase of 200 basis points — (161.0)
    Decrease of 200 basis points — 189.2

    Refer to Appendix 2 for the impact on profit before tax arising from the impact of 100 bps and 200 basis point increases and decreases in interest rates during 2024.

    4. Operating segments

    The Group has four reportable segments, as described below. These segments represent the principal split of business that is regularly reported to the Group’s Board of Directors, which is considered to be the Group’s chief operating decision maker in line with IFRS 8 Operating Segments.

    UK Insurance

    The segment consists of the underwriting of Motor, Household, Pet and Travel insurance and other products that supplement these insurance policies within the UK. It also includes the generation of revenue from additional products and fees from underwriting insurance in the UK. The Directors consider the results of these activities to be reportable as one segment as the activities carried out in generating the revenue are not independent of each other and are performed as one business. This mirrors the approach taken in management reporting.

    International Insurance

    The segment consists of the underwriting of car and home insurance and the generation of revenue from additional products and fees from underwriting car insurance outside of the UK. It specifically covers the Group operations Admiral Seguros in Spain, ConTe in Italy, L’olivier Assurance in France and Elephant Auto in the US. None of these operations are reportable on an individual basis, based on the threshold requirements in IFRS 8.

    Admiral Money

    The segment relates to the Admiral Money business launched in 2017, which provides consumer finance and car finance products in the UK, through the comparison channel, credit scoring applications and direct channels including car dealers and brokers.

    Other

    The ‘Other’ segment is designed to be comprised of all other operating segments that are not separately reported to the Group’s Board of Directors and do not meet the threshold requirements for individual reporting. It includes the results of Admiral Pioneer.

    Taxes are not allocated across the segments and, as with the corporate activities, are included in the reconciliation to the Consolidated Income Statement and Consolidated Statement of Financial Position.

    An analysis of the Group’s revenue and results for the year ended 31 December 2024, by reportable segment, is shown below. The accounting policies of the reportable segments are materially consistent with those presented in the notes to the financial statements for the Group.

        Year ended 31 December 2024
      UK
    Insurance
    £m    		 International
    Insurance
    £m    		 Admiral
    Money
    £m    		 Other
    £m    		 Eliminations3
    £m    		 Total
    £m
    Turnover1 5,108.5 840.0 108.3 89.9 — 6,146.7
    Insurance revenue 3,873.4 829.5 – 73.3 – 4,776.2
    Insurance revenue net of XoL 3,751.1 794.2 – 65.8 – 4,611.1
    Insurance services expenses (745.7) (236.5) – (33.7) – (1,015.9)
    Insurance claims net of XoL (1,952.1) (564.5) – (39.0) – (2,555.6)
    Quota share reinsurance result (290.0) (4.1) – – – (294.1)
    Net movement in onerous loss component 1.1 0.4 – – – 1.5
    Underwriting result 764.4 (10.5) – (6.9) – 747.0
    Net investment income2 70.5 6.1 0.3 0.7 (7.9) 69.7
    Net interest income from financial services – – 69.3 0.9 6.1 76.3
    Net other revenue and operating expenses 141.8 (0.9) (56.6) (12.1) – 72.2
    Segment profit/(loss) before tax4 976.7 (5.3) 13.0 (17.4) (1.8) 965.2
    Other central revenue and expenses, including share scheme charges   (115.0)
    Investment and interest income       13.5
    Finance costs           (24.5)
    Consolidated profit before tax           839.2
    Taxation expense           (176.3)
    Consolidated profit after tax         662.9

    Revenue and results for the corresponding reportable segments for the year ended 31 December 2023 are shown below.

        Year ended 31 December 2023
      UK
    Insurance
    £m    		 International
    Insurance
    £m    		 Admiral
    Money
    £m    		 Other
    £m    		 Eliminations3
    £m    		 Total
    £m
    Turnover1 3,776.0 894.9 92.1 48.5 – 4,811.5
    Insurance revenue 2,596.8 842.6 – 46.7 – 3,486.1
    Insurance revenue net of XoL 2,517.3 811.8 – 44.4 – 3,373.5
    Insurance services expenses (559.6) (249.4) – (27.9) – (836.9)
    Insurance claims net of XoL (1,560.2) (565.2) – (33.1) – (2,158.5)
    Quota share reinsurance result (18.4) (22.1) – 0.1 – (40.4)
    Net movement in onerous loss component 4.3 0.6 – – – 4.9
    Underwriting result 383.4 (24.3) – (16.5) – 342.6
    Net investment income2 55.2 4.3 – 0.3 (3.2) 56.6
    Net interest income from financial services – – 66.4 0.2 1.5 68.1
    Net other revenue and operating expenses 157.9 2.0 (56.2) (12.4) – 91.3
    Segment profit/(loss) before tax4 596.5 (18.0) 10.2 (28.4) (1.7) 558.6
    Other central revenue and expenses, including share scheme charges     (101.8)
    Investment and interest income       4.6
    Finance costs           (18.6)
    Consolidated profit before tax           442.8
    Taxation expense           (105.6)
    Consolidated profit after tax         337.2

    1 Turnover is an Alternative Performance Measure presented before intra-group eliminations. Refer to the glossary and note 14 for further information.

    2 Net Investment income is reported net of impairment of financial assets, in line with management reporting.

    3 Eliminations are in respect of the intra-group interest charges related to the UK Insurance and Admiral Money segment.

    4 Segment results exclude gross share scheme charges, and any quota share reinsurance recoveries; these net share scheme charges are presented within ‘Other central revenue and expenses, including share scheme charges’ in line with internal management reporting.

    5. Insurance Service result

    5a. Accounting policies

    The full accounting policies will be provided in the Group’s 2024 Annual Report.

    Discount rates

    A bottom-up approach has been applied in the determination of discount rates. Under this approach, the discount rate is determined as the risk-free yield adjusted for differences in liquidity characteristics between the financial assets used to derive the risk-free yield and the relevant liability cashflows (known as an illiquidity premium).

    The following weighted average rates, based on the yield curves derived using the above methodology, were used to discount the liability for incurred claims at the end of the current and prior periods:

      31 December 2024 31 December 2023
      1 year 3 years 5 years 10 years 1 year 3 years 5 years 10 years
    UK Insurance 5.0% 4.7% 4.5% 4.6% 5.4% 4.3% 4.0% 3.9%
    International (European motor) 2.7% 2.6% 2.6% 2.8% 4.0% 3.1% 3.0% 3.0%

    5b. Insurance revenue

    Insurance revenue for the corresponding reportable segments for the period ended 31 December 2024 are shown below.

      31 December 2024
      UK Motor
    £m    		 UK Non-motor
    £m    		 Int. Insurance
    £m    		 Other
    £m    		 Total Group
    £m
    Insurance revenue related movement in liability for remaining coverage 3,369.5 503.9 829.5 73.3 4,776.2

    Insurance revenue for the corresponding reportable segments for the period ended 31 December 2023 are shown below.

      31 December 2023
      UK Motor
    £m    		 UK Non-motor
    £m    		 Int. Insurance
    £m    		 Other
    £m    		 Total Group
    £m
    Insurance revenue related movement in liability for remaining coverage 2,250.2 346.6 842.6 46.7 3,486.1

    The Group’s share of its insurance business was underwritten by Admiral Insurance (Gibraltar) Limited, Admiral Insurance Company Limited, Admiral Europe Compañia Seguros (‘AECS’) and Elephant Insurance Company. The majority of contracts are short term in duration, lasting for between 6 and 12 months.

    5c. Insurance service expenses

    Insurance service expenses for the corresponding reportable segments for the period ended 31 December 2024 are shown below.

      31 December 2024
      UK Motor
    £m    		 UK Non-motor
    £m    		 Int. Insurance
    £m    		 Other
    £m    		 Total Group
    £m
    Incurred claims          
    Claims incurred in the period 2,107.2 298.2 583.7 48.9 3,038.0
    Changes to liabilities for incurred claims (496.1) (51.4) (11.1) (1.3) (559.9)
    Total incurred claims 1,611.1 246.8 572.6 47.6 2,478.1
    Movement in onerous contracts (5.1) 0.1 (0.1) — (5.1)
    Directly attributable expenses          
    Administration expenses 461.5 113.7 175.2 18.7 769.1
    Acquisition expenses 125.3 45.2 61.3 15.0 246.8
    Insurance expenses 586.8 158.9 236.5 33.7 1,015.9
    Share scheme expenses 40.7 5.4 11.1 1.4 58.6
    Total insurance expenses including share scheme expenses 627.5 164.3 247.6 35.1 1,074.5
    Total Insurance service expenses 2,233.5 411.2 820.1 82.7 3,547.5

    Insurance service expenses for the corresponding reportable segments for the period ended 31 December 2023 are shown below.

      31 December 2023
      UK Motor
    £m    		 UK Non-motor
    £m    		 Int. Insurance
    £m    		 Other
    £m    		 Total Group
    £m
    Incurred claims          
    Claims incurred in the period 1,755.5 255.0 618.2 36.4 2,665.1
    Changes to liabilities for incurred claims (406.9) (9.1) (21.3) (3.3) (440.6)
    Total incurred claims 1,348.6 245.9 596.9 33.1 2,224.5
    Movement in onerous contracts (18.6) (2.4) (2.4) — (23.4)
    Directly attributable expenses          
    Administration expenses 377.8 73.5 184.0 19.0 654.3
    Acquisition expenses 73.4 34.8 65.4 8.9 182.5
    Insurance expenses 451.2 108.3 249.4 27.9 836.8
    Share scheme expenses 43.2 2.4 8.9 0.8 55.3
    Total insurance expenses including share scheme expenses 494.4 110.7 258.3 28.7 892.1
    Total Insurance service expenses 1,824.4 354.2 852.8 61.8 3,093.2

    5d. Net expenses from reinsurance contracts held

    Net expenses from reinsurance contracts held for the corresponding reportable segments for the period ended 31 December 2024 are shown below.

      31 December 2024
      UK Motor
    £m    		 UK Non-motor
    £m    		 Int. Insurance
    £m    		 Other
    £m    		 Total Group
    £m
    Allocation of reinsurance premiums 145.8 45.8 153.9 7.6 353.1
    Amounts recoverable from reinsurers for incurred insurance service expenses          
    Incurred claims (29.2) 3.1 (275.9) (8.5) (310.5)
    Changes to liabilities for incurred claims 291.6 34.3 146.3 — 472.2
    Net expense from reinsurance contracts excluding movement in onerous loss component 408.2 83.2 24.3 (0.9) 514.8
    Other reinsurance recoveries including movement in onerous loss component 4.0 (0.1) (0.3) — 3.6
    Net expenses/(income) from reinsurance contracts held 412.2 83.1 24.0 (0.9) 518.4

    Net expenses from reinsurance contracts held for the corresponding reportable segments for the period ended 31 December 2023 are shown below.

      31 December 2023
      UK Motor
    £m    		 UK Non-motor
    £m    		 Int. Insurance
    £m    		 Other
    £m    		 Total Group
    £m
    Allocation of reinsurance premiums 93.6 49.5 190.0 2.2 335.3
    Amounts recoverable from reinsurers for incurred insurance service expenses          
    Incurred claims (173.8) (52.0) (270.3) — (496.1)
    Changes to liabilities for incurred claims 135.1 (1.4) 95.9 (0.1) 229.5
    Net expense from reinsurance contracts excluding movement in onerous loss component 54.9 (3.9) 15.6 2.1 68.7
    Other reinsurance recoveries including movement in loss recovery component 14.5 2.2 1.7 — 18.4
    Net expenses/(income) from reinsurance contracts held 69.4 (1.7) 17.3 2.1 87.1

    5e. Finance expenses/(income) from insurance contracts held and reinsurance contracts issued

    £m 2024 2023
    Amounts recognised through the income statement    
    Insurance finance expenses from insurance contracts issued 128.4 94.5
    Insurance finance income from reinsurance contracts held (35.9) (28.9)
    Net finance expense from insurance / reinsurance contracts issued 92.5 65.6
         
    £m 2024 2023
    Insurance finance reserve    
    Insurance finance reserve – insurance contracts 119.0 111.1
    Deferred tax in relation to insurance finance reserve – insurance contracts (18.6) (13.5)
    Insurance finance reserve – reinsurance contracts (32.4) (35.7)
    Deferred tax in relation to insurance finance reserve – reinsurance contracts 4.7 3.4
    Total insurance finance reserve 72.7 65.3

    5f. Insurance Liabilities and Reinsurance assets

    (i). Analysis of recognised amounts

      Year ended 31 December 2024 Year ended 31 December 2023
    £m Liability for remaining coverage Liability for incurred claims Total Liability for remaining coverage Liability for incurred claims Total
    Insurance contracts issued          
    UK Motor 883.3 2,691.1 3,574.4 769.0 2,546.7 3,315.7
    UK Non-motor 195.3 214.7 410.0 136.2 217.5 353.7
    International Motor 201.4 690.2 891.6 221.0 641.5 862.5
    Other 8.6 76.8 85.4 3.5 46.3 49.8
    Total insurance contracts issued 1,288.6 3,672.8 4,961.4 1,129.7 3,452.0 4,581.7
                 
      Asset/(liability) for remaining coverage Asset for incurred claims Total Asset/(liability) for remaining coverage Asset for incurred claims Total
    Reinsurance contracts held          
    UK Motor 34.0 236.5 270.5 23.1 496.8 519.9
    UK Non-Motor 11.2 173.5 184.7 21.4 170.2 191.6
    International Motor 43.1 481.5 524.6 (21.0) 502.8 481.8
    Other (0.1) 8.9 8.8 (1.4) — (1.4)
    Total reinsurance contracts held 88.2 900.4 988.6 22.1 1,169.8 1,191.9
                 
      Liability/(asset) for remaining coverage Liability/(asset) for incurred claims Total Liability/(asset) for remaining coverage Liability/(asset) for incurred claims Total
    Net            
    UK Motor 849.3 2,454.6 3,303.9 745.9 2,049.9 2,795.8
    UK Non-Motor 184.1 41.2 225.3 114.8 47.3 162.1
    International Motor 158.3 208.7 367.0 242.0 138.7 380.7
    Other 8.7 67.9 76.6 4.9 46.3 51.2
    Total insurance contracts issued 1,200.4 2,772.4 3,972.8 1,107.6 2,282.2 3,389.8

    (ii) Roll-forward of net asset or liability for insurance contracts issued

    UK Motor

    The following tables reconcile the opening and closing balances of the LRC and LIC for UK Motor.

    2024 Liability for remaining coverage Liability for incurred claims Total
    £m Excluding loss component Loss component Total Present value of future cashflows Risk adj. for non-financial risk Total Total
    Opening assets — — — — — — —
    Opening liabilities (766.0) (3.0) (769.0) (2,202.8) (343.9) (2,546.7) (3,315.7)
    Net opening balance (766.0) (3.0) (769.0) (2,202.8) (343.9) (2,546.7) (3,315.7)
    Insurance revenue 3,369.5 — 3,369.5 — — — 3,369.5
    Insurance service expenses              
    Incurred claims and insurance service expenses — — — (2,548.7) (186.0) (2,734.7) (2,734.7)
    Changes to liabilities for
    incurred claims    		 — — — 343.4 152.7 496.1 496.1
    Losses and reversals of losses on onerous contracts — 5.1 5.1 — — — 5.1
    Insurance service result 3,369.5 5.1 3,374.6 (2,205.3) (33.3) (2,238.6) 1,136.0
    Insurance finance income/(expense) recognised in
    profit or loss    		 — (2.4) (2.4) (86.5) (15.3) (101.8) (104.2)
    Insurance finance income/(expense) recognised in OCI — 0.3 0.3 16.2 2.2 18.4 18.7
    Total changes in comprehensive income 3,369.5 3.0 3,372.5 (2,275.6) (46.4) (2,322.0) 1,050.5
    Other changes 35.9 — 35.9 79.3 — 79.3 115.2
    Cashflows              
    Premiums received (3,522.7) — (3,522.7) — — — (3,522.7)
    Claims and other insurance service expenses paid — — — 2,098.3 — 2,098.3 2,098.3
    Other movements — — — — — — —
    Total cashflows (3,522.7) — (3,522.7) 2,098.3 — 2,098.3 (1,424.4)
    Net closing balance (883.3) — (883.3) (2,300.8) (390.3) (2,691.1) (3,574.4)
    Closing assets — — — — — — —
    Closing liabilities (883.3) — (883.3) (2,300.8) (390.3) (2,691.1) (3,574.4)
    2023 Liability for remaining coverage Liability for incurred claims Total
    £m Excluding loss component Loss component Total Present value of future cashflows Risk adj. for non-financial risk Total Total
    Opening assets — — — — — — —
    Opening liabilities (534.1) (8.1) (542.2) (1,984.5) (426.6) (2,411.1) (2,953.3)
    Net opening balance (534.1) (8.1) (542.2) (1,984.5) (426.6) (2,411.1) (2,953.3)
    Insurance revenue 2,250.2 — 2,250.2 — — — 2,250.2
    Insurance service expenses              
    Incurred claims and insurance service expenses — — — (2,105.1) (144.8) (2,249.9) (2,249.9)
    Changes to liabilities for
    incurred claims    		 — — — 140.1 266.8 406.9 406.9
    Losses and reversals of losses on onerous contracts — 18.6 18.6 — — — 18.6
    Insurance service result 2,250.2 18.6 2,268.8 (1,965.0) 122.0 (1,843.0) 425.8
    Insurance finance income/(expense) recognised in
    profit or loss    		 — (4.1) (4.1) (59.0) (12.3) (71.3) (75.4)
    Insurance finance income/(expense) recognised in OCI — (9.4) (9.4) (60.5) (27.0) (87.5) (96.9)
    Total changes in comprehensive income 2,250.2 5.1 2,255.3 (2,084.5) 82.7 (2,001.8) 253.5
    Other changes1   — — 64.0 — 64.0 64.0
    Cashflows              
    Premiums received (2,482.1) — (2,482.1) — — — (2,482.1)
    Claims and other insurance service expenses paid1 — — — 1,802.2 — 1,802.2 1,802.2
    Other movements — — — — — — —
    Total cashflows (2,482.1) — (2,482.1) 1,802.2 — 1,802.2 (679.9)
    Net closing balance (766.0) (3.0) (769.0) (2,202.8) (343.9) (2,546.7) (3,315.7)
    Closing assets — — — — — — —
    Closing liabilities (766.0) (3.0) (769.0) (2,202.8) (343.9) (2,546.7) (3,315.7)

    1 Claims paid and other changes have been re-presented to separately present the transfer of non-cash insurance service expenses, (primarily depreciation, amortisation and IFRS 2 equity-settled share based payments), out of the LIC. There is no impact on the closing balance.

    (iii) Roll-forward of net asset or liability for reinsurance contracts issued

    UK Motor

    The following tables reconcile the opening and closing balances of the ARC and AIC for UK Motor.

    2024 Asset for remaining coverage Asset for incurred claims Total
    £m Excluding loss component Loss-recovery component Total Present value of future cashflows Risk adj. for non-financial risk Total Total
    Opening assets 20.8 2.3 23.1 313.2 183.6 496.8 519.9
    Opening liabilities — — — — — — —
    Net opening balance 20.8 2.3 23.1 313.2 183.6 496.8 519.9
    Allocation of reinsurance premiums (145.8) — (145.8) — — — (145.8)
    Amounts recoverable from reinsurers for incurred claims              
    Incurred claims — — — 22.2 7.0 29.2 29.2
    Changes to liabilities for
    incurred claims    		 — — — (158.6) (133.0) (291.6) (291.6)
    Changes in the loss
    recovery component    		 — (4.0) (4.0) — — — (4.0)
    Net income/ (expense) from reinsurance contracts held (145.8) (4.0) (149.8) (136.4) (126.0) (262.4) (412.2)
    Reinsurance finance income/(expense) recognised in
    profit or loss    		 — 1.8 1.8 11.1 7.9 19.0 20.8
    Reinsurance finance income/(expense) recognised in OCI — (0.1) (0.1) (2.8) (1.5) (4.3) (4.4)
    Total changes in comprehensive income (145.8) (2.3) (148.1) (128.1) (119.6) (247.7) (395.8)
    Cashflows              
    Premiums paid 159.0 — 159.0 — — — 159.0
    Claims recoveries — — — (0.9) — (0.9) (0.9)
    Recoveries as a result of commutations — — — (11.7) — (11.7) (11.7)
    Total cashflows 159.0 — 159.0 (12.6) — (12.6) 146.4
    Net closing balance 34.0 — 34.0 172.5 64.0 236.5 270.5
    Closing assets 34.0 — 34.0 172.5 64.0 236.5 270.5
    Closing liabilities — — — — — — —
    2023 Asset for remaining coverage Asset for incurred claims Total
    £m Excluding loss component Loss-recovery component Total Present value of future cashflows Risk adj. for non-financial risk Total Total
    Opening assets 20.2 6.3 26.5 255.4 175.6 431.0 457.5
    Opening liabilities — — — — — — —
    Net opening balance 20.2 6.3 26.5 255.4 175.6 431.0 457.5
    Allocation of reinsurance premiums (93.6) — (93.6) — — — (93.6)
    Amounts recoverable from reinsurers for incurred claims — — — — — — —
    Incurred claims — — — 96.7 77.1 173.8 173.8
    Changes to liabilities for
    incurred claims    		 — — — (43.1) (92.0) (135.1) (135.1)
    Changes in the loss
    recovery component    		 — (14.5) (14.5) — — — (14.5)
    Net income/ (expense) from reinsurance contracts held (93.6) (14.5) (108.1) 53.6 (14.9) 38.7 (69.4)
    Reinsurance finance income/(expense) recognised in
    profit or loss    		 — 3.2 3.2 9.4 7.5 16.9 20.1
    Reinsurance finance income/(expense) recognised in OCI — 7.3 7.3 12.5 15.4 27.9 35.2
    Total changes in comprehensive income (93.6) (4.0) (97.6) 75.5 8.0 83.5 (14.1)
    Cashflows — — — — — — —
    Premiums paid 94.2 — 94.2 — — — 94.2
    Claims recoveries — — — (2.2) — (2.2) (2.2)
    Recoveries as a result of commutations — — — (15.5) — (15.5) (15.5)
    Total cashflows 94.2 — 94.2 (17.7) — (17.7) 76.5
    Net closing balance 20.8 2.3 23.1 313.2 183.6 496.8 519.9
    Closing assets 20.8 2.3 23.1 313.2 183.6 496.8 519.9
    Closing liabilities — — — — — — —

    (iv) Claims development

    The tables below illustrate how estimates of cumulative claims for UK Motor have developed over time on a gross and net of reinsurance basis, for each underwriting year, and reconciles the cumulative claims to the amount included in the Statement of Financial Position.

    Gross claims development

    Financial year ended 31 December 2024
    Underwriting year 2014 & prior 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 Total
      £m £m £m £m £m £m £m £m £m £m £m £m
    UK Motor (core)                        
    At end of year one   394 436 552 686 701 552 688 845 973 1,241  
    At end of year two   701 829 1,144 1,175 1,067 985 1,326 1,584 1,812    
    At end of year three   707 788 994 1,109 1,010 954 1,294 1,544      
    At end of year four   680 727 947 1,064 996 921 1,270        
    At end of year five   636 713 912 1,008 981 910          
    At end of year six   619 690 890 1,000 938            
    At end of year seven   606 656 865 959              
    At end of year eight   594 652 849                
    At end of year nine   585 657                  
    Ten years later   583                    
    Gross best estimates of undiscounted claims 3,803 583 657 849 959 938 910 1,270 1,544 1,812 1,241 14,566
    Cumulative gross claims paid (3,666) (568) (618) (782) (906) (822) (733) (924) (1,104) (1,105) (561) (11,789)
    Gross undiscounted best estimate liabilities 137 15 39 67 53 116 177 346 440 707 680 2,777
    Risk adjustment (undiscounted)                       480
    Effect of discounting                       (673)
    Gross claims liabilities                       2,584
    Ancillary claims and expense liabilities                       107
    UK Motor Gross liabilities for incurred claims                       2,691

    Claims development net of XoL reinsurance

    Financial year ended 31 December 2024
    Underwriting year 2014 & prior 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 Total
      £m £m £m £m £m £m £m £m £m £m £m £m
    UK Motor (core)                        
    At end of year one   378 427 510 646 675 520 661 825 951 1,220  
    At end of year two   682 783 1,053 1,123 1,033 949 1,292 1,550 1,776    
    At end of year three   667 743 917 1,053 986 927 1,257 1,517      
    At end of year four   637 692 883 1,024 969 892 1,240        
    At end of year five   607 677 860 974 950 886          
    At end of year six   599 663 840 978 925            
    At end of year seven   586 640 820 946              
    At end of year eight   579 635 825                
    At end of year nine   577 644                  
    Ten years later   580                    
    Net of XoL best estimates of undiscounted claims 3,773 580 644 825 946 925 886 1,240 1,517 1,776 1,220 14,332
    Cumulative
    claims paid    		 (3,666) (568) (618) (782) (906) (822) (733) (924) (1,104) (1,105) (561) (11,789)
    Net of XoL undiscounted best estimate liabilities 107 12 26 43 40 103 153 316 413 671 659 2,543
    Risk adjustment (undiscounted)                       428
    Effect of discounting                       (543)
    Net of XoL
    claims liabilities    		                       2,428
    Ancillary claims and expense liabilities                       107
    UK Motor Net of XoL liabilities for incurred claims                       2,535

    Claims development net of reinsurance

    Financial year ended 31 December 2024
    Underwriting year 2014 & prior 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 Total
      £m £m £m £m £m £m £m £m £m £m £m £m
    UK Motor (core)                        
    At end of year one   378 427 493 625 626 520 657 762 939 1,220  
    At end of year two   682 783 1,016 1,086 1,033 949 1,259 1,442 1,776    
    At end of year three   667 743 886 1,018 986 927 1,239 1,470      
    At end of year four   637 692 853 990 969 892 1,236        
    At end of year five   607 677 830 957 950 886          
    At end of year six   599 663 811 944 925            
    At end of year seven   586 640 793 913              
    At end of year eight   579 635 798                
    At end of year nine   577 644                  
    Ten years later   580                    
    Net best estimates of undiscounted claims 3,773 580 644 798 913 925 886 1,236 1,470 1,776 1,220 14,221
    Cumulative net
    claims paid    		 (3,666) (568) (618) (755) (874) (822) (733) (924) (1,104) (1,105) (561) (11,730)
    Net undiscounted best
    estimate liabilities    		 107 12 26 43 39 103 153 312 366 671 659 2,491
    Risk adjustment (undiscounted)                       419
    Effect of discounting                       (528)
    Net claims liabilities                       2,382
    Ancillary claims and
    expense liabilities    		                       72
    UK Motor Net liabilities for
    incurred claims    		                       2,454

    (v) UK Motor Loss ratios and Changes to liabilities for incurred claims

    The table below shows the development of UK Motor Insurance loss ratios for the past three financial periods, presented on an underwriting year basis, both using undiscounted amounts (i.e. cashflows) and discounted amounts.

      31 December
    UK Motor Insurance loss ratio development – undiscounted*, net of excess of loss reinsurance 2021 2022 2023 2024
    Underwriting year        
    2019 73% 71% 67% 64%
    2020 68% 65% 58% 57%
    2021 95% 91% 86% 82%
    2022 —% 104% 96% 91%
    2023 —% —% 94% 80%
    2024 —% —% —% 77%

    * Booked undiscounted loss ratios presented from the transition date of IFRS 17 (1 January 2022) onwards.

      31 December
    UK Motor Insurance loss ratio development – discounted*, net of excess of loss reinsurance 2021 2022 2023 2024
    Underwriting year        
    2019 71% 69% 65% 63%
    2020 67% 63% 57% 55%
    2021 92% 86% 81% 77%
    2022 —% 97% 88% 83%
    2023 —% —% 86% 72%
    2024 —% —% —% 71%

    * Loss ratios using discounted locked-in curves, excluding finance expenses are presented from the transition date of IFRS 17 (1 January 2022) onwards.

    The following table analyses the impact of movements in changes to liabilities from incurred claims by underwriting year on a gross and net of excess of loss reinsurance basis for UK Motor.

      31 December 2024
    £m    		 31 December 2023
    £m
    Gross    
    Underwriting year    
    2019 & prior 173.7 152.9
    2020 41.8 98.2
    2021 87.0 76.4
    2022 107.1 79.4
    2023 83.8 0.0
    2024 0.0 0.0
    Total UK Motor gross changes to liabilities for incurred claims 493.4 406.9
    Net    
    Underwriting year    
    2019 & prior 99.6 145.6
    2020 30.5 97.7
    2021 70.6 80.1
    2022 94.5 69.4
    2023 76.7 0.0
    2024 0.0 0.0
    Total UK Motor net of excess of loss changes to liabilities for incurred claims 371.9 392.8

    6. Investment income and finance costs

    6a. Investment return

      31 December 2024
    £m    		 31 December 2023
    £m
      At EIR Other Total At EIR Other Total
    Investment return            
    On assets classified as FVTPL — 67.1 67.1 — 43.3 43.3
    On assets classified as FVOCI1 3 100.4 5.2 105.6 77.0 (3.6) 73.4
    On assets classified as amortised cost1 5.9 — 5.9 4.1 — 4.1
                 
    Net unrealised losses            
    Unrealised (loss) / gain on forward contracts — (0.2) (0.2) — (0.2) (0.2)
    Share of associate profit/ loss — (1.0) (1.0) — (1.3) (1.3)
    Interest income on cash and cash equivalents1 — 5.5 5.5 — 5.4 5.4
    Investment fees — (2.0) (2.0) — (1.8) (1.8)
    Total investment and interest income2 106.3 74.6 180.9 81.1 41.8 122.9

    1 Interest received during the year was £90.6 million (2023: £76.8 million).

    2 Total investment return excludes £7.9 million of intra-group interest (2023: £3.2 million).

    3 Realised losses on sales of debt securities classified as FVOCI are £4.5 million (2023: £0.9 million).

    6b. Finance costs

      31 December 2024
    £m    		 31 December 2023
    £m
    Interest expense on subordinated loan notes and other credit facilities1 2 24.5 18.5
    Interest expense on lease liabilities 2.6 2.0
    Interest recoverable from co-insurers (0.6) (0.4)
    Total finance costs 26.5 20.1

    1 Interest paid during the year was £27.0 million (2023: £20.5 million).

    2 See note 7 for details of credit facilities.

    Finance costs represent interest payable on the £250.0 million (2023: £305.1 million) subordinated notes and other financial liabilities.

    Interest expense on lease liabilities represents the unwinding of the discount on lease liabilities under IFRS 16.

    6c. Expected credit losses

      31 December 2024
    £m    		 31 December 2023
    £m
    Expected credit (gains)/losses on financial investments 6.3 (2.5)
    Expected credit losses on loans and advances to customers1 28.3 33.5
    Total expense for expected credit losses 34.6 31.0

    1 Includes £26.1 million (2023: £15.0 million) of write-offs, with total movement in the expected credit loss provision being £28.3 million (2023: £33.5 million).

    6d. Financial assets and liabilities

    The Group’s financial assets and liabilities can be analysed as follows:

      31 December 2024
    £m    		 31 December 2023
    £m
    Financial investments measured at FVTPL    
    Money market funds 902.6 587.5
    Other funds1 473.9 301.3
    Derivative financial instruments 5.8 17.6
    Equity investments (designated FVTPL) 46.9 12.4
      1,429.2 918.8
    Financial investments classified as FVOCI    
    Corporate debt securities 2,410.9 2,040.6
    Government debt securities2 772.2 519.6
    Private debt securities 152.3 242.7
      3,335.4 2,802.9
    Equity investments (designated FVOCI) — 23.0
      3,335.4 2,825.9
    Financial assets measured at amortised cost    
    Deposits with credit institutions 91.7 116.7
    Other    
    Investment in Associate — 1.0
    Investment Property 6.9 —
    Total financial investments 4,863.2 3,862.4
         
    Other financial assets (measured at amortised cost)    
    Insurance related receivables 51.1 272.7
    Trade and other receivables 110.4 75.0
    Insurance related and other receivables 161.5 347.7
    Loans and advances to customers (note 7) 1,106.9 879.4
    Cash and cash equivalents 313.6 353.1
    Total financial assets 6,445.2 5,442.6
    Financial liabilities    
    Subordinated notes 258.9 315.2
    Loan backed securities 937.7 759.6
    Other borrowings 117.4 55.0
    Derivative financial instruments 8.2 —
    Subordinated and other financial liabilities 1,322.2 1,129.8
    Trade and other payables3 175.3 305.8
    Lease liabilities 79.6 81.2
    Total financial liabilities 1,577.1 1,516.8

    1Other funds include funds which primarily invest in fixed income securities are recognised as fair value through profit and loss
    2Government debt securities include £0.6 million of short term UK government bonds held for collateral against foreign exchange hedging derivatives

    3Trade and other payables include deferred income, accruals and other tax and social security.

    The table below shows how the financial assets and liabilities held at fair value have been measured using the fair value hierarchy:

      31 December 2024 31 December 2023
      FVTPL
    £m    		 FVOCI
    £m    		 FVTPL
    £m    		 FVOCI
    £m
    Level one (quoted prices in active markets) 1,221.2 3,183.1 888.8 2,560.1
    Level two (use of observable inputs) (2.4) — 17.6 —
    Level three (use of significant unobservable inputs) 202.2 152.3 12.4 265.8
    Total 1,421.0 3,335.4 918.8 2,825.9

    Level three investments consist of debt investments and equity investments.

    Debt investments are comprised primarily of investments in funds which invest in debt securities, these are valued at the proportion of the Group’s holding of the Net Asset Value (NAV) reported by the investment vehicle. These include funds that invest in corporate direct lending, residential and commercial mortgages, infrastructure debt and other private debt. In addition, there is a small allocation of privately placed bonds which do not trade on active markets, these are valued using discounted cash-flow models designed to appropriately reflect the credit and illiquidity of these instruments; these valuations are performed by the external fund managers. The key unobservable input across private debt securities is the discount rate which is based on the credit performance of the assets. A deterioration of the credit performance or expected future performance will result in higher discount rates and lower values.

    As these debt investments are held within investment funds where appropriate the Group elects to treat these investments as equity through OCI. Debt investments in which the funds are closed ended are classified as FVTPL within Other funds (2024: £154.8 million).

    Equity securities are primarily comprised of investments in Private Equity and Infrastructure Equity funds, which are valued at the proportion of the Group’s holding of the NAV reported by the investment vehicle. These are based on several unobservable inputs including market multiples and cashflow forecasts. These are held at FVTPL, with realised and unrealised gains/losses flowing through the P&L.

    There were no significant inter-relationships between unobservable inputs that materially affect fair values.

    The table below presents the movement in the period relating to financial instruments valued using a level three valuation:

    31 December 2024
    £m
    Level Three Investments Equity Investments Debt Investments Total
    Balance as at 1 January 2024 35.5 242.7 278.2
    Gains/(losses) recognised in the Income Statement (4.5) 9.6 5.1
    Gains/(losses) recognised in Other Comprehensive Income — (2.8) (2.8)
    Purchases 16.1 94.9 111.0
    Disposals (0.2) (36.8) (37.0)
    Balance as at 31 December 2024 46.9 307.6 354.5
    31 December 2023
    £m
    Level Three Investments Equity Investments Debt Investments Total
    Balance as at 1 January 2023 31.6 166.6 198.2
    Gains/(losses) recognised in the Income Statement (0.1) 10.0 9.9
    Gains/(losses) recognised in Other Comprehensive Income (1.0) 0.8 (0.2)
    Purchases 6.1 89.6 95.7
    Disposals (1.1) (24.3) (25.4)
    Balance as at 31 December 2023 35.5 242.7 278.2

    7. Loans and Advances to Customers

      31 December 2024
    £m    		 31 December 2023
    £m
    Loans and advances to customers – gross carrying amount 1,174.0 956.8
    Loans and advances to customers – provision (84.3) (81.7)
    Total loans and advances to customers – Admiral Money 1,089.7 875.1
    Total loans and advances to customers – Other 17.2 4.3
    Total loans and advances to customers 1,106.9 879.4

    Loans and advances to customers are comprised of the following:

      31 December 2024
    £m    		 31 December 2023
    £m
    Unsecured personal loans 1,155.6 937.7
    Finance leases 18.4 19.1
    Other 18.6 4.4
    Total loans and advances to customers, gross 1,192.6 961.2

    Forward-looking information

    Under IFRS 9 the provision must reflect an unbiased and probability-weighted amount that is determined by evaluating a range of possible outcomes. The means by which the Group has determined this is to run scenario analysis.

    Management judgment has been used to define the weighting and severity of the different scenarios based on available data.

    As at December 2024 there are three key economic drivers of credit losses factored into the scenarios, as follows:

    • UK Unsecured Debt to Income (‘DTI’)
    • UK Employment Hazard Rates
    • Annual UK GDP % Change

    The variables are combined using a statistical model which will estimate the relative change in the PD of an account for each scenario over the life of the loan. The Group has moved from a single variable model as at December 2023 (Unemployment) to model containing three drivers in recognition of the fact that there are multiple macroeconomic drivers which can influence the direction of default rates.

    The scenario weighting assumptions used are detailed below, along with the annual peak for each economic driver assumed in each scenario at 31 December 2024.

      For the Forecast Year Ended
    At 31 December 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029
      % % % % %
    Base – 50%          
    Gross domestic product 1.6 1.6 1.6 1.7 1.7
    Unemployment rate 4.4 4.3 4.1 4.1 4.1
    UK Household Unsecured Debt to Income 13.2 13.7 14.1 14.4 14.5
    Upside – 10%          
    Gross domestic product 2.7 3.0 1.8 1.6 1.8
    Unemployment rate 4.2 3.8 3.8 3.8 3.8
    UK Household Unsecured Debt to Income 12.6 12.3 11.9 12.2 12.3
    Downside – 30%          
    Gross domestic product 0.9 0.1 3.0 3.0 2.7
    Unemployment rate 5.6 6.0 5.6 4.9 4.6
    UK Household Unsecured Debt to Income 13.4 14.5 15.0 15.1 15.1
    Severe – 10%          
    Gross domestic product 0.8         (1.1) 2.6 3.4 3.1
    Unemployment rate 6.6 8.0 7.9 6.8 6.1
    UK Household Unsecured Debt to Income 13.6 15.0 15.7 15.9 16.1
    Probability-weighted          
    Gross domestic product 1.4 1.0 2.1 2.3 2.1
    Unemployment rate 5.0 5.1 4.9 4.6 4.4
    UK Household Unsecured Debt to Income 13.2 13.9 14.3 14.5 14.6
      For the Forecast Year Ended
    At 31 December 2023 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029
      % % % % %
    Base – 50%          
    Gross domestic product 1.5 1.6 1.6 1.8 1.9
    Unemployment rate 4.7 4.2 4.1 4.1 4.1
    UK Household Unsecured Debt to Income 13.8 14.2 14.4 14.5 14.5
    Upside – 10%          
    Gross domestic product 2.7 2.4 2.1 1.6 1.4
    Unemployment rate 3.6 3.7 3.8 3.9 3.9
    UK Household Unsecured Debt to Income 12.5 12.4 12.5 12.5 12.4
    Downside – 30%          
    Gross domestic product 0.1 3.0 3.0 3.0 2.3
    Unemployment rate 6.0 5.7 4.9 4.6 4.5
    UK Household Unsecured Debt to Income 14.5 14.8 15.0 15.2 15.2
    Severe – 10%          
    Gross domestic product         (1.8) 3.0 3.9 3.9 3.0
    Unemployment rate 8.0 8.0 6.7 5.9 5.4
    UK Household Unsecured Debt to Income 15.1 15.7 15.9 16.1 16.2
    Probability-weighted          
    Gross domestic product 0.8 2.2 2.3 2.3 2.1
    Unemployment rate 5.3 4.9 4.6 4.4 4.3
    UK Household Unsecured Debt to Income 14.0 14.4 14.6 14.7 14.7

    The economic scenarios and forecasts have been updated in conjunction with a third party economics provider. The probability weightings reflect the view that there is a probability of 40% attached to recessionary outcomes. 

    Sensitivities to key areas of estimation uncertainty

    The key areas of estimation uncertainty identified, as per note 2 to the financial statements, are in the probability of default (‘PD’) and the forward-looking scenarios.

      31 December 2024
    Weighting    		 31 December 2024
    Sensitivity    		 31 December 2023
    Weighting    		 31 December 2023
    Sensitivity
    Base 50% (1.7) 50% (1.1)
    Upturn 30% (3.3) 10% (5.2)
    Downturn 10% 2.9 30% 2.5
    Severe 10% 6.3 10% 8.2

    The sensitivities in the above tables show the variance to expected credit loss (‘ECL’) that would be expected if the given scenario unfolded rather than the weighted position the provision is based on. At 31 December 2024 the implied weighted peak unemployment rate is 5.0%: the table shows that in a downturn scenario with a 5.6% peak unemployment rate the provision would increase by £2.9 million, whilst the upturn would reduce the provision by £3.3 million, base case reduce by £1.7 million and severe increase the provision by £6.3 million.

    Stage 1 assets represent 86.6% of the total loan assets; 0.1% increase in the stage 1 PD, i.e. from 2.3% to 2.4% would result in a £0.8 million increase in ECL.

    Judgements required – Post Model Adjustments (‘PMA’s)

    As at 31 December 2024, the expected credit loss allowance included PMAs totalling £4.6 million (2023: £9.2 million).

    Post Model Adjustments 31 December 2024
    £m    		 31 December 2023
    £m
    Model performance 1.5 2.0
    Cost of Living 1.3 6.5
    Economic scenarios 1.8 0.7
      4.6 9.2

    PMAs are calculated using management judgement and analysis. The key categories of PMAs are as follows:

    Model performance

    The Loss Given Default (‘LGD’) model considers long run recoveries over a period of up to five years post default. A potential shortfall has been identified for customers that roll straight through the arrears buckets up the point of write off. Although this shortfall is immaterial, an adjustment has been made to ensure it is accounted for in our expected credit loss.

    Cost of Living

    This PMA captures the risk of customers falling into a negative affordability position, whereby customers are no longer able to meet their credit commitments due to higher expenditure driven by increased mortgage payments, when their standard variable or fixed term rate comes to an end. A PMA is held to acknowledge this, using both external and internal data.

    Economic scenarios

    A new econometric model has been implemented to derive our forward-looking view of ECL’s. The model is sensitive to the timing of forecasted peaks in, for example, unemployment rates. Given increased uncertainty driven by geo-political events, management has made an adjustment equivalent to a six-month advancement in the peak point of each scenario.

    Write off policy

    Loans are written off where there is no reasonable expectation of recovery. The Group considers there to be no reasonable expectation of recovery where an extensive set of collections processes has been completed, the debt is statute barred, the debtor cannot be traced or is deceased, or in situations involving significant financial hardship. The Group’s policy is to write down balances to their estimated net realisable value. Write offs are actioned on a case-by-case basis taking into account the operational position and the collections strategy.

    Credit grade information

            31 December 2024 31 December 2023
      Stage 1 
    12 month ECL 
    £m     		 Stage 2 
    Lifetime ECL 
    £m    		 Stage 3  
    Lifetime ECL 
    £m    		 Total 
    £m    		 Total 
    £m
    Credit Grade1          
    Higher 786.5 67.6 — 854.1 649.3
    Medium 171.2 21.3 — 192.5 186.6
    Lower 53.9 9.1 — 63.0 65.4
    Credit impaired — — 64.4 64.4 55.5
    Gross carrying amount 1,011.6 98.0 64.4 1,174.0 956.8
    Expected credit loss allowance (15.5) (19.8) (48.5) (83.8) (81.1)
    Other loss allowance2 (0.5) — — (0.5) (0.6)
    Carrying amount – Admiral Money 995.6 78.2 15.9 1,089.7 875.1
    Carrying amount – Other 16.8 0.3 0.1 17.2 4.3
    Carrying amount 1,012.4 78.5 16.0 1,106.9 879.4

    1Credit grade is the internal credit banding given to a customer at origination. This is based on external credit rating information.

    2Other loss allowance covers losses due to a reduction in current or future vehicle value or costs associated with recovery and sale of vehicles and those as a result of changes in the performance of the EIR asset.

    8. Other revenue and co-insurer profit commission

      31 December 2024
      UK Insurance
    £m    		 International Insurance
    £m    		 Admiral Money
    £m    		 Other
    £m    		 Total Group
    £m
    Major products/service line        
    Fee and commission revenue 119.5 0.1 0.2 0.2 120.0
    Revenue from law firm 16.3 — — — 16.3
    Comparison income — — — — —
    Total other revenue 135.8 0.1 0.2 0.2 136.3
    Profit commission from co-insurers 53.3 — — — 53.3
    Total other revenue and co-insurer profit commission 189.1 0.1 0.2 0.2 189.6
               
    Timing of revenue recognition          
    Point in time 139.0 0.1 0.2 0.2 139.5
    Over time 50.1 — — — 50.1
      189.1 0.1 0.2 0.2 189.6
      31 December 2023
      UK Insurance
    £m    		 International Insurance
    £m    		 Admiral Money
    £m    		 Other
    £m    		 Total Group
    £m
    Major products/service line        
    Fee and commission revenue 107.2 — 0.1 — 107.3
    Revenue from law firm 18.3 — — — 18.3
    Comparison income — — — 1.6 1.6
    Total other revenue 125.5 — 0.1 1.6 127.2
    Profit commission from co-insurers 76.5 2.0 — — 78.5
    Total other revenue and co-insurer profit commission 202.0 2.0 0.1 1.6 205.7
               
    Timing of revenue recognition          
    Point in time 160.4 2.0 0.1 1.6 164.1
    Over time 41.6 — — — 41.6
      202.0 2.0 0.1 1.6 205.7

    Profit commission

    The cumulative profit commission recognised at each point in time is calculated in aggregate across the contract, in line with contract terms, based on a number of detailed inputs for each individual underwriting year, the most material of which are as follows:

    • Premiums, defined as gross premiums ceded including any instalment income, less reinsurance premium (for excess of loss reinsurance).
    • Insurance expenses incurred.
    • Claims costs incurred.
      • The Group uses the expected value method for the initial calculation of profit commission revenue, based on known premiums and expenses, and the best estimate of claims costs.
      • The variable revenue estimated using the expected value method above is constrained through the inclusion of the risk adjustment within the claims cost element of the calculation, with the profit commission recognised aligned to the IFRS 17 booked loss ratios, discounted at locked-in rates, and inclusive of finance expense. The inclusion of the risk adjustment constrains the cumulative profit commission revenue recognised to a level where there is a high probability of no significant reversal.

    The key methods, inputs and assumptions used to estimate the variable consideration of profit commission are therefore in line with those used for the calculation of claims liabilities, as set out in note 3 to the financial statements, with further detail also included in note 5. There are no further critical accounting estimates or judgements in relation to the recognition of profit commission.

      31 December 2024
    £m    		 31 December 2023
    £m
    Underwriting year    
    2020 & prior 51.7 76.5
    2021 — —
    2022 — —
    2023 — —
    2024 1.6 —
    Total UK motor profit commission 53.3 76.5

    9. Directly attributable and other expenses

      31 December 2024
      Directly attributable expenses
    £m    		 Other operating expenses
    £m    		 Total expenses
    £m
    Administration and acquisition expenses 1,015.9 121.3 1,137.2
    Expenses relating to additional products and fees — 46.2 46.2
    Share scheme expenses 58.6 35.3 93.9
    Loan expenses (excluding movement on ECL provision) — 29.9 29.9
    Movement in expected credit loss provision — 34.6 34.6
    Profit on disposal of Insurify share option — (12.5) (12.5)
    Other1 — 73.4 73.4
    Total 1,074.5 328.2 1,402.7
      31 December 2023
      Directly attributable expenses
    £m    		 Other operating expenses
    £m    		 Total expenses
    £m
    Administration and acquisition expenses 836.8 100.8 937.6
    Expenses relating to additional products and fees — 41.4 41.4
    Share scheme expenses 55.3 28.5 83.8
    Loan expenses (excluding movement on ECL provision) — 23.0 23.0
    Movement in expected credit loss provision — 31.0 31.0
    Other1 — 57.1 57.1
    Total 892.1 281.8 1,173.9

    1 Other includes centralised costs primarily for employees and projects (2024: £49.9 million, 2023: £34.5 million), business development costs (2024: £19.9 million, 2023: £15.3 million) and other costs (2024: £3.6 million, 2023: £7.3 million).

    10. Taxation

      31 December 2024
    £m    		 31 December 2023
    £m
    Current tax    
    Corporation tax on profits for the year 139.3 91.6
    Under provision relating to prior periods 1.8 21.3
    Pillar Two income taxes 15.4 —
    Current tax charge 156.5 112.9
    Deferred tax    
    Current period deferred taxation movement 16.4 0.7
    Under/(over) provision relating to prior periods 3.4 (8.0)
    Total tax charge per Consolidated Income Statement 176.3 105.6

    Factors affecting the total tax charge are:

      31 December 2024
    £m    		 31 December 2023
    £m
    Profit before tax 839.2 442.8
    Corporation tax thereon at effective UK corporation tax rate of 25% (2023: 23.5%) 209.8 104.1
    Expenses and provisions not deductible for tax purposes 4.1 3.0
    Non-taxable income (21.3) (13.4)
    Impact of change in UK tax rate on deferred tax balances — (0.4)
    Adjustments relating to prior periods 5.2 13.5
    Impact of Pillar Two income taxes 15.4 —
    Impact of different overseas tax rates (45.5) (8.9)
    Unrecognised deferred tax 8.6 7.7
    Total tax charge for the period as above 176.3 105.6

    Corporation tax assets as at 31 December 2024 totaled £18.1 million, with corporation tax liabilities of £35.0 million (2023: £20.4 million asset and £4.9 million liabilities). Corporation tax liabilities includes £15.4 million (2023: £nil) relating to Pillar Two income taxes.

    The UK corporation tax rate for 2024 is 25% (2023: 23.5%).

    The Group are within the scope of the OECD Pillar Two model rules which aims to ensure that large, multinational corporations pay their fair share of tax in the countries in which they operate by introducing a new global minimum corporate income tax rate of 15%. Under the new rules, top-up taxes can be payable either by the UK ultimate parent company or by an overseas entity if a jurisdiction has an effective tax rate of less than 15%, as calculated under the rules. Legislation has been enacted in various countries (including the United Kingdom), with the rules first coming into effect for the Group from 1 January 2024.

    A current tax expense of £15.4 million has been included in the total tax charge for the year ended 31 December 2024, which relates to estimated top-up taxes payable by a subsidiary undertaking in Gibraltar, where the statutory corporate tax rate applicable for the year ended 31 December 2024 is 13.8% (due to a change in the rate from 12.5% to 15% from 1 July 2024). No top-up taxes for the year ended 31 December 2024 are expected to arise in relation to operations in other countries. The Pillar Two rules are complex and the Group continues to monitor ongoing developments in legislation and guidance to assess the impact.

    The Group has applied the temporary mandatory exception to recognising and disclosing information about deferred tax assets and liabilities related to Pillar Two income taxes, as provided in the amendments to IAS 12 issued in May 2023.

    11. Other Assets and Other Liabilities

    11a. Intangible assets

    Renewal Rights (included within Customer contracts, relationships and brand)

    Renewal rights are recognised as an intangible asset and amortised using the reducing balance method over an expected useful life determined as ranging between nine and fourteen years. Renewal rights on initial recognition have been recognised at fair value arising through an acquisition.

    The carrying value of renewal rights is reviewed every six months for evidence of impairment, with the value being written down if any impairment exists. Impairment may be reversed if conditions subsequently improve.

    Brand (included within Customer contracts, relationships and brand)

    Brand rights are recognised as an intangible asset and amortised using the straight line method over an expected useful life of fifteen years. Brand rights on initial recognition have been recognised at its fair value arising through an acquisition.

    The carrying value of brand rights is reviewed every six months for evidence of impairment, with the value being written down if any impairment exists. Impairment may be reversed if conditions subsequently improve.

    Goodwill

    All business combinations are accounted for using the acquisition method. Goodwill has been recognised on acquisitions of trade and assets representing a business and/or acquisition of subsidiaries and represents the difference between the cost of the acquisition and the fair value of the net identifiable assets acquired.

    Goodwill is stated at cost less any accumulated impairment losses. Goodwill is allocated to cash generating units (CGUs) according to business segment and is reviewed every six months for evidence of impairment and tested annually for impairment.

      Goodwill
    £m    		 Customer contracts, relationships and brand
    £m    		 Software – Internally generated
    £m    		 Software – Other
    £m    		 Total
    £m
    At 1 January 2023 62.3 — 136.4 18.9 217.6
    Additions — 7.9 51.1 7.7 66.7
    Amortisation charge — — (34.8) (5.5) (40.3)
    Disposals — — (0.1) — (0.1)
    Impairment — — (0.2) — (0.2)
    Foreign exchange movement & other movements — — (0.4) (0.4) (0.8)
    At 31 December 2023 62.3 7.9 152.0 20.7 242.9
    Additions 49.8 44.5 48.8 3.1 146.2
    Amortisation charge — (2.8) (54.5) (4.3) (61.6)
    Disposals — — (0.3) (0.4) (0.7)
    Impairment — — (3.5) (0.9) (4.4)
    Transfers — — 6.2 (6.2) —
    Foreign exchange movement & other movements — (0.3) (0.6) (0.5) (1.4)
    At 31 December 2024 112.1 49.3 148.1 11.5 321.0

    Customer contracts, relationships and brand includes Home and Pet renewal rights which has a net carrying value of £34.5 million as at 31 December 2024 and an amortisation period of 9 years for Home renewal rights and 14 years for Pet renewal rights. See note 13 for further information. Internally generated software includes a new claims system implemented within the UK business in the year which has a carrying amount of £33.2 million as at 31 December 2024 and a remaining amortisation period of 2.8 years.

    Goodwill relates to the acquisition of Group subsidiary EUI Limited (formerly Admiral Insurance Services Limited) in November 1999, and on the purchase of the direct Home and Pet renewal rights from the RSA Insurance Group Limited (‘RSA’) in April 2024. The carrying amount of goodwill as at 31 December 2024 is £112.1 million (2023: £62.3 million).

    11b. Trade and other payables

      31 December 2024
    £m    		 31 December 2023
    £m
    Trade payables 52.4 42.3
    Other tax and social security 12.5 11.9
    Amounts owed to co-insurers — 156.9
    Other payables 34.0 42.5
    Accruals and deferred income 76.4 52.2
    Total trade and other payables 175.3 305.8
         
    Analysis of accruals and deferred income    
    Accruals 48.2 28.3
    Deferred income 28.2 23.9
    Total accruals and deferred income as above 76.4 52.2

    11c. Contingent liabilities

    The Group’s legal entities operate in numerous tax jurisdictions and on a regular basis are subject to review and enquiry by the relevant tax authority.

    One of the Group’s previously owned subsidiaries was subject to a Spanish Tax Audit which concluded with the Tax Authority denying the application of the VAT exemption relating to insurance intermediary services. The Company has appealed this decision via the Spanish Courts and is confident in defending its position which is, in its view, in line with the EU Directive and is also consistent with the way similar supplies are treated throughout Europe. Whilst the Company is no longer part of the Admiral Group, the contingent liability which the Company is exposed to has been indemnified by the Admiral Group up to a cap of €24 million.

    No material provisions have been made in these financial statements in relation to the matters noted above. 

    The Group notes the ongoing Court of Appeal ruling relating to non-disclosure of commission to dealers in relation to motor finance. Prior to the Group’s re-launch of motor finance lending, all lending was through price comparison websites. The Group had no lending through dealers and no discretionary commission structures in place. Accordingly the Group does not have an ongoing exposure to commission arrangements of this nature and therefore has not recognised any contingent liability in relation to the case.

    The Group continues to monitor regulatory developments, including the Supreme Court decision which is expected later in 2025, ensuring the customer acquisition practices remain fully aligned with legal and regulatory requirements and industry best practices.

    The Group is, from time to time, subject to threatened or actual litigation and/or legal and/or regulatory disputes, investigations or similar actions both in the UK and overseas. All potentially material matters are assessed, with the assistance of external advisors if appropriate, and in cases where it is concluded that it is more likely than not that a payment will be made, a provision is established to reflect the best estimate of the liability. In some cases it will not be possible to form a view, for example if the facts are unclear or because further time is needed to properly assess the merits of the case or form a reliable estimate of its financial effect. In these circumstances, specific disclosure of a contingent liability and an estimate of its financial effect will be made where material, unless it is not practicable to do so.

    The Directors do not consider that the final outcome of any such current case will have a material adverse effect on the Group’s financial position, operations or cashflows, and as such, no material provisions are currently held in relation to such matters.

    A number of the Group’s contractual arrangements with reinsurers include features that, in certain scenarios, allow for reinsurers to recover losses incurred to date. The overall impact of such scenarios would not lead to an overall net economic outflow from the Group.

    12. Dividends, Earnings and Related Parties

    12a. Dividends

    Dividends were proposed, approved and paid as follows:

      31 December 2024
    £m    		 31 December 2023
    £m
    Proposed March 2023 (52.0 pence per share, approved April 2023 and paid June 2023) — 154.9
    Declared August 2023 (51.0 pence per share, paid October 2023) — 152.2
    Proposed March 2024 (52.0 pence per share, approved April 2024 and paid May 2024) 156.2 —
    Declared August 2024 (71.0 pence per share, paid October 2024) 213.6 —
    Total dividends 369.8 307.1

    The dividends proposed in March (approved in April) represent the final dividends paid in respect of the 2022 and 2023 financial years. The dividends declared in August are interim distributions in respect of 2023 and 2024.

    A 2024 final dividend of 121.0 pence per share (approximately £366.6 million) has been proposed. Refer to the financial narrative for further detail.

    12b. Earnings per share

      31 December 2024
    £m    		 31 December 2023
    £m
    Profit for the financial year after taxation attributable to equity shareholders 663.3 338.0
    Weighted average number of shares – basic 306,304,676 303,989,170
    Unadjusted earnings per share – basic 216.6p 111.2p
    Weighted average number of shares – diluted 306,304,676 305,052,941
    Unadjusted earnings per share – diluted 216.6p 110.8p

    The difference between the basic and diluted number of shares at the end of 2024 (being nil; 2023: 1,063,771) relates to awards committed, but not yet issued under the Group’s share schemes. Refer to note 9 for further detail.

    12c. Share capital

      31 December 2024
    £m    		 31 December 2023
    £m
    Authorised    
    500,000,00 ordinary shares of 0.1 pence 0.5 0.5
    Issued, called up and fully paid    
    306,304,676 ordinary shares of 0.1 pence 0.3 0.3

    12d. Related party transactions

    The Board considers that only the Executive and Non-Executive Directors of Admiral Group plc are key management personnel.

    Further detail on the remuneration and shareholdings of key management personnel will be set out in the Directors’ Remuneration Report in the Group’s 2024 Annual Report.

    12e. Post balance sheet events

    During February 2025, the Group entered into an agreement with a third party which resulted in the sale of back book loans with a total carrying value of around £150 million. This agreement, signed after the reporting date, provides for the transfer of these loans to the counterparty in accordance with the agreed terms. Accordingly, no adjustment has been made to the financial statements for the year ended 31 December 2024.

    The financial impact of the sale, including any gain arising from the transaction, will be recognised in the Group’s financial statements for the year ending 31 December 2025.

    In early March 2025, Admiral entered into a memorandum of understanding with a counterparty with a view to signing a purchase agreement to sell Elephant. The agreement, if signed, would be subject to regulatory approval.

    No further events have occurred since the reporting date that materially impact these financial statements.

    13. Business combinations

    As at 2nd April 2024, Admiral successfully completed the purchase of the direct Home and Pet renewal rights from the RSA Insurance Group Limited (‘RSA’), a general insurer based in the UK. The transaction includes the renewal rights, the “More Than” brand and the transfer of more than 280 people but does not include liabilities relating to existing policies which will remain with RSA. The acquisition is closely aligned to Admiral’s strategy to diversify its product offering and build multi-product customer relationships in its core markets. It will strengthen Admiral’s home business and accelerate its direct pet proposition launched in 2022.

    The consideration included an initial cash payment of £82.5 million with contingent consideration of £32.5 million. The contingent consideration has a range of £nil to a maximum of £32.5 million dependent on the number of policies successfully migrated to Admiral. The fair value of the contingent consideration has a value of £2.7 million and is based on a probability weighted scenario including an element of discounting relating to the timing of payments.

    The amounts recognised in respect of the identifiable assets acquired at at the acquisition date are as set out in the table below:

      £m
    Total consideration  
    Amount settled in cash 82.5
    Fair value of contingent consideration 2.7
    Total consideration 85.2
       
    Identifiable assets acquired  
    Renewal Rights 36.4
    Brand 8.1
    Total identifiable assets acquired 44.5
       
    Purchase price recognised as Goodwill 40.7
    Additional Goodwill recognised on Deferred Tax Liability 9.1
    Total Goodwill recognised on acquisition 49.8

    A deferred tax liability has been recognised of £9.1million based upon a tax base cost of £36.4 million representing the fair value of the renewal rights. A corresponding increase in goodwill of £9.1 million is recognised as a result. The goodwill and brand are not considered deductible for tax purposes. The deferred tax liability will unwind in line with the amortisation of the renewal rights acquired.

    The recognition of goodwill reflects the synergies arising through the transaction including operational, capital, pricing and risk synergies, as well as the attributable value to the workforce in place.

    The policies in relation to the acquisition started renewing in July 2024. As at 31 December 2024, transaction costs of £6.5 million have been recognised within operating expenses, along with integration costs of £11.9 million within insurance expenses. The impact of the acquisition if it had happened as at the start of the reporting period is impractical for disclosure given the nature of the trade and assets acquired for integration.

    The acquisition contributed £42.3 million of total premiums written and £9.9 million of insurance revenue, and £3.8 million of expenses for the period between the date of acquisition and the reporting date. Due to the acquired renewal rights being fully integrated into the existing business lines, it is impracticable to separately identify the specific profit contributions.

    14. Reconciliation of turnover to reported insurance premium and other revenue as per the financial statements

    The following table reconciles turnover, a significant Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) and non-GAAP measure presented within the Strategic Report, to insurance revenue, as presented in note 4 to the financial statements.

      Consolidated Financial Statement Note 31 December 2024
    £m    		 31 December 2023
    £m
    Insurance revenue related movement in liability for remaining coverage 5b 4,776.2 3,486.1
    Less other insurance revenue   (281.7) (202.8)
    Insurance premium revenue   4,494.5 3,283.3
    Movement in unearned premium and cancellations   346.7 528.3
    Premiums written after coinsurance   4,841.2 3,811.6
    Co-insurer share of written premiums   778.4 577.8
    Total premiums written   5,619.6 4,389.4
    Other insurance revenue 5b 281.7 202.8
    Other revenue 8 136.3 127.2
    Interest income on loans to customers   109.1 92.1
    Turnover as per note 4 of financial statements   6,146.7 4,811.5

    APPENDIX 1 TO THE GROUP FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (unaudited)

    1a: Reconciliation of reported loss and expense ratios: Group

            31 December 2024
    £m Consolidated Financial Statement Note Core product Ancillary income Total gross Total, net of XoL reinsurance
    Insurance premium revenue   4,329.9 164.6 4,494.5 4,329.4
    Administration fees, instalment income and non-separable ancillary commission   — 281.7 281.7 281.7
    Insurance revenue (A) 5b/5d 4,329.9 446.3 4,776.2 4,611.1
    Insurance expenses (B) 5c (951.4) (64.5) (1,015.9) (1,015.9)
    Claims incurred (C) 5c/5d (2,976.9) (61.1) (3,038.0) (2,980.7)
    Claims releases (D) 5c/5d 556.8 3.2 559.9 425.1
    Claims incurred and releases excluding Ogden1 (E)         (2,661.7)
    Quota share reinsurance result2 4         (294.1)
    Onerous loss component movement3         1.5
    Underwriting result (F)         747.0
    Net share scheme costs4         (36.7)
    Insurance service result         710.3
    Reported loss ratio ((C+D)/A)         55.4%
    Reported loss ratio excluding Ogden1(E/A)         57.7%
    Reported expense ratio (B/A)         22.0%
    Insurance service margin (F/A)         16.2%
            31 December 2023
    £m Consolidated Financial Statement Note Core product Ancillary income Total gross Total, net of XoL reinsurance
    Insurance premium revenue   3,152.3 131.0 3,283.3 3,170.6
    Administration fees, instalment income and non-separable ancillary commission   — 202.8 202.8 202.8
    Insurance revenue (A) 5b/5d 3,152.3 333.8 3,486.1 3,373.4
    Insurance expenses (B) 5c (795.2) (41.6) (836.8) (836.8)
    Claims incurred (C) 5c/5d (2,624.6) (40.5) (2,665.1) (2,605.8)
    Claims releases (D) 5c/5d 440.6 — 440.6 447.3
    Quota share reinsurance result2 4         (40.4)
    Onerous loss component movement3         4.9
    Underwriting result (E)         342.6
    Net share scheme costs4         (36.8)
    Insurance service result         305.8
    Reported loss ratio ((C+D)/A)         63.9%
    Reported expense ratio (B/A)         24.8%
    Insurance service margin (E/A)         10.2%

    1 Excludes benefit from the Ogden discount rate change
    2 Quota share reinsurance result excludes quota share reinsurers’ share of share scheme costs and movement in onerous loss-recovery component
    3 Onerous loss component movement is shown net of all reinsurance
    4 Net share scheme costs of £36.7 million (2023: £36.8 million), being gross costs of £58.6 million (2023: £55.3 million, see note 5c) less reinsurers’ share of share scheme costs of £21.9 million (2023: £18.5 million) are excluded from the underwriting result.

    1b. Reconciliation of reported loss and expense ratios: UK Motor

              31 December 2024
    £m Consolidated Financial Statement Note Core product Ancillary income1 Total gross Total, net of XoL reinsurance Core product, net of XoL
    Total premiums written   4,006.6 151.1 4,157.7 4,033.3 3,882.2
    Gross premiums written   3,234.1 151.1 3,385.2 3,284.7 3,133.6
    Insurance premium revenue   3,020.7 139.8 3,160.5 3,062.4 2,922.5
    Instalment income   — 155.9 155.9 155.9 —
    Administration fees & non-separable ancillary commission   — 53.1 53.1 53.1 —
    Insurance revenue (A) 5b/5d 3,020.7 348.8 3,369.5 3,271.4 2,922.5
    Insurance expenses (B) 5c (530.9) (55.9) (586.8) (586.8) (530.9)
    Claims incurred (C) 5c/5d (2,051.5) (55.6) (2,107.2) (2,078.1) (2,022.5)
    Claims incurred excluding Ogden (D)   (2,078.5) (55.6) (2,134.1) (2,105.1) (2,049.5)
    Claims releases (E) 5c/5d 493.4 2.7 496.1 374.6 371.9
    Claims releases excluding Ogden (F)   414.2 2.7 416.9 295.4 292.7
    Insurance service result, gross of quota share reinsurance   931.7 240.0 1,171.7 981.1 741.0
    Quota share reinsurance result2         (228.8) (228.8)
    Onerous loss component movement         1.1 1.1
    Underwriting result (G)         753.4 513.3
    Current period loss ratio (C/A)         63.5% 69.2%
    Claims releases (E/A)         (11.4)% (12.7)%
    Reported loss ratio ((C+E)/A)         52.1% 56.5%
    Reported expense ratio (B/A)         17.9% 18.2%
    Insurance service margin (G/A)         23.0% 17.6%
    Current period loss ratio excluding
    Ogden (D/A)    		         64.3% 70.1%
    Claims releases excluding Ogden (F/A)         (9.0)% (10.0)%
    Reported loss ratio excluding
    Ogden ((D+F)/A)    		         55.3% 60.1%
              31 December 2023
    £m Consolidated Financial Statement Note Core product Ancillary income1 Total gross Total, net of XoL reinsurance Core product, net of XoL
    Total premiums written   3,004.3 113.9 3,118.2 3,016.8 2,903.0
    Gross premiums written   2,453.9 113.9 2,567.8 2,485.0 2,371.1
    Insurance premium revenue   2,007.6 107.8 2,115.4 2,053.8 1,946.0
    Instalment income   — 99.0 99.0 99.0 —
    Administration fees non-separable ancillary commission   — 35.8 35.8 35.8 —
    Insurance revenue (A) 5b/5d 2,007.6 242.6 2,250.2 2,188.6 1,946.0
    Insurance expenses (B) 5c (416.8) (34.4) (451.2) (451.2) (416.8)
    Claims incurred (C) 5c/5d (1,719.9) (35.6) (1,755.5) (1,729.0) (1,693.4)
    Claims releases (D) 5c/5d 406.9 — 406.9 392.8 392.8
    Insurance service result, gross of quota share reinsurance   277.8 172.6 450.4 401.2 228.6
    Quota share reinsurance result2         (16.8) (16.8)
    Onerous loss component movement         4.1 4.1
    Underwriting result (E)         388.5 215.9
    Current period loss ratio (C/A)         79.0% 87.0%
    Claims releases (D/A)         (17.9)% (20.2)%
    Reported loss ratio ((C+D)/A)         61.1% 66.8%
    Reported expense ratio (B/A)         20.6% 21.4%
    Insurance service margin (E/A)         17.8% 11.1%

    1 Ancillary income combined with other net income is presented as part of UK motor insurance other revenue in reporting “Other revenue per vehicle”. Total other revenue was £321.8 million (2023: £247.3 million).

    2 Net share scheme costs of £29.6 million (2023: £32.1 million), being gross costs of £40.7 million (2023: £43.2 million, see note 5c) less reinsurers’ share of share scheme costs of £11.1 million (2023: £11.1 million) are excluded from the underwriting result.

    1c. Reconciliation of reported loss and expense ratios: UK Non-Motor

      31 December 2024
    £m Consolidated Financial Statement Note UK Household UK Travel & Pet UK Non-Motor UK Household, net of XoL reinsurance
    Insurance revenue (A) 5b/5d 399.6 104.3 503.9 376.4
    Insurance expenses (B) 5c (102.9) (56.0) (158.9) (102.9)
    Claims incurred in the period (C) 5c/5d (233.7) (64.5) (298.2) (225.7)
    Changes in liabilities for incurred claims (releases) (D) 5c/5d 46.3 5.1 51.4 37.0
    Insurance service result, gross of quota share reinsurance   109.3 (11.1) 98.2 84.8
    Quota share reinsurance result1         (61.2)
    Onerous loss component movement         —
    Underwriting result (E)         23.6
    Current period loss ratio (C/A)         60.0%
    Claims releases (D/A)         (9.9)%
    Reported loss ratio ((C+D)/A)         50.1%
    Reported expense ratio (B/A)         27.3%
    Insurance service margin (E/A)         6.3%
      31 December 2023
    £m Consolidated Financial Statement Note UK Household UK Travel & Pet UK Non-Motor UK Household, net of XoL reinsurance
    Insurance revenue (A) 5b/5d 292.8 53.8 346.6 275.3
    Insurance expenses (B) 5c (80.9) (27.4) (108.3) (80.9)
    Claims incurred in the period (C) 5c/5d (223.5) (31.4) (254.9) (199.8)
    Changes in liabilities for incurred claims (releases) (D) 5c/5d 8.3 0.8 9.1 6.4
    Insurance service result, gross of quota share reinsurance   (3.3) (4.2) (7.5) 1.0
    Quota share reinsurance result1         (1.4)
    Onerous loss component movement         —
    Underwriting result (E)         (0.4)
    Current period loss ratio (C/A)         72.6%
    Claims releases (D/A)         (2.4)%
    Reported loss ratio ((C+D)/A)         70.2%
    Reported expense ratio (B/A)         29.4%
    Insurance service margin (E/A)         (0.1)%

    1Net share scheme costs of £1.6 million (2023: £0.7 million), being gross costs of £5.4 million (2023: £2.4 million, see note 5c) less reinsurers’ share of share scheme costs of £3.8 million (2023: £1.7 million) are excluded from the underwriting result.

    1d. Reconciliation of reported loss and expense ratios: International

      31 December 2024
    £m Consolidated Financial Statement Note Total gross Total, net of XoL reinsurance
    Insurance revenue (A) 5b/5d 829.5 794.2
    Insurance expenses (B) 5c (236.5) (236.5)
    Claims incurred in the period less changes in liabilities for incurred claims (C) 5c/5d (572.6) (564.5)
    Insurance service result, gross of quota share reinsurance   20.4 (6.8)
    Quota share reinsurance result1     (4.1)
    Onerous loss component movement     0.4
    Underwriting result (D)     (10.5)
    Reported loss ratio (C/A)     71.1%
    Reported expense ratio (B/A)     29.8%
    Insurance service margin (D/A)     (1.3)%
      31 December 2023
    £m Consolidated Financial Statement Note Total gross Total, net of XoL reinsurance
    Insurance revenue (A) 5b/5d 842.6 811.8
    Insurance expenses (B) 5c (249.4) (249.4)
    Claims incurred in the period less changes in liabilities for incurred claims (C) 5c/5d (596.9) (565.2)
    Insurance service result, gross of quota share reinsurance   (3.7) (2.8)
    Quota share reinsurance result1     (22.1)
    Onerous loss component movement     0.6
    Underwriting result (D)     (24.3)
    Reported loss ratio (C/A)     69.6%
    Reported expense ratio (B/A)     30.7%
    Insurance service margin (D/A)     (3.0)%

    1 Net share scheme costs of £4.3 million (2023: £3.2 million), being gross costs of £11.1 million (2023: £8.9 million, see note 5c) less reinsurers’ share of share scheme costs of £6.8 million (2023: £5.7 million) are excluded from the underwriting result.

    APPENDIX 2 TO THE GROUP FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (unaudited)

    The following table of non-GAAP measures illustrates the sensitivity of profit and loss (before tax) arising from the impact of 100 and 200 basis point increases and decreases in interest rates over the financial year 2024.

    2a. Additional sensitivities to interest rate risk

      31 December 2024
      Insurance contract liabilities and reinsurance contract assets Cash and investments
    £m Impact on profit before tax gross of reinsurance Impact on profit before tax net of reinsurance Impact on profit before tax
    Increase of 100 basis points 25.9 25.9 19.9
    Decrease of 100 basis points (28.5) (28.5) (19.9)
    Increase of 200 basis points 49.8 49.8 39.8
    Decrease of 200 basis points (60.6) (60.6) (39.8)

    Changes impact profit before tax as follows:

    • Interest revenue and other finance costs on floating-rate financial instruments (assuming that interest rates had varied by 100 basis points during the year)
    • Interest revenue and other finance costs on floating-rate financial instruments (assuming that interest rates had varied by 100 basis points during the year)
    • Changes in the discounted fulfilment cashflows of onerous contracts
    • Insurance claims expenses, reinsurance claims recoveries and finance income or expenses recognised in profit or loss, as a result of discounting future cashflows at a revised locked-in rate for the current period (i.e. assuming that interest rates had varied by 100 basis points during the year).

    Glossary

    Alternative Performance Measures

    Throughout this report, the Group uses a number of Alternative Performance Measures (APMs); measures that are not required or commonly reported under International Financial Reporting Standards, the Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP) under which the Group prepares its financial statements.

    These APMs are used by the Group, alongside GAAP measures, for both internal performance analysis and to help shareholders and other users of the Annual Report and financial statements to better understand the Group’s performance in the period in comparison to previous periods and the Group’s competitors.

    The table below defines and explains the primary APMs used in this report. Financial APMs are usually derived from financial statement items and are calculated using consistent accounting policies to those applied in the financial statements, unless otherwise stated. Non-financial KPIs incorporate information that cannot be derived from the financial statements but provide further insight into the performance and financial position of the Group.

    APMs may not necessarily be defined in a consistent manner to similar APMs used by the Group’s competitors. They should be considered as a supplement rather than a substitute for GAAP measures.

    Turnover Turnover is defined as total premiums written (as below), Other insurance revenue, Other revenue and interest income from Admiral Money. It is reconciled to financial statement line items in note 14 to the financial statements.
    This measure has been presented by the Group in every Annual Report since it became a listed Group in 2004. It reflects the total value of the revenue generated by the Group and analysis of this measure over time provides a clear indication of the size and growth of the Group.
    The measure was developed as a result of the Group’s business model. The UK Car insurance business has historically shared a significant proportion of the risks with Munich Re, a third party reinsurance Group, through a co-insurance arrangement, with the arrangement subsequently being replicated in some of the Group’s international insurance operations. Premiums and claims accruing to the external co-insurer are not reflected in the Group’s income statement and therefore presentation of this metric enables users of the Annual Report to see the scale of the Group’s insurance operations in a way not possible from taking the income statement in isolation.
    Total Premiums Written Total premiums written are the total forecast premiums, net of forecast cancellations written in the underwriting year within the Group, including co-insurance. It is reconciled to financial statement line items in note 14 to the financial statements.
    This measure has been presented by the Group in every Annual Report since it became a listed Group in 2004. It reflects the total premiums written by the Group’s insurance intermediaries and analysis of this measure over time provides a clear indication of the growth in premiums, irrespective of how co-insurance agreements have changed over time.
    The reasons for presenting this measure are consistent with that for the Turnover APM noted above.
    Underwriting result (profit or loss) For each insurance business an underwriting result is presented. This shows the insurance segment result before tax excluding investment income, finance expenses, co-insurer profit commission and other net income. It excludes both gross share scheme costs and any assumed quota share reinsurance recoveries on those share scheme costs.
    The calculations and compositions of the underwriting result are presented within Appendix 1 to these financial statements.
    Loss Ratio Loss ratios are reported as follows:
    Reported loss ratios are expressed as a percentage, of claims incurred, on a gross basis net of XoL reinsurance, divided by insurance revenue net of XoL reinsurance premiums ceded.
    The reported loss ratios use the total claims, and earned premium and related income (instalment income, administration fees and ancillary income where it is highly correlated to the core product). It is understood that this is consistent with the approach taken by peers, and it is considered to reflect the true profitability of products sold.
    Core product loss ratios use the total claims and earned premiums for the core product only (insurance premiums excluding instalment income, administration fees & ancillary income). This measure is more consistent with that used previously, and are reflective of the performance of the core product in a line of business.
    The calculations and compositions of the loss ratios are presented within Appendix 1 to these financial statements.
    Expense Ratio Expense ratios are reported as follows:
    Reported expense ratios are expressed as a percentage, of expenses incurred, on a gross basis excluding share scheme costs, divided by insurance revenue net of XoL reinsurance premiums ceded.The reported expense ratios use the total expenses (excluding share scheme costs), and earned premium and related income (instalment income, administration fees and ancillary income where it is highly correlated to the core product). It is understood that this is consistent with the approach taken by peers, and it is considered to reflect the true profitability of products sold.
    Core product expense ratios use the total expenses (excluding share scheme costs) and earned premiums for the core product only (insurance premiums excluding instalment income, administration fees & ancillary income). This measure is more consistent with that used previously, and are reflective of the performance of the core product in a line of business.
    Written expense ratios are calculated using total expenses (excluding share scheme costs) and written premiums, net of cancellation provision, for the core product only.
    The calculations of the reported expense ratios are presented within Appendix 1 to the financial statements.
    Combined Ratio Combined ratios are the sum of the loss and expense ratios as defined above. Explanation of these figures is noted above.
    Insurance service margin This is the reported insurance segment underwriting result, divided by insurance revenue net of excess of loss premiums ceded. Reconciliation of the calculations are provided in Appendix 1.
    Quota share result The total result (ceded premiums minus ceded recoveries) from contractual quota share arrangements, excluding the quota share reinsurer’s share of share scheme expenses, finance expenses and onerous loss component. Reconciliation of the calculations are provided in Appendix 1.
    Segment result The profit or loss before tax reported for individual business segments, which exclude net share scheme costs and other central expenses.
    Return on Equity Return on equity is calculated as profit after tax for the period attributable to equity holders of the Group divided by the average total equity attributable to equity holders of the Group in the year. This average is determined by dividing the opening and closing positions for the year by two. It excludes the impact of discontinued operations.
    Group Customers Group customer numbers reflect the total number of cars, vans, households and pets on cover at the end of the year, across the Group, and the total number of travel insurance, Admiral Money and Admiral Business customers.
    This measure has been presented by the Group in every Annual Report since it became a listed Group in 2004. It reflects the size of the Group’s customer base and analysis of this measure over time provides a clear indication of the growth. It is also a useful indicator of the growing significance to the Group of the different lines of business and geographic regions.
    The measure has been restated from 2022 onwards to exclude Veygo policies, given the significant fluctuations that can arise at a point in time as a result of the short-term nature of the product.
    Solvency Ratio The Solvency UK regulatory framework requires insurers to hold funds in excess of the Solvency Capital Requirement (SCR). Own funds are available capital resources determined under Solvency UK. The SCR is calculated at a Group level using the standard formula, to reflect the cost of mitigating the risk of insolvency to a 99.5% confidence level over a one-year time horizon – equivalent to a 1 in 200 year event – against financial and non-financial shocks.

    Additional Terminology

    There are many other terms used in this report that are specific to the Group or the markets in which it operates. These are defined as follows:

    Accident year The year in which an accident occurs. Claims incurred may be presented on an accident year basis or an underwriting year basis, the latter sees the claims attach to the year in which the insurance policy incepted.
    Actuarial best estimate The probability-weighted average of all future claims and cost scenarios calculated using historical data, actuarial methods and judgement.
    ASHE ‘Annual Survey of Hours and Earnings’ – a statistical index that is typically used for calculating the inflation of annual payment amounts under Periodic Payment Order (PPO) claims settlements.
    Claims reserves A monetary amount set aside for the future payment of incurred claims that have not yet been settled, thus representing a balance sheet liability.
    Co-insurance An arrangement in which two or more insurance companies agree to underwrite insurance business on a specified portfolio in specified proportions. Each co-insurer is directly liable to the policyholder for their proportional share.
    Commutation An agreement between a ceding insurer and the reinsurer that provides for the valuation, payment, and complete discharge of all obligations between the parties under a particular reinsurance contract.
    The Group typically commutes UK motor insurance quota share contracts after 24-36 months from the start of an underwriting year where it makes economic sense to do so.
    Earnings per share Earnings per share represents the profit after tax attributable to equity shareholders, divided by the weighted average number of basic shares.
    Effective Tax Rate Effective tax rate is defined as the approximate tax rate derived from dividing the tax charge going through the income statement by the Group’s profit before tax. It is a measure historically presented by the Group and enables users to see how the tax cost incurred by the Group compares over time and to current corporation tax rates.
    EIOPA European Insurance and Occupational Pensions Authority: EIOPA is the European supervisory authority for occupational pensions and insurance.
    Expected credit loss (ECL) Expected Credit Loss (ECL) is the probability-weighted estimate of credit losses over the expected life of a Financial Instrument.
    Insurance market cycle The tendency for the insurance market to swing between highs and lows of profitability over time, with the potential to influence premium rates (also known as the “underwriting cycle”).
    Claims net of XoL reinsurance The cost of claims incurred in the period, less any claims costs recovered via salvage and subrogation arrangements or under XoL reinsurance contracts. It includes both claims payments and movements in claims reserves.
    Excess of Loss (‘XoL’) reinsurance Contractual arrangements whereby the Group transfers part or all of the insurance risk accepted to another insurer on an excess of loss (‘XoL’) basis (full reinsurance for claims over an agreed value).
    Insurance premium revenue Insurance premium revenue reflects the expected premium receipts allocated to the period based on the passage of time, adjusted for seasonality if required. It excludes “Other insurance revenue” as defined below.
    Insurance premium revenue net of XoL Insurance premium revenue less the ceded XoL reinsurance earned in the period.
    Other Insurance revenue Insurance revenue minus insurance premium revenue as defined above. Other insurance revenue is comprised of revenue that is considered non-separable from the core insurance product sold and therefore under IFRS 17 is reported within insurance revenue. For the Group, this is typically the instalment income, administration fees and any other non-separable income related to the Group’s retained share of the underwritten products.
    Net promotor score NPS is currently measured based on a subset of customer responding to a single question: On a scale of 0-10 (10 being the best score), how likely would you recommend our Company to a friend, family or colleague through phone, online or email. Answers are then placed in 3 groups; Detractors: scores ranging from 0 to 6; Passives/neutrals: scores ranging from 7 to 8; Promoters: scores ranging from 9 to 10 and the final NPS score is : % of promoters – % of detractors
    Ogden discount rate The discount rate used in calculation of personal injury claims settlements in the UK.
    Periodic Payment Order (PPO) A compensation award as part of a claims settlement that involves making a series of annual payments to a claimant over their remaining life to cover the costs of the care they will require.
    Premium A series of payments are made by the policyholder, typically monthly or annually, for part of or all of the duration of the contract. Written premium refers to the total amount the policyholder has contracted for, whereas earned premium refers to the recognition of this premium over the life of the contract.
    Profit commission A clause found in some reinsurance and co-insurance agreements that provides for profit sharing. Co-insurer profit commission is presented separately on the income statement whilst reinsurer profit commissions are presented within the reinsurance result, as a part of any recovery for incurred claims.
    Quota share reinsurance result Admiral’s quota share (QS) reinsurance result reflects the net movement on ceded premiums, reinsurer margins and expected recoveries (claims and expenses, excluding share scheme charges) for underwriting years on which quota share reinsurance is in place.
    Regulatory Solvency Capital Requirement (‘SCR’) The Group’s Regulatory Solvency Capital Requirement (SCR) is an amount of capital that it should hold in addition to its liabilities in order to provide a cushion against unexpected events. In line with the rulebook of the Group’s regulator, the PRA, the Group’s SCR is calculated using the Solvency II Standard Formula, and includes a fixed capital add-on to reflect limitations in the Standard Formula with respect to Admiral’s risk profile (predominately in respect of co-and reinsurance profit commission arrangements and risks relating to Periodic Payment Orders (PPOs). The Group’s current fixed capital add-on of £24 million was approved by the PRA during 2023.
    The Group is required to maintain eligible Own Funds ( Solvency II capital) equal to at least 100% of the Group SCR. Both eligible Own Funds and the Group SCR are reported to the PRA on a quarterly basis and reported publicly on an annual basis in the Group’s Solvency and Financial Condition Report.
    Admiral separately calculates a ‘dynamic’ capital add-on and has used this this to report a solvency capital requirement and solvency ratio at the date of this report. A reconciliation between the regulatory solvency ratio and that calculated on a dynamic basis is included in note 3 to the Group financial statements.
    Reinsurance Contractual arrangements whereby the Group transfers part or all of the insurance risk accepted to another insurer. This can be on a quota share basis (a percentage share of premiums, claims and expenses) or an excess of loss (‘XoL’) basis (full reinsurance for claims over an agreed value).
    Scaled Agile Scaled Agile is a framework that uses a set of organisational and workflow patterns for implementing agile practices at an enterprise scale. Scaled agile at Admiral represents the ability to drive agile at the team level whilst applying the same sustainable principles of the group.
    Securitisation A process by which a group of assets, usually loans, is aggregated into a pool, which is used to back the issuance of new securities. A Company transfer assets to a special purpose entity (SPE) which then issues securities backed by the assets.
    Solvency ratio A ratio of an entity’s Solvency II capital (referred to as Own Funds) to Solvency Capital Requirement. Unless otherwise stated, Group solvency ratios include a reduction to Own Funds for a foreseeable dividend (i.e. dividends relating to the relevant financial period that will be paid after the balance sheet date)
    Special Purpose Entity (SPE) An entity that is created to accomplish a narrow and well-defined objective. There are specific restrictions or limited around ongoing activities. The Group uses an SPE set up under a securitisation programme.
    Ultimate loss ratio A projected actuarial best estimate loss ratio for a particular accident year or underwriting year.
    Underwriting year The year in which an insurance policy was incepted.
    Underwriting year basis Also referred to as the written basis. Claims incurred are allocated to the calendar year in which the policy was underwritten. Underwriting year basis results are calculated on the whole account (including co-insurance and reinsurance shares) and include all premiums, claims, expenses incurred and other revenue (for example instalment income and commission income relating to the sale of products that are ancillary to the main insurance policy) relating to policies incepting in the relevant underwriting year.
    Written/Earned basis An insurance policy can be written in one calendar year but earned over a subsequent calendar year.

    The MIL Network –

  • MIL-Evening Report: Cyclone Alfred is slowing – and that could make it more destructive. Here’s how climate change might have influenced it

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Liz Ritchie-Tyo, Professor of Atmospheric Sciences, Monash University

    Cyclone Alfred has now been delayed, as the slow-moving system stalls in warm seas off southeast Queensland. Unfortunately, the expected slow pace of the cyclone will bring even more rain to affected communities.

    This is because it will linger for longer over the same location, dumping more rain before it moves on. Alfred’s slowing means the huge waves triggered by the cyclone will last longer too, likely making coastal erosion and flooding worse.

    Cyclone Alfred is unusual – the first cyclone in half a century to come this far south and make expected landfall.

    When unusual disasters strike, people naturally want to know what role climate change played – a process known as “climate attribution”. Unfortunately, this process takes time if you want details on a specific event.

    We can’t yet say if Alfred’s unusual path and slow speed are linked to climate change. But climate change is driving very clear trends which can load the dice for more intense cyclones arriving in subtropical regions. These include the warm waters which fuel cyclones spreading further south, and cyclones dumping more rain than they used to.

    So, let’s unpick what’s driving Cyclone Alfred’s behaviour – including the potential role of climate change.



    Read more:
    Cyclone Alfred is bearing down. Here’s how it grew so fierce – and where it’s expected to hit

    A Bureau of Meteorology update on Cyclone Alfred dated Thursday, March 6.

    Not necessarily climate linked: Alfred’s southerly path

    Many cyclones make it as far south as Brisbane – but they’re nearly all far out at sea. Weather patterns mean most cyclones heading south are diverted to the east, where remnants can hit New Zealand as large extratropical storms.

    The fact that Alfred is set to make landfall is very unusual. But we can’t yet definitively say this is due to climate change. Cyclones are steered by winds and weather patterns, and the Coral Sea’s complex weather makes cyclone paths here very hard to predict.

    Alfred’s abrupt westward shift is due to a large region of high pressure to its south, which has pushed it directly towards heavily populated areas of southeast Queensland and northern New South Wales. These steering winds are not very strong, which is why Alfred is moving slowly.

    In 2014, researchers showed cyclones are reaching their maximum intensity in areas further south in the southern hemisphere and north in the northern hemisphere than they used to. In 2021, researchers also found cyclones were reaching their maximum intensity closer to coasts, moving about 30 km closer per decade.

    Climate link: Warmer seas

    Cyclones typically need water temperatures of 26.5°C or more to form.

    More than 90% of all extra heat trapped by greenhouse gas emissions is stored in the seas. The oceans are the hottest on record, and records keep falling. But normal seasonal variability and shifting ocean currents are still at work too, and we can get unusually warm waters without climate change as a cause.

    What we do know is that ocean temperatures around much of Australia have been unusually warm.

    The northeastern Coral Sea, where Cyclone Alfred formed, experienced the fourth-hottest temperatures on record for February and the hottest on record for January.

    In the Coral Sea, sea surface temperatures were the fourth highest on record in February 2025 and the highest on record in January 2025. This figure shows the trend over time for February.
    Bureau of Meteorology, CC BY-NC-ND

    We also know Australia’s southern waters are warming up too.

    The energy available to power tropical cyclones in subtropical regions has also increased in recent decades, due largely to rising ocean temperatures.

    Average sea surface temperatures in central and southern Queensland on Thursday March 6th. Point Danger is on the Gold Coast.
    Bureau of Meteorology, CC BY-NC-ND

    Climate link: Fewer cyclones but more likely to be intense

    In the northern hemisphere, researchers have found a trend towards fewer cyclones over time. But of those which do form, a higher proportion are more intense.

    It’s not fully clear if the same trend exists in the southern hemisphere, though we are seeing fewer cyclones forming over time.

    This summer, eight tropical cyclones have formed in Australian waters. Six were classified as severe (category 3 and up). Historically, Australia has experienced a higher proportion of category 1 and 2 cyclones, which bring weaker wind speeds.

    On average, we see about 11 cyclones form and 4-5 make landfall. There has been a downward trend in the number of cyclones forming in the Australian region in recent decades.

    Fewer cyclones, but more likely to be intense: this figure shows the number of severe (Category 3 and up) and non-severe tropical cyclones (Category 1 and 2) since 1970/71.
    Bureau of Meteorology, CC BY-NC-ND

    Climate link: Cyclones dumping more rain

    The intensity of a cyclone refers to the speed of the wind and size of the wind-affected area.

    But a cyclone’s rain field is also important. This refers to the area of heavy rain produced by storms when they’re at cyclone intensity and afterwards as they decay into tropical lows.

    The rate of rainfall brought by cyclones in Australia isn’t necessarily increasing, but more cyclones are moving slowly, such as Alfred. This means more rain per cyclone, on average.

    Rising ocean temperatures mean more water evaporates off the sea surface, meaning forming cyclones can absorb more moisture and dump more rain when it reaches land.

    Why are cyclones slowing down? This is likely because air current circulation in the tropics has weakened. This has a clear link to climate change. Wind speeds have fallen 5 to 15% in the tropics, depending on where you are in the world. It’s hard to pinpoint the change clearly in our region, because the historic record of cyclone tracks isn’t very long.

    For every degree (°C) of warming, rainfall intensity increases 7%. This is well established. But newer research is showing the rate may actually be double this or even higher, as the process of condensation releases heat which can trigger more rain.

    Clear climate link: Bigger storm surges due to sea level rise

    Sea levels are on average about 20 centimetres higher than they were before 1880.

    When a cyclone is about to make landfall, its intense winds push up a body of seawater ahead of it – the storm surge. In low lying areas, this can spill out and flood streets.

    Because climate change is causing baseline sea levels to rise, storm surges can reach further inland. Sea-level rise will also make coastal erosion more destructive.

    What should we take from this?

    We can’t say definitively that climate change is behind Cyclone Alfred’s unusual track.

    But factors such as rising sea levels, slower cyclones and warmer oceans are changing how cyclones behave and the damage they can do.

    Over time, we can expect to see cyclones arriving in regions not historically affected – and carrying more rain when they arrive.

    Liz Ritchie-Tyo receives funding from The Australian Research Council and the U.S. Office of Naval Research

    Andrew Dowdy receives funding from University of Melbourne as well as supported through the Australian Research Council.

    Hamish Ramsay receives funding from the Australian Climate Service.

    – ref. Cyclone Alfred is slowing – and that could make it more destructive. Here’s how climate change might have influenced it – https://theconversation.com/cyclone-alfred-is-slowing-and-that-could-make-it-more-destructive-heres-how-climate-change-might-have-influenced-it-251594

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Senator Markey Hosts Roundtable to Address Energy Access and Affordability in Massachusetts

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Massachusetts Ed Markey

    Stakeholders from Massachusetts and national energy assistance organizations discuss funding shortfalls, rising energy burdens, and the urgent need to strengthen LIHEAP

    Senator Markey Speaks with LIHEAP Roundtable Attendees

    Washington (March 5, 2025) – Senator Edward J. Markey (D-Mass.), a member of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, today convened a roundtable with Massachusetts-based Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP) providers, consumer advocates, and national energy assistance organizations to discuss the urgent need to strengthen and expand LIHEAP to better serve families struggling with rising energy costs.

    At the roundtable, Senator Markey underscored the growing demand for heating and cooling assistance through LIHEAP as energy prices continue to rise and reaffirmed his commitment to push for full program funding. Roundtable participants discussed how LIHEAP funding cuts have forced providers to ration aid, leaving many low-income households without critical energy assistance. In Massachusetts, LIHEAP applications have surged by 20 percent in the past year, and the number of first-time applicants has increased by 50 percent. Participants also highlighted the lack of dedicated cooling assistance in many states, including Massachusetts, leaving vulnerable residents at risk as extreme summer heat events become more frequent due to climate change.

    “Heating and cooling isn’t a luxury – it is a necessity. But too many families are having to choose between heating and cooling their home or putting food on the table,” said Senator Markey. “In Massachusetts, energy prices have skyrocketed as climate change fuels more extreme weather, making accessible and affordable heating and cooling assistance a lifeline for low-income families. We need to strengthen and expand LIHEAP so working families can pay their bills and heat their homes in the winter and cool their homes in the summer.”

    At the roundtable, Senator Markey announced the forthcoming reintroduction of the Heating and Cooling Relief Act, which aims to ensure LIHEAP serves more families in need by increasing funding, expanding eligibility, and improving access to cooling assistance. The bill would transform LIHEAP from a limited relief program into a robust safeguard against energy poverty, ensuring households can afford safe, reliable energy year-round.

    “Senator Markey has supported LIHEAP since it was first enacted more than 40 years ago during a period of very high heating oil prices. We are again facing high winter home energy prices but also record summer cooling prices,” said Mark Wolfe, Executive Director of the National Energy Assistance Directors Association. “As a result, families are facing high levels of utility debt, and millions could be facing the shut-off of power this year if additional LIHEAP funding is not provided. Fortunately, we have members of Congress like Senator Markey who have supported LIHEAP funding each and every year. With the support of members of Congress like Senator Markey low-income families will not have to choose between paying for food or their home energy bill.”

    “The National Energy and Utility Affordability Coalition (NEUAC) is pleased to join Senator Markey to plan for the future of LIHEAP for Massachusetts and the country,” said Katrina Metzler, Executive Director at The National Energy and Utility Affordability Coalition (NEUAC). “Avoiding energy poverty is critical to protecting the health and safety of families, and Senator Markey’s leadership in fighting energy insecurity is legend. Protecting LIHEAP is our highest priority, and Senator Markey shares that priority.”

    Director of Action for Boston Community Development (ABCD) Energy Services Andrea Mendoza said, “Heating and cooling costs have risen to unprecedented levels, crippling households and their ability to afford necessities like food and heat. The Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP) continuously enables millions of individuals and families to mitigate these challenges. We must continue to work across sectors, raise awareness, and develop solutions to improve access to economic success, and better health outcomes in our communities. ABCD thanks Senator Markey for being a tireless champion for LIHEAP and for the opportunity to participate in this discussion.”

    “I’d like to take this opportunity to thank Senator Markey for letting me take part in this discussion regarding the importance of LIHEAP,” said Liz Berube, Executive Director at Citizens for Citizens. “Not only was I given the chance to share our fear of funding cuts in a program that supplements the cost of heating and cooling, but I was also able to convey the successful impact LIHEAP has on thousands of hard working families, their children, and elderly as we continue to keep our most vulnerable populations warm in safe and healthy homes. The Senator continues to be such a great leader and supporter of our LIHEAP program!”

    “On behalf of the residents and families of Berkshire County, I would like to express my gratitude for Senator Markey’s longtime and steadfast support of the LIHEAP program. This program is vital in assisting our energy burdened families remain safe and warm through the cold Massachusetts winters,” said Deb Leonczyk, Executive Director of the Berkshire Community Action Council. “It has become ever more crucial as the cost of energy continues to rise. We must not allow this program to be cut or eliminated, as the health of our community is at stake. We are fortunate to have Senator Markey working at the forefront of this cause.”

    “Senator Markey has shown unwavering support for the LIHEAP program over these many years. We look forward to working with the Senator to ensure LIHEAP is able to keep struggling families connected to critical energy service year-round, particularly during periods of extreme cold and extreme heat,” said Olivia Wein, Senior Attorney at the National Consumer Law Center.

    Senator Markey is a champion for expanding energy assistance and fighting for full LIHEAP funding. In April 2024, he signed onto an appropriations letter led by Senator Jack Reed (D-R.I.), calling for robust LIHEAP funding in the FY2025 budget. He has also successfully advocated for emergency LIHEAP funding releases and will soon reintroduce his Heating and Cooling Relief Act, which he originally introduced with Representative Jamaal Bowman in January 2022, to significantly expand the program. In October 2023, he celebrated the release of $130 million in LIHEAP funding for Massachusetts, helping residents afford winter heating costs. Additionally, he has pushed for greater investments in home efficiency and electrification to help low-income families reduce their energy burdens.

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-Evening Report: Cyclone Alfred is slowing down – and that could make it more destructive. Here’s how climate change might have influenced it

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Liz Ritchie-Tyo, Professor of Atmospheric Sciences, Monash University

    Cyclone Alfred has now been delayed, as the slow-moving system stalls in warm seas off southeast Queensland. Unfortunately, the expected slow pace of the cyclone will bring even more rain to affected communities.

    This is because it will linger for longer over the same location, dumping more rain before it moves on. Alfred’s slowing means the huge waves triggered by the cyclone will last longer too, likely making coastal erosion and flooding worse.

    Cyclone Alfred is unusual – the first cyclone in half a century to come this far south and make expected landfall.

    When unusual disasters strike, people naturally want to know what role climate change played – a process known as “climate attribution”. Unfortunately, this process takes time if you want details on a specific event.

    We can’t yet say if Alfred’s unusual path and slow speed are linked to climate change. But climate change is driving very clear trends which can load the dice for more intense cyclones arriving in subtropical regions. These include the warm waters which fuel cyclones spreading further south, and cyclones dumping more rain than they used to.

    So, let’s unpick what’s driving Cyclone Alfred’s behaviour – including the potential role of climate change.

    A Bureau of Meteorology update on Cyclone Alfred dated Thursday, March 6.

    Not necessarily climate linked: Alfred’s southerly path

    Many cyclones make it as far south as Brisbane – but they’re nearly all far out at sea. Weather patterns mean most cyclones heading south are diverted to the east, where remnants can hit New Zealand as large extratropical storms.

    The fact that Alfred is set to make landfall is very unusual. But we can’t yet definitively say this is due to climate change. Cyclones are steered by winds and weather patterns, and the Coral Sea’s complex weather makes cyclone paths here very hard to predict.

    Alfred’s abrupt westward shift is due to a large region of high pressure to its south, which has pushed it directly towards heavily populated areas of southeast Queensland and northern New South Wales. These steering winds are not very strong, which is why Alfred is moving slowly.

    In 2014, researchers showed cyclones are reaching their maximum intensity in areas further south in the southern hemisphere and north in the northern hemisphere than they used to. In 2021, researchers also found cyclones were reaching their maximum intensity closer to coasts, moving about 30 km closer per decade.

    Climate link: Warmer seas

    Cyclones typically need water temperatures of 26.5°C or more to form.

    More than 90% of all extra heat trapped by greenhouse gas emissions is stored in the seas. The oceans are the hottest on record, and records keep falling. But normal seasonal variability and shifting ocean currents are still at work too, and we can get unusually warm waters without climate change as a cause.

    What we do know is that ocean temperatures around much of Australia have been unusually warm.

    The northeastern Coral Sea, where Cyclone Alfred formed, experienced the fourth-hottest temperatures on record for February and the hottest on record for January.

    In the Coral Sea, sea surface temperatures were the fourth highest on record in February 2025 and the highest on record in January 2025. This figure shows the trend over time for February.
    Bureau of Meteorology, CC BY-NC-ND

    We also know Australia’s southern waters are warming up too.

    The energy available to power tropical cyclones in subtropical regions has also increased in recent decades, due largely to rising ocean temperatures.

    Average sea surface temperatures in central and southern Queensland on Thursday March 6th. Point Danger is on the Gold Coast.
    Bureau of Meteorology, CC BY-NC-ND

    Climate link: Fewer cyclones but more likely to be intense

    In the northern hemisphere, researchers have found a trend towards fewer cyclones over time. But of those which do form, a higher proportion are more intense.

    It’s not fully clear if the same trend exists in the southern hemisphere, though we are seeing fewer cyclones forming over time.

    This summer, eight tropical cyclones have formed in Australian waters. Six were classified as severe (category 3 and up). Historically, Australia has experienced a higher proportion of category 1 and 2 cyclones, which bring weaker wind speeds.

    On average, we see about 11 cyclones form and 4-5 make landfall. There has been a downward trend in the number of cyclones forming in the Australian region in recent decades.

    Fewer cyclones, but more likely to be intense: this figure shows the number of severe (Category 3 and up) and non-severe tropical cyclones (Category 1 and 2) since 1970/71.
    Bureau of Meteorology, CC BY-NC-ND

    Climate link: Cyclones dumping more rain

    The intensity of a cyclone refers to the speed of the wind and size of the wind-affected area.

    But a cyclone’s rain field is also important. This refers to the area of heavy rain produced by storms when they’re at cyclone intensity and afterwards as they decay into tropical lows.

    The rate of rainfall brought by cyclones in Australia isn’t necessarily increasing, but more cyclones are moving slowly, such as Alfred. This means more rain per cyclone, on average.

    Rising ocean temperatures mean more water evaporates off the sea surface, meaning forming cyclones can absorb more moisture and dump more rain when it reaches land.

    Why are cyclones slowing down? This is likely because air current circulation in the tropics has weakened. This has a clear link to climate change. Wind speeds have fallen 5 to 15% in the tropics, depending on where you are in the world. It’s hard to pinpoint the change clearly in our region, because the historic record of cyclone tracks isn’t very long.

    For every degree (°C) of warming, rainfall intensity increases 7%. This is well established. But newer research is showing the rate may actually be double this or even higher, as the process of condensation releases heat which can trigger more rain.

    Clear climate link: Bigger storm surges due to sea level rise

    Sea levels are on average about 20 centimetres higher than they were before 1880.

    When a cyclone is about to make landfall, its intense winds push up a body of seawater ahead of it – the storm surge. In low lying areas, this can spill out and flood streets.

    Because climate change is causing baseline sea levels to rise, storm surges can reach further inland. Sea-level rise will also make coastal erosion more destructive.

    What should we take from this?

    We can’t say definitively that climate change is behind Cyclone Alfred’s unusual track.

    But factors such as rising sea levels, slower cyclones and warmer oceans are changing how cyclones behave and the damage they can do.

    Over time, we can expect to see cyclones arriving in regions not historically affected – and carrying more rain when they arrive.

    Liz Ritchie-Tyo receives funding from The Australian Research Council and the U.S. Office of Naval Research

    Andrew Dowdy receives funding from University of Melbourne as well as supported through the Australian Research Council.

    Hamish Ramsay receives funding from the Australian Climate Service.

    – ref. Cyclone Alfred is slowing down – and that could make it more destructive. Here’s how climate change might have influenced it – https://theconversation.com/cyclone-alfred-is-slowing-down-and-that-could-make-it-more-destructive-heres-how-climate-change-might-have-influenced-it-251594

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: Robert F. Kennedy Jr says vitamin A protects you from deadly measles. Here’s what the study he cites actually says

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Evangeline Mantzioris, Program Director of Nutrition and Food Sciences, Accredited Practising Dietitian, University of South Australia

    RobsPhoto/Shutterstock

    Robert F. Kennedy Jr, who oversees the health of more than 340 million Americans, says vitamin A can prevent the worst effects of measles rather than urging more people to get vaccinated.

    In an opinion piece for Fox News, the US health secretary said he was “deeply concerned” about the current measles outbreak in Texas. However, he said the decision to vaccinate was a “personal one” and something for parents to discuss with their health-care provider.

    Kennedy mentioned updated advice from the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) to treat measles with vitamin A. He also cited a study he said shows vitamin A can reduce the risk of dying from measles.

    Here’s what the vitamin A study actually says and why public health officials are so concerned about Kennedy’s latest statement.

    Why is a measles outbreak so worrying?

    Measles is a highly contagious disease caused by a virus. It spreads easily including when an infected person breathes, coughs or sneezes.

    Measles initially infects the respiratory tract and then the virus spreads throughout the body. Symptoms include a high fever, cough, red eyes, runny nose and a rash all over the body.

    Measles can also be severe, can cause complications including blindness and swelling of the brain, and can be fatal. Measles can affect anyone but is most common in children.

    The Texan health department has confirmed 150-plus cases of measles and one death of an unvaccinated child during the current outbreak. While this is by far the largest measles outbreak in the US in 2025, the CDC has reported smaller outbreaks in several other states so far this year.

    Why vitamin A?

    Vitamin A is essential for our overall health. It has many roles in the body, from supporting our growth and reproduction, to making sure we have healthy vision, skin and immune function.

    Foods rich in vitamin A or related molecules include orange, yellow and red coloured fruits and vegetables, green leafy vegetables, as well as dairy, egg, fish and meat. You can take it as a supplement.

    Vitamin A can also be used therapeutically. In other words, doctors may prescribe vitamin A to treat a deficiency. Vitamin A deficiency has long been associated with more severe cases of infectious disease, including measles. Vitamin A boosts immune cells and strengthens the respiratory tract lining, which is the body’s first defence against infections.

    Because of this, the CDC has recently said vitamin A can also be prescribed as part of treatment for children with severe measles – such as those in hospital – under doctor supervision.

    One key message from the CDC’s advice is that people are already sick enough with measles to be in hospital. They’re not taking vitamin A to prevent catching measles in the first place.

    The other key message is vitamin A is taken under medical supervision, under specific circumstances, where patients can be closely monitored to prevent toxicity from high doses.

    Vitamin A toxicity can cause birth defects and increase the risk of fractures in elderly people. Vitamin A and beta-carotene (which the body turns into vitamin A) from supplements may also increase your risk of cancer, especially if you smoke.

    Taking too much vitamin A can lead to toxicity and cause birth defects.
    ChameleonsEye/Shutterstock

    How about the study Kennedy cites?

    Kennedy cites and links to a 2010 study, a type known as a systematic review and meta-analysis. Researchers reviewed and analysed existing studies, which included ones that looked at the effectiveness of vitamin A in preventing measles deaths.

    They found three studies that looked at vitamin A treatment by specific dose. There were different doses depending on the age of the children, measured in IU (international units). Having two doses of vitamin A (200,000IU for children over one year of age or 100,000IU for infants below one year) reduced mortality by 62% compared to children who did not have vitamin A.

    The 2010 study did not show vitamin A reduced your risk of getting measles from another infected person. To my knowledge no study has shown this.

    To be fair, Kennedy did not say that vitamin A stops you from catching measles from another infected person. Instead, he used the following vague statement:

    Studies have found that vitamin A can dramatically reduce measles mortality.

    It’s easy to see how a reader could misinterpret this as “take vitamin A if you want to avoid dying from measles”.

    We know what works – vaccines

    The World Health Organization recommends all children receive two doses of measles vaccine.

    The CDC states two doses of the measles vaccine (measles-mumps-rubella or MMR vaccine) is 97% effective against getting measles. This means out of every 100 people who are vaccinated only three will get it, and this will be a milder form.

    But these facts were missing from Kennedy’s statement. Should we be surprised? Kennedy is well known for his vaccine sceptism and for undermining vaccination efforts, including for the measles vaccine.

    As Sue Kressly, president of the American Academy of Pediatrics, told the Washington Post:

    relying on vitamin A instead of the vaccine is not only dangerous and ineffective […] it puts children at serious risk.

    Evangeline Mantzioris is affiliated with Alliance for Research in Nutrition, Exercise and Activity (ARENA) at the University of South Australia. Evangeline Mantzioris has received funding from the National Health and Medical Research Council, and has been appointed to the National Health and Medical Research Council Dietary Guideline Expert Committee.

    – ref. Robert F. Kennedy Jr says vitamin A protects you from deadly measles. Here’s what the study he cites actually says – https://theconversation.com/robert-f-kennedy-jr-says-vitamin-a-protects-you-from-deadly-measles-heres-what-the-study-he-cites-actually-says-251465

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Tuberville Speaks with NIH Nominee, Calls for Radical Transparency at the NIH

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator Tommy Tuberville (Alabama)

    WASHINGTON – Today,U.S. Senator Tommy Tuberville (R-AL) spoke with Dr. Jayanta Bhattacharya, President Trump’s nominee to lead the National Institutes of Health (NIH) during his confirmation hearing before the Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions (HELP) Committee. During his remarks, Bhattacharya explained his plan to root out waste within the NIH and how he will earn back the trust of the American people by ensuring transparency.

    Read Sen. Tuberville’s remarks below or on YouTube or Rumble.

    TUBERVILLE: “Thank you doctor for being here. It’s always good to run into somebody that’s name’s harder to say than mine and mispronounced more.

    You’ve got a hard job in front of you, but I share the ideas and desire that the President has to root out waste and the fraud that we have in this country. Because if we don’t, we’re not gonna have a country left. It’s gonna be gone. And he’s doing the right thing. You’re gonna have a tough job. You’re gonna have to put your team together and do the same thing. We have got to make sure we use American taxpayers’ money the right way.

    So, kind of give me your plan of how you’re gonna do this—when you come into office and are confirmed how you’re gonna put your team together?”

    BHATTACHARYA: “Thanks Senator, I should say this: I have a background as an economist as well as being a doctor. And to me, that background, what it leads me to do is understand that every dollar wasted on a frivolous study is a dollar not spent—every dollar wasted on administrative costs that are not needed—is a dollar not spent on research. The team I’m gonna put together is gonna be hyper-focused to make sure that the portfolio grants that the NIH funds is devoted to the chronic disease problems of this country. It’s gonna be devoted to making sure we have not just incremental progress, but research projects that have the capacity to make huge advances in treatment for cancer, for diabetes, for obesity. That’s how I’m going to decide what the team is.

    And the NIH […], I’m blessed in some ways because it already has so many excellent scientists there to advise me on the on the areas I don’t know about. And I wanna tap [into] that resource. I wanna make sure I talk to every single person who who’s already a leader at the NIH to understand where those opportunities are.”

    TUBERVILLE: “Yeah. Well, thank you.

    You know, for the past four years, I’ve been on this Committee, and we’ve obviously gone through COVID [which was] devastating to not just our country, but the world.

    Transparency and trust is gonna have to be earned again from a lot of people. Most people across this country don’t know what the hell NIH stands for. Okay? But now they do because of COVID. You said that science has to be reliable, exactly. But people also have to trust, you know, we’re finding out now we have biolabs in Ukraine—where a war is going on, and we’re funding them.

    I mean, and so you’ve got to be on top of that, and the American people have to trust you that you will say, ‘Listen, we’re gonna keep an eye on, you know, the biolabs in North Carolina,’ or wherever we have them. Because it scares me to death of what’s going on. 

    What’s your plan there of getting trust back in this country?”

    BHATTACHARYA: “Senator first of all […], I want to work with Congress to make sure that there’s appropriate regulation of any risky research. The NIH […] I don’t think should be doing any research that has the potential to cause a pandemic. And I want to work with Congress to make sure that happens.

    As far as trust, I think the key thing is we have to be utterly open, if I’m confirmed, I’ll be at the head of an organization that’s a scientific organization. As a citizen, I would often look for FOIA responses from the NIH Freedom Information Act request, and they’d be fully redacted during the pandemic.

    You can’t have trust unless you are transparent. And if I’m confirmed as an NIH Director, I fully commit to making sure that the American people can see all of the activities of the NIH openly, with limited sort of obfuscation. [The NIH has been characterized this way], I think unfortunately, [because of the] way that they’ve interacted with American people.”

    TUBERVILLE: “And I think that starts with being very visual on television, telling people, you know, the truth. Don’t hide anything because we’ve been hiding things for years and that that doesn’t work. We found that out.

    You know, Chairman Cassidy and I led a letter to the NIH under the last administration asking questions about a grant that the NIH funded focused on children transitioning genders. The study followed all these children—two of them committed suicide. Devastating. 

    So, how can we ensure the NIH doesn’t grant funds to things like this?”

    BHATTACHARYA: “Well, first of all, I think it’s if you have a negative result and it’s politically inconvenient to you, usually, you have an obligation to scientists to report it. Right? 

    So, the NIH funds a study that shows that the gender transition doesn’t reduce suicide rate among, you know, adolescents. That researcher has an obligation to report it even though she may think it’s politically inconvenient. So, I wanna make sure that NIH research is required to report even negative results. And there’s ways to do that we can talk about.

    But I think as far as, like, the prioritization of studies, as I was telling Senator Paul, I think we wanna make sure that the studies are focused on the diseases that really are hurting Americans—obesity—a lot of the research that, you know, it’s so easy to come up with, examples of this. One of a shrimp on a treadmill for instance, that was once funded. It’s not that I’m necessarily against research like that, but the American taxpayer should be focused on the needs of American taxpayers. And the research should be focused on those needs, the health needs of Americans. And I want to make sure that the NIH, if confirmed, focuses on exactly that.”

    TUBERVILLE: “Thank you. Good luck.”

    BHATTACHARYA: “Thank you so much.”

    Senator Tommy Tuberville represents Alabama in the United States Senate and is a member of the Senate Armed Services, Agriculture, Veterans’ Affairs, HELP, and Aging Committees.

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI Australia: 3BA The Big Show, Ballarat

    Source: Australian Ministers 1

    PAUL TAYLOR [HOST]: Let’s go local, Ballarat, and I was going to speak to Lilly from Not Your Grandma’s Pantry, but unfortunately Lilly’s not answering her phone. We’ll get her on another time, though. I tell you what, her replacement though this morning has a major announcement to make, that is for sure. And the Honourable Catherine King MP, Minister for Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Local Government – good morning to you, Catherine.

    CATHERINE KING [MINISTER]: Good morning, and also the most important title I have and the one I am proudest of is Federal Member of Ballarat. But I’m doing- I’m here in my ministerial capacity today.

    PAUL TAYLOR: Absolutely you are. Could we add any extra duties to your portfolio, do you think?

    CATHERINE KING: [Laughs] No, I’m pretty busy, to be honest. I’ve got some terrific junior ministers who help me out a fair bit, it’s a big portfolio and really busy. But I’m at home today, which is really lovely to actually be able to be in Ballarat. And I can smell the smoke in the air, and I hope everyone’s all right out at Buninyong Surrounds. That would’ve been a pretty scary event [indistinct] …

    PAUL TAYLOR: [Talks over] Our emergency services once again did a wonderful job in protecting our communities out Mount Clear and Mount Buninyong way.

    Speaking of which, Anthony Albanese up- is he still in Queensland at the moment, with the cyclone happening?

    CATHERINE KING: Yeah, as I understand it that’s where he is. He was certainly there yesterday with the Emergency Services Minister Jenny McAllister. She’s sort of basing herself up there at the moment, and we’ve got the National Emergency Management Agency – obviously the state of Queensland takes the lead, but we’ve got all of those national assets in place who’ve had time to prepare. But yeah, it’s pretty scary watching it. It seems unbelievable to imagine how much rain they’ve had right up the top of the state, and then to see this. And I’m sure there’s many people who know I’ve got family there, I’ve got staff there as well. I know there’s people who know- have lots of family, lots of people who- known up there, so I think our thoughts are all with them at the moment.

    PAUL TAYLOR: Catherine, a lot of pundits were saying Sunday was going to be the day that Mr Albanese would head to the GG’s office. But given Cyclone Alfred, that’s not likely to happen, do you think?

    CATHERINE KING: Well, again, the election timing’s a matter for him. But look, I think that he’s pretty focused on- you know, you’ve got such a big emergency up the top of the country. I don’t think it’s- I think we’re focused on how do we help, what do we do, what do we actually need to do to make sure people are safe. And then if there is, in the event of terrible and- you know, the sort of things we think might happen, then how do we help people recover quickly. And so I think he’s pretty focused on that at the moment. The election obviously is going to have to be held before May, but I think when you’ve got something like that happening, we’re all just like, okay what do we need to do, is really the mode we’re in at the moment, and the election sort of takes a bit of a backseat. But again, that’ll be a matter for him.

    PAUL TAYLOR: Catherine King, let’s get to the announcement at hand. If anyone’s travelled the Western Freeway, in particular around Melton and Caroline Springs, those sorts of areas, it’s a very frustrating drive, especially at peak hour. What’s going on where the Western Freeway is concerned? A lot of money to be thrown at this to make it a lot safer, Catherine King.

    CATHERINE KING: Yeah, absolutely. So the Victorian Government and the Albanese Labor Government, we put in money – about 20 million – to do a joint business case that has finished. There’s still some more work to be done on that, but in order to get the ball really rolling on the highway- it just really can’t wait, it’s at capacity or it’s about to be at capacity in the next five years or so, so we’re being told. So we’re putting in $1 billion- $1.1 billion actually, to- particularly from that Melton to Caroline Springs end to try and look at how can we make the road safer, how can we ease some of that congestion, particularly in those peak hours in the morning as people are coming out of Bacchus Marsh, out of Melton, out of Rockbank and trying to get into work- that really from 6am onwards, it’s very difficult to get through there, and the state of the road is not really keeping up with the demands of the population there. And then obviously the return peak hour, that also is really significant problem. We know that once the West Gate Tunnel is done, there’ll be some alleviation of the sort of bottleneck at the end, but really at the moment the road is just not keeping up.

    So that $1.1 billion, there’s also out of that 100 million to try and really resolve the issue that we’ve got down our end around Brewery Tap Road. It’s a really dangerous intersection there. I’ve had lots of people talking to me about really that needs to be fixed. It’s an accident waiting to happen, so we want to try and get ahead of that. It’s really awful when you’re trying to run the gambit crossing there, so we’ll do the work with the Victorian state government about what the solutions are to try and resolve that. But we’re putting 100 million in there.

    And there’s also a smaller amount of money down a bit further, which is to fix some of the bridges heading towards [indistinct], but all of the remaining money, there’s already $1 billion in the highway to do a range of other things down the other end of the highway. So that’s really what we’re announcing today. I use it- at least weekly I’m down that highway. I know lots of people use it to get to and from work, to get to and from family. It’s a really important piece of infrastructure for the whole west of the state. So we’ll be pleased to be making that announcement today.

    PAUL TAYLOR: Catherine, is that money guaranteed, even though we’ve got an election looming? If the Albanese Government is ousted, does that money stay? What’s …

    CATHERINE KING: Yeah. Well, any announcements we’re making before the election is called are obviously decisions of government. So they’re budgeted decisions that will show up in the Pre-Election Financial Outlook. The only risk, of course, is if the Liberals come in and say they want to cut things. And unfortunately, we do know that they’ve got to find money for the cuts that they do want to make, and that is always a risk when elections change. But this obviously is money that we’re making as a decision of government announced as government.

    PAUL TAYLOR: Well, good to see money being thrown at the Brewery Tap Road intersection at Warrenheip. It is a worrisome intersection and needs to be fixed as soon as possible, as does the congestion further down the Freeway towards Melton and Rockbank, Caroline Springs, those sorts of areas.

    The Honourable Catherine King, MP for Ballarat and all the other titles that you hold nowadays, thank you so much for coming on The Big Show. Few and far between nowadays with you jet setting around and looking after a whole heap of other things in your portfolio, but we appreciate your time this morning, Catherine. And take care on the roads, won’t you?

    CATHERINE KING: I will do. It’s always good to be with you, and a privilege that as the Member for Ballarat, I then get to hold these bigger roles. But it’s only because I’m the Member of Ballarat that I get to hold those bigger roles, so always an incredible privilege to be that and to hold that in the community as well. So I’m very, very appreciative for the opportunity afforded to me by the people of Ballarat, really.

    PAUL TAYLOR: Thank you so much, the Honourable Catherine King MP.

    MIL OSI News –

  • MIL-OSI Australia: NSW Women of the Year 2025 award recipients honoured

    Source: New South Wales Government 2

    Headline: NSW Women of the Year 2025 award recipients honoured

    The NSW Women of the Year Awards are the centrepiece of NSW Women’s Week, which runs from Sunday 2 March and concludes on International Women’s Day on Saturday 8 March.

    The five 2025 Award recipients are:

    Dr Jessica Luyue Teoh (Hornsby), NSW Young Woman of the Year

    Dr Jessica Luyue Teoh is a domestic violence advocate and 2023 Churchill Fellow – one of only two women under 30 in Australia to receive this honour.

    Sandy Rogers (Tweed), NSW Community Hero

    Sandy Rogers has dedicated 40 years to improving the lives of children with intellectual and physical disability and their families.

    Dr Vanessa Pirotta (Canada Bay), Premier’s NSW Woman of Excellence

    Dr Vanessa Pirotta is a wildlife scientist renowned for her impact on marine conservation and science communication.

    Kirsty Evans (Orange), NSW Regional Woman of the Year

    Kirsty Evans has led efforts to provide pro bono legal advice to the community of Molong, affected by severe flooding in 2022.

    Marjorie Anderson (Georges River), NSW Aboriginal Woman of the Year

    Marjorie Anderson is a dedicated leader who has been pivotal in the success of 13YARN – the first national crisis support service for Aboriginal & Torres Strait Islander people in crisis, since its inception.

    The Ones to Watch (girls aged 7-15 years)

    • Aish Khurram (The Hills Shire)
    • Ashleen Khela (The Hills Shire)
    • Aurora Iler (Campbelltown)
    • Chloe Croker (Goulburn Mulwaree)
    • Emilia Trustum (Richmond Valley)
    • Hayley Paterson (Hornsby)
    • Jiayi Fang (Ku-ring-gai)
    • Kat Mulcair (Yass Valley)
    • Lydia Tofaeono (Strathfield)
    • Waniya Syed (Camden)

    This year, a special In Memoriam was added to the Awards ceremony for Maddy Suy, a vibrant girl whose love for life inspired many. Diagnosed with a brain tumour at age six, Maddy faced the challenge with bravery and positivity. Maddy advocated for those who could not. She wanted to leave a legacy and to inspire others to contribute through the Maddy & Co hubs.

    Local Woman of the Year 2025 recipients, who were nominated by their local MP also attended the Awards ceremony today and received certificates for exemplary service to their communities. The Local Woman Honour Roll will be published on the Women of the Year Awards webpage.

    The NSW Women of the Year Awards have been running since 2012, recognising and celebrating the New South Wales’s revolutionary thinkers, everyday heroes, social advocates and innovative role models.

    More details about the NSW Women of the Year Awards program and recorded livestream of 2025 ceremony are available on the Women of the Year Awards webpage.

    Premier Chris Minns said:

    “I’m delighted to congratulate NSW’s most remarkable women and girls, for breaking barriers and achieving the highest success in their respective fields.”

    “You are the future of NSW, inspiring everyone right across the state with your dedication, passion and lasting impacts in the community.”

    Minister for Women Jodie Harrison said:

    “Congratulations to the recipients of the NSW Women of the Year Awards. You are truly deserving of the recognition you received today. The New South Wales Government is proud to celebrate your incredible success and highlight your role in inspiring other women and girls across the state.

    “You can’t be what you can’t see, and you all are paving the way forward for women and girls with your strength, resilience and achievements.

    “The program also recognises women at the core of communities and families, with our Local Women of the Year recognition.

    “I also look forward to following the journeys of our incredible young recipients. You are all already hitting goals and making waves in your communities, so I’m sure you have bright futures ahead.”

    NSW Young Woman of the Year 2025 recipient Jessica Teoh said:

    “To stand alongside such a diverse and passionate group of women, each making impactful contributions to their communities and fields, is truly inspiring. This recognition highlights the collective strength of women driving change, and I am grateful to be part of this incredible journey.”

    NSW Community Hero 2025 recipient Sandy Rogers said:

    “I have been fortunate enough to be given great opportunities to help many in our community. Being able to support those needing a ‘little helping hand’ when times and money are tough, make me feel good and I know it means a lot to those we support.”

    Premier’s NSW Woman of Excellence 2025 recipient Dr Vanessa Pirotta said:

    “This recognition is so powerful and means a lot to me as an early career researcher in science and as a mum. So much of my work is intergenerational and community based, which enables me to ask questions to help equip future generations with important information now about our marine environment. This recognition will help make waves – pardon the pun – across the state to encourage communities to connect with the sea, regardless of whether they live in Bondi, Forbes or where I grew up in Murrumbateman.”

    NSW Regional Woman of the Year 2025 recipient Kirsty Evans said:

    “It’s a privilege to be acknowledged among such inspiring women who are making a meaningful impact across our state. This recognition is not just a personal milestone but also a reflection of the incredible support I’ve received from my community, my colleagues and family.”

    NSW Aboriginal Woman of the Year 2025 recipient, Marjorie Anderson said:

    “I am passionate about having healthy, sustainable and safe Aboriginal communities. This award reflects my important work in the community and delivery of a world first national crisis line for Indigenous people. Women need to be recognised for the outstanding work they do and supported to continue to achieve greatness.”

    MIL OSI News –

  • MIL-OSI New Zealand: Northland News – CityLink bus service diverted after more stone throwing incidents

    Source: Northland Regional Council

    Services on CityLink Whangārei’s Otangarei Route Four will temporarily bypass Matai St from today until further notice while police investigate a series of rock throwing incidents that have damaged buses and put drivers and passengers at risk.
    The 16-bus CityLink network is operated by Ritchies Transport Whangarei under contract to the Northland Regional Council.
    The council’s Transport Manager Chris Powell says the council and Ritchies were already dealing with a spate of recent rock throwing on Matai St that had seen bus windows smashed in separate incidents on both Saturday and Monday.
    “We take these incidents very seriously as in both cases there were passengers on board and either incident had the potential to injure either those passengers or our drivers, although fortunately that did not occur.”
    Both the drivers involved and their passengers had been shaken by the incidents.
    Mr Powell says there have unfortunately been several more incidents of Matai St rock throwing since Monday and things had come to a head today when yet more rocks were thrown.
    After discussions between Ritchies and the council, the decision had been made to temporarily stop travelling along Matai St on safety grounds while police investigate.
    Instead the Route Four bus would do a loop around nearby William Jones Dr.
    The council estimated several regular passengers a day would be directly impacted by the decision, but all involved felt they had no choice but to avoid Matai St until the matter was resolved.
    “We take health and safety considerations very seriously.” “We’ve got a responsibility to both our drivers and passengers to ensure that we’re operating in a safe environment hence today’s decision.”
    Mr Powell says the council and Ritchies hoped to meet with Otangarei community leaders to discuss the situation and what might be able to be done to prevent the issue going forwards.
    Things had been quiet in the area since a previous spate of rock throwing in the suburb 10 years ago. In that case the council and Ritchies had worked together to stress the importance of the buses to the community and that the incidents of rock throwing were putting the service at risk locally. 

    MIL OSI New Zealand News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Senator Collins Announces that Department of Commerce has Agreed to Renegotiate Maine Sea Grant

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Maine Susan Collins

    Washington, D.C. – U.S. Senator Susan Collins today announced that the Department of Commerce has agreed to renegotiate funding for Maine Sea Grant. At the urging of Senator Collins, Secretary Lutnick is directing NOAA to renegotiate the terms and conditions of the work to be performed by Maine Sea Grant to ensure that it focuses on advancing Maine’s coastal economies, working waterfronts and sustainable fisheries. The announcement comes following a conversation Tuesday between Secretary Lutnick and Senator Collins in which Senator Collins explained all that is at stake for Maine’s coastal communities with the loss of Sea Grant funding.

    “I appreciate the Secretary’s willingness to work together to ensure that Maine Sea Grant can continue to conduct research, support a robust pipeline of skilled labor, and ensure that our coastal economies remain profitable hubs for fishermen, lobstermen, and hospitality workers. It is important that Maine Sea Grant can continue to provide valuable services for communities across the state for years to come,” said Senator Collins.

    In a memo from the Department of Commerce, Vice Admiral Nancy Hann said, “After productive conversations with Senator Susan Collins and her staff, the Department of Commerce is committed to engaging in bilateral negotiations to modify the Year 2 award requirements and related funding of the Maine Sea Grant Omnibus Award.

                “Through these bilateral negotiations, the Department will ensure that the American people, including hardworking Mainers like lobstermen and fishermen, receive the benefit of the bargain consistent with the Administration’s priorities and continued relevance to program objectives.”

    Read the full memo here.

    “I am so grateful for Senator Collins’ unwavering dedication to sustaining our fisheries, working waterfronts, and local communities,” said Gayle Zydlewski, Director, Maine Sea Grant.

    “We deeply appreciate Senator Collins, the U.S. Department of Commerce, and NOAA for restoring funding to Maine Sea Grant. This investment ensures continued collaboration between scientists and fishermen, supporting sustainable fisheries and Maine’s coastal communities. UMaine remains committed to advancing research that strengthens our blue economy and marine industries,” said University of Maine President Joan Ferrini-Mundy.

    Maine Sea Grant is a direct investment in Maine’s coastal communities, driving economic growth, creating jobs, and supporting fisheries and the seafood industry, including local businesses like Ready Seafood:

    “Maine Sea Grant has been supporting Ready Seafood since we started as a small lobster company on Hobson’s Pier in Portland in 2004, and helped propel our business to become the largest lobster processing company in the world,” said Curt Brown, lobsterman and marine biologist for Ready Seafood. “Senator Collins’ tireless leadership has once again delivered a huge victory for Maine’s coastal communities. From Kittery to Cutler, Maine’s coastal economy is stronger today, thanks to her efforts!” 

    Senator Collins has been in contact with the Trump Administration and University of Maine leadership since the news broke Friday evening that the program was being defunded. Tuesday, Senator Collins met with the Director of Maine Sea Grant and other program advocates in her office. She spoke with Commerce Secretary Lutnick later that day.

    Facts about Maine Sea Grant:

    • Maine Sea Grant contributed to $23.5 million in documented economic benefits in 2023 alone. For every $1 of funding, there’s a $15 return.
    • Sea Grant has more than 700 established partnerships with businesses, researchers, community organizations, and local and county governments.
    • In 2023, Sea Grant created or supported 332 businesses and 565 jobs.
    • Sea Grant supports American Seafood Competitiveness by enhancing the sustainability and profitability of Maine’s $600 million lobster industry and growing aquaculture sector, helping maintain American leadership in global seafood markets.

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI Australia: Innovative technology installed in Menindee to restore native fish passages

    Source: New South Wales Ministerial News

    Published: 6 March 2025

    Released by: Minister for Agriculture, Minister for Water

    The Minns Labor Government is trialling Fishheart; a state-of-the-art temporary fish passage technology in the Lower Darling-Baaka River near Menindee, western NSW.

    The goal of this initiative is to test options to connect the Northern and Southern Basin and reduce the accumulation of fish, as part of the Government’s response to the Office of the NSW Chief Scientist and Engineer (OCSE) independent review into the March 2023 mass fish kill.

    The NSW Government continues to make good progress in addressing the recommendations identified in the OSCE report, with 10 of the 26 actions we’ve committed to now complete and the remaining 16 underway funded under the $25 million Restoring the Darling-Baaka River Program.

    One of the key actions the NSW Government has committed to is a $6.52 million trial of new temporary fish passage technology at Menindee.

    Australian native fish need to migrate to feed, breed and seek new habitat but due to the introduction of barriers to fish passage, like dams and weirs, fish migration pathways have been impacted.

    Currently in the Lower Darling-Baaka, fish can only migrate upstream as far as Lake Wetherell and Menindee Main Weir. The Fishheart unit is a floating hydraulic fishway system designed to assist fish moving over existing barriers. Construction commenced to install the Fishheart unit to the Lake Wetherell outlet regulator in December 2024.

    Work continued over the summer, with the technology being lowered into the Lower Darling-Baaka River in late January 2025. Calibration and testing of the Fishheart is currently underway. 

    The Fishheart unit works by attracting fish into the fishway and then using Artificial Intelligence (AI) to detect and collect fish in the chambers, counting fish, gathering data before moving fish up and over barriers like the Lake Wetherell outlet regulator.

    This is the first time that this innovative technology will be trialled at this scale on Australian inland freshwater fish and builds on Fishheart’s work in Europe and the USA that has shown plenty of promise.

    The aim of the project is to test options to connect sections of the river, thereby helping move some fish out of the Menindee town weir pool to complete their life cycle and reducing the biomass and associated risks for water quality and fish kills.

    Fisheries Scientists from the Department of Primary Industries and Regional Development (DPIRD) Fisheries will conduct the monitoring program, using underwater sonar and video capture technology, plus trapping activities under appropriate permits.

    For more information about the project visit the Menindee Lower Darling-Baaka Temporary Tube Fishway Trial webpage.

    To read the NSW Government’s six-month Darling-Baaka progress report, visit the Restoring the Darling-Baaka program webpage.

    Minister for Agriculture and Regional NSW, Tara Moriarty said:

    “This is the first time that this fishway technology will be trialled under Australian conditions at this scale and on native inland freshwater fish and it demonstrates the commitment of the Minns Labor Government to address environmental issues using innovative approaches, especially in western NSW.

    “While there is no one size fits all solution to restore fish passage in the Lower Darling-Baaka River or the Menindee Lakes system, this project aims to use innovative science, data and infrastructure as we promised to do.

    “Construction has been progressing through very hot days out at Menindee and we are grateful to all the personnel for their efforts in ensuring the fishway can get operational as soon as possible.

    “The Fishheart will be trialled for three breeding seasons, to measure its effectiveness in Menindee. But overseas experiences provide strong indicators for success, for moving fish through the fishway safely and hopefully reduce the risks of future fish kills in the Lower Darling-Baaka.”

    Minister for Water Rose Jackson said:

    “It’s fantastic to see the fish passage being trialled in Menindee which is one of the innovative infrastructure solutions proposed to prevent future fish deaths.

    “We pledged to take decisive action on water quality in the Darling-Baaka to improve fish health and we are delivering on this promise, with a six-month progress report now available to show the community where we are up to.

    “So far, we have developed new water quality triggers, overhauled our emergency response plans, continued to upgrade monitoring and added additional resources while also exploring state-of-the-art infrastructure solutions such as the tube fishway and microbubble technology.

    “I’m encouraged by the progress in a short space of time, which the Chief Scientist himself has acknowledged publicly, but there is still a lot of work to be done.

    “The reality is this is an incredibly complex river system with significant challenges that won’t go away overnight, but we are in a much stronger position to respond to changing conditions than ever before, and we are undoubtedly moving in the right direction.”

    MIL OSI News –

  • MIL-OSI New Zealand: Consumer NZ calls for an end to the surcharge “swindle”

    Source: Consumer NZ

    Consumer NZ is calling on the Commerce Commission to consider a ban on card payment surcharges due to growing concerns about excessive and hidden fees.

    While the Commission is considering lowering interchange fees – to reduce merchants’ costs for accepting card payments, – Consumer says there’s no guarantee this will reduce card surcharges for consumers, and that should be the priority.  

    Currently, there are no regulations in New Zealand on surcharges, only guidelines. The guidelines recommend surcharges be transparent, avoidable and not excessive. Unfortunately, these recommendations are often ignored, to the detriment of shoppers.
     
    “The surcharging situation in New Zealand is a mess. We have received hundreds of complaints showing merchants are not complying with the guidelines. It’s time to introduce new surcharge rules,” says Consumer acting head of research and advocacy, Jessica Walker.  

    Although the Commission has said it will consider some form of surcharge regulation, an outright ban doesn’t appear to be one of the options being considered. Yet Consumer thinks a ban would be a simple and effective solution, with the benefits outweighing the risks.  
     
    “Less thought would be required about what card to use, whether to swipe, insert or tap; what the surcharge amount is and whether there’s a way to avoid the surcharge.
     
    “You could just leave the house with your phone in your pocket, knowing you wouldn’t have to pay a hefty surcharge for the convenience of not carrying any cards. A ban makes things simpler for merchants too,” Walker says.  

    Issues with surcharging

    Complaints to Consumer about surcharges include:

    Excessive fees: Merchants are charging well over what it costs them to accept the card payment. In the worst cases, card payment surcharges have exceeded 20%. The Commission estimates New Zealanders are paying up to $65 million per year in excessive surcharges, with Mastercard estimating this figure to be $90 million.  

    Lack of transparency: Some merchants don’t mention the fact they add surcharges. Others have terminals that simply state “surcharge applies”, without specifying the amount.

    Fixed fees: Some merchants charge flat fees rather than percentages, which don’t always reflect their actual costs.

    Hidden fees: Additional costs, like service fees, are often bundled with surcharges, confusing consumers.

    To address these issues, Consumer is calling on the Commission to consider a ban on surcharges.  

    The benefits of a surcharge ban  

    Transparency: A surcharge ban would eliminate unclear and hidden fees, allowing consumers to more easily compare prices.

    Consistency: Consumers would have a consistent experience across merchants, with no nasty surprises at the counter.

    Simplicity: A ban would be easy for consumers and businesses to understand and easy for the Commission to enforce.

    Fairer: A ban would incentivise merchants to search for better card deals that allow them to reduce their payment costs. While surcharging is allowed, there’s no incentive for merchants to do this. Lower interchange fees also mean businesses could more easily absorb payment costs.

    Encourages competition: Transparent pricing would allow consumers to shop around more easily, fostering competition.

    Alignment with other jurisdictions: The United Kingdom and European Union have banned surcharges, proving such a ban can work.

    The case for banning surcharges in New Zealand is strong.

    Consumer lodged a submission with the Commission this week supporting further interchange regulation and calling for the Commission to consider a ban on surcharges.  

    We urge anyone else who is fed up with surcharges to let the Commission know by 5pm on 18 March 2025 using this simple online form: https://consumernz.cmail20.com/t/i-l-fdykily-ijjdkdttjk-j/

    MIL OSI New Zealand News –

  • MIL-OSI New Zealand: Consumer NZ calls for an end to the surcharge “swindle”

    Source: Consumer NZ

    Consumer NZ is calling on the Commerce Commission to consider a ban on card payment surcharges due to growing concerns about excessive and hidden fees.

    While the Commission is considering lowering interchange fees – to reduce merchants’ costs for accepting card payments, – Consumer says there’s no guarantee this will reduce card surcharges for consumers, and that should be the priority.  

    Currently, there are no regulations in New Zealand on surcharges, only guidelines. The guidelines recommend surcharges be transparent, avoidable and not excessive. Unfortunately, these recommendations are often ignored, to the detriment of shoppers.
     
    “The surcharging situation in New Zealand is a mess. We have received hundreds of complaints showing merchants are not complying with the guidelines. It’s time to introduce new surcharge rules,” says Consumer acting head of research and advocacy, Jessica Walker.  

    Although the Commission has said it will consider some form of surcharge regulation, an outright ban doesn’t appear to be one of the options being considered. Yet Consumer thinks a ban would be a simple and effective solution, with the benefits outweighing the risks.  
     
    “Less thought would be required about what card to use, whether to swipe, insert or tap; what the surcharge amount is and whether there’s a way to avoid the surcharge.
     
    “You could just leave the house with your phone in your pocket, knowing you wouldn’t have to pay a hefty surcharge for the convenience of not carrying any cards. A ban makes things simpler for merchants too,” Walker says.  

    Issues with surcharging

    Complaints to Consumer about surcharges include:

    Excessive fees: Merchants are charging well over what it costs them to accept the card payment. In the worst cases, card payment surcharges have exceeded 20%. The Commission estimates New Zealanders are paying up to $65 million per year in excessive surcharges, with Mastercard estimating this figure to be $90 million.  

    Lack of transparency: Some merchants don’t mention the fact they add surcharges. Others have terminals that simply state “surcharge applies”, without specifying the amount.

    Fixed fees: Some merchants charge flat fees rather than percentages, which don’t always reflect their actual costs.

    Hidden fees: Additional costs, like service fees, are often bundled with surcharges, confusing consumers.

    To address these issues, Consumer is calling on the Commission to consider a ban on surcharges.  

    The benefits of a surcharge ban  

    Transparency: A surcharge ban would eliminate unclear and hidden fees, allowing consumers to more easily compare prices.

    Consistency: Consumers would have a consistent experience across merchants, with no nasty surprises at the counter.

    Simplicity: A ban would be easy for consumers and businesses to understand and easy for the Commission to enforce.

    Fairer: A ban would incentivise merchants to search for better card deals that allow them to reduce their payment costs. While surcharging is allowed, there’s no incentive for merchants to do this. Lower interchange fees also mean businesses could more easily absorb payment costs.

    Encourages competition: Transparent pricing would allow consumers to shop around more easily, fostering competition.

    Alignment with other jurisdictions: The United Kingdom and European Union have banned surcharges, proving such a ban can work.

    The case for banning surcharges in New Zealand is strong.

    Consumer lodged a submission with the Commission this week supporting further interchange regulation and calling for the Commission to consider a ban on surcharges.  

    We urge anyone else who is fed up with surcharges to let the Commission know by 5pm on 18 March 2025 using this simple online form: https://consumernz.cmail20.com/t/i-l-fdykily-ijjdkdttjk-j/

    MIL OSI New Zealand News –