NewzIntel.com

Category: Fisheries

  • MIL-OSI Global: Meditation and mindfulness at work are welcome, but do they help avoid accountability for toxic culture?

    Source: The Conversation – France (in French) – By Raysa Geaquinto Rocha, Assistant Professor at the Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam and lecturer, University of Essex

    In an age when home offices, hybrid work arrangements and blurred boundaries between work and personal life are the norm, a recently established narrative is intensifying: the integration of spirituality into business.

    This idea involves deliberately incorporating personal values and meaningful purpose into all aspects of organisational life – from individual expression to workplace practices and corporate identity. It’s an approach that seeks to cultivate environments where employees can find deeper meaning in their work while contributing to both economic and social progress, as my past research in the Journal of Business Ethics shows.

    Spirituality in business transcends traditional management methods by acknowledging the inner lives of workers, promoting their personal growth and fostering genuine community connections. According to a 2016 interview with Eileen Fisher, the founder and then CEO of a $450-million fashion brand, company meetings opened with the ring of a meditation bell followed by a minute of silence. Fisher said the practice allows employees “to get in touch with what they’re there for and what matters to them and show up a little differently” and has contributed to the company’s recognised leadership in sustainability and women’s advocacy.

    But are all corporate efforts like these genuine attempts to foster well-being, or can they instead be strategies to rebrand productivity demands?

    Spiritual well-being in business

    The incorporation of spirituality into the workplace represents a shift in how businesses approach leadership, employee wellbeing and corporate culture.

    Take ice-cream maker Ben & Jerry’s partnership with Greyston Bakery, a leader in social enterprise. Under their “linked prosperity” model, Ben & Jerry’s sources all brownies for its Chocolate Fudge Brownie flavour from Greyston, which operates with an “open hiring” policy that does not require a background check for applicants and provides “help with child care, housing and ESL (English as a second language) classes”. The partnership shows how valuing human dignity and community empowerment can reshape conventional business practices into drivers of social change.

    Spiritual integration manifests in plenty of other ways, too. Morning gatherings can become spaces for shared reflection rather than mere status updates. Dedicated quiet rooms can offer sanctuary for contemplation or prayer. Through mentorship relationships and community service initiatives, workplaces can evolve into environments where individuals can explore deeper questions about purpose. US outdoor clothing company Patagonia describes how it offers paid environmental internships and flexible policies that enable employees to align their work lives with how they see their authentic selves. These offerings reflect the idea that while people come to work to earn a living, they stay and thrive when work nourishes their spirit.

    The trend of integrating spirituality into the workplace taps into the practical wisdom of spiritual traditions, honed over millennia, to foster attributes like mindfulness, compassion and interconnectedness. But despite its benefits, integration – or lip service to it – risks becoming a convenient excuse for businesses to shift the responsibility for stress and burn-out onto employees instead of addressing systemic issues.

    The rise and fall of WeWork illustrates this phenomenon. As documented in both Hulu’s “WeWork: or the Making and Breaking of a $47 Billion Unicorn” and Apple TV+’s dramatic series “WeCrashed”, the workspace company masterfully leveraged spiritual rhetoric to attract young professionals. While the company promoted meditation spaces and wellness initiatives, these benefits masked issues including unsustainable work expectations, questionable management practices and a sexual assault claim. The disconnect between WeWork’s offerings and operational reality demonstrates how companies can appropriate spiritual practices only as a veneer.

    When suits start talking spirit

    When McKinsey & Company, a US management consulting firm that epitomizes corporate pragmatism, releases a podcast titled “Beyond 9 to 5: The power of spiritual health in the workplace”, it is clear that spirituality in business has moved beyond the fringe.

    McKinsey’s global survey of 41,000 respondents, detailed in their May 2024 report “In search of self and something bigger: A spiritual health exploration”, found that spiritual health matters deeply to employees. But does this data reflect a genuine commitment to spirituality, or is it just a reflection of its currency in the corporate world?

    After almost half a century of research on spirituality in business, it has become a mature field. The Academy of Management, “an association for management and organizational scholars”, recognised Management, Spirituality, and Religion as a Division, [“reflecting”] a broad range of member interests”. Still, the corporate world’s interest is raising eyebrows: the suspicion remains that spirituality is merely being repackaged as a tool for enhancing productivity. In his 2019 book “McMindfulness: How Mindfulness Became the New Capitalist Spirituality”, Ronald Purser illustrates this concern through Google’s “Search Inside Yourself” programme. While marketed as a path to employee wellness, the initiative exemplifies how meditation and mindfulness can be transformed into performance-enhancement tools, asking workers to develop “resilience” rather than addressing the root causes of workplace stress.

    The whole self at work

    The concept of bringing one’s “whole self” to work – a cornerstone of the Industry 5.0 concept promoted by the European Commission – emphasises employee authenticity. The idea of spirituality in the workplace intertwines with the idea of authentic self-expression, encompassing the recognition of one’s beliefs, values and quest for deeper meaning. These are dimensions historically excluded from professional settings. The idea is to create an environment where people can align their deepest motivations with their work.

    While this ideal is noble in concept, it also raises complex questions about which aspects of our “whole selves” are appropriate to bring into the workplace. In 2015, the US Supreme Court ruled in favour of a job applicant whom the clothing company Abercrombie & Fitch refused to hire because her hijab conflicted with its dress code. Delta Airlines’ uniform policy revision last July illuminates the ongoing complexity of the issue. Following a controversy that began when a passenger made a social media post describing two flight attendants’ Palestinian flag pins – which were permitted under existing policy – as “Hamas badges”, the airline banned all national flag pins except US ones.

    Juggling multiple selves

    The promise of integrating our identities more seamlessly instead of compartmentalizing them features in the Apple TV series Severance. The show presents a dystopian take on work-life balance in which employees surgically separate their work and personal memories, inviting us to reflect on the identities we balance in our professional and personal lives. The character of Mark Scout, whose “innie” (work self) develops genuine connections with colleagues like Helly, demonstrates how even artificially separated selves seek authentic relationships and meaning. However, when these connections begin to flourish, employer Lumon Industries’ harsh punishments and control mechanisms kick in – suggesting that true workplace innovation and collaboration can only emerge when we’re allowed to bring our whole, unsevered selves to work.

    By acknowledging and nurturing the various aspects of our personalities, we might attain new levels of connection in the workplace. But could the integration of spirituality and work lead to an environment where employees are perpetually “on”? A risk lies in creating a culture where work infiltrates every aspect of life, leaving no true respite. The very practices meant to nurture the spirit could paradoxically become tools that further blur the boundaries between professional obligations and personal renewal. A constant connection to work erodes personal boundaries, which can lead to stress and dissatisfaction that spills over into personal life. Addressing this “shadow side” is essential if we are to answer the question “Do you believe in life after work?” with a resounding yes.

    A balanced approach

    The integration of spirituality into business requires genuine commitment. While spiritual practices can bring multiple benefits, they must emerge from authentic values rather than serving as a quick fix for systemic issues.

    Since the 1980s, when major corporations first explored Eastern spirituality, workplace spirituality has evolved into a $7.9 billion meditation market. But as companies invest in meditation apps and mindfulness programmes, they often fail to address the root causes of workplace stress and burn-out. Today, well-intentioned apps like CHILL Anywhere risk functioning as band-aids that place the burden of stress management on employees, instead of examining issues like unrealistic workloads, inadequate compensation, toxic leadership or prejudice.

    Instrumentalizing spiritual practices into productivity tools fundamentally misses the point: true spirituality in business requires organizations to critically examine and transform the structural conditions that create employee suffering in the first place. Until companies commit to addressing these foundational issues, meditation rooms and mindfulness apps will remain superficial solutions that enable rather than challenge harmful workplace dynamics.

    The future workplace should aim to harmonise profit and purpose, recognising that employee well-being is integral to long-term success. Spirituality in business manifests when organisations commit to both business excellence and human flourishing – addressing foundational concerns while nurturing deeper meaning and purpose. Only then can the promise of bringing our whole selves to work become a reality worth believing in.

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

    – ref. Meditation and mindfulness at work are welcome, but do they help avoid accountability for toxic culture? – https://theconversation.com/meditation-and-mindfulness-at-work-are-welcome-but-do-they-help-avoid-accountability-for-toxic-culture-244587

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-Evening Report: ‘I was shocked’: a scientist tracking koalas films startling behaviour between young males

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Darcy Watchorn, Threatened Species Biologist, Wildlife Conservation & Science Department, Zoos Victoria, and Visiting Scholar, School of Life & Environmental Science, Deakin University

    Darcy Watchorn

    It’s a cold, drizzly night in a forest west of Melbourne. I’m sitting on a damp log, clutching a thermos of lukewarm tea and watching a koala snooze on a branch above me. Suddenly, it lifts its head. I sit up straight, pen poised to record what happens. But the koala simply yawns and resumes the blob position. I sigh and take another sip of tea.

    Why am I doing this? To research the social behaviour of koalas and hopefully learn more about what they do at night, when they are most active.

    After many nights, and many sips of tea, I witness something truly unexpected: male koalas engaging in affectionate behaviours with each other, such as play and grooming. I was shocked. Adult koalas are normally solitary, so observations such as this are exceedingly rare.

    My new research paper presents these findings. It provides the most detailed account of these behaviours to date, and offers a unique glimpse into how social dynamics between koalas may change when they are forced to live in close quarters.

    An adult female koala (right) and her very large joey (left) on a tree in Cape Otway, Victoria
    Darcy Watchorn

    Why are these behaviours so surprising?

    Most animals exhibit some type of social behaviour. These can include mating, vocalising to communicate, or defending their territory. But some highly social, group-living animals – such as wolves, primates and dolphins – will also display friendly and peaceful acts between individuals, such as grooming each other and playing.

    These are known as “affiliative” behaviours, and they are key to social relationships between animals, and to maintaining complex social hierarchies.

    Adult koalas, though, are generally solitary (except, obviously, when mating). They are usually widely spread over an area and rarely come face-to-face, instead interacting over long distances by vocalising and leaving their scent.

    And when male koalas do physically interact, it is usually a violent affair. More than once, I’ve seen male koalas scratched and bloodied — missing chunks of fur and even a claw — after fighting with a rival male.

    That’s why my observations of affection between young male koalas were so surprising.

    What I saw after dark

    Over three painstaking weeks, I studied a koala population in the woodlands of Cape Otway, southern Victoria. Each night, I went out between 9pm and 2am to track and observe the males. I used a red-light spotlight to avoid disturbing them. If I saw something interesting, I filmed it. You can watch the video below.

    After two weeks, I observed three males engaging in unexpected “affiliative” behaviours. They were grooming each other, sniffing each other’s genitals and vocalising to each other in soft, high-pitched calls, similar to the sounds baby koalas make.

    They also appeared to be playing. They would gently — but perhaps provocatively — bite one another on the arm and ear, a bit like cheeky puppies do.

    These interactions weren’t brief, either. I watched the koalas for two hours before finally giving in to sleep. When I went back at lunchtime the next day, they were still at it.

    What’s behind these affectionate behaviours?

    This type of social interaction between wild koalas had only been observed once before, more than 30 years ago, in a high-density koala population on French Island off Victoria.

    Like that earlier observation, the koalas I recorded were young adult males, roughly aged between three and five years. Hormonal activity can surge at this life stage, leading to an increase in social behaviours such as play and boldness.

    But if the affectionate behaviours were solely the result of teenage hormones, you’d expect it to be observed more often in many koalas in this age group. But that’s not the case.

    Instead, these behaviours are most likely a result of the large koala populations.

    Typically, fewer than two koalas are found per hectare. At Cape Otway, there were 15 koalas per hectare. This number can reach up to 20 in parts of South Australia and Victoria.

    This high density means the home ranges of koalas are more likely to overlap and their interactions will be more frequent. It also means competition for food, space and mates can be especially high.

    So young males might use affectionate behaviours — such as grooming and playing — to reduce conflict and manage stress. It may help individuals become familiar with their neighbours, establish hierarchies and avoid aggressive encounters.

    Genetics may also play a role. Like many high-density koala populations, this population had low genetic diversity, meaning there was a high degree of relatedness among individuals.

    Low genetic diversity can be a big problem for species overall. But it does mean some animals might identify their relatives, and tolerate being close to them.

    The causes of low genetic diversity in high-density koala populations are complex. The species was almost hunted to extinction. This meant a vastly reduced number of koalas could pass on their genes to the next generation. To make matters worse, habitat destruction can prevent koalas from dispersing over a wide area.

    This truckload of koala pelts was taken during the 1927 open season in Queensland.
    State Library of Queensland, CC BY-ND

    The complex reality of koala conservation

    Koalas are listed as endangered in New South Wales, Queensland and the ACT. But high-density koala populations, such as the one I observed in Cape Otway, also present major conservation challenges.

    Too many koalas feeding in an area puts pressure on preferred tree species. This can result in mass tree death, and habitat loss for koalas and other species. In some cases, koalas can starve.

    Unfortunately, there are no quick and easy solutions to this issue. Moving koalas from crowded areas to places where they are endangered often isn’t possible, due to differences in climate and the unique gut bacteria koalas need for their local food trees.

    Other interventions, such as fertility control, can be effective. But this takes many years of intensive effort and significant funding, making it vulnerable to budget cuts and shifting priorities.

    Some experts say culling could be used to control koala numbers and conserve the surrounding habitat, as it is for kangaroos. However, this is likely to draw widespread public opposition.

    These complex challenges offer an unexpected silver lining, however. As my experience shows, high-density koala populations provide unique opportunities to observe rare social behaviours in this iconic species. All you need is curiosity, a big cup of tea, and patience.

    Darcy Watchorn works for Zoos Victoria, a not-for-profit zoo-based conservation organisation. He is a member of the Ecological Society of Australia, the Australian Mammal Society, and the Society for Conservation Biology.

    – ref. ‘I was shocked’: a scientist tracking koalas films startling behaviour between young males – https://theconversation.com/i-was-shocked-a-scientist-tracking-koalas-films-startling-behaviour-between-young-males-247339

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Durbin Votes ‘No’ On Advancing President Trump’s Pick To Be Attorney General, Pam Bondi

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Illinois Dick Durbin
    January 29, 2025
    WASHINGTON – U.S. Senate Democratic Whip Dick Durbin (D-IL), Ranking Member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, today voted against advancing President Trump’s pick to be Attorney General of the United States, Pam Bondi, in the Senate Judiciary Committee executive business meeting this morning. The Committee voted to advance her nomination on a party-line vote of 12-10.
    Key Quotes:
    “If you want to know the role of the Department of Justice under President Trump, just listen to his words. He said ‘I have the absolute right to do what I want to do with the Justice Department.’ He not only uses the Justice Department to advance his political interests but he has also promised to seek ‘retribution’ against ‘the enemy within.’ The President has repeatedly threatened to weaponize the justice system against those he feels have wronged him and that’s a long list. It includes career prosecutors, military officials, and his own former political appointees. Unfortunately, we are seeing these threats emerge in real time.”
    “Given the massive upheaval that President Trump has caused at the Justice Department in just the first few days in office, the next Attorney General will have their work cut out for them. As I said during Ms. Bondi’s hearing, it is absolutely critical that any nominee for this position be committed first and foremost to the Constitution and the American people—not the President and his political agenda. Unfortunately, I am unconvinced that Ms. Bondi shares my belief. She is one of four personal lawyers of President Trump that he has already selected for top positions at the Department of Justice. And she has echoed President Trump’s calls for exacting revenge on his political opponents.”
    “Ms. Bondi undermined our democracy by joining in President Trump’s efforts to overturn the 2020 election. It appears she does not regret this decision, as she refused before this Committee repeatedly during her hearing to acknowledge that President Trump actually lost the vote in 2020. During her hearing, I asked if she was familiar with the January 2021 phone call in which President Trump called on the Republican Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger [to] ‘find 11,780 votes.’ Ms. Bondi denied having ever listened to that phone call. However, in August 2023, she appeared on a news program and defended President Trump’s conduct with Raffensperger. She stated that his actions were ‘not a crime’ and were instead ‘free speech.’ She condemned the criminal charges that had been filed against President Trump due to his conduct on this call where he asked the Georgia Secretary of State to ‘find 11,780 votes.’ I asked Ms. Bondi to explain why she spoke so authoritatively on the legal strength of a case when she was, according to her own claim before this Committee, unfamiliar with the evidence. Her explanation was that she was on television, not in a court of law.”
    “It is deeply concerning that someone seeking the role of Attorney General believes it is appropriate to comment publicly on a criminal case without conducting even a minimal assessment of the evidence against the defendant. The role of Attorney General is a serious one. It requires someone who is committed to the facts and the law—not someone who is willing to say whatever is most politically expedient.”
    “During Ms. Bondi’s hearing, I was shocked to hear her speak of a ‘peaceful transition of power’ in 2021. In written questions, Ms. Bondi attempted to walk that statement back, instead referring to ‘a smooth transition of power.’ I was at the Capitol on January 6, 2021. The events of that day were neither peaceful nor smooth. You don’t have to take my word for it. The 140 law enforcement officers who were assaulted by President Trump’s supporters on January 6 can attest to what actually happened. Ms. Bondi also refused to comment on possible pardons for January 6 rioters who violently assaulted police officers. One of my Republican colleagues—a friend on this panel—dismissed my question on the subject and said it was ‘an absurd and unfair hypothetical,’ to even ask if President Trump was going to grant pardons to those who assaulted police officers. Now we know what happened.”
    “I went into Ms. Bondi’s hearing with an open mind for obvious reasons… There remains one basic question that I wanted answered—whether she would be willing to tell President Trump and wealthy special interests ‘No’ if faced with pressure to use her position as Attorney General to benefit those parties. In light of the Trump Administration’s actions over the course of the past week, that question is even more critical. And I did not receive a satisfactory answer from Ms. Bondi. Since Watergate, there has been bipartisan support for the idea that the Justice Department must be independent from the White House. President Trump’s conduct during his first term underscored the need for this independence. I do not believe that Ms. Bondi will provide it.”
    “I hope she proves me wrong, but I cannot support her nomination.”
      
    Video of Durbin’s opening statement is available here.
    Audio of Durbin’s opening statement is available here.
    Footage of Durbin’s opening statement is available here for TV Stations.
    Ms. Bondi was previously a registered lobbyist with the Washington, D.C.-based firm Ballard Partners. In that role, she has represented wealthy special interests and foreign governments, presenting serious potential conflicts of interest if she is confirmed as Attorney General. In response to Question 22 of the Senate Judiciary Questionnaire regarding conflicts of interest, she only listed two potential conflicts of interest: her work for the America First Policy Institute and her brother’s legal practice.
    To view Durbin’s questions to Ms. Bondi in her confirmation hearing click here.
    -30-

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI United Kingdom: LegenDerry Food Month adds exciting new experiences

    Source: Northern Ireland – City of Derry

    LegenDerry Food Month adds exciting new experiences

    29 January 2025

    As we gear up for the third annual Love LegenDerry Food Month, the programme is even bigger and better with a tantalising selection of food experiences to look forward to.

    Already a highlight of the culinary calendar, this celebration of the city’s thriving food and drink scene offers more unique ways than ever to indulge, explore, and connect with the region’s vibrant culinary culture.

    The programme is delivered by the LegenDerry Food Network with support from Derry City and Strabane District Council, and the Department of Agriculture and Rural Affairs Regional Food Programme.

    The Network brings together the finest local producers, growers, chefs, brewers, restaurateurs working together to put the City and District on the map when it comes to the finest produce and creative culinary experiences.

    If you fancy something a bit more creative, then why not Paint Your Partner at Offing Coffee? Friday 14th February, brings the quirky Paint Your Partner event at Offing Coffee, hosted by Spark and Ponder. This light-hearted experience invites couples or friends to try their hand at painting each other’s portraits while enjoying locally roasted coffee and delicious treats. It’s a blend of laughter, art, and excellent hospitality, promising a unique and memorable afternoon.

    Theis new addition joins a packed calendar of events with highlights including the Oyster & Stout Festival, the Dart Mountain Cheese Experience, the Wild and Fired Dining Experience, Seafood Supper and the Derry By Fork Food Tour. Whether you’re savouring fresh seafood, discovering the craft of cheese-making, or exploring the city’s rich culinary history, this February promises to showcase the very best of Derry’s food scene.

    So, if you haven’t booked your place yet, now is the time. Love LegenDerry Food Month offers something for everyone – from creative workshops to indulgent dinners – all against the stunning backdrop of one of Northern Ireland’s most dynamic cities.

    For full event listings and booking details, visit www.legenderryfood.com/events

    Or explore Visit Derry for things to see and do, accommodation. Plus, for places to eat and drink www.visitderry.com.

    MIL OSI United Kingdom –

  • MIL-OSI Global: Why we should all try to eat like people in rural Papua New Guinea – new study

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Jens Walter, Professor at the School of Microbiology, University College Cork

    Tanya Keisha/Shutterstock

    Western diets – high in processed foods and low in fibre – are associated with obesity, diabetes and heart disease. These diets don’t only harm our bodies, they also harm our gut microbiomes, the complex community of bacteria, fungi and viruses found in our intestinal tract that are important for our health.

    Scientists, including my colleagues and me, are actively searching for ways to create healthy microbiomes to prevent chronic diseases. And my search has taken me to Papua New Guinea.

    I have long been fascinated by this country, with its remote valleys almost untouched by the modern world until 1930, more than 800 languages, an ancient system of sustenance agriculture and entire communities living a non-industrialised lifestyle. This fascination kicked off a thrilling nine-year research project involving researchers from eight countries, which led to a paper published in the scientific journal Cell.

    In previous research, my team studied the gut microbiomes of rural Papua New Guineans. We discovered microbiomes that are more diverse than their westernised counterparts, enriched in bacteria that thrive on dietary fibre, and with lower levels of inflammation-causing bacteria that are typically found in people who eat highly processed foods.

    This information provided hints on how to perhaps redress the damage caused to our gut microbiomes.

    The traditional diet in rural Papua New Guinea is rich in unprocessed plant-based foods that are full of fibre but low in sugar and calories, something I was able to see for myself on a field trip to Papua New Guinea. Determined to create something everyone could use to benefit their health, our team took what we saw in Papua New Guinea and other non-industrialised societies to create a new diet we call the NiMe (non-industrialised microbiome restore) diet.

    What sets NiMe apart from other diets is that it is dominated by vegetables (such as leafy greens) and legumes (such as beans) and fruit. It only contains one small serving of animal protein per day (salmon, chicken or pork), and it avoids highly processed foods.

    Dairy, beef and wheat were excluded from the human trial because they are not part of the traditional diet in rural Papua New Guinea. The other characteristic distinction of the diet is a substantial dietary fibre content. In our trial, we went for around 45g of fibre a day, which exceeds the recommendations in dietary guidelines.

    One of my PhD students got creative in the kitchen designing recipes that would appeal to a person used to typical western dishes. These meals allowed us to develop a meal plan that could be tested in a strictly controlled study in healthy Canadian adults.

    Remarkable results

    We saw remarkable results including weight loss (although participants didn’t change their regular calorie intake), a drop in bad cholesterol by 17%, decreased blood sugar by 6%, and a 14% reduction in a marker for inflammation and heart disease called C-reactive protein. These benefits were directly linked to improvements in the participants’ gut microbiome, specifically, microbiome features damaged by industrialisation.

    On a western diet low in dietary fibre, the gut microbiome degrades the mucus layer in the gut, which leads to inflammation. The NiMe diet prevented this process, which was linked to a reduction in inflammation.

    The diet also increased beneficial bacterial metabolites (byproducts) in the gut, such as short-chain fatty acids, and in the blood, such as indole-3-propionic acid – a metabolite that has been shown to protect against type 2 diabetes and nerve damage.

    Research also shows that low dietary fibre leads to gut microbes ramping up protein fermentation, which generates harmful byproducts that may contribute to colon cancer.

    In fact, there is a worrying trend of increased colon cancer in younger people, which may be caused by recent trends towards high-protein diets or supplements. The NiMe diet increased carbohydrate fermentation at the expense of protein fermentation, and it reduced bacterial molecules in the participants’ blood that are linked to cancer.

    The findings from our research show that a dietary intervention targeted towards restoring the gut microbiome can improve health and reduce disease risk. The NiMe diet offers a practical roadmap to achieve this, by providing recipes that were used in our study. It allows anyone interested in healthy eating to improve their diet to feed their human cells and their microbiome.

    Jens Walter has received honoraria and/or paid consultancy from PrecisionBiotics/Novonesis A/S. NiMe is a trademark of Anissa M. Armet and Jens Walter.

    The research described in this article was supported by the Weston Family Microbiome Initiative, PrecisionBiotics Group Ltd., the “Hundred Talents Program” Research Start-up Fund of Zhejiang University, Alberta Innovates Postgraduate Fellowship, Izaak Walton Killam Memorial Scholarship, the Alberta Innovates Graduate Student Scholarship, the Frederick Banting and Charles Best Canada Graduate Scholarship, the Walter H. Johns Graduate Fellowship, the University of Alberta Doctoral Recruitment Scholarship, the Campus Alberta Innovates Program, the Canada Research Chairs Program, the Science Foundation Ireland Centre grant to APC microbiome Ireland (APC/SFI/12/RC/2273_P2) and a Science Foundation Ireland Professorship (19/RP/6853).

    I would like to thank the people of Papua New Guinea whose way of life has been an inspriation for the development of the NiMe diet, and the participants of the human trial. I am deeply indepted to all the collaborators and the scientific institutions that have contributed to the research (please see author list and affiliations on publication). I would like to thank Prof. Andrew Greenhill (Federation University, Australia) and Prof William Pomat (Papua New Guinea Institute of Medical Research) for hosting me in Papua New Guina in 2019. I would further like to thank Jessica Stanisich and Tina Darb from the APC Microbiome Ireland for their help with this article.

    – ref. Why we should all try to eat like people in rural Papua New Guinea – new study – https://theconversation.com/why-we-should-all-try-to-eat-like-people-in-rural-papua-new-guinea-new-study-248064

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI USA: 01.28.2025 Sens. Cruz, Schatz, Britt, and Tuberville Introduce Bill Targeting Illegal Fishing Operations

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Texas Ted Cruz
    WASHINGTON, D.C. – Today, U.S. Senate Commerce Committee Chairman Ted Cruz (R-Texas), Sen. Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii), Sen. Katie Britt (R-Ala.), and Sen. Tommy Tuberville (R-Ala.) introduced the bipartisan Illegal Red Snapper and Tuna Enforcement Act, which directs the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) to develop a standard methodology for identifying the country of origin of red snapper and certain species of tuna imported into the United States.
    Technology exists to chemically test and find the geographic origin of many foods, but not for red snapper and tuna. The legislation aims to develop a field test kit that can be used to accurately ascertain whether fish were caught in U.S. or foreign waters, thus allowing federal and state law enforcement officers to identify the origin of the fish and confiscate illegally caught red snapper and tuna before it is imported back into the U.S.
    Upon the introduction of the Illegal Red Snapper and Tuna Enforcement Act, Sen. Cruz said, “Cartels and other criminal entities are illegally catching, importing, and selling red snapper and tuna to unwitting consumers then using such profits to fund other illicit activities like drug smuggling and human trafficking. I am glad to join my colleagues in introducing this common-sense, bipartisan legislation to support U.S. fishermen, and I am hopeful Congress will act quickly to stop these dangerous criminal gangs.”
    Sen. Schatz said, “Seafood that’s caught illegally or intentionally mislabeled rips off consumers and makes it harder for law-abiding U.S. fishermen to compete. Our bill will help fight against pirate fishermen who try to pass off cheap foreign tuna for high-quality ahi from local Hawai‘i fishermen.”
    Sen. Britt said, “Cartel-backed poachers need to face consequences for their illicit activities in the Gulf of America. Red snapper is a core component of Coastal Alabama’s economy, and our hardworking fishermen and food producers deserve fairness when fishing in the Gulf. Senator Cruz’s and my Red Snapper and Tuna Enforcement Act will help protect Alabama’s fishermen. This is yet another message to Mexico that illegal actions cannot and will not stand.”
    Sen. Tuberville said, “Alabama lands 34 percent of all recreationally caught Red Snapper in the Gulf. Unfortunately, our domestic Red Snapper industry is being undermined by Mexican fishermen who are illegally catching American snapper in the Gulf, smuggling them into Mexico, and then reselling the same fish back to American consumers. In addition to taking business away from Alabama’s fishermen, many of the profits from these illegal fishing operations are funding the cartels. I’m proud to join Senator Cruz in introducing the Illegal Red Snapper and Tuna Enforcement Act to stop illegal Red Snapper from flooding our markets and bankrupting our great fishermen.”
    Background:
    Mexican fishermen cross the maritime border between Texas and Mexico on small boats called “lanchas” to illegally catch red snapper in U.S. waters and return to Mexico. The fish are sold in Mexico or mixed in with legally-caught red snapper then exported back into the United States across land borders. Red snapper is one of the most well-managed and profitable fish in the Gulf, but illegal fishing by Mexican lanchas puts law-abiding U.S. fishermen and seafood producers at a competitive disadvantage.
    In Hawaii, commercial fishermen have long fought to combat illegal fishing and human trafficking in the seafood industry. Illegal, Unreported, and Unregulated (IUU) fishing activities violate both national and international fishing regulations.
    Sens. Cruz, Britt, and Tuberville previously introduced similar legislation during the 118th Congress, which passed the Commerce Committee in July of last year.

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI Russia: “Cubist Portrait” in Library No. 46

    Translartion. Region: Russians Fedetion –

    Source: Moscow Government – Government of Moscow –

    Library No. 46 will host a master class on painting in the style of abstract cubism. It is characterized by geometric shapes, deformations, angularity and a complete lack of realism. The founders of the movement were Pablo Picasso and Georges Braque, but artists continue to paint in a similar manner today.

    During the class, everyone will try to create a free portrait of Dora Maar, which they can take home. No special training or artistic skills are required to participate. The necessary materials are provided.

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

    Please Note; This Information is Raw Content Directly from the Information Source. It is access to What the Source Is Stating and Does Not Reflect

    https: //vv.mos.ru/afisha/Event/330063257/

    MIL OSI Russia News –

  • MIL-OSI Russia: Concert in memory of poet Valery Belozerov in library No. 42 named after A.P. Platonov

    Translartion. Region: Russians Fedetion –

    Source: Moscow Government – Government of Moscow –

    Library No. 42 named after A.P. Platonov invites you to a concert in memory of the poet, singer-songwriter, playwright Valery Belozerov, dedicated to the 65th anniversary of his birth. The event is organized jointly with the studio of the author’s song “Second Me”. Belozerov’s songs will be performed both in bard and pop formats. In addition, guests will hear the poet’s poems.

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

    Please Note; This Information is Raw Content Directly from the Information Source. It is access to What the Source Is Stating and Does Not Reflect

    https: //vv.mos.ru/Afisha/Event/330064257/

    MIL OSI Russia News –

  • MIL-OSI Asia-Pac: Advisory At Pasir Ris Beach On Swimming And Primary Contact Sports Is Lifted

    Source: Asia Pacific Region 2 – Singapore

    Water quality at Pasir Ris Beach has improved and is now safe for primary contact activities. Swimming and other primary contact activities continue to be discouraged at Sembawang Park Beach.

    Singapore, 24 January 2025 – Six out of seven recreational beaches have been graded “Good” in the latest beach grading exercise and are suitable for all water activities. This includes Pasir Ris Beach, which was graded “Fair” in Feb 2024. Sembawang Park Beach, continues to be graded “Fair” even though its water quality has improved from last year.

    Advisory on swimming and primary contact sports

    2               The recreational beaches are graded based on World Health Organization (WHO) recreational water quality guidelines. The grading takes into account the incidences of elevated Enterococcus (EC) bacteria count in the beach water samples [1] which increases the risk of gastrointestinal infection when the water is ingested.

    3               With the latest beach grading results, the advisory discouraging swimming and other primary contact activities [2] at Pasir Ris Beach is lifted. The advisory discouraging swimming and other primary contact activities will remain for Sembawang Park Beach. Non-primary contact water activities, such as sailing, kayaking and canoeing can continue as normal at Sembawang Beach.

    4               As there could be occasions when the EC level at beaches are elevated, we encourage beachgoers to refer to the weekly Beach Short-term Water Quality Information (BSWI) on the NEA website or the myENV app before engaging in water activities.

    Sources of Elevated EC Bacteria

    5               Findings suggest that the earlier elevated EC levels at Pasir Ris and Sembawang Beach might have originated from multiple sources, including bin centres, food establishments and construction sites, where improper hygiene practices such as pouring of water containing waste materials into the drains could have impacted the water quality in our waterways.

    6                Respective Government agencies have been working with stakeholders to ensure proper housekeeping and waste management measures to minimise EC in our waterways, for example by ensuring the proper discharge of wastewater and washing water into sewers within the premises. Agencies have stepped up inspections at these premises and will take enforcement actions against any errant practices. The next grading of Singapore’s recreational beaches will be in July 2025.

    —————————

    [1] Based on WHO recreational water quality guidelines, beaches with EC levels greater than 200 cfu/100ml for more than 5 per cent of the samples will be graded “Fair” or poorer.  

    [2] Primary contact activities refer to activities where a person’s whole body or face and trunk are frequently immersed and it is likely that some water will be swallowed. Primary contact activities include swimming, wakeboarding, windsurfing and water immersion training.

    ~~ End ~~

    For more information, please submit your enquiries electronically via the Online Feedback Form or myENV mobile application.

    ANNEX A

     2025 Beach Grading

    Beach Grade
    Changi Good
    East Coast Park Good
    Pasir Ris Good
    Punggol Good
    Seletar Island Good
    Sembawang Park Fair
    Sentosa Island Good

      

    ANNEX B

     Beach Advisory Installed at Sembawang Park [3] Beach

     

     

    [3] Sembawang Park beach stretches from Sembawang Park fishing pier to mouth of Simpang Kiri river.

    MIL OSI Asia Pacific News –

  • MIL-OSI Global: AI can affect anonymous surveys. Here are some ways for researchers to mitigate its impact

    Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Christopher Dietzel, Postdoctoral fellow, the DIGS Lab, Concordia University

    Anonymous surveys protect participants from becoming targets of anti-2SLGBTQIA+ hate. However, researchers need to be careful about the potential for bad actors to spoil survey data. (Shutterstock)

    As 2SLGBTQIA+ people are increasingly under threat in Canada, and facing escalating dangers from the Donald Trump administration in the United States, more research is urgently needed to understand how to address issues of gender and sexual diversity moving forward.

    Unfortunately, researchers who aim to explore emerging issues impacting 2SLGBTQIA+ communities and develop interventions to support them are facing a new problem: what if our research participants aren’t actually real?

    Anonymous online surveys are a great way for marginalized groups, including 2SLGBTQIA+ communities, to contribute to research without significant time commitments. Anonymous surveys also protect participants from becoming targets of anti-2SLGBTQIA+ hate. However, researchers need to be careful about the potential of disingenuous participants to spoil survey data.

    The anonymous nature of online research makes it easy for someone to infiltrate research studies and submit false responses. This issue is not new, as researchers have dealt with this concern for years. Ineligible participants may participate in surveys to access honorariums or sabotage research on topics they disagree with.

    As artificial intelligence (AI) becomes more advanced, this problem is magnified. And while AI detectors exist, they are not always accurate and cannot confront the issue of human respondents who are simply lying in their survey responses.

    Our team has conducted online research about digital hate targeting 2SLGBTQIA+ professionals and organizations in Canada through the Ontario Digital Literacy and Access Network. We encountered this problem with two surveys we administered in 2024. Researchers from the SHaG Lab at Dalhousie University and the DIGS Lab at Concordia University confronted similar issues when conducting online surveys about 2SLGBTQIA+ issues.

    This shared concern about participant authenticity and the potential infiltration of dishonest respondents — whether AI or not — has led us to identify issues that could have a negative impact on online research.

    Anonymous online surveys are a great way for marginalized groups, including 2SLGBTQIA+ communities, to contribute to research; however, ineligible participants and AI bots can undermine their accuracy.
    (Shutterstock)

    The challanges we encountered

    Location:
    Our most recent survey focused on Two Spirit, trans and non-binary professionals working at 2SLGBTQIA+ organizations in Canada. The narrow participant criteria made it easy to check IP addresses and spot ones that did not qualify. We could also identify and block IP addresses that submitted multiple responses.

    When reviewing the data, we found that many of the suspicious responses were linked to one IP address located in China. We also received a high volume of responses claiming to come from Prince Edward Island. This was suspect, not only because of contradictory IP addresses, but because the number of responses seemed disproportionately high for the population of the smallest Canadian province.

    Time:
    Our survey received 1,491 responses within three days, which was suspicious given the narrow eligibility criteria. Many responses were completed too quickly for a survey that included written responses. We also noticed that there were waves of responses, and those respondents completed the survey in roughly the same amount of time.

    Incentives:
    It is hard to know exactly why people complete surveys for which they are ineligible. Some people may may do it for the compensation on offer. Others many want to spoil the data. We noticed that false responses increased when some form of compensation was offered, whether it was cash or gift cards.



    Read more:
    Imposter participants challenge research integrity in the digital age

    Email addresses:
    Another pattern we noticed was the use of generic Outlook or Yahoo email addresses, which followed the formula of first name-last name-numbers. While many people might use this same format, this is also an easy and quick way to create email addresses en masse.

    Contradictions:
    When looking at the data, we found that many responses did not make sense for our target demographic group. There were a lot of “prefer not to answer” responses to prompts about pronouns, gender identity and sexual orientation.

    Many respondents also selected “yes” when asked if they were First Nations, Inuit or Métis, but then wrote “white” when asked about their race or ethnicity. Identities can be complex, and what appears to be a contradiction may in fact be an intersection that is poorly represented through demographic questionnaires. Flagging potentially fake responses based on how we assume respondents will identify themselves is a bad idea for research about 2SLGBTQIA+ people who inhabit non-normative gender and sexual identities.

    Some of these responses were also flagged because of other issues, including IP address and completion rate. However, there were others that were less suspicious, leaving us unsure about their validity.

    These responses may have been created by AI bots or by people using AI to generate responses and manually enter them. It could have been someone actively trying to misrepresent themselves or someone who earnestly wants to contribute but does not feel confident in their English-language skills or writing ability. For this reason, it is important to consider multiple factors when reviewing survey responses to determine whether data is usable.

    AI presents new opportunities and challenges for online research.
    (Shutterstock)

    Moving forward

    Technology like AI chatbots presents new opportunities and new challenges for online research that require specific interventions. The concerns we’ve outlined are potential red flags that can help alert researchers to suspicious data.

    Some solutions we found for these issues include IP tracking, requiring a password to access the survey, asking the same question twice to verify that the responses match, and having “attention check” or “trap” questions where respondents are asked to select a specific response.

    Researchers can also flag “speeder” respondents who take less than one-third of the median response time, and average respondents who select the same responses across the survey, like always choosing the first option. Some researchers may already be aware of these and other solutions, and we encourage anyone doing online research to be prepared to address dishonest participants and protect the integrity of their data.

    While these solutions may require additional time, labour and resources, it is important not to abandon online research. In-person methods are not always viable or accessible, particularly to reach 2SLGBTQIA+ people and other marginalized populations.

    Research in this area is vital. We encourage other researchers to share their experiences and solutions to these problems to raise awareness.

    Christopher Dietzel receives funding from Le Fonds de recherche du Québec – Société et culture (FRQSC) and is the community research advisor of the Ontario Digital Literacy and Access Network (ODLAN).

    Evan Vipond is a research officer at the Ontario Digital Literacy and Access Network (ODLAN).

    Hannah Maitland is the co-founder and administrative coordinator of the Ontario Digital Literacy and Access Network (ODLAN).

    – ref. AI can affect anonymous surveys. Here are some ways for researchers to mitigate its impact – https://theconversation.com/ai-can-affect-anonymous-surveys-here-are-some-ways-for-researchers-to-mitigate-its-impact-247758

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: Bennu asteroid reveals its contents to scientists − and clues to how the building blocks of life on Earth may have been seeded

    Source: The Conversation – USA – By Timothy J McCoy, Supervisory Research Geologist, Smithsonian Institution

    This photo of asteroid Bennu is composed of 12 Polycam images collected on Dec. 2, 2024, by the OSIRIS-REx spacecraft. NASA

    A bright fireball streaked across the sky above mountains, glaciers and spruce forest near the town of Revelstoke in British Columbia, Canada, on the evening of March 31, 1965. Fragments of this meteorite, discovered by beaver trappers, fell over a lake. A layer of ice saved them from the depths and allowed scientists a peek into the birth of the solar system.

    Nearly 60 years later, NASA’s OSIRIS-REx mission returned from space with a sample of an asteroid named Bennu, similar to the one that rained rocks over Revelstoke. Our research team has published a chemical analysis of those samples, providing insight into how some of the ingredients for life may have first arrived on Earth.

    Born in the years bracketing the Revelstoke meteorite’s fall, the two of us have spent our careers in the meteorite collections of the Smithsonian Institution in Washington, D.C., and the Natural History Museum in London. We’ve dreamed of studying samples from a Revelstoke-like asteroid collected by a spacecraft.

    Then, nearly two decades ago, we began turning those dreams into reality. We joined NASA’s OSIRIS-REx mission team, which aimed to send a spacecraft to collect and return an asteroid sample to Earth. After those samples arrived on Sept. 24, 2023, we got to dive into a tale of rock, ice and water that hints at how life could have formed on Earth.

    In this illustration, NASA’s OSIRIS-REx spacecraft collects a sample from the asteroid Bennu.
    NASA/Goddard/University of Arizona

    The CI chondrites and asteroid Bennu

    To learn about an asteroid – a rocky or metallic object in orbit around the Sun – we started with a study of meteorites.

    Asteroids like Bennu are rocky or metallic objects in orbit around the Sun. Meteorites are the pieces of asteroids and other natural extraterrestrial objects that survive the fiery plunge to the Earth’s surface.

    We really wanted to study an asteroid similar to a set of meteorites called chondrites, whose components formed in a cloud of gas and dust at the dawn of the solar system billions of years ago.

    The Revelstoke meteorite is in a group called CI chondrites. Laboratory-measured compositions of CI chondrites are essentially identical, minus hydrogen and helium, to the composition of elements carried by convection from the interior of the Sun and measured in the outermost layer of the Sun. Since their components formed billions of years ago, they’re like chemically unchanged time capsules for the early solar system.

    So, geologists use the chemical compositions of CI chondrites as the ultimate reference standard for geochemistry. They can compare the compositions of everything from other chondrites to Earth rocks. Any differences from the CI chondrite composition would have happened through the same processes that formed asteroids and planets.

    CI chondrites are rich in clay and formed when ice melted in an ancient asteroid, altering the rock. They are also rich in prebiotic organic molecules. Some of these types of molecules are the building blocks for life.

    This combination of rock, water and organics is one reason OSIRIS-REx chose to sample the organic-rich asteroid Bennu, where water and organic compounds essential to the origin of life could be found.

    Evaporites − the legacy of an ancient brine

    Ever since the Bennu samples returned to Earth on Sept. 24, 2023, we and our colleagues on four continents have spent hundreds of hours studying them.

    The instruments on the OSIRIS-REx spacecraft made observations of reflected light that revealed the most abundant minerals and organics when it was near asteroid Bennu. Our analyses in the laboratory found that the compositions of these samples lined up with those observations.

    The samples are mostly water-rich clay, with sulfide, carbonate and iron oxide minerals. These are the same minerals found in CI chondrites like Revelstoke. The discovery of rare minerals within the Bennu samples, however, surprised both of us. Despite our decades of experience studying meteorites, we have never seen many of these minerals.

    We found minerals dominated by sodium, including carbonates, sulfates, chlorides and fluorides, as well as potassium chloride and magnesium phosphate. These minerals don’t form just when water and rock react. They form when water evaporates.

    We’ve never seen most of these sodium-rich minerals in meteorites, but they’re sometimes found in dried-up lake beds on Earth, like Searles Lake in California.

    Bennu’s rocks formed 4.5 billion years ago on a larger parent asteroid. That asteroid was wet and muddy. Under the surface, pockets of water perhaps only a few feet across were evaporating, leaving the evaporite minerals we found in the sample. That same evaporation process also formed the ancient lake beds we’ve seen these minerals in on Earth.

    Bennu’s parent asteroid likely broke apart 1 to 2 billion years ago, and some of the fragments came together to form the rubble pile we know as Bennu.

    These minerals are also found on icy bodies in the outer solar system. Bright deposits on the dwarf planet Ceres, the largest body in the asteroid belt, contain sodium carbonate. The Cassini mission measured the same mineral in plumes on Saturn’s moon Enceladus.

    We also learned that these minerals, formed when water evaporates, disappear when exposed to water once again – even with the tiny amount of water found in air. After studying some of the Bennu samples and their minerals, researchers stored the samples in air. That’s what we do with meteorites.

    Unfortunately, we lost these minerals as moisture in the air on Earth caused them to dissolve. But that explains why we can’t find these minerals in meteorites that have been on Earth for decades to centuries.

    Fortunately, most of the samples have been stored and transported in nitrogen, protected from traces of water in the air.

    Until scientists were able to conduct a controlled sample return with a spacecraft and carefully curate and store the samples in nitrogen, we had never seen this set of minerals in a meteorite.

    An unexpected discovery

    Before returning the samples, the OSIRIS-REx spacecraft spent over two years making observations around Bennu. From that two years of work, researchers learned that the surface of the asteroid is covered in rocky boulders.

    We could see that the asteroid is rich in carbon and water-bearing clays, and we saw veins of white carbonate a few feet long deposited by ancient liquid water. But what we couldn’t see from these observations were the rarer minerals.

    We used an array of techniques to go through the returned sample one tiny grain at a time. These included CT scanning, electron microscopy and X-ray diffraction, each of which allowed us to look at the rock at a scale not possible on the asteroid.

    Cooking up the ingredients for life

    From the salts we identified, we could infer the composition of the briny water from which they formed and see how it changed over time, becoming more sodium-rich.

    This briny water would have been an ideal place for new chemical reactions to take place and for organic molecules to form.

    While our team characterized salts, our organic chemist colleagues were busy identifying the carbon-based molecules present in Bennu. They found unexpectedly high levels of ammonia, an essential building block of the amino acids that form proteins in living matter. They also found all five of the nucleobases that make up part of DNA and RNA.

    Based on these results, we’d venture to guess that these briny pods of fluid would have been the perfect environments for increasingly complicated organic molecules to form, such as the kinds that make up life on Earth.

    When asteroids like Bennu hit the young Earth, they could have provided a complete package of complex molecules and the ingredients essential to life, such as water, phosphate and ammonia. Together, these components could have seeded Earth’s initially barren landscape to produce a habitable world.

    Without this early bombardment, perhaps when the pieces of the Revelstoke meteorite landed several billion years later, these fragments from outer space would not have arrived into a landscape punctuated with glaciers and trees.

    Timothy J McCoy receives funding from NASA.

    Sara Russell receives funding from the UK Science and Technology Facilities Council (STFC).

    – ref. Bennu asteroid reveals its contents to scientists − and clues to how the building blocks of life on Earth may have been seeded – https://theconversation.com/bennu-asteroid-reveals-its-contents-to-scientists-and-clues-to-how-the-building-blocks-of-life-on-earth-may-have-been-seeded-248096

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Lankford, Coons Lead Bill to Incentivize Charitable Giving

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Oklahoma James Lankford
    WASHINGTON, DC – Senators James Lankford (R-OK) and Chris Coons (D-DE) introduced the Charitable Actto expand and extend the expired non-itemized deduction for charitable giving. The bill would ensure Americans who donate to charities, houses of worship, religious organizations, and other nonprofits of their choice are able to deduct that donation from their federal taxes at a higher level than the previous $300 deduction.  
    This provision was first included under the CARES Act passed by President Donald J. Trump. The policy resulted in 90 million tax returns utilizing the deduction, and households making between $30,000 and $100,000 saw the largest increase in charitable giving. Charitable organizations received $30 billion in increased donations as a result. 
    “America’s first safety net should never be the government—government is the least efficient caregiver by far. Our families, churches, and other nonprofits do incredible work to lift up those who need it most. Updating the tax law to incentivize giving empowers Americans to make an even bigger impact for the homeless, hurting, and hungry,” said Lankford. 
    “Delawareans have always risen to the occasion in support of our communities,” said Coons. “Last year, Americans demonstrated our generosity by donating a collective $557 billion to charities, houses of worship, and nonprofits. I am proud to reintroduce the Charitable Act with Senator Lankford to help the federal government encourage even more Americans to embrace the civic virtue of giving to those in need.”
    Lankford and Coons were joined on this bill by Senators Catherine Cortez Masto (D-NV), John Hickenlooper (D-CO), Pete Ricketts (R-NE), Amy Klobuchar (D-MN), Raphael Warnock (D-GA), Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH), John Curtis (R-UT), Marsha Blackburn (R-TN), Jerry Moran (R-KS), Katie Britt (R-AL), and Tim Scott (R-NC).
    This bill is supported by numerous organizations including National Council of Nonprofits (25,000 member organizations), Charitable Giving Coalition (175 member organizations), the Nonprofit Alliance, Faith & Giving Coalition, Leadership 18, Independent Sector, YMCA, Council on Foundations, American Endowment Foundation, Philanthropy Southwest, Christian Alliance for Orphans, Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission, United Philanthropy Forum, National Association of Charitable Gift Planners, Association of Art Museum Directors, ECFA, Association of Fundraising Professionals, Council for Advancement and Support of Education, Americans for the Arts, American Heart Association, Oklahoma Center for Nonprofits, Delaware Alliance for Nonprofit Advancement, Maryland Nonprofits, Boys and Girls Club of America, March of Dimes, and Habitat for Humanity.
    “Bravo to Senators Lankford and Coons on this much-needed support for America’s nonprofits. They both understand from personal experience the key role the nonprofit sector plays both as a provider of critical services to millions of Americans and as a major employer in Oklahoma and nationwide. In this era of historic inflation and ever-rising costs, the need for nonprofit services has not declined — in fact, we are needed more than ever. The Charitable Act will help recreate an environment of years past where charitable givers at every level can feel incentivized and appreciated—after all, we are all in this together,” said Marnie Taylor, President & CEO, Oklahoma Center for Nonprofits. 
    “Nonprofits are the backbone of our communities, addressing critical needs and enhancing the quality of life for all. The Charitable Act is a vital step in restoring a proven incentive that encourages generosity and empowers nonprofits to meet growing demands, even in challenging times. We applaud Senators Lankford and Coons for their leadership and steadfast commitment to strengthening the nonprofit sector, ensuring we can continue to deliver essential services and drive positive change.” said Sheila Bravo, President and CEO, Delaware Alliance for Nonprofit Advancement.
    “Faith & Giving heartily thanks and commends Senators James Lankford and Chris Coons for reintroducing the Charitable Act to restore a charitable deduction for taxpayers who do not itemize. Giving by individuals is the financial lifeblood of many thousands of American faith communities and faith-based organizations. Yet since 2017 individual giving to religion has fallen billions of dollars short of keeping pace with inflation. No single policy is more important for restoring the health of individual giving and faith-based charities than a non-itemizer charitable deduction like the one Congress created to stimulate giving in 2020 and 2021,” Brian Walsh, Executive Director, Faith & Giving. 
    “Nonprofits need tools like the nonitemizer deduction proposed by the Charitable Act to meet growing and changing community needs,” said YMCA of the USA President and CEO Suzanne McCormick. “We saw this policy unlock more giving when it was enacted temporarily during the pandemic, and we know that making it permanent will help YMCAs serve and support more neighbors every day. Senators Lankford and Coons recognize the important role nonprofits play in communities and understand that the universal charitable deduction helps nonprofits like the Y make their communities stronger. I’m grateful for their leadership.”
    “The temporary non-itemizer charitable deduction implemented in 2020 and 2021 led to an additional $18 billion in donations to nonprofits. As nonprofits are faced with higher demand for services, increased costs, workforce challenges, and declining donations, the Charitable Act presents an opportunity to reinstate that incentive and provide nonprofits with more resources to carry out their mission. The networks of the National Council of Nonprofits enthusiastically endorse this vital legislation and appreciate leaders like Sen. Lankford and Sen. Coons who continue to be stalwart champions for these efforts and the nonprofit sector,” said Diane Yentel, President & CEO, National Council of Nonprofits.
    “Generosity is a core American value that should be incentivized to help meet the evolving needs of communities,” said Kathleen Enright, Council on Foundations president and CEO. “The temporary non-itemizer deduction in the CARES Act successfully sparked more people to give. We hope Congress will cement this effective policy into law and inspire many more generous Americans to give charitably to support one another and the causes they value. We thank the House and Senate sponsors of the Charitable Act for their leadership on this issue.”
    “American Endowment Foundation (AEF) is mission-motivated to expand philanthropy, and many current and potential donors are seeking new ways to connect with their communities and give back. However, today’s tax code excludes nonitemizers from deducting their charitable contributions, limiting their ability to give. The Charitable Act would level the playing field, offering all donors—regardless of whether they itemize—more opportunities to support their communities. We are proud to support this important legislation and look forward to collaborating with Congress to enact policies that expand philanthropy for everyone,” said Ron Ransom, Chief Executive Officer, American Endowment Foundation.
    “The Charitable Act represents an opportunity to continue to strengthen the philanthropic ecosystem with tax incentives that will reverse a downward trend in levels of charitable giving. Philanthropy Southwest, its members and the charitable sector continue to confront unprecedented needs. By recognizing tax code should support giving at all levels and from all Americans, and encouraging more Americans to support nonprofit organizations, this legislation has the potential to create meaningful, lasting impact across our most critical social challenges,” said Tony J. Fundaro, President & CEO, Philanthropy Southwest. 
    “The generosity of ordinary citizens reflects America at her best and provides immense public good.  It fuels vital projects and services, from aid to the needy, to education for the young, to parks, museums, and civic life, and so much more.  Citizen-giving also nurtures strong, healthy accountability for nonprofits, insisting that they prove their worth in order to earn the support of their neighbors.  Finally, as many studies now confirm, generosity benefits givers, too — measurably boosting happiness, connectedness, and overall well-being.  The Charitable Act will significantly advance all of these benefits and more,” said Jedd Medefind, President, Christian Alliance for Orphans (CAFO). 
    “Churches, faith-based organizations, and other non-profit institutions that depend on charitable giving are the backbone of a healthy civil society, contributing to our communities and serving those in need. Southern Baptists have long understood this principle. Therefore, the ERLC fully supports Sen. Lankford’s reintroduction of the Charitable Act that would extend the Charitable Deduction to 100% of taxpayers. This legislation deserves broad support and quick passage,” said ERLC’s President, Brent Leatherwood. 
    “Charitable giving supports lifesaving work, provides essential services, and strengthens our communities. The past few years have offered incontrovertible proof that tax incentives impact giving: when everyday Americans had access to the charitable deduction, they gave more generously. Fortunately, Congress has a rare opportunity to strengthen the work of charitable organizations and the fabric of our nation by passing the Charitable Act this year,” said Independent Sector President and CEO Dr. Akilah Watkins.
    “United Philanthropy Forum commends these Congressional champions for their steadfast support of America’s charitable sector and the vital services these organizations provide to communities nationwide,” said Deborah Aubert Thomas, President & CEO of United Philanthropy Forum. “The Forum maintains that implementing a non-itemizer deduction would modernize giving incentives, strengthen our nation’s philanthropic foundation, and empower donors across all tax brackets to increase their charitable investments. This approach would be particularly impactful in engaging younger generations in meaningful charitable giving that strengthens their communities,” said Deborah Aubert Thomas, President and CEO, United Philanthropy Forum. 
    “We applaud the reintroduction of this important legislation that would provide all taxpayers with access to the charitable deduction for their generosity,” said Michael Kenyon, President & CEO of the National Association of Charitable Gift Planners. “As gift planners, we know that once a donor starts to support a cause or organization, they are much more likely to continue giving in the future, no matter the size of their initial contribution. Restoring a non-itemizer charitable would encourage all taxpayers, irrespective of income level, to give, instilling a habit of philanthropy that will drive more dollars to charity for years to come from a new generation of givers.”
    “The Charitable Act isn’t just about tax policy – it’s about democratizing generosity and unleashing the full potential of American philanthropy. When teachers, nurses, and other everyday heroes can’t receive the same tax benefits for their charitable giving as wealthy donors, we’re reinforcing inequality in our giving ecosystem. We cannot afford to discourage giving from hardworking Americans. The Charitable Act would empower all donors, regardless of tax filing status, to make a bigger impact and strengthen the vital services that our communities desperately need,” said Shannon McCracken, CEO The Nonprofit Alliance. 
    “The Association of Art Museum Directors thanks Sens. Lankford and Coons for their leadership on the Charitable Act. Donations make possible free and reduced admissions, educational programs, and a host of community services.  We look forward to a resurgence of giving upon passage of their bill, just as gifts increased following the temporary enactment of a deduction for non-itemizers in 2020-21,” said Christine Anagnos, Executive Director of the Association of Art Museum Directors.
    “The charitable deduction sends a powerful message that America wants to honor and encourage openhanded generosity,” said ECFA President & CEO Michael Martin. “The Charitable Act wisely democratizes this proven incentive and supports habits of giving for all taxpayers regardless of whether they itemize on their tax forms or not.”
    “According to Q3 2024 data compiled by AFP’s Fundraising Effectiveness Project, the number of small gift donors (gifts under $100) saw a steep decline of -12.4%; this is a continued decline in the last two years since the charitable deduction for non-itemizers was not renewed.,” said Mike Geiger, President and CEO of the Association of Fundraising Professionals. “On behalf of our more than 26,000 fundraising professional members that raise more than $100 billion annually for charities, we are grateful for our Congressional champions reintroducing the bipartisan Charitable Act as this giving incentive will support nonprofits in their communities who rely on these funds to provide much needed services.”
    “We are grateful for the leadership of Senators Lankford and Coons in reintroducing the bipartisan Charitable Act, legislation that will ensure that all American taxpayers, regardless of income, are encouraged to give more to support local soup kitchens, homeless and domestic abuse shelters, disaster relief organizations, schools, cultural organizations, and religious congregations and ministries—among innumerable other crucial charities. We know from experience that a charitable deduction for non-itemizers will generate additional giving. In 2020 and 2021, the CGC and its members successfully worked with Congress to enact a modest temporary charitable deduction for non-itemizers that led to increased giving, particularly through a significant increase in small gifts. In 2020, 42 million taxpayers used the temporary universal charitable deduction to give $10.9 billion to charities, with a quarter of the Americans taking that $300 deduction made less than $30,000. We look forward to working with Sens. Lankford, Coons and their colleagues to ensure that this important proposal is included in tax reform legislation,” said Brian Flahaven, Chair, Charitable Giving Coalition. 
    “Donors invest in schools, colleges, and universities because of the essential role they play in transforming lives and society. By restoring a charitable deduction for non-itemizers, the bipartisan Charitable Act will encourage more Americans to make donations aimed at funding scholarships, educating and preparing students, supporting ground-breaking research, and strengthening academic programs. We applaud and thank Senators James Lankford (R-OK) and Chris Coons (D-DE) for re-introducing the Charitable Act and look forward to advocating for its speedy enactment,” said Sue Cunningham, President and CEO, Council for Advancement and Support of Education.
    “Small donations are crucial to the nonprofit arts and culture sector, which generated $151.7 billion in economic activity, supported 2.6 million jobs, created $29.1 billion in tax revenue, and provided residents $101 billion in personal income in 2022. Those who do not itemize on their taxes are a crucial part of this sector,” said Suzy Delvalle, co-CEO of Americans for the Arts.
    “When we support the arts through small donations, we invest in both economic and community well-being, particularly in rural areas. We thank Senator Lankford and Senator Coons for their leadership on this important issue,” said Jamie Bennett, co-CEO of Americans for the Arts.
    “Charitable organizations work tirelessly to improve and enrich communities nationwide. The bipartisan Charitable Act would support the life-changing work of our nation’s charities by encouraging middle- and lower-income taxpayers to contribute to nonprofits making an impact across the country. The American Heart Association thanks the congressional champions reintroducing the Charitable Act and looks forward to working with these lawmakers to pass this bill,” said Mark Schoeberl, Executive Vice President of Advocacy, American Heart Association.
    “Charitable giving is for everyone, and everyone who donates should have the same opportunity to receive a tax deduction. The Charitable Act expands access to these incentives, ensuring that all Americans—whether they itemize deductions or not—can benefit from a tax break on their contributions. This legislation empowers more people to support the vital work of nonprofits in their communities,” said Heather Iliff, President & CEO of Maryland Nonprofits. 

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA News: Press Briefing by Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt

    Source: The White House

    1:06 P.M. EST

         MS. LEAVITT:  Good afternoon, everybody. 

    Q    Good afternoon.

    MS. LEAVITT:  How are we?  Good to see all of you.  It’s an honor to be here with all of you.  A lot of familiar faces in the room, a lot of new faces.

    And President Trump is back, and the golden age of America has most definitely begun. 

    The Senate has already confirmed five of President Trump’s exceptional Cabinet nominees: Secretary of State Marco Rubio, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, CIA Director John Ratcliffe, Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem, and Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent.  It is imperative that the Senate continues to confirm the remainder of the president’s well-qualified nominees as quickly as possible.

    As you have seen during the past week, President Trump is hard at work fulfilling the promises that he made to the American people on the campaign trail.  Since taking the oath of office, President Trump has taken more than 300 executive actions; secured nearly $1 trillion in U.S. investments; deported illegal alien rapists, gang members, and suspected terrorists from our homeland; and restored common sense to the federal government.

    I want to take a moment to go through some of these extraordinary actions. 

    On day one, President Trump declared a national emergency at our southern border to end the four-year-long invasion of illegal aliens under the previous administration.  Additionally, President Trump signed an executive order to end catch and release and finish construction of his effective border wall.  By using every lever of his federal power, President Trump has sent a loud and clear message to the entire world: America will no longer tolerate illegal immigration. 

    And this president expects that every nation on this planet will cooperate with the repatriation of their citizens, as proven by this weekend, when President Trump swiftly directed his team to issue harsh and effective sanctions and tariffs on the Colombian government upon hearing they were denied a U.S. military aircraft full of their own citizens who were deported by this administration.  Within hours, the Colombian government agreed to all of President Trump’s demands, proving America is once again respected on the world stage.

    So, to foreign nationals who are thinking about trying to illegally enter the United States, think again.  Under this president, you will be detained, and you will be deported. 

         Every day, Americans are safer because of the violent criminals that President Trump’s administration is removing from our communities.

    On January 23rd, ICE New York arrested a Turkish national for entry without inspection who is a known or suspected terrorist.  On January 23rd, ICE San Francisco arrested a citizen of Mexico unlawfully present in the United States who has been convicted of continuous sexual abuse of a child aged 14 years or younger.  ICE Saint Paul has arrested a citizen of Honduras who was convicted of fourth-degree criminal sexual conduct with a minor.  ICE Buffalo arrested a citizen of Ecuador who has been convicted of rape. 

    ICE Boston arrested a citizen of the Dominican Republic who has a criminal conviction for second-degree murder.  This criminal was convicted of murder for beating his pregnant wife to death in front of her five-year-old son. 

         And ICE Saint Paul also arrested a citizen of Mexico who was convicted of possessing pornographic material of a minor on a work computer.

    These are the heinous individuals that this administration is removing from American communities every single day.  And to the brave state and local law enforcement officers, CBP, and ICE agents who are helping in the facilitation of this deportation operation, President Trump has your back and he is grateful for your hard work.

    On the economic front, President Trump took immediate action to lower costs for families who are suffering from four long years of the Biden administration’s destructive and inflationary policies.  President Trump ordered the heads of all executive departments and agencies to help deliver emergency price relief to the American people, untangle our economy from Biden’s regulatory constraints, and end the reckless war on American energy.

    President Trump also signed sweeping executive orders to end the weaponization of government and restore common sense to the federal bureaucracy.  He directed all federal agencies to terminate illegal diversity, equity, and inclusion programs to help return America to a merit-based society.

    President Trump also signed an executive order declaring it is now the policy of the federal government that there are only two sexes: male and female.  Sanity has been restored.

    Before I take your questions, I would like to point out to — all of you once again have access to the most transparent and accessible president in American history.  There has never been a president who communicates with the American people and the American press corps as openly and authentically as the 45th and now 47th president of the United States. 

    This past week, President Trump has held multiple news conferences, gaggled on Air Force One multiple times, and sat down for a two-part interview on Fox News, which aired last week.  As Politico summed it up best, “Trump is everywhere again,” and that’s because President Trump has a great story to tell about the legendary American revival that is well underway.

    And in keeping with this revolutionary media approach that President Trump deployed during the campaign, the Trump White House will speak to all media outlets and personalities, not just the legacy media who are seated in this room, because apporting — according to recent polling from Gallup, Americans’ trust in mass media has fallen to a record low.  Millions of Americans, especially young people, have turned from traditional television outlets and newspapers to consume their news from podcasts, blogs, social media, and other independent outlets.

    It’s essential to our team that we share President Trump’s message everywhere and adapt this White House to the new media landscape in 2025.  To do this, I am excited to announce the following changes will be made to this historic James S. Brady Briefing Room, where Mr. Brady’s legacy will endure.

    This White House believes strongly in the First Amendment, so it’s why our team will work diligently to restore the press passes of the 440 journalists whose passes were wrongly revoked by the previous administration. 

    We’re also opening up this briefing room to new media voices who produce news-related content and whose outlet is not already represented by one of the seats in this room.  We welcome independent journalists, podcasters, social media influencers, and content creators to apply for credentials to cover this White House.  And you can apply now on our new website, WhiteHouse.gov/NewMedia. 

    Starting today, this seat in the front of the room, which is usually occupied by the press secretary staff, will be called the “new media” seat.  My team will review the applications and give credentials to new media applicants who meet our criteria and pass United States Secret Service requirements to enter the White House complex.

    So, in light of these announcements, our first questions for today’s briefing will go to these new media members whose outlets, despite being some of the most viewed news websites in the country, have not been given seats in this room. 

    And before I turn to questions, I do have news directly from the president of the United States that was just shared with me in the Oval Office from President Trump directly — an update on the New Jersey drones: After research and study, the drones that were flying over New Jersey in large numbers were authorized to be flown by the FAA for research and various other reasons. 

    Many of these drones were also hobbyists — recreational and private individuals that enjoy flying drones.  In meanti- — in the — in time, it got worse, due to curiosity.  This was not the enemy.  A — a statement from the president of the United States to start this briefing with some news.

    And with that, I will turn it over to questions, and we will begin with our new media members: Mike Allen from Axios, Matt Boyle from Breitbart. 

         Mike, why don’t you go ahead.

    Q    Thank you very much.  Karoline, does the president see anything fishy about DeepSeek, either its origins or its cost?  And could China’s ability to make these models quicker, cheaper affect our thinking about expanding generation data centers, chip manufacturing?

    MS. LEAVITT:  Sure.  The president was asked about DeepSeek last night on Air Force One when he gaggled for, I think, the third or fourth time throughout the weekend with members of the traveling press corps.  The president said that he believes that this is a wake-up call to the American AI industry.  The last administration sat on their hands and allowed China to rapidly develop this AI program.

    And so, President Trump believes in restoring American AI dominance, and that’s why he took very strong executive action this past week to sign executive orders to roll back some of the onerous regulations on the AI industry.  And President Trump has also proudly appointed the first AI and crypto czar at this White House, David Sacks, whom I spoke with yesterday — very knowledgeable on this subject.  And his team is here working every single day to ensure American AI dominance.

    As for the national security implications, I spoke with NSC this morning.  They are looking into what those may be, and when I have an update, I will share it with you, Mike.

    Q    And, Karoline, you say “restore” U.S. dominance.  Is there fear that the U.S. either is falling or has fallen behind?  And how would the president make sure the U.S. stays ahead?

    MS. LEAVITT:  No.  The president is confident that we will restore American dominance in AI. 

    Matt.

    Q    Yeah.  So, Karoline, first off, thank you to you and President Trump for actually giving voices to new media outlets that represent millions and millions of Americans.  The thing I would add — the — I’ve got a two-part question for you.  The first is just: Can you expand upon what steps the White House is going to take to bring more voices, not less — which is what our founder, Andrew Breitbart, believed in — into this room, where they rightly belong?

    MS. LEAVITT:  Yeah, absolutely.  And as I said in my opening statement, Matt, it is a priority of this White House to honor the First Amendment.  And it is a fact that Americans are consuming their news media from various different platforms, especially young people.  And as the youngest press secretary in history, thanks to President Trump, I take great pride in opening up this room to new media voices to share the president’s message with as many Americans as possible.

    In doing so, number one, we will ensure that outlets like yours — Axios and Breitbart, which are widely respected and viewed outlets — have an actual seat in this room every day.  We also, again, encourage anybody in this country — whether you are a TikTok content creator, a blogger, a podcaster — if you are producing legitimate news content, no matter the medium, you will be allowed to apply for press credentials to this White House. 

    And as I said earlier, our new media website is WhiteHouse.gov/NewMedia, and so we encourage people to apply.  Again, as long as you are creating news-related content of the day and you’re a legitimate independent journalist, you’re welcome to cover this White House. 

    Q    And secondly, Karoline, you sa- — you laid out several of the actions that President Trump has taken.  Obviously, it’s a stark contrast to the previous administration and a breakneck speed from President Trump.  Can we expect that pace to continue as the hun- — the — you know, the first 100 days moves along here and beyond that?

    MS. LEAVITT:  Absolutely.  There is no doubt President Trump has always been the hardest working man in politics.  I think that’s been proven over the past week.  This president has, again, signed more than 300 executive orders.  He’s taken historic action. 

    I gaggled aboard Air Force One to mark the first 100 days of this administration — 4:00 p.m. last Friday — first 100 hours, rather.  And this president did more in the first 100 hours than the previous president did in the first 100 days. 

    So, President Trump, I think you can all expect to — for him to continue to work at this breakneck speed.  So, I hope you’re all ready to work very hard.  I know that we are.

    Zeke Miller.

    Q    Thanks, Karoline.  A question that we’ve asked your predecessors of both parties in this job.  When you’re up here in this briefing room speaking to the American public, do you view yourself and your role as speaking on — advocating on behalf of the president, or providing the unvarnished truth that is, you know, not to lie, not to obfuscate to the American people?

    MS. LEAVITT:  I commit to telling the truth from this podium every single day.  I commit to speaking on behalf of the president of the United States.  That is my job. 

    And I will say it’s very easy to speak truth from this podium when you have a president who is implementing policies that are wildly popular with the American people, and that’s exactly what this administration is doing.  It’s correcting the lies and the wrongs of the past four years, many of the lies that have been told to your faces in this very briefing room.  I will not do that.

    But since you brought up truth, Zeke, I would like to point out, while I vow to provide the truth from this podium, we ask that all of you in this room hold yourselves to that same standard.  We know for a fact there have been lies that have been pushed by many legacy media outlets in this country about this president, about his family, and we will not accept that.  We will call you out when we feel that your reporting is wrong or there is misinformation about this White House. 

    So, yes, I will hold myself to the truth, and I expect everyone in this room to do the same. 

    Q    And, Karoline, just on a substantive question.  Yesterday, the White House Office of Management and Budget directed an across-the-board freeze with — with some exceptions for individual assistance.  We understand just federal grants.

    MS. LEAVITT:  Right.

    Q    It’s caused a lot of confusion around the country among Head Start providers, among providers — from services to homeless veterans, provid- — you know, Medicaid providers, states saying they’re having trouble accessing the portal.  Could you put — help us clear up some confusion —

    MS. LEAVITT:  Yes.

    Q    — give some certainty to folks?  And then also, is that uncertainty — how does that uncertainty service the president’s voters?

    MS. LEAVITT:  Well, I think there’s only uncertainty in this room amongst the media.  There’s no uncertainty in this building. 

    So, let me provide the certainty and the clarity that all of you need.  This is not a blanket pause on federal assistance in grant programs from the Trump administration.  Individual assistance, that includes — I’m not naming everything that’s included, but just to give you a few examples — Social Security benefits, Medicare benefits, food stamps, welfare benefits — assistance that is going directly to individuals will not be impacted by this pause. 

    And I want to make that very clear to any Americans who are watching at home who may be a little bit confused about some of the media reporting: This administration — if you are receiving individual assistance from the federal government, you will still continue to receive that. 

    However, it is the responsibility of this president and this administration to be good stewards of taxpayer dollars.  That is something that President Trump campaigned on.  That’s why he has launched DOGE, the Department of Government Efficiency, who is working alongside OMB.  And that’s why OMB sent out this memo last night, because the president signed an executive order directing OMB to do just this.  And the reason for this is to ensure that every penny that is going out the door is not conflicting with the executive orders and actions that this president has taken. 

    So, what does this pause mean?  It means no more funding for illegal DEI programs.  It means no more funding for the Green New Scam that has ta- — cost American taxpayers tens of billions of dollars.  It means no more funding for transgenderism and wokeness across our federal bureaucracy and agencies.  No more funding for Green New Deal social engineering policies.  Again, people who are receiving individual asintan- — assistance, you will continue to receive that.

    And President Trump is looking out for you by issuing this pause because he is being good steward of your taxpayer dollars.

    Q    Thanks, Karoline. 

    MS. LEAVITT:  Sure.

    Q    How long is this pause going to last?  And how is the Trump administration recommending that organizations that rely on federal funding make payroll, pay their rent in the meantime?

    MS. LEAVITT:  It is a temporary pause, and the Office of Management and Budget is reviewing the federal funding that has been going out the door, again, not for individual assistance, but for all of these other programs that I mentioned.

    I also spoke with the incoming director of OMB this morning, and he told me to tell all of you that the line to his office is open for other federal government agencies across the board, and if they feel that programs are necessary and in line with the president’s agenda, then the Office of Management and Budget will review those policies. 

    I think this is a very responsible measure.  Again, the past four years, we’ve seen the Biden administration spend money like drunken sailors.  It’s a big reason we’ve had an inflation crisis in this country, and it’s incumbent upon this administration to make sure, again, that every penny is being accounted for honestly.

    Q    Why impose this pause with so little notice?  Why not give organizations more time to plan for the fact that they are about to lose, in some cases, really crucial federal funding —

    MS. LEAVITT:  There was —

    Q    — at least for a — for a period of time?

    MS. LEAVITT:  There was notice.  It was the executive order that the president signed. 

    There’s also a freeze on hiring, as you know; a regulatory freeze; and there’s also a freeze on foreign aid.  And this is a — again, incredibly important to ensure that this administration is taking into consideration how hard the American people are working.  And their tax dollars actually matter to this administration. 

    You know, just during this pause, DOGE and OMB have actually found that there was $37 million that was about to go out the door to the World Health Organization, which is an organization, as you all know, that President Trump, with the swipe of his pen in that executive order, is — no longer wants the United States to be a part of.  So, that wouldn’t be in line with the president’s agenda. 

    DOGE and OMB also found that there was about to be 50 million taxpayer dollars that went out the door to fund condoms in Gaza.  That is a preposterous waste of taxpayer money. 

    So, that’s what this pause is focused on: being good stewards of tax dollars. 

    Q    And so, this doesn’t affect —

    MS. LEAVITT:  Jennifer.

    Q    — Meals on Wheels or Head Start or disaster aid?

    MS. LEAVITT:  Again, it does not affect individual assistance that’s going to Americans.

    Q    To follow up on Nancy, do you think there will be a list of who is affected and how much money is affected?  How — how will these contractors and organizations know if they are actually being — having their funding frozen?

    And then, secondly, if you’re willing, can you just clarify, is the end goal of this to essentially challenge Congress or to — to prove that the president can withhold federal funding?  Is — in other words, is this an attempt to pick a fight to prove that he can do this?

    MS. LEAVITT:  No, absolutely not.  As it says right here in the memo, which I have — and I’d encourage all of you to read it — it says, “The American people elected President Trump to be the president of the United States and gave him a mandate to increase the impact of every federal dollar.”  “This memo requires federal agencies to identify and review all Federal financial assistance programs and supporting activities consistent with the president’s policies and requirements.” 

    The American people gave President Trump an overwhelming mandate on November 5th, and he’s just trying to ensure that the tax money going out the door in this very bankrupt city actually aligns with the will and the priorities of the American people. 

    (Cross-talk.)

    Brian Glenn.

    Q    Yes.  Welcome. 

    MS. LEAVITT:  Thank you.

    Q    You look great.  You’re doing a great job. 

    MS. LEAVITT:  Thank you.

    Q    You talked about transparency.  And some of us in this room know how just transparent President Trump has been the last five or six years; I think you’ll do the same. 

    My question is, do you think this latest incident with the president of Colombia is indicative of the global, powerful respect they have for President Trump moving forward not only to engage in — in economic diplomacy with these countries but also world peace?

    MS. LEAVITT:  Absolutely.  I’ll echo the answer that the president gave on Air Force One last night when he was asked a very similar question by one of your colleagues in the media: This signifies peace through strength is back, and this president will not tolerate illegal immigration into America’s interior. 

    And he expects every nation on this planet, again, to cooperate with the repatriation of their citizens who illegally entered into our country and broke America’s laws.  Won’t be tolerated. 

    And as you saw, the Colombian government quickly folded and agreed to all of President Trump’s demands.  Flights are underway once again.

    (Cross-talk.)

    Diana.

    Q    Two questions on deportations, if I may.  President Trump had said on the campaign trail that he would deport pro-Hamas students who are here on visas, and on his first day in office, he signed an executive order that said, quote, “The U.S. must ensure that admitted aliens and aliens otherwise already present in the U.S. do not bear hostile attitudes toward its citizens, culture, government, institutions, or founding principles.”  So, should we take this executive order as Trump saying he would be open to de- — deporting those students who are here on visas, but, you know, hold pro-Hamas sympathies?

    MS. LEAVITT:  The president is open to deporting individuals who have broken our nation’s immigrations laws.  So, if they are here illegally, then certainly he is open to deporting them, and that’s what this administration is hard at work at doing. 

    We receive data from DHS and from ICE every single day.  From what we hear on the ground, ICE agents are feeling incredibly empowered right now because they actually have a leader in this building who is supporting them in doing their jobs that they were hired to do, which is to detain, arrest, and deport illegal criminals who have invaded our nation’s borders over the past four years.  That’s what the president is committed to seeing. 

    Q    One more. 

    MS. LEAVITT:  Peter.
        
         Q    Just following up on that, Karoline —

    Q    Karoline, if I could ask you very quickly, just following up on the question on immigration.  First, President Trump, during the course of the campaign in 2024, said the following about illegal im- — immigration.  He said, “They’re going back home where they belong, and we start with the criminals.  There are many, many criminals.”  NBC News has learned that ICE arrested 1,179 undocumented immigrants on Sunday, but nearly half of them — 566 of the migrants — appear to have no prior criminal record besides entering the country illegally. 

    MS. LEAVITT:  (Laughs.)

    Q    Is the president still focused exclusiv- — which is a civil crime, not a — not a — it’s not criminal —

    MS. LEAVITT:  It’s a federal crime. 

    Q    It’s a fed- — so, I’m asking though, he said he was going to focus on those violent offenders first.  So, is violent offenders no longer the predicate for these people to be deported?

    MS. LEAVITT:  The president has said countless times on the campaign trail — I’ve been with him at the rallies; I know you’ve been there covering them too, Peter — that he is focused on launching the largest mass deportation operation in American history of illegal criminals. 

    And if you are an individual, a foreign national, who illegally enters the United States of America, you are, by definition, a criminal.  And so, therefore —

    Q    So, to be clear, it’s not exclusively —

    MS. LEAVITT:  — you are subject deportation. 

    Q    I apologize for interrupting.  So, to be clear, it’s not — violent criminals do not receive precedence in terms of the deportations taking place?

    MS. LEAVITT:  The president has also said — two things can be true at the same time.  We want to deport illegal criminals, illegal immigrants from this country.  But the president has said that, of course, the illegal dr- — criminal drug dealers, the rapists, the murderers, the individuals who have committed heinous acts on the interior of our country and who have terrorized law-abiding American citizens, absolutely, those should be the priority of ICE.  But that doesn’t mean that the other illegal criminals who entered our nation’s borders are off the table. 

    Q    Understood.  Then let me ask you a separate question about the confusion that still exists across the country right now as it relates to the — the freeze — or the pause, as it’s described.  President Trump, of course, ran — one of the key policy items was that he was going to lower prices, lower the cost of everything from groceries, as he often said.  But in many of the cases, it would seem that some of these moves could raise prices for real Americans on everything from low-income heating — that program; childcare programs.  Will nothing that the president is doing here, in terms of the freeze in these programs, raise prices on ordinary Americans?

    MS. LEAVITT:  What particular actions are you referring to that would —

    Q    I’m referring to LHEAP right now.  That’s the low-income heating program, for example.  We can talk about — there’s no clarity, so I could refer to a lot of them.  We don’t know what they are specifically.  Can you tell us that LHEAP — that LIHEAP is not one of those affected?

    MS. LEAVITT:  So, you’re asking a hypoc- — -thetical based on programs that you can’t even identify?

    Q    No, I just identified — I —

    MS. LEAVITT:  What I can tell you is that the —

    Q    Well, just to be — just to be clear, since you guys haven’t identified, let’s do it together, just for Americans at home.  Medicaid, is that affected?

    MS. LEAVITT:  I gave you a list of examples — Social Security, Medicare, welfare benefits —

    Q    Medicaid too, correct?

    MS. LEAVITT:  — food stamps — that will not be impacted by this federal pause.  I can get you the full list after this briefing from the Office of Management and Budget.

    But I do want to address the cost cutting, because that’s certainly very important, and — and cutting the cost of living in this country.  President Trump has taken historic action over the past week to do that.  He actually signed a memorandum to deliver emergency price relief for American families, which took a number of actions.  I can walk you through those. 

    He also repealed many onerous Biden administration regulations.  We know, over the past four years, American households has been essentially taxed $55,000 in regulations from the previous administration.  President Trump, with the swipe of his pen, rescinded those, which will ultimately put more money back in the pockets of the American people.  So, deregulation is a big deal. 

    And then, when it comes to energy, I mean, the president signed an executive order to declare a national energy emergency here at home, which is going to make America energy dominant.  We know that energy is one of the number-one drivers of inflation, and so that’s why the president wants to increase our energy supply: to bring down costs for Americans.  The Trump energy boom is incoming, and Americans can expect that.

    Q    Please share that memo.  Thank you.

    MS. LEAVITT:  I will.

    (Cross-talk.)

    Q    Karoline, I think — some of the confusion, I think, may be here with this pause on federal funding.  You’ve made it clear you’re not stopping funds that go directly to individuals, but there certainly are lots of organizations that receive funding and then may pass along a benefit — Meals on Wheels, for one.  They provide meals for over 2.2 million seniors. 

    What is the president’s message to Americans out there, many of whom supported him and voted for him, who are concerned that this is going to impact them directly, even if, as you said, the funding isn’t coming directly to their wallet?

    MS. LEAVITT:  I have now been asked and answered this question four times.  To individuals at home who receive direct assistance from the federal government, you will not be impacted by this federal freeze.  In fact, OMB just sent out a memo to Capitol Hill with Q and A to — to clarify some of the questions and the answers that all of you are a- — are asking me right now. 

    Again, direct assistance will not be impacted.  I’ve been asked and answered about this OMB memo.  There’s many other topics of the day. 

    Jacqui Heinrich. 

    Q    But on indirect assistance, Karoline —

    Q    Thank you, Karoline.

    Q    — if it’s going to another organization and then trickling down?

    MS. LEAVITT:  Direct assistance that is in the hands of the American people will not be impacted. 

    Again, as I said to Peter, we will continue to provide that list as it comes to fruition.  But OMB right now is focused on analyzing the federal government’s spending, which is exactly what the American people elected President Trump to do. 

    (Cross-talk.)

    Q    Thank you, Karoline.

    Q    And one question on immigration, Karoline.  On immigration. 

    Q    Thank you, Karo- —

    Q    Of the 3,500 arrests ICE has made so far since President Trump came back into office, can you just tell us the numbers?  How many have a criminal record versus those who are just in the country illegally.

    MS. LEAVITT:  All of them, because they illegally broke our nation’s laws, and, therefore, they are criminals, as far as this administration goes.  I know the last administration didn’t see it that way, so it’s a big culture shift in our nation to view someone who breaks our immigration laws as a criminal.  But that’s exactly what they are. 

    Jacqui.

    (Cross-talk.)

    Q    Karoline, on tariffs.

    Q    But you made a point of going with the worst first. 

    Q    On tariffs.

    Q    They all have a criminal record?

    Q    And welcome to the briefing room.

    MS. LEAVITT:  If they broke our nation’s laws, yes, they are a criminal. 

    Yes.

    Q    Thank you.  On stripping security details for figures like John Bolton, Pompeo, Brian Hook.  Senator Tom Cotton said that he’s seen the intelligence and the threat from Iran is real for anyone who played a role in the Soleimani strike.  He voiced concern it wouldn’t just impact those individuals but potentially their family, innocent bystanders, friends — anyone who is near them when they’re out in public.  Is the president open to reconsidering his decision?

    MS. LEAVITT:  The president was asked and answered this yesterday, and he was firm in his decision, despite some of the comments that you had referenced.  And he’s made it very clear that he does not believe American taxpayers should fund security details for individuals who have served in the government for the rest of their lives.  And there’s nothing stopping these individuals that you mentioned from obtaining private security. 

    That’s where the president stands on it.  I have no updates on that. 

    Q    Is there any concern that this decision might jeopardize the administration’s ability to hire the best advisers for these kinds of positions in the future?

    MS. LEAVITT:  No.  In fact, I’ve talked to the Presidential Personnel Office who has told me directly that there is such an influx of resumes for this administration that it’s incredibly overwhelming.  There is no lack of talent for the Trump administration. 

    Reagan Ree- —

    Q    And would he — would he take any responsibility —

    Q    Thanks, Karoline.

    Q    — if anything happened to these people?  Would he feel at all that his decision was a factor in that?

    MS. LEAVITT:  The president was asked and answered this yesterday.  I’d defer you to his comments.

    Q    Thanks, Karoline.

    Q    Karoline —

    MS. LEAVITT:  Reagan, since you’re in the back row, I hear y- — the back row hasn’t gotten much attention in the last four years —

    Q    Yes, thank you.

    MS. LEAVITT:  — so I’m happy to answer your question. 

    Q    And I can project.  (Laughter.)

    Does the president intend to permanently cut off funding to NGOs that are bringing illegal foreign nationals to the country, such as Catholic Charities?

         MS. LEAVITT:  I am actually quite certain that the president signed an executive order that did just that, and I can point you to that.

         Q    One more, Karoline.

    MS. LEAVITT:  Yeah.

    Q    President Trump issued an executive order on increased vetting for refugees in visa applications. 

    MS. LEAVITT:  That’s right.

    Q    Part of that order was considering an outright ban for countries that have deficient screening processes.  Has the president considered yet which countries might fall into this category?  Are countries like Afghanistan or Syria under consideration for a full ban?

    MS. LEAVITT:  Yeah.  So, the president signed an executive order to streamline the vetting for visa applicants and for illegal immigrants in this country who are coming, of course, from other nations. 

    It also directed the secretary of State to review the process and make sure that other countries around the world are being completely transparent with our nation and the individuals that they are sending here.  And so, the secretary of State has been directed to report back to the president.  I haven’t seen that report yet.  We’ve only been here for a few days.

    (Cross-talk.)

    Q    Karoline, two questions for you.  One on the freeze in federal funding.  Who advised the president on the legality of telling government agencies that they don’t have to spend money that was already appropriated by Congress?

    MS. LEAVITT:  Well, as the OMB memo states, this is certainly within the confines of the law. 

    So, White House Counsel’s Office believes that this is within the pe- — president’s power to do it, and therefore, he’s doing it.

    Q    Okay.  So, they disagree with lawmakers who say that they don’t have the power to — to freeze this funding?

    MS. LEAVITT:  Again, I would point you to the language in the memo that clearly states this is within the law.

    Q    And on what happened on Friday night.  The — the administration fired several inspectors general without giving Congress the 30-day legally required notification that they were being fired.  I think only two were left at DO- — DHS and the DOJ.  And then, yesterday, we saw several prosecutors — I believe 12 — fired from the Justice Department who worked on the investigations into the president.  As you know, they are career prosecutors; therefore, they are afforded civil service protections.  How is the administration deciding which laws to follow and which ones to ignore?

    MS. LEAVITT:  So, it is the belief of this White House and the White House Counsel’s Office that the president was within his exe- — executive authority to do that.  He is the executive of the executive branch, and, therefore, he has the power to fire anyone within the executive branch that he wishes to. 

    There’s also a case that went before the Supreme Court in 2020: Scaila [Seila] Law LLC, v. the Customs — the [Consumer Financial Protection] Bureau Protection.  I would advise you to look at that case, and that’s the legality that this White House has rested on. 

    Q    So, you’re confident that if they bring lawsuits against you — those prosecutors who were fired — that — that they will succeed?

    MS. LEAVITT:  We will win in court, yes.

    Q    And did he personally direct this, given they worked on the classified documents investigation and the election interference investigation?

    MS. LEAVITT:  This was a memo that went out by the Presidential Personnel Office, and the president is the leader of this White House.  So, yes.

    Q    So, it did come from him?

    MS. LEAVITT:  Yes, it came from this White House.

    (Cross-talk.)

    Q    Karoline.

    MS. LEAVITT:  Sir.

    Q    Thank you.  Congrats on your first day behind the podium.

    MS. LEAVITT:  Thank you.

    Q    President Trump ended funding for UNRWA and also designated the Houthis a foreign terrorist organization.

    MS. LEAVITT:  That’s right.

    Q    Both were decisions that the previous administration had reversed.  So, here’s my question: Will there be an investigation into who gave the previous administration this terrible advice?

    MS. LEAVITT:  Well, that’s a very good point.  I haven’t heard discussions about such an ins- — investigation, but it wouldn’t be a bad idea, considering that the Houthis cer- — certainly are terrorists.  They have launched attacks on U.S. naval ships across this world, and so I think it was a very wise move by this administration to redesignate them as a terrorist group, because they are.  And I think it was a foolish decision by the previous administration to do so. 

    As for an investigation, I’m not sure about that, but it’s not a bad idea.

    (Cross-talk.)

    Josh.

    Q    Thank you for the question.  I appreciate it.  Can you give us an update on the president’s plan for his tariff agenda?  He spoke a lot about this yesterday, and there’s a couple of dates coming up that —

    MS. LEAVITT:  Sure.

    Q    — he’s spoken to.  Number one, February 1st.  He’s alluded to both the potential for tariffs for Canada and Mexico but also China to take effect on those days.  Where is — what’s he thinking about that?

    MS. LEAVITT:  Yeah.

    Q    Should those countries expect that on the 1st?

    MS. LEAVITT:  Again, he was asked and answered this question this past weekend when he took a lot of questions from the press, and he said that the February 1st date for Canada and Mexico still holds.

    Q    And what about the China 10 percent tariff that he also had mused about last Tuesday going into effect on the same date?

    MS. LEAVITT:  Yeah, the president has said that he is very much still considering that for February 1st.

    Q    And then, separately, yesterday, he talked also about sectoral tariffs on, for instance, pharmaceuticals, as well as semiconductor computer chips.  He talked about steel, aluminum, and copper.  What’s the timeline on those?  Is that a similar sort of “coming days” thing or —

    MS. LEAVITT:  Yeah, so when the president talked about that in his speech yesterday, that actually wasn’t a new announcement.  That was within a presidential memorandum that he signed in one of the first days here in the White House on his America First trade agenda.  So, there’s more details on those tariffs in there.

    As far as a date, I don’t have a specific date to read out to you, but the president is committed to implementing tariffs effectively, just like he did in his first term.

    Q    And then — and then, finally, he also was asked on the plane when he gaggled about the potential for a universal tariff.  He was asked maybe about two and a half percent.

    MS. LEAVITT:  Yeah.

    Q    There was a report about that.  He said he wanted “much bigger than that.”  Should we understand that these tariffs would add up?  You know, in other words, you might have country-specific tariffs like Canada, Mexico, China.  You might have sectoral tariffs, like on pharmaceuticals, as well as a potential universal tariff on top of that.  Do these stack on one or the other, or would one sort of take precedence over another?

    MS. LEAVITT:  All I can point you to is what the president has said on this front: the February 1st date for Canada and Mexico and also the China tariff that he has discussed.

    He rejected the 2.5 percent tariff.  He said that was a little bit too low.  He wants it to be higher. 

    I’ll leave it to him to make any decisions on that front.

    Q    Do you have any comment on what the —

    (Cross-talk.)

    Q    — what the Mexicans and Canadians —

    MS. LEAVITT:  Phil.

    Q    — have done so far?  Do you have any comment on whether that has met the bar of what he wants to see on fentanyl?  Thank you.

    MS. LEAVITT:   I — I won’t get ahead of the president, again, on advocating to foreign nations on what they should or shouldn’t do to get away from these tariffs.  The president has made it very clear, again, that he expects every nation around this world to cooperate with the repatriation of their citizens.  And the president has also put out specific statements in terms of Canada and Mexico when it comes to what he expects in terms of border security.

    We have seen a historic level of cooperation from Mexico.  But, again, as far as I’m still tracking — and that was last night talking to the president directly — February 1st is still on the books.

    Q    Thank you.

    MS. LEAVITT:  Phil.

    Q    Thank you, Karoline.  Quick programming note, and then a question on taxes.

    MS. LEAVITT:  A programming note.

    Q    Well, in terms of programming, should —

    MS. LEAVITT:  That sounds fun. 

    Q    — we expect to see you here every day?  How frequently will these —

    Q    That’s a good question.

    Q    — press briefings be?

    MS. LEAVITT:  It is a good question, April.

    So, look, the president, as you know, is incredibly accessible.  First day here, he wanted all of you in the Oval Office.  You got a 60-minute press conference with the leader of the free world — while he was simultaneously signing executive orders, I may add.  That’s pretty impressive.  I don’t think the previous office holder would be able to pull such a thing off. 

    So, look, the president is the best spokesperson that this White House has, and I can assure you that you will be hearing from both him and me as much as possible.

    Q    And then a question about tax cuts.  You know, the president has promised to extend the tax cuts from the previous term.  I’m curious, you know, does the president support corresponding spending cuts, as some Republicans have called for in Congress?  And will the new Treasury secretary be leading those negotiations with the Hill, as Mnuchin did during the first administration?

    MS. LEAVITT:  The president is committed to both tax cuts and spending cuts.

    And he has a great team negotiating on his behalf, but there’s no better negotiator than Donald Trump, and I’m sure he’ll be involved in this reconciliation process as it moves forward.

    (Cross-talk.)

    Q    Karoline, in the announcement that you made last night on the Iron Dome, it said the president had directed that the United States will build this Iron Dome.

    MS. LEAVITT:  Yeah.

    Q    When you read into the executive order, it seemed short of that.  It asked for a series of studies —

    MS. LEAVITT:  Yeah.

    Q    — and reports back on — can you tell us whether the president has directed this and, if he is this concerned on this issue, why the suspensions that we saw listed by OMB included so many different nuclear programs, nonproliferation programs, programs to blend down nuclear weapons, and s- — and so forth?

    MS. LEAVITT:  First of all, when it comes to the Iron Dome, the executive order directed the implementation of the — of an Iron Dome.  It also, as you said, kind of directed research and studies to see if — or — or how the United States can go about doing this, particularly the Department of Defense.

    When it comes to the other question that you asked about those specific programs, again, I would say, this is not a — a ban; this is a temporary pause and a freeze to ensure that all of the money going out from Washington, D.C., is in align with the president’s agenda.

    And as the Office of Management and Budget has updates on what will be kick-started, once again, I will provide those to you. 

    Q    Can you clarify for a sec what you were saying before on Medicaid?  It wasn’t clear to me whether you were saying that no Medicaid would be cut off.  Obviously, a lot of this goes to states before it goes to individuals and so forth.  So, are you guaranteeing here that no individual now on Medicaid would see a cutoff because of the pause?

    MS. LEAVITT:  I’ll check back on that and get back to you. 

    Jon.

    Q    Thanks a lot, Karoline.  As you know, in the first week that the president was in office, signed an executive order as it relates to birthright citizenship — trying to eliminate that.  Now, 22 state attorney generals have said that this is unconstitutional.  A federal judge has just agreed with their argument.  What’s the administration’s argument for doing away with birthright citizenship?

    MS. LEAVITT:  The folks that you mentioned have a right to have that legal opinion, but it is in disagreement with the legal opinion of this administration. 

    This administration believes that birthright citizenship is unconstitutional, and that is why President Trump signed that executive order.  Illegal immigrants who come to this country and have a child are not subject to the laws of this jurisdiction.  That’s the opinion of this administration. 

    We have already appealed the rul- — the lawsuit that was filed against this administration, and we are prepared to fight this all the way to the Supreme Court if we have to, because President Trump believes that this is a necessary step to secure our nation’s borders and protect our homeland. 

    Monica.

    Q    And then on foreign policy — on foreign policy, Karoline —

    Q    Thank you, Karoline.  It’s great to see you, and you’re doing a great —

    Q    — on foreign policy, if I may.  The president’s commitment to the NATO defense Alliance, is it as strong as the prior administration?  Is it the same as when he served as president in his first term in office?

    MS. LEAVITT:  As long as NATO pays their fair share.

    And President Trump has called on NATO Allies to increase their defense spending to 5 percent.  You actually saw the head of NATO at Davos last week on Bloomberg Television saying that President Trump is right and if Europe wants to keep itself safe, they should increase their defense spending. 

    I would just add that there was no greater ally to our European allies than President Trump in his first term.  The world, for all nations in Europe, and, of course, here at home was much safer because of Presidents Tru- — Trump’s peace through strength diplomatic approach. 

    Monica.

    Q    Karoline —

    Q    Thank you.  Thank you, Karoline.  And it’s great to finally be called on as well in the briefing room.  I appreciate that. 

    MS. LEAVITT:  You’re welcome. 

    Q    Of course, we know President Trump just got back from North Carolina and California meeting with victims of natural disasters.  There’s the two-year anniversary of the East Palestine, Ohio, toxic train derailment.  Does the president have any plans to go visit the victims of that toxic spill or just visit in general?

    MS. LEAVITT:  Not — no plans that I can read out for you here.  If that changes, I will certainly keep you posted. 

    What I can tell you is that President Trump still talks about his visit to East Palestine, Ohio.  That was one of the turning points, I would say, in the previous election campaign, where Americans were reminded that President Trump is a man of the people.  And he, as a candidate, visited that town that was just derailed by the train derailment — no pun intended — and he offered support and hope, just like I saw the president do this past week. 

    It was a purposeful decision by this president, on his first domestic trip, to go to North Carolina and to California to visit with Americans who were impacted by Hurricane Helene and also by the deadly fires — a red state and a blue state, both of which feel forgotten by the previous administration and the federal government.  That has now — that has now ended under President Trump. 

    He will continue to put Americans first, whether they’re in East Palestine, in Pacific Palisades, or in North Carolina.

    (Cross-talk.)

    Sure.

    Q    Thank you, Karoline.  On California, could you please clarify what the military did with the water last night, as referenced in the president’s Truth Social post?

    MS. LEAVITT:  The water has been turned back on in California, and this comes just days after President Trump visited Pacific Palisades and, as you all saw, applied tremendous pressure on state and local officials in Pacific Palisades, including Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass, to turn on the water and to direct that water to places in the south and in the middle of the state that have been incredibly dry, which has led to the expansion — the rapid expansion of these fires.

    Q    So, could you clarify what the military’s role was, where the water came from, and how it got there?

    MS. LEAVITT:  Again, the Army Corps of Engineers has been on the ground in California to respond to the devastation from these wildfires.  And I would point out that just days after President Trump visited the devastation from these fires, the water was turned on.  That is because of the pressure campaign he put on state and local officials there, who clearly lack all common sense. 

    And I will never forget being at that round table with the president last week and hearing the frustration in the voices of Pacific Palisades residents who feel as though their government has just gone insane.  Before President Trump showed up on the scene, Karen Bass was telling private property owners that they would have to wait 18 months to access their private property.

    So, this administration, the president and his team that’s on the ground in California — Ric Grenell, who he has designated to oversee this great crisis — ha- — will continue to put pressure on Karen Bass and state and local officials to allow residents to access their properties. 

    This is a huge part of it.  These residents want to take part in their own clearing out of their properties.  They should be able to do that.  It’s the United States of America.  What happened to our freedom?  Clearly, it’s gone in California, but not anymore under President Trump.

    Q    Karoline —

    MS. LEAVITT:  April.

    Q    Karoline, welcome to the briefing room.

    MS. LEAVITT:  Thank you.

    Q    Several questions.  One on the pause.  Will minority-serving institutions, preferably colleges and universities, have those monies held back temporarily at this moment?

    MS. LEAVITT:  Again, I have not seen the entire list, because this memo was just sent out.  So, I will provide you all with updates as we receive them.  Okay?

    Q    Karoline —

    Q    And secondly — als- —

    Q    Karoline.

    Q    Also, secondly, when it comes to immigration, there is this southern border focus.  What happens to those who have overstayed their visas?  That is part of the broken immigration system.  In 2023, there was a report by the Biden administration, the Homeland Security Department, that said overstays of visas were three times more than usual.  Will there be a focus on the overstays for visas as well?

    MS. LEAVITT:  If an individual is overstaying their visa, they are therefore an illegal immigrant residing in this country, and they are subject to deportation.  

    Q    And also, lastly —

    MS. LEAVITT:  Yes.

    Q    Lastly, as we’re dealing with anti-DEI, anti-woke efforts, we understand this administration could — is thinking about celebrating Black History Month.  Have you got any word on that?  Anything that you can offer to us?

    MS. LEAVITT:  As far as I know, this White House certainly still intends to celebrate, and we will continue to celebrate American history and the contributions that all Americans, regardless of race, religion, or creed, have made to our great country.  And America is back.

    Christian Datoc.

    Q    Thanks, Karoline.  Just real quick.  You mentioned the inflation executive order the president signed, but egg prices have skyrocketed since President Trump took office.  So, what specifically is he doing to lower those costs for Americans?

    MS. LEAVITT:  Really glad you brought this up, because there is a lot of reporting out there that is putting the onus on this White House for the increased cost of eggs.  I would like to point out to each and every one of you that, in 2024, when Joe Biden was in the Oval Office — or upstairs in the residence sleeping; I’m not so sure — egg prices increased 65 percent in this country.  We also have seen the cost of everything, not just eggs — bacon, groceries, gasoline — have increased because of the inflationary policies of the last administration.

    As far as the egg shortage, what’s also contributing to that is that the Biden administration and the Department of Agriculture directed the mass killing of more than 100 million chickens, which has led to a lack of chicken supply in this country, therefore a lack of egg supply, which is leading to the shortage.

    So, I will leave you with this point.  This is an example of why it’s so incredibly important that the Senate moves swiftly to confirm all of President Trump’s nominees, including his nominee for the United States Department of Agriculture, Brooke Rollins, who is already speaking with Kevin Hassett, who is leading the economic team here at the White House, on how we can address the egg shortage in this country.

    As for cots, I laid out — costs — I laid out the plethora of ways that President Trump has addressed saving costs for the American people over the past week.  He looks forward to continuing to doing that —

    Q    Karoline, what —

    MS. LEAVITT:  — in the days ahead.

    (Cross-talk.)

    Thank you, guys, so much.  I’ll see you soon.

    END                1:52 P.M. EST

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Biology Associate Professor Awarded Nation’s Highest Honor for Early-Career Researchers

    Source: US State of Connecticut

    On Jan. 14, UConn ecology and evolutionary biology associate professor Jill Wegrzyn was among nearly 400 individuals honored by President Biden with the Presidential Early Career Award for Scientists and Engineers (PECASE). This is the highest honor bestowed by the U.S. government on outstanding scientists and engineers who are in the early phases of their careers. UConn engineering professor Arash Zaghi also received this award. 

    Established by President Clinton in 1996, PECASE recognizes scientists and engineers who show exceptional potential for leadership early in their research careers. The award celebrates innovative and far-reaching developments in science and technology. 

    “This award recognizes Professor Wegrzyn’s exceptional contributions to computational and evolutionary biology, and I am immensely proud of her achievement,” says Ofer Harel, dean of the College of Liberal Arts and Sciences. “Her innovative research pushes the boundaries of genome science and has significant implications for biodiversity conservation.” 

    A computational biologist, Wegrzyn develops computational applications for analyzing both single genomes and entire populations, aiming to understand how organisms adapt to their environment. 

    “I have always aspired to integrate computer programming and genetics within the broader context of the natural world,” Wegrzyn says.  

    This curiosity led to a precocious start to her research career: as an undergraduate at the University of California, Davis, she started to develop some of the university’s first courses in bioinformatics, the study of biological sequence data (like genetic codes). 

    Now at UConn, where she leads the Plant Computational Genomics lab, Wegrzyn has worked to develop reference genomes for various “non-model” plant species. In contrast to model organisms, whose genomes have been sequenced and studied extensively, non-model plant species are still genetic mysteries – and many of them are of conservation concern. What’s more, since some of their genomes can be nearly ten times as long as the human genome, effectively sequencing them is no easy task.  

    I’m very interested in finding ways to assemble genomes better, faster, and more efficiently, especially when they’re large and complex.

    Wegrzyn describes them as the “species that are a little bit harder to work on, and present new computational challenges” — the underdogs of the plant kingdom. 

    The lab also works to develop software that can help genomic researchers perform crucial tasks like assembling, analyzing, and annotating genomic data. 

    “A lot of the software currently available to tackle those issues has traditionally been very focused on human genetics or model species,” Wegrzyn says. “I’m very interested in finding ways to assemble genomes better, faster, and more efficiently, especially when they’re large and complex. How do we identify genes more efficiently? And how can we scale from working with a single genome to studying entire populations on the landscape, to understand how they’re adapting to a changing climate?” 

    This research is assisting conservation efforts for many tree species across the country, which are important for protecting biodiversity and ecosystem health, timber production, and even the nation’s annual Christmas tree crop. 

    For example, Wegrzyn says, her lab has identified regions of the genome (genes) that confer resistance to invasive pests or pathogens. Managers can then select for this resistance and plant hardier trees. In the world of forests, where generations are measured not in annual growing cycles but in decades, this could potentially save countless years. 

    “Trees can have generation times of 12 to 15 years or more before you can even determine how they’re going to respond to their current (or future) environment,” Wegrzyn says. “So the sooner we can predict how they’re going to perform in a particular environment, the more we can do.” 

    The lab is also responsible for creating and maintaining the international CartograPlant database and application, which empowers scientists of all backgrounds to explore how genetics, phenotypes (traits), and environmental factors combine to shape plant population responses. 

    Wegrzyn is one of the lead PIs of the NSF-funded Evolving Meta-Ecosystems (EVOME) institute, which seeks to understand how Arctic species (including birds, plants, fish, and insects) will respond, along with their ecosystems, to rapid climate change. 

    In addition to her teaching duties and lab research, Wegrzyn is also the Lead Bioinformatician in the Computational Biology Core within the Institute for Systems Genomics. She’s also a PI on UConn’s NSF-funded Research and Mentoring for Postbaccalaureates (RaMP) initiative. RaMP is geared toward recent college graduates who did not have the opportunity to pursue dedicated research as undergraduates, providing them with hands-on lab experience that can culminate in new graduate study or professional opportunities. 

    Most recently, RaMP scholars helped generate the first chromosome-level genome of the desert hairy scorpion; this year’s cohort is aiming to do the same with the threatened Everglades mink. 

    Wegrzyn became eligible for the PECASE after receiving the NSF’s prestigious CAREER Award in 2020. This award helped fund the development of her EASEL (Efficient, Accurate, Scalable Eukaryotic modeLs) software: an open-source genome annotation tool that leverages machine learning, RNA folding, and functional annotations to enhance gene prediction accuracy. 

    “Our software has been applied to everything from deep sea corals to desert invertebrates to high elevation conifers, which represent an incredible range of complexity,” Wegrzyn says. “Through our software, we aim to facilitate fundamental questions in evolution while also providing actionable targets for conservation and restoration programs. Receiving this prestigious award in the midst of climate change elevates the importance of this work and also inspires the students and trainees who contribute to its success.” 

     

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI Australia: Child bitten by dingo on K’gari

    Source: Government of Queensland

    Issued: 25 Jan 2025

    Rangers are reminding parents to keep their children close this long weekend, after a child was bitten by a tagged female dingo on K’gari.

    The dingo reportedly charged two children, aged four and 12 years old, who were swimming in shallow water in Lake McKenzie (Boorangoora) on Thursday 23 January 2025.

    Sadly, the dingo bit the four-year-old child on the left shoulder, resulting in superficial lacerations.

    The child’s mother picked them up and the father yelled and chased the dingo. It reportedly continued to loiter near the family.

    Senior Ranger Dr Linda Behrendorff reminds people that dingoes are opportunistic animals and will strike if given the chance.

    “Dingoes are apex predators, and they will have a go and hunt if they feel someone has strayed from the pack,” Dr Behrendorff said.

    “This unfortunate incident highlights the importance of carrying a dingo stick which works as a deterrent.

    “Always keep your children within arm’s reach, and consider staying in the fenced camping areas of K’gari.

    “We urge people to Be dingo-safe! and remain vigilant when visiting K’gari.”

    Queensland Parks and Wildlife Service (QPWS) rangers have increased patrols and signage in the area and are attempting to identify the dingo involved.

    Report any concerning dingo encounters by calling 07 4127 9150 or emailing dingo.ranger@des.qld.gov.au

    Simple ways to Be dingo-safe! these holidays:

    • Always stay within arm’s reach of children and young teenagers
    • Always walk in groups and carry a stick
    • Never feed dingoes
    • K’gari’s environment provides plenty of food for dingoes, and they do not need to be fed
    • Camp in fenced areas where possible
    • Do not run. Running or jogging can trigger a negative dingo interaction
    • Lock up food stores and iceboxes (even on a boat)
    • Never store food or food containers in tents, and
    • Secure all rubbish, fish and bait.

    View more information on K’gari dingoes.

    MIL OSI News –

  • MIL-OSI Australia: Second long weekend dingo incident at Lake McKenzie

    Source: Government of Queensland

    Issued: 26 Jan 2025

    Visitors to K’gari are strongly urged to heed Be dingo-safe! messaging following two bite incidents reported this long weekend.

    On Sunday 26 January 2025, a dingo bit a two-year-old on the leg at Lake McKenzie (Boorangaroo) resulting in a superficial injury.

    The dingo encountered the child in the carpark. Rangers were onsite to provide basic first-aid care and advice.

    Yesterday the department was also notified of an incident that occurred on Saturday 18 January 2025, also at Lake McKenzie.

    A woman was bitten on the leg by a dingo after trying to stop the animal from taking her bag, resulting in a superficial injury.

    Senior Ranger Dr Linda Behrendorff is reminding people of the importance of carrying a dingo stick and keeping children close.

    “Some dingoes will target children because they are seen as the weaker links of the pack. This is why it is so important to keep children within arm’s reach,” Dr Behrendorff said.

    “We have increased our ranger patrols during this busy long weekend period, but urge people to remain vigilant, particularly parents with young children.

    “Visitors must not be complacent. People need to understand their risk when travelling to K’gari. Our message is simple: Be dingo-safe!”

    Queensland Parks and Wildlife Service (QPWS) is investigating these incidents to determine next steps.

    Report any concerning dingo encounters by calling 07 4127 9150 or emailing dingo.ranger@des.qld.gov.au

    Simple ways to Be dingo-safe! these holidays:

    • Always stay within arm’s reach of children and young teenagers
    • Always walk in groups and carry a stick
    • Never feed dingoes
    • K’gari’s environment provides plenty of food for dingoes, and they do not need to be fed
    • Camp in fenced areas where possible
    • Do not run. Running or jogging can trigger a negative dingo interaction
    • Lock up food stores and iceboxes (even on a boat)
    • Never store food or food containers in tents, and
    • Secure all rubbish, fish and bait.

    View more information on K’gari dingoes.

    MIL OSI News –

  • MIL-OSI Russia: Partnership of GUU and KubSAU: new prospects for the Russian agro-industry

    Translartion. Region: Russians Fedetion –

    Source: State University of Management – Official website of the State –

    On January 29, 2024, a ceremonial signing of a cooperation agreement between the State University of Management and the Kuban State Agrarian University named after I.T. Trubilin took place.

    On behalf of our university, the signature was put by Rector Vladimir Stroyev, on behalf of KubSAU – by Rector Alexander Trubilin. In addition to them, the meeting was attended by Advisor to the Rector’s Office of the State University of Management Nikolay Mikhailov and Head of the Department for Coordination of Scientific Research of the State University of Management Maxim Pletnev, as well as Dean of the Faculty of Finance and Credit of KubSAU Alexander Adamenko.

    The first step in implementing the agreement will be the opening of a network educational program for bachelor’s degrees in Finance and Business Management. The new educational program provides the opportunity to obtain a bachelor’s degree in economics and management within the framework of one diploma. It provides for alternating study locations: Krasnodar (first and second years) – Moscow (third year) – Krasnodar (fourth year).

    Welcoming the guests, Vladimir Stroyev noted that the meeting had been planned for quite a long time and had finally taken place. The rector briefly spoke about the history of the State University of Management, which is noticeably longer than the official 105 years. During this time, the university has participated and continues to participate in many global state transformations.

    Vladimir Vitalievich spoke in more detail about the main historical areas of the university’s work. He spoke about the first department of personnel management in the country. He shared the successes of the department of state and municipal management. And he placed special emphasis on the approach to management that has changed over time. Fortunately, the State University of Management managed to preserve some areas of industry management, which is again in great demand in the labor market today.

    The rector also particularly noted that GUU has taken the path of developing network programs. In this regard, our university is a leader in Russia. At the moment, eight such programs are being implemented and three more are in development.

    Rector of KubSAU Alexander Trubilin admitted that they also have a task to develop network programs, but so far only one is being implemented, with MGIMO. And since the State University of Management has gone so far ahead, it makes even more sense to cooperate in this direction and adopt experience.

    Aleksandr Ivanovich also spoke about the specifics of working in the Krasnodar Region, a region with the highest population growth in the country and a 50/50 urban-rural ratio. The region’s universities are faced with the task of maintaining this ratio, that is, helping to retain young specialists in the field. For the comprehensive development of rural areas, KubSAU is expanding the range of educational programs and seeking cooperation with other universities.

    In response to this, Vladimir Stroyev spoke about the activities of the Eurasian Network University, which has already gone beyond not only the Eurasian Economic Union, but also the geographical boundaries of Eurasia. The rector invited his colleague to join the consortium if he wished.

    Maxim Pletnev, Head of the Scientific Research Coordination Department of the State University of Management, told the guests about the university’s scientific work, in particular about the digital estate project, which is a core project for KubSAU and is being implemented jointly with the Omsk Agricultural Research Center and the Udmurt State University. He reported on the trip of young scientists from the State University of Management to an internship at the largest agricultural holding company, STEPPE, as a result of which the university received an order to develop import-substituted parts for agricultural machinery. He also mentioned joint projects within the framework of the RosGeoTech Advanced Engineering School.

    The final part of the visit was the excursion program, within the framework of which the guests visited the Pre-University of the State University of Management, asking with interest about the number of students, the conditions for admission, the academic performance of schoolchildren and the number of those entering our university after that. Representatives of KubSAU looked into the Sports Complex and the Information Technology Center. They also visited the Media Center, which they were completely delighted with. They lingered for a long time in the laboratory of the Director of the Engineering Project Management Center Vladimir Filatov, who spoke about the work of the inter-university design bureau, clarified the details of the digital village project and gave examples of joint developments with TMH Engineering. Also, the head of engineering projects of the State University of Management showed on the screen of the work computer a project of an unmanned aerial vehicle, which is currently at the exhibition, and said that flight tests will take place this year. The guests were interested in the development and offered to use their test site for the first flights of the drone from the State University of Management.

    Subscribe to the TG channel “Our GUU” Date of publication: 01/29/2025

    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 Global: Fake papers are contaminating the world’s scientific literature, fueling a corrupt industry and slowing legitimate lifesaving medical research

    Source: The Conversation – USA – By Frederik Joelving, Contributing editor, Retraction Watch

    Assistant professor Frank Cackowski, left, and researcher Steven Zielske at Wayne State University in Detroit became suspicious of a paper on cancer research that was eventually retracted. Amy Sacka, CC BY-ND

    Over the past decade, furtive commercial entities around the world have industrialized the production, sale and dissemination of bogus scholarly research, undermining the literature that everyone from doctors to engineers rely on to make decisions about human lives.

    It is exceedingly difficult to get a handle on exactly how big the problem is. Around 55,000 scholarly papers have been retracted to date, for a variety of reasons, but scientists and companies who screen the scientific literature for telltale signs of fraud estimate that there are many more fake papers circulating – possibly as many as several hundred thousand. This fake research can confound legitimate researchers who must wade through dense equations, evidence, images and methodologies only to find that they were made up.

    Even when the bogus papers are spotted – usually by amateur sleuths on their own time – academic journals are often slow to retract the papers, allowing the articles to taint what many consider sacrosanct: the vast global library of scholarly work that introduces new ideas, reviews other research and discusses findings.

    These fake papers are slowing down research that has helped millions of people with lifesaving medicine and therapies from cancer to COVID-19. Analysts’ data shows that fields related to cancer and medicine are particularly hard hit, while areas like philosophy and art are less affected. Some scientists have abandoned their life’s work because they cannot keep pace given the number of fake papers they must bat down.

    The problem reflects a worldwide commodification of science. Universities, and their research funders, have long used regular publication in academic journals as requirements for promotions and job security, spawning the mantra “publish or perish.”

    But now, fraudsters have infiltrated the academic publishing industry to prioritize profits over scholarship. Equipped with technological prowess, agility and vast networks of corrupt researchers, they are churning out papers on everything from obscure genes to artificial intelligence in medicine.

    These papers are absorbed into the worldwide library of research faster than they can be weeded out. About 119,000 scholarly journal articles and conference papers are published globally every week, or more than 6 million a year. Publishers estimate that, at most journals, about 2% of the papers submitted – but not necessarily published – are likely fake, although this number can be much higher at some publications.

    While no country is immune to this practice, it is particularly pronounced in emerging economies where resources to do bona fide science are limited – and where governments, eager to compete on a global scale, push particularly strong “publish or perish” incentives.

    As a result, there is a bustling online underground economy for all things scholarly publishing. Authorship, citations, even academic journal editors, are up for sale. This fraud is so prevalent that it has its own name: paper mills, a phrase that harks back to “term-paper mills”, where students cheat by getting someone else to write a class paper for them.

    The impact on publishers is profound. In high-profile cases, fake articles can hurt a journal’s bottom line. Important scientific indexes – databases of academic publications that many researchers rely on to do their work – may delist journals that publish too many compromised papers. There is growing criticism that legitimate publishers could do more to track and blacklist journals and authors who regularly publish fake papers that are sometimes little more than artificial intelligence-generated phrases strung together.

    To better understand the scope, ramifications and potential solutions of this metastasizing assault on science, we – a contributing editor at Retraction Watch, a website that reports on retractions of scientific papers and related topics, and two computer scientists at France’s Université Toulouse III–Paul Sabatier and Université Grenoble Alpes who specialize in detecting bogus publications – spent six months investigating paper mills.

    This included, by some of us at different times, trawling websites and social media posts, interviewing publishers, editors, research-integrity experts, scientists, doctors, sociologists and scientific sleuths engaged in the Sisyphean task of cleaning up the literature. It also involved, by some of us, screening scientific articles looking for signs of fakery.

    Problematic Paper Screener: Trawling for fraud in the scientific literature

    What emerged is a deep-rooted crisis that has many researchers and policymakers calling for a new way for universities and many governments to evaluate and reward academics and health professionals across the globe.

    Just as highly biased websites dressed up to look like objective reporting are gnawing away at evidence-based journalism and threatening elections, fake science is grinding down the knowledge base on which modern society rests.

    As part of our work detecting these bogus publications, co-author Guillaume Cabanac developed the Problematic Paper Screener, which filters 130 million new and old scholarly papers every week looking for nine types of clues that a paper might be fake or contain errors. A key clue is a tortured phrase – an awkward wording generated by software that replaces common scientific terms with synonyms to avoid direct plagiarism from a legitimate paper.

    Problematic Paper Screener: Trawling for fraud in the scientific literature

    An obscure molecule

    Frank Cackowski at Detroit’s Wayne State University was confused.

    The oncologist was studying a sequence of chemical reactions in cells to see if they could be a target for drugs against prostate cancer. A paper from 2018 from 2018 in the American Journal of Cancer Research piqued his interest when he read that a little-known molecule called SNHG1 might interact with the chemical reactions he was exploring. He and fellow Wayne State researcher Steven Zielske began a series of experiments to learn more about the link. Surprisingly, they found there wasn’t a link.

    Meanwhile, Zielske had grown suspicious of the paper. Two graphs showing results for different cell lines were identical, he noticed, which “would be like pouring water into two glasses with your eyes closed and the levels coming out exactly the same.” Another graph and a table in the article also inexplicably contained identical data.

    Zielske described his misgivings in an anonymous post in 2020 at PubPeer, an online forum where many scientists report potential research misconduct, and also contacted the journal’s editor. Shortly thereafter, the journal pulled the paper, citing “falsified materials and/or data.”

    “Science is hard enough as it is if people are actually being genuine and trying to do real work,” says Cackowski, who also works at the Karmanos Cancer Institute in Michigan. “And it’s just really frustrating to waste your time based on somebody’s fraudulent publications.”

    Wayne State scientists Frank Cackowski and Steven Zielske carried out experiments based on a paper they later found to contain false data.
    Amy Sacka, CC BY-ND

    He worries that the bogus publications are slowing down “legitimate research that down the road is going to impact patient care and drug development.”

    The two researchers eventually found that SNHG1 did appear to play a part in prostate cancer, though not in the way the suspect paper suggested. But it was a tough topic to study. Zielske combed through all the studies on SNHG1 and cancer – some 150 papers, nearly all from Chinese hospitals – and concluded that “a majority” of them looked fake. Some reported using experimental reagents known as primers that were “just gibberish,” for instance, or targeted a different gene than what the study said, according to Zielske. He contacted several of the journals, he said, but received little response. “I just stopped following up.”

    The many questionable articles also made it harder to get funding, Zielske said. The first time he submitted a grant application to study SNHG1, it was rejected, with one reviewer saying “the field was crowded,” Zielske recalled. The following year, he explained in his application how most of the literature likely came from paper mills. He got the grant.

    Today, Zielske said, he approaches new research differently than he used to: “You can’t just read an abstract and have any faith in it. I kind of assume everything’s wrong.”

    Legitimate academic journals evaluate papers before they are published by having other researchers in the field carefully read them over. This peer review process is designed to stop flawed research from being disseminated, but is far from perfect.

    Reviewers volunteer their time, typically assume research is real and so don’t look for signs of fraud. And some publishers may try to pick reviewers they deem more likely to accept papers, because rejecting a manuscript can mean losing out on thousands of dollars in publication fees.

    “Even good, honest reviewers have become apathetic” because of “the volume of poor research coming through the system,” said Adam Day, who directs Clear Skies, a company in London that develops data-based methods to help spot falsified papers and academic journals. “Any editor can recount seeing reports where it’s obvious the reviewer hasn’t read the paper.”

    With AI, they don’t have to: New research shows that many reviews are now written by ChatGPT and similar tools.

    To expedite the publication of one another’s work, some corrupt scientists form peer review rings. Paper mills may even create fake peer reviewers impersonating real scientists to ensure their manuscripts make it through to publication. Others bribe editors or plant agents on journal editorial boards.

    María de los Ángeles Oviedo-García, a professor of marketing at the University of Seville in Spain, spends her spare time hunting for suspect peer reviews from all areas of science, hundreds of which she has flagged on PubPeer. Some of these reviews are the length of a tweet, others ask authors to cite the reviewer’s work even if it has nothing to do with the science at hand, and many closely resemble other peer reviews for very different studies – evidence, in her eyes, of what she calls “review mills.”

    PubPeer comment from María de los Ángeles Oviedo-García pointing out that a peer review report is very similar to two other reports. She also points out that authors and citations for all three are either anonymous or the same person – both hallmarks of fake papers.
    Screen capture by The Conversation, CC BY-ND

    “One of the demanding fights for me is to keep faith in science,” says Oviedo-García, who tells her students to look up papers on PubPeer before relying on them too heavily. Her research has been slowed down, she adds, because she now feels compelled to look for peer review reports for studies she uses in her work. Often there aren’t any, because “very few journals publish those review reports,” Oviedo-García says.

    An ‘absolutely huge’ problem

    It is unclear when paper mills began to operate at scale. The earliest article retracted due to suspected involvement of such agencies was published in 2004, according to the Retraction Watch Database, which contains details about tens of thousands of retractions. (The database is operated by The Center for Scientific Integrity, the parent nonprofit of Retraction Watch.) Nor is it clear exactly how many low-quality, plagiarized or made-up articles paper mills have spawned.

    But the number is likely to be significant and growing, experts say. One Russia-linked paper mill in Latvia, for instance, claims on its website to have published “more than 12,650 articles” since 2012.

    An analysis of 53,000 papers submitted to six publishers – but not necessarily published – found the proportion of suspect papers ranged from 2% to 46% across journals. And the American publisher Wiley, which has retracted more than 11,300 compromised articles and closed 19 heavily affected journals in its erstwhile Hindawi division, recently said its new paper-mill detection tool flags up to 1 in 7 submissions.

    Day, of Clear Skies, estimates that as many as 2% of the several million scientific works published in 2022 were milled. Some fields are more problematic than others. The number is closer to 3% in biology and medicine, and in some subfields, like cancer, it may be much larger, according to Day. Despite increased awareness today, “I do not see any significant change in the trend,” he said. With improved methods of detection, “any estimate I put out now will be higher.”

    The paper-mill problem is “absolutely huge,” said Sabina Alam, director of Publishing Ethics and Integrity at Taylor & Francis, a major academic publisher. In 2019, none of the 175 ethics cases that editors escalated to her team was about paper mills, Alam said. Ethics cases include submissions and already published papers. In 2023, “we had almost 4,000 cases,” she said. “And half of those were paper mills.”

    Jennifer Byrne, an Australian scientist who now heads up a research group to improve the reliability of medical research, submitted testimony for a hearing of the U.S. House of Representatives’ Committee on Science, Space, and Technology in July 2022. She noted that 700, or nearly 6%, of 12,000 cancer research papers screened had errors that could signal paper mill involvement. Byrne shuttered her cancer research lab in 2017 because the genes she had spent two decades researching and writing about became the target of an enormous number of fake papers. A rogue scientist fudging data is one thing, she said, but a paper mill could churn out dozens of fake studies in the time it took her team to publish a single legitimate one.

    “The threat of paper mills to scientific publishing and integrity has no parallel over my 30-year scientific career …. In the field of human gene science alone, the number of potentially fraudulent articles could exceed 100,000 original papers,” she wrote to lawmakers, adding, “This estimate may seem shocking but is likely to be conservative.”

    In one area of genetics research – the study of noncoding RNA in different types of cancer – “We’re talking about more than 50% of papers published are from mills,” Byrne said. “It’s like swimming in garbage.”

    In 2022, Byrne and colleagues, including two of us, found that suspect genetics research, despite not having an immediate impact on patient care, still informs the work of other scientists, including those running clinical trials. Publishers, however, are often slow to retract tainted papers, even when alerted to obvious signs of fraud. We found that 97% of the 712 problematic genetics research articles we identified remained uncorrected within the literature.

    When retractions do happen, it is often thanks to the efforts of a small international community of amateur sleuths like Oviedo-García and those who post on PubPeer.

    Jillian Goldfarb, an associate professor of chemical and biomolecular engineering at Cornell University and a former editor of the Elsevier journal Fuel, laments the publisher’s handling of the threat from paper mills.

    “I was assessing upwards of 50 papers every day,” she said in an email interview. While she had technology to detect plagiarism, duplicate submissions and suspicious author changes, it was not enough. “It’s unreasonable to think that an editor – for whom this is not usually their full-time job – can catch these things reading 50 papers at a time. The time crunch, plus pressure from publishers to increase submission rates and citations and decrease review time, puts editors in an impossible situation.”

    In October 2023, Goldfarb resigned from her position as editor of Fuel. In a LinkedIn post about her decision, she cited the company’s failure to move on dozens of potential paper-mill articles she had flagged; its hiring of a principal editor who reportedly “engaged in paper and citation milling”; and its proposal of candidates for editorial positions “with longer PubPeer profiles and more retractions than most people have articles on their CVs, and whose names appear as authors on papers-for-sale websites.”

    “This tells me, our community, and the public, that they value article quantity and profit over science,” Goldfarb wrote.

    In response to questions about Goldfarb’s resignation, an Elsevier spokesperson told The Conversation that it “takes all claims about research misconduct in our journals very seriously” and is investigating Goldfarb’s claims. The spokesperson added that Fuel’s editorial team has “been working to make other changes to the journal to benefit authors and readers.”

    That’s not how it works, buddy

    Business proposals had been piling up for years in the inbox of João de Deus Barreto Segundo, managing editor of six journals published by the Bahia School of Medicine and Public Health in Salvador, Brazil. Several came from suspect publishers on the prowl for new journals to add to their portfolios. Others came from academics suggesting fishy deals or offering bribes to publish their paper.

    In one email from February 2024, an assistant professor of economics in Poland explained that he ran a company that worked with European universities. “Would you be interested in collaboration on the publication of scientific articles by scientists who collaborate with me?” Artur Borcuch inquired. “We will then discuss possible details and financial conditions.”

    A university administrator in Iraq was more candid: “As an incentive, I am prepared to offer a grant of $500 for each accepted paper submitted to your esteemed journal,” wrote Ahmed Alkhayyat, head of the Islamic University Centre for Scientific Research, in Najaf, and manager of the school’s “world ranking.”

    “That’s not how it works, buddy,” Barreto Segundo shot back.

    In email to The Conversation, Borcuch denied any improper intent. “My role is to mediate in the technical and procedural aspects of publishing an article,” Borcuch said, adding that, when working with multiple scientists, he would “request a discount from the editorial office on their behalf.” Informed that the Brazilian publisher had no publication fees, Borcuch said a “mistake” had occurred because an “employee” sent the email for him “to different journals.”

    Academic journals have different payment models. Many are subscription-based and don’t charge authors for publishing, but have hefty fees for reading articles. Libraries and universities also pay large sums for access.

    A fast-growing open-access model – where anyone can read the paper – includes expensive publication fees levied on authors to make up for the loss of revenue in selling the articles. These payments are not meant to influence whether or not a manuscript is accepted.

    The Bahia School of Medicine and Public Health, among others, doesn’t charge authors or readers, but Barreto Segundo’s employer is a small player in the scholarly publishing business, which brings in close to $30 billion a year on profit margins as high as 40%. Academic publishers make money largely from subscription fees from institutions like libraries and universities, individual payments to access paywalled articles, and open-access fees paid by authors to ensure their articles are free for anyone to read.

    The industry is lucrative enough that it has attracted unscrupulous actors eager to find a way to siphon off some of that revenue.

    Ahmed Torad, a lecturer at Kafr El Sheikh University in Egypt and editor-in-chief of the Egyptian Journal of Physiotherapy, asked for a 30% kickback for every article he passed along to the Brazilian publisher. “This commission will be calculated based on the publication fees generated by the manuscripts I submit,” Torad wrote, noting that he specialized “in connecting researchers and authors with suitable journals for publication.”

    Excerpt from Ahmed Torad’s email suggesting a kickback.
    Screenshot by The Conversation, CC BY-ND

    Apparently, he failed to notice that Bahia School of Medicine and Public Health doesn’t charge author fees.

    Like Borcuch, Alkhayyat denied any improper intent. He said there had been a “misunderstanding” on the editor’s part, explaining that the payment he offered was meant to cover presumed article-processing charges. “Some journals ask for money. So this is normal,” Alkhayyat said.

    Torad explained that he had sent his offer to source papers in exchange for a commission to some 280 journals, but had not forced anyone to accept the manuscripts. Some had balked at his proposition, he said, despite regularly charging authors thousands of dollars to publish. He suggested that the scientific community wasn’t comfortable admitting that scholarly publishing has become a business like any other, even if it’s “obvious to many scientists.”

    The unwelcome advances all targeted one of the journals Barreto Segundo managed, The Journal of Physiotherapy Research, soon after it was indexed in Scopus, a database of abstracts and citations owned by the publisher Elsevier.

    Along with Clarivate’s Web of Science, Scopus has become an important quality stamp for scholarly publications globally. Articles in indexed journals are money in the bank for their authors: They help secure jobs, promotions, funding and, in some countries, even trigger cash rewards. For academics or physicians in poorer countries, they can be a ticket to the global north.

    Consider Egypt, a country plagued by dubious clinical trials. Universities there commonly pay employees large sums for international publications, with the amount depending on the journal’s impact factor. A similar incentive structure is hardwired into national regulations: To earn the rank of full professor, for example, candidates must have at least five publications in two years, according to Egypt’s Supreme Council of Universities. Studies in journals indexed in Scopus or Web of Science not only receive extra points, but they also are exempt from further scrutiny when applicants are evaluated. The higher a publication’s impact factor, the more points the studies get.

    With such a focus on metrics, it has become common for Egyptian researchers to cut corners, according to a physician in Cairo who requested anonymity for fear of retaliation. Authorship is frequently gifted to colleagues who then return the favor later, or studies may be created out of whole cloth. Sometimes an existing legitimate paper is chosen from the literature, and key details such as the type of disease or surgery are then changed and the numbers slightly modified, the source explained.

    It affects clinical guidelines and medical care, “so it’s a shame,” the physician said.

    Ivermectin, a drug used to treat parasites in animals and humans, is a case in point. When some studies showed that it was effective against COVID-19, ivermectin was hailed as a “miracle drug” early in the pandemic. Prescriptions surged, and along with them calls to U.S. poison centers; one man spent nine days in the hospital after downing an injectable formulation of the drug that was meant for cattle, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. As it turned out, nearly all of the research that showed a positive effect on COVID-19 had indications of fakery, the BBC and others reported – including a now-withdrawn Egyptian study. With no apparent benefit, patients were left with just side effects.

    Research misconduct isn’t limited to emerging economies, having recently felled university presidents and top scientists at government agencies in the United States. Neither is the emphasis on publications. In Norway, for example, the government allocates funding to research institutes, hospitals and universities based on how many scholarly works employees publish, and in which journals. The country has decided to partly halt this practice starting in 2025.

    “There’s a huge academic incentive and profit motive,” says Lisa Bero, a professor of medicine and public health at the University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus and the senior research-integrity editor at the Cochrane Collaboration, an international nonprofit organization that produces evidence reviews about medical treatments. “I see it at every institution I’ve worked at.”

    But in the global south, the publish-or-perish edict runs up against underdeveloped research infrastructures and education systems, leaving scientists in a bind. For a Ph.D., the Cairo physician who requested anonymity conducted an entire clinical trial single-handedly – from purchasing study medication to randomizing patients, collecting and analyzing data and paying article-processing fees. In wealthier nations, entire teams work on such studies, with the tab easily running into the hundreds of thousands of dollars.

    “Research is quite challenging here,” the physician said. That’s why scientists “try to manipulate and find easier ways so they get the job done.”

    Institutions, too, have gamed the system with an eye to international rankings. In 2011, the journal Science described how prolific researchers in the United States and Europe were offered hefty payments for listing Saudi universities as secondary affiliations on papers. And in 2023, the magazine, in collaboration with Retraction Watch, uncovered a massive self-citation ploy by a top-ranked dental school in India that forced undergraduate students to publish papers referencing faculty work.

    The root – and solutions

    Such unsavory schemes can be traced back to the introduction of performance-based metrics in academia, a development driven by the New Public Management movement that swept across the Western world in the 1980s, according to Canadian sociologist of science Yves Gingras of the Université du Québec à Montréal. When universities and public institutions adopted corporate management, scientific papers became “accounting units” used to evaluate and reward scientific productivity rather than “knowledge units” advancing our insight into the world around us, Gingras wrote.

    This transformation led many researchers to compete on numbers instead of content, which made publication metrics poor measures of academic prowess. As Gingras has shown, the controversial French microbiologist Didier Raoult, who now has more than a dozen retractions to his name, has an h-index – a measure combining publication and citation numbers – that is twice as high as that of Albert Einstein – “proof that the index is absurd,” Gingras said.

    Worse, a sort of scientific inflation, or “scientometric bubble,” has ensued, with each new publication representing an increasingly small increment in knowledge. “We publish more and more superficial papers, we publish papers that have to be corrected, and we push people to do fraud,” said Gingras.

    In terms of career prospects of individual academics, too, the average value of a publication has plummeted, triggering a rise in the number of hyperprolific authors. One of the most notorious cases is Spanish chemist Rafael Luque, who in 2023 reportedly published a study every 37 hours.

    In 2024, Landon Halloran, a geoscientist at the University of Neuchâtel, in Switzerland, received an unusual job application for an opening in his lab. A researcher with a Ph.D. from China had sent him his CV. At 31, the applicant had amassed 160 publications in Scopus-indexed journals, 62 of them in 2022 alone, the same year he obtained his doctorate. Although the applicant was not the only one “with a suspiciously high output,” according to Halloran, he stuck out. “My colleagues and I have never come across anything quite like it in the geosciences,” he said.

    According to industry insiders and publishers, there is more awareness now of threats from paper mills and other bad actors. Some journals routinely check for image fraud. A bad AI-generated image showing up in a paper can either be a sign of a scientist taking an ill-advised shortcut, or a paper mill.

    The Cochrane Collaboration has a policy excluding suspect studies from its analyses of medical evidence. The organization also has been developing a tool to help its reviewers spot problematic medical trials, just as publishers have begun to screen submissions and share data and technologies among themselves to combat fraud.

    This image, generated by AI, is a visual gobbledygook of concepts around transporting and delivering drugs in the body. For instance, the upper left figure is a nonsensical mix of a syringe, an inhaler and pills. And the pH-sensitive carrier molecule on the lower left is huge, rivaling the size of the lungs. After scientist sleuths pointed out that the published image made no sense, the journal issued a correction.
    Screen capture by The Conversation, CC BY-ND
    This graphic is the corrected image that replaced the AI image above. In this case, according to the correction, the journal determined that the paper was legitimate but the scientists had used AI to generate the image describing it.
    Screen capture by The Conversation, CC BY-ND

    “People are realizing like, wow, this is happening in my field, it’s happening in your field,” said the Cochrane Collaboration’s Bero”. “So we really need to get coordinated and, you know, develop a method and a plan overall for stamping these things out.”

    What jolted Taylor & Francis into paying attention, according to Alam, the director of Publishing Ethics and Integrity, was a 2020 investigation of a Chinese paper mill by sleuth Elisabeth Bik and three of her peers who go by the pseudonyms Smut Clyde, Morty and Tiger BB8. With 76 compromised papers, the U.K.-based company’s Artificial Cells, Nanomedicine, and Biotechnology was the most affected journal identified in the probe.

    “It opened up a minefield,” says Alam, who also co-chairs United2Act, a project launched in 2023 that brings together publishers, researchers and sleuths in the fight against paper mills. “It was the first time we realized that stock images essentially were being used to represent experiments.”

    Taylor & Francis decided to audit the hundreds of articles in its portfolio that contained similar types of images. It doubled Alam’s team, which now has 14.5 positions dedicated to doing investigations, and also began monitoring submission rates. Paper mills, it seemed, weren’t picky customers.

    “What they’re trying to do is find a gate, and if they get in, then they just start kind of slamming in the submissions,” Alam said. Seventy-six fake papers suddenly seemed like a drop in the ocean. At one Taylor & Francis journal, for instance, Alam’s team identified nearly 1,000 manuscripts that bore all the marks of coming from a mill, she said.

    And in 2023, it rejected about 300 dodgy proposals for special issues. “We’ve blocked a hell of a lot from coming through,” Alam said.

    Fraud checkers

    A small industry of technology startups has sprung up to help publishers, researchers and institutions spot potential fraud. The website Argos, launched in September 2024 by Scitility, an alert service based in Sparks, Nevada, allows authors to check if new collaborators are trailed by retractions or misconduct concerns. It has flagged tens of thousands of “high-risk” papers, according to the journal Nature.

    Fraud-checker tools sift through papers to point to those that should be manually checked and possibly rejected.
    solidcolours/iStock via Getty Images

    Morressier, a scientific conference and communications company based in Berlin, “aims to restore trust in science by improving the way scientific research is published”, according to its website. It offers integrity tools that target the entire research life cycle. Other new paper-checking tools include Signals, by London-based Research Signals, and Clear Skies’ Papermill Alarm.

    The fraudsters have not been idle, either. In 2022, when Clear Skies released the Papermill Alarm, the first academic to inquire about the new tool was a paper miller, according to Day. The person wanted access so he could check his papers before firing them off to publishers, Day said. “Paper mills have proven to be adaptive and also quite quick off the mark.”

    Given the ongoing arms race, Alam acknowledges that the fight against paper mills won’t be won as long as the booming demand for their products remains.

    According to a Nature analysis, the retraction rate tripled from 2012 to 2022 to close to .02%, or around 1 in 5,000 papers. It then nearly doubled in 2023, in large part because of Wiley’s Hindawi debacle. Today’s commercial publishing is part of the problem, Byrne said. For one, cleaning up the literature is a vast and expensive undertaking with no direct financial upside. “Journals and publishers will never, at the moment, be able to correct the literature at the scale and in the timeliness that’s required to solve the paper-mill problem,” Byrne said. “Either we have to monetize corrections such that publishers are paid for their work, or forget the publishers and do it ourselves.”

    But that still wouldn’t fix the fundamental bias built into for-profit publishing: Journals don’t get paid for rejecting papers. “We pay them for accepting papers,” said Bodo Stern, a former editor of the journal Cell and chief of Strategic Initiatives at Howard Hughes Medical Institute, a nonprofit research organization and major funder in Chevy Chase, Maryland. “I mean, what do you think journals are going to do? They’re going to accept papers.”

    With more than 50,000 journals on the market, even if some are trying hard to get it right, bad papers that are shopped around long enough eventually find a home, Stern added. “That system cannot function as a quality-control mechanism,” he said. “We have so many journals that everything can get published.”

    In Stern’s view, the way to go is to stop paying journals for accepting papers and begin looking at them as public utilities that serve a greater good. “We should pay for transparent and rigorous quality-control mechanisms,” he said.

    Peer review, meanwhile, “should be recognized as a true scholarly product, just like the original article, because the authors of the article and the peer reviewers are using the same skills,” Stern said. By the same token, journals should make all peer-review reports publicly available, even for manuscripts they turn down. “When they do quality control, they can’t just reject the paper and then let it be published somewhere else,” Stern said. “That’s not a good service.”

    Better measures

    Stern isn’t the first scientist to bemoan the excessive focus on bibliometrics. “We need less research, better research, and research done for the right reasons,” wrote the late statistician Douglas G. Altman in a much-cited editorial from 1994. “Abandoning using the number of publications as a measure of ability would be a start.”

    Nearly two decades later, a group of some 150 scientists and 75 science organizations released the San Francisco Declaration on Research Assessment, or DORA, discouraging the use of the journal impact factor and other measures as proxies for quality. The 2013 declaration has since been signed by more than 25,000 individuals and organizations in 165 countries.

    Despite the declaration, metrics remain in wide use today, and scientists say there is a new sense of urgency.

    “We’re getting to the point where people really do feel they have to do something” because of the vast number of fake papers, said Richard Sever, assistant director of Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press, in New York, and co-founder of the preprint servers bioRxiv and medRxiv.

    Stern and his colleagues have tried to make improvements at their institution. Researchers who wish to renew their seven-year contract have long been required to write a short paragraph describing the importance of their major results. Since the end of 2023, they also have been asked to remove journal names from their applications.

    That way, “you can never do what all reviewers do – I’ve done it – look at the bibliography and in just one second decide, ‘Oh, this person has been productive because they have published many papers and they’re published in the right journals,’” says Stern. “What matters is, did it really make a difference?”

    Shifting the focus away from convenient performance metrics seems possible not just for wealthy private institutions like Howard Hughes Medical Institute, but also for large government funders. In Australia, for example, the National Health and Medical Research Council in 2022 launched the “top 10 in 10” policy, aiming, in part, to “value research quality rather than quantity of publications.”

    Rather than providing their entire bibliography, the agency, which assesses thousands of grant applications every year, asked researchers to list no more than 10 publications from the past decade and explain the contribution each had made to science. According to an evaluation report from April, 2024 close to three-quarters of grant reviewers said the new policy allowed them to concentrate more on research quality than quantity. And more than half said it reduced the time they spent on each application.

    Gingras, the Canadian sociologist, advocates giving scientists the time they need to produce work that matters, rather than a gushing stream of publications. He is a signatory to the Slow Science Manifesto: “Once you get slow science, I can predict that the number of corrigenda, the number of retractions, will go down,” he says.

    At one point, Gingras was involved in evaluating a research organization whose mission was to improve workplace security. An employee presented his work. “He had a sentence I will never forget,” Gingras recalls. The employee began by saying, “‘You know, I’m proud of one thing: My h-index is zero.’ And it was brilliant.” The scientist had developed a technology that prevented fatal falls among construction workers. “He said, ‘That’s useful, and that’s my job.’ I said, ‘Bravo!’”

    Learn more about how the Problematic Paper Screener uncovers compromised papers.

    Labbé receives funding from the European Research Council.
    He has also received funding from the French National Research Agency (ANR), and the U.S. Office of Research Integrity.
    Labbé has been in touch with most of the major publishers and their integrity officers, offering pro-bono consulting regarding detection tools to various actors in the field including STM-Hub and Morressier.

    Cabanac receives funding from the European Research Council (ERC) and the Institut Universitaire de France (IUF). He is the administrator of the Problematic Paper Screener, a public platform that uses metadata from Digital Science and PubPeer via no-cost agreements. Cabanac has been in touch with most of the major publishers and their integrity officers, offering pro bono consulting regarding detection tools to various actors in the field including ClearSkies, Morressier, River Valley, Signals, and STM.

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

    – ref. Fake papers are contaminating the world’s scientific literature, fueling a corrupt industry and slowing legitimate lifesaving medical research – https://theconversation.com/fake-papers-are-contaminating-the-worlds-scientific-literature-fueling-a-corrupt-industry-and-slowing-legitimate-lifesaving-medical-research-246224

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI United Kingdom: Chancellor vows to go further and faster to kickstart economic growth

    Source: United Kingdom – Executive Government & Departments

    Chancellor of the Exchequer Rachel Reeves spoke at Siemens Healthineers in Oxfordshire on 29 January 2025.

    Thank you everyone. 

    It’s fantastic to be here at Siemens at this amazing facility.  

    Today, I want to talk about economic growth. 

    Why it matters.  

    How we achieve it.  

    And what we are going to do further and faster to deliver it. 

    Before we came into office… 

    … the Prime Minister and I have said loud and clear:  

    Economic growth is the number one mission of this government.  

    Without growth, we cannot cut hospital waiting lists or put more police on the streets.  

    Without growth, we cannot meet our climate goals… 

    … or give the next generation the opportunities that they need to thrive. 

    But most of all… 

    … without economic growth… 

    … we cannot improve the lives of ordinary working people.  

    Because growth isn’t simply about lines on a graph. 

    It’s about the pounds in people’s pockets. 

    The vibrancy of our high streets. 

    And the thriving businesses that create wealth, jobs and new opportunities for us, for our children, and grandchildren.  

    We will have succeeded in our mission when working people are better off. 

    I know that the cost of living crisis is still very real for many families across Britain.  

    The sky high inflation and interest rates of the past few years have left a deep mark… 

    … with too many people still making sacrifices to pay the bills and to pay their mortgages.   

    But we have begun to turn this around.  

    Everything I see as I travel around the country gives me more belief in Britain. 

    And more optimism about our future. 

    Because we as a country have huge potential.  

    A country of strong communities, with small and local businesses at their heart.  

    We are at the forefront of some of the most exciting developments in the world… 

    … like artificial intelligence and life sciences…  

    … with great companies like DeepMind, AstraZeneca, Rolls Royce… and of course Siemens…  

    … delivering jobs and investment across Britain. 

    We have fundamental strengths – in our history, in our language, and in our legal system – to compete in a global economy.  

    But for too long, that potential has been held back.  

    For too long, we have accepted low expectations and accepted decline. 

    We no longer have to do that.  

    We can do so much better. 

    Low growth is not our destiny.  

    But growth will not come without a fight.  

    Without a government willing to take the right decisions now to change our country’s future for the better. 

    That’s what our Plan for Change is all about. 

    That is what drives me as Chancellor.  

    In my Mais lecture in March last year, I set out my approach to achieving economic growth… 

    … and identified the fundamental barriers to realising our full potential.  

    The productive capacity of the UK economy has become far too weak.  

    Productivity, the driver of living standards…   

    …has grown more slowly here than in countries like Germany and the US.  

    The supply side of our economy has suffered due to chronic underinvestment… 

    … and stifling and unpredictable regulation…  

    … not helped by the shocks we have faced in recent years. 

    [redacted political content]

    The strategy that I have consistently set out… 

    … is to grow the supply-side of our economy… 

    … recognising that first and foremost… 

    … it is businesses, investors and entrepreneurs who drive economic growth… 

    … a government that systematically removes the barriers that they face – one by one and has their back 

    This strategy has three essential elements: 

    First, stability in our politics, our public finances and our economy – the basic condition for secure economic growth. 

    Second, reform – reform which makes it easier for businesses to trade, to raise finance and to build.  

    And third, investment, the lifeblood of economic growth. 

    Let me explain each of those in turn.  

    Stability – the first line of our manifesto was a promise to bring stability to the public finances.  

    It is the rock upon which everything else is built. 

    And it is the essential foundation of our Plan for Change.  

    Because economic stability is the precondition for economic growth. 

    That’s why the first piece of legislation that we passed as a government was the Budget Responsibility Act… 

    … so never again will we see our independent forecaster sidelined.

    [redacted political content]

    At my first Budget in October… 

    … it was my duty as Chancellor… 

    … to fix the foundations of our economy, and repair the public finances that we inherited. 

    To restore stability and create the conditions for growth and investment.  

    I set out new fiscal rules which are non-negotiable, and will always be met. 

    We began to rebuild our NHS and our schools – the start of a programme of public service reform.  

    I capped the rate of corporation tax – and I extended our generous capital allowances for the duration of this parliament – as the CBI and the BCC have long called for.  

    And I protected working people after a cost of living crisis… 

    … by freezing fuel duty… 

    … and with no increases in their National Insurance, Income Tax or VAT. 

    But taking the right decisions and the responsible decisions does not always mean taking the easy decisions. 

    The increase in Employers’ National Insurance contributions has consequences on business and beyond.   

    I said that up front in my Budget speech. 

    I accept that there are costs to responsibility. 

    But the costs of irresponsibility would have been far higher. 

    Those who oppose my Budget know that too. 

    That is why, since October, I have seen no alternative put forward [redacted political content].

    No alternatives to deal with the challenges we face.  

    No alternatives to restoring economic stability… 

    … and therefore no plan for driving economic growth. 

    Alongside stability, we need to drive forward the reform which makes investment more likely… 

    … by removing the constraints on the supply side of our economy… 

    … making it easier for businesses to trade… 

    … to raise finance… 

    … and to build.  

    Let me first address our approach to trade.  

    We stand at a moment of global change.  

    In that context, we should be guided by one clear principle above all.  

    To act in the national interest… 

    … for our economy… 

    … for our businesses… 

    … and for the British people. 

    That means building on our special relationship with the United States under President Trump. 

    The Prime Minister discussed the vital importance of growth with the President last weekend…  

    … and I look forward to working with the new Treasury Secretary, Scott Bessent… 

    … to deepen our economic relationship in the months and the years ahead. 

    Acting in our national interest also means resetting our relationship with the EU – our nearest and our largest trading partner – to drive growth and support business.  

    We are pragmatic about the challenges that we have inherited from the last government’s failed Brexit deal.  

    But we are also ambitious in our goals.  

    [redacted political content]

    … we will prioritise proposals that are consistent with our manifesto commitments… 

    … and which contribute to British growth and British prosperity… 

    … because that is what the national interest demands.  

    Our approach to trade also means building stronger relationships with fast-growing economies all around the world. 

    That is why I led a delegation to China for the first Economic and Financial Dialogue since 2019… 

    … alongside world-leading financial service businesses, including HSBC, Standard Chartered and Schroders…  

    … unlocking £600 million of tangible benefits for the UK economy. 

    And I am pleased to confirm that the Business and Trade Secretary will shortly visit India … 

    … to restart talks on the free trade agreement and bilateral investment treaty [redacted political content].  

    Our businesses can only realise these opportunities if they can recruit the skilled staff that they need. 

    So we are reforming our employment system to create a national jobs and careers service. 

    We have created Skills England to meet the skills of the next decade in sectors like construction and engineering.  

    And we will deliver fundamental reform of our welfare system.  

    That includes looking at areas that have been ducked for too long… 

    … like the rising cost of health and disability benefits… 

    … and the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions will set out our plans to address this ahead of the Spring Statement.  

    Next, the Immigration White Paper, that will bring forward concrete proposals to bring the overall levels of net migration down. 

    But we know that the UK is in an international competition for talent in vital growth sectors.    

    That is why last week, I set out plans for attracting global talent. 

    We will look at the visa routes for very highly skilled people…  

    … so the best people in the world choose the UK to live, work and create wealth… 

    … bringing jobs and investment to Britain. 

    To help businesses access the finance and support they need to grow…  

    … we have delivered significant reforms to provide greater flexibility for firms and founders to raise finance on UK capital markets, by rewriting the UK’s listing rules.  

    In my Mansion House speech, I announced a series of reforms to our pensions system…  

    … including the creation of larger, consolidated funds… 

    … which have much greater capacity to invest in high growth British companies at the scale that we need them to.  

    The consultation on these reforms is already complete and the final report will be published in the Spring. 

    Yesterday we confirmed that we have plans to go further, whilst always protecting the important role that pension funds play in the gilt market. 

    We will introduce new flexibilities for well-funded Defined Benefit schemes… 

    … to release surplus funds where it is safe to do so… 

    … generating even more investment into some of our fastest growing industries. 

    I know too that businesses are held back by a complex and unpredictable regulatory system… 

    … and that is a drag on investment and innovation. 

    We have already provided new growth-focused remits to our financial services regulators… 

    … we have announced a new interim Chair of the Competition and Markets Authority…  

    … and we have established the Regulatory Innovation Office, with an initial focus on synthetic biology, space, AI, and connected and autonomous vehicles.  

    But we need to go further and we need to go faster.  

    So earlier this month, I met the Heads of some of our largest regulators. 

    They have already provided a range of options to drive growth in their sectors… 

    … and proposals for how they can be more agile and responsive to businesses… 

    … and we will publish that final action plan in March to make regulation work much better for our economy. 

    To get Britain building again… 

    … we have delivered the most significant reforms to our planning system in a generation.  

    I have been genuinely shocked about how slow our planning system is. 

    By how long it takes to get things done.  

    Take the decision to build a solar farm in Cambridgeshire – a decision the Energy Secretary took only a few weeks into the job in July… 

    [redacted political content]

    The Deputy Prime Minister has already driven significant progress across government in addressing these issues.   

    My colleagues have determined 13 major planning decisions in just six months… 

    … including for airports, data centres and major housing developments.   

    We have significantly raised housing targets across our country and made them mandatory, so that we can build one-and-a-half million homes in this parliament.  

    We have reformed decades-old “green belt” policies, making it easier to build on the “grey belt” land around our major cities. 

    And we have opened up our planning system to build new infrastructure – like onshore wind farms or data centres driving the AI revolution. 

    Having listened closely to calls from business groups like the Institute of Directors… 

    … and businesses across our economy about the need to speed up infrastructure delivery… 

    … including Mace, Skanska and Arup who are here today… 

    … and members of our British Infrastructure Taskforce like Lloyds, Blackrock and Phoenix… 

    … we have now set out plans to go even further. 

    Last week we confirmed our priorities for the Planning and Infrastructure Bill … 

    … to rapidly streamline the process for determining applications… 

    … to make the consultation process far less burdensome… 

    … and to fundamentally reform our approach to environmental regulation. 

    The problems in our economy… 

    … the lack of bold reform that we have seen over decades… 

    … can be summed up by a £100 million bat tunnel built for HS2… 

    … the type of decision that has made delivering major infrastructure in our country far too expensive and far too slow. 

    So we are reducing the environmental requirements placed on developers when they pay into the nature restoration fund that we have created… 

    …so they can focus on getting things built, and stop worrying about bats and newts.  

    And to build our new infrastructure like nuclear power plants, trainlines and windfarms more quickly… 

    … we are changing the rules to stop blockers getting in the way of development… 

    … through excessive use of Judicial Review. 

    This Bill, the Planning and Infrastructure Bill, is a priority for this government. 

    It will be introduced in the Spring… 

    … and we will work tirelessly in parliament to ensure its smooth, and speedy and rapid delivery.  

    By providing a foundation of economic stability… 

    … and by delivering the reforms needed to make it easier for businesses to succeed and grow… 

    … we will create the right conditions to increase investment in our economy – the final key element of our strategy. 

    Investment and innovation go hand in hand.  

    I want to see the sounds and the sights of the future arriving.    

    Delivered by amazing businesses like Wayve and Oxford Nanopore. 

    They are the future. 

    And Britain should be the best place in the world to be an entrepreneur. 

    That is why we protected funding for research and development… 

    … and it is why one of the first decisions I made as Chancellor… 

    … was to extend the Enterprise Investment Scheme and the Venture Capital Trust schemes for a further 10 years… 

    … to get more investment into new companies, driving their innovation and growth.  

    I am determined to make Britain the best place in the world to invest.  

    That was my message in Davos last week.  

    That ambition demands action. 

    The International Investment Summit that we hosted in October delivered £63 billion of investment right across our country… 

    … from Iberdrola doubling its investment in clean energy in places like Suffolk… 

    … Blackstone investing £10 billion in a data centre in Northumberland… 

    … and Eren Holdings investing £1 billion in advanced manufacturing in North Wales.  

    While the lifeblood of growth is business investment, a strategic state has a crucial role to play. 

    That is why we established the National Wealth Fund… 

    … to create that partnership between business, private investors and government to invest in the industries of the future…  

    … like clean energy. 

    Today I can announce two further investments by the National Wealth Fund. 

    First, a £65 million investment for Connected Kerb, to expand their electric vehicle charging network across the UK. 

    And second, a £28 million equity investment in Cornish Metals… 

    … providing the raw materials to be used in solar panels, wind turbines and electric vehicles… 

    … supporting growth and jobs in the South-West of England.  

    There is no trade-off between economic growth and net zero. 

    Quite the opposite. 

    Net zero is the industrial opportunity of the 21st century, and Britain must lead the way. 

    That is why we will publish a refreshed Carbon Budget Delivery Plan later this year, which alongside the Spending Review, will set out our plans to deliver Carbon Budget 6. 

    Today, I can also announce that we are removing barriers to deliver 16 gigawatts of offshore wind…   

    … by designating new Marine Protected Areas to enable the development of this technology in areas like East Anglia and Yorkshire… 

    … crowding in up to £30 billion of investment in homegrown clean power. 

    And there’s more. 

    Our industrial and manufacturing base, brilliantly represented by Make UK, have been banging their heads against the wall for years at the lack of a proper industrial strategy from government. 

    That is why we have launched our modern industrial strategy… 

    … to drive investment into the industries that will define our success in the years ahead. 

    We have already provided funding to unlock investment in sectors like aerospace, automotives and life sciences… 

    … and we have set out reforms to boost financial services, the AI sector and creative industries. 

    We are not wasting any time, and we will move forward with the next stages of the Industrial Strategy ahead of its publication in the Spring.  

    We will work with the private sector to deliver the infrastructure that our country desperately needs.  

    This includes the Lower Thames Crossing, which will improve connectivity at Port of Tilbury and Dover, London Gateway and Medway… 

    … alleviating severe congestion… 

    … as goods destined for export come from the North, and the Midlands and across the country to markets overseas.   

    To drive growth and deliver value for money for taxpayers, we are exploring options to privately finance this important project.  

    And we have changed course on public investment, too… 

    … with a new Investment Rule to ensure that we don’t just count the costs of investment – we count the benefits too.    

    We are now investing 2.6% of GDP on average over the next five years, compared to 1.9% planned by the previous government..  

    … delivering an additional £100 billion of growth-enhancing capital spending… 

    … which catalyses private sector investment… 

    … in more housing… 

    … better transport links… 

    … and clean energy.  

    These are significant steps in just six months… 

    … and we are seeing some encouraging signs in the British economy. 

    The IMF have upgraded our growth prospects for 2025… 

    … the only G7 country outside the US to see this happen.  

    This gives us the fastest growth of any major European economy this year.  

    And a global survey of CEOs by PWC, has shown Britain is now the second most attractive country in the world for businesses looking to invest.  

    The first time the UK has been in that position for 28 years.  

    This is all welcome news.  

    But there is still more that we can and will do.  

    I am not satisfied with the position we are in. 

    While we have huge amounts of potential, the structural problems in our economy run deep. 

    And the low growth of the last 14 years cannot just be turned around overnight. 

    This has to be our focus for the duration of the parliament.  

    Because the situation demands us to do more. 

    And today I will go further and faster in kickstarting economic growth. 

    Our mission to grow our economy is about raising living standards in every single part of the United Kingdom.  

    Manchester is home to the UK’s fastest growing tech sector.  

    Leeds is one of the largest financial services centres outside of London.  

    These great northern cities have so much potential and promise… 

    …which our brilliant metro mayors, Andy Burnham and Tracy Brabin, are working hard to realise…  

    … just like our other metro mayors are doing to deliver new opportunities in their areas.  

    And there is so much more that government can do to support our city regions.    

    To achieve this requires greater focus on two key areas: infrastructure and investment.  

    If we can improve connectivity between towns and cities across the North of England, we can unlock their true growth potential… 

    … by making it easier for people to live, travel and work across the area.  

    At the Budget, I set out funding for the Transpennine Route Upgrade… 

    … a multi-billion-pound programme of improvements that will connect towns and cities from Manchester to York via Stalybridge, Leeds and Huddersfield. 

    We are delivering railway schemes to improve journeys for people across the North… 

    … including upgrades at Bradford Forster Square and by electrifying the Wigan-Bolton line. 

    We have committed to supporting the delivery of a new mass transit system in West Yorkshire.  

    And in Spring, we will publish the Spending Review and a 10-Year Infrastructure Strategy… 

    … which will set out further detail of our plans for infrastructure right across the UK. 

    New transport infrastructure can also act as a catalyst for new housing. 

    We have already seen the benefits that unlocking untapped land around stations can deliver in places like Stockport… 

    … where joint work spearheaded by Andy Burnham and council leaders has delivered new housing and wider commercial opportunities. 

    We will introduce a new approach to planning decisions on land around stations, changing the default answer to yes. 

    We are working with the devolved governments to ensure the benefits of growth can be felt across Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland… 

    … including by partnering with them on the Industrial Strategy to support their considerable sectoral strengths. 

    And in December, I met with Metro Mayors from across England.  

    They told me that more opportunities for investment are vital if their local economies are to grow in the years ahead. 

    We are listening closely to them. 

    As the Metro Mayor of Liverpool, Steve Rotherham, has called for… 

    … we will review the Green Book and how it is being used to provide objective, transparent advice on public investment across the country, including outside London and the Southeast.  

    This means that investment in all regions is given a fair hearing by the Treasury that I lead. 

    The Office for Investment is going to be working hand in hand with local areas… 

    … to develop a commercially attractive pipeline of investment opportunities for a global audience… 

    … starting with the Liverpool City Region and the North East Combined Authority, led by Kim McGuinness. 

    The National Wealth Fund is establishing strategic partnerships to provide deeper, more focused support for city regions, starting in Glasgow, West Yorkshire, the West Midlands, and Greater Manchester. 

    We are supporting key investment opportunities across the UK. 

    The government is backing Andy Burnham’s plans for the redevelopment of Old Trafford, which promises to create new housing and commercial development around a new stadium… 

    … to drive regeneration and growth in the area. 

    We are moving forward with the Wrexham and Flintshire Investment Zone… 

    … focusing on the area’s strengths in advanced manufacturing… 

    … backed by major businesses like Airbus and JCB… 

    … to leverage £1 billion of private investment in the next ten years… 

    … creating up to 6,000 jobs. 

    [redacted political content]

    So I can announce today that we will work with Doncaster Council and the Mayor of South Yorkshire, Oliver Coppard… 

    … to support their efforts to recreate South Yorkshire Airport City as a thriving regional airport.  

    And finally, I am pleased to announce a partnership between Prologis and Manchester Airport Group in the East Midlands, where the Metro Mayor Claire Ward is doing an excellent job growing the local economy there. 

    Prologis and MAG will work together to build a new advanced manufacturing and logistics park at East Midlands Airport … 

    … unlocking up to £1 billion of investment and 2,000 jobs at the site… 

    … a major investment from a global business into our country… 

    … representing a huge vote of confidence in the East Midlands and in the UK. 

    This is just the start of our work to get more investment into every nation and region of Britain. 

    Next, I want to set out further detail for plans for the area we are in today.  

    Oxford and Cambridge offer huge potential for our nation’s growth prospects. 

    Only 66 miles apart… 

    … these cities are home to two of the best universities in the world… 

    … and the area is a hub for globally renowned science and technology firms. 

    This area has the potential to be Europe’s Silicon Valley.  

    To make that a reality, we need a systematic approach to attract businesses to come here and to grow here. 

    At the moment, it takes over two and a half hours to travel between Oxford and Cambridge by train.  

    There is no way to commute directly by rail from places like Bedford and Milton Keynes to Cambridge. 

    And there is a lack of affordable housing right across the region.  

    In other words, the demand is there… 

    … but there are far too many supply side constraints on economic growth here.  

    We are going to fix that.  

    The Ox Cam arc was initially launched in 2003 – over 20 years ago.  

    [redacted political content]

    We are not prepared to miss out on the opportunities here any longer.  

    So working with the Deputy Prime Minister… 

    … who is already driving forward vital work in the region…  

    … we are going further and faster to unlock the potential of the Oxford-Cambridge Growth Corridor.   

    First, we are funding the transport links needed to make the Oxford Cambridge growth corridor a success… 

    … including East-West Rail, with new services between Oxford and Milton Keynes starting this year… 

    … and road upgrades to reduce journey times between Milton Keynes and Cambridge. 

    East West Rail will also support vibrant new and expanded communities along the route. 

    We have already received proposals for New Towns along the new railway… 

    … with 18 submissions for sizeable new developments. 

    At Tempsford – the nexus of the East Coast Mainline, the A1 and East West Rail… 

    …we will move quicker to deliver a mainline station, meaning journey times to London of under an hour…  

    … and to Cambridge in under 30 minutes when East West Rail is operational. 

     Second, we are ensuring that the area has the right infrastructure and public services in place to support the growth corridor as it expands. 

    A new Cambridge Cancer Research Hospital is being prioritised for investment as part of wave 1 of the New Hospital Programme.  

    Water infrastructure has also been a major hindrance to development. 

    So we have now agreed water resources management plans, unlocking £7.9 billion of investment in the next 5 years…  

    …including plans for the new Fens Reservoir serving Cambridge and the South East Strategic Reservoir near Oxford.  

    And I can confirm today that the Environment Agency have now lifted their objections to new development in Cambridge, following this government’s intervention to address water scarcity… 

    … which means 4,500 additional homes, new schools, and new office, retail and laboratory space can be built.  

    Third, I am delighted that Cambridge University have come forward with plans for a new flagship innovation hub at the centre of Cambridge… 

    … to attract global investment and foster a community that catalyses innovation, as other cities around the world like Boston and Paris have done.  

    Just yesterday, Moderna completed the build for their new vaccine production and R&D site in Harwell, right here in Oxfordshire, alongside a commitment to invest a further £1 billion in the UK.  

    And we are creating a new AI Growth Zone in Culham to speed up planning approvals for the rapid build-out of data centres.  

    And finally, to take this project forward at real pace… 

    … and catalyse private sector investment into the region… 

    … I am pleased to announce that the Deputy Prime Minister and I have asked Lord Patrick Vallance to be the champion for the Oxford Cambridge Growth Corridor.  

    Lord Vallance has extensive experience across the sciences, academia, and government. 

    He will work with local leaders and with the Housing and Planning Minister to deliver this exciting project… 

    … including with Peter Freeman, who is already doing excellent work in Cambridge… 

    … and a new Growth Commission for Oxford, which will help to accelerate growth in the city and its surrounding area.   

    This is the government’s modern Industrial Strategy in action. 

    With central government, local leaders and business working together… 

    … the Oxford and Cambridge Growth Corridor could add up to £78 billion to the UK economy by 2035 … 

    … driving investment, innovation and growth. 

    Finally, I come to the decision that perhaps more than any other… 

    … has been delayed… 

    … has been avoided… 

    … has been ducked. 

    The question of whether to give Heathrow … 

    … our only hub airport… 

    … a third runway… 

    … has run on for decades. 

    The last full length runway in Britain was built in the 1940s. 

    No progress in eighty years.  

    Why is this so damaging?  

    It’s because Heathrow is at the heart of the UK’s openness as a country.   

    It connects us to emerging markets all over the world, opening up new opportunities for growth. 

    Around three-quarters of all long-haul flights in the UK go from Heathrow. 

    Over 60% of UK air freight comes through Heathrow. 

    And about 15 million business travellers used Heathrow in 2023. 

    But for decades, its growth has been constrained.  

    Successive studies have shown that this really matters for our economy. 

    According to the most recent study from Frontier Economics, a third runway could increase potential GDP by 0.43% by 2050. 

    Over half – 60% of that boost, would go to areas outside London and the South-East. 

    … increasing trade opportunities for products like Scotch whiskey and Scottish salmon – already two of the biggest British exports out of Heathrow.  

    And a third runway could create over 100,000 jobs. 

    For international investors, persistent delays have cast doubt about our seriousness towards improving our economic prospects. 

    Business groups, like the CBI, the Federation of Small Businesses and the Chambers of Commerce right across the UK… 

    …as well trade unions like GMB and Unite are clear… 

    … a third runway is badly needed. 

    In 2018, the previous government steered its Airports National Policy Statement through parliament.  

    But no action was taken. 

    It simply sat on the shelf. 

    We are taking a totally different approach to airport expansion.  

    This Government has already given its support to expansion at City Airport and at Stansted.  

    And there are two live decisions on Luton and Gatwick which will be made by the Transport Secretary shortly.  

    But as our only hub airport, Heathrow is in a unique position – and we cannot duck the decision any longer.   

    I have always been clear that a third runway at Heathrow would unlock further growth… 

    … boost investment… 

    … increase exports… 

    … and make the UK more open and more connected.   

    And now, the case is stronger than ever… 

    … because our reforms to the economy… 

    … like speeding up the planning system… 

    … and our plans for modernised UK airspace…  

    … mean the delivery of this project is set up for success.  

    So I can confirm today that this Government supports a third runway at Heathrow… 

    … and is inviting proposals to be brought forward by the summer.  

    We will then take forward a full assessment through the Airport National Policy Statement. 

    That will ensure that the project is value for money – and our clear expectation is that any associated surface transport costs will be financed through private funding. 

    And it will ensure that a third runway is delivered in line with our legal, environmental and climate obligations.  

    Heathrow themselves are clear that their proposal for expansion will meet strict rules on noise, air quality and carbon emissions. 

    And we are already making great strides in transitioning to cleaner and greener aviation.  

    Sustainable Aviation Fuel reduces CO2 emissions compared to fossil fuel by around 70%. 

    At the start of this month, the Sustainable Aviation Fuel mandate became law.  

    And today I can announce that we are investing £63 million into the Advanced Fuels Fund over the next year… 

    … and we have today set out the details of how we will deliver a Revenue Certainty Mechanism to encourage investment into this growing industry. 

    These measures will encourage more investors to back production in the UK, bringing good, high-skilled jobs to areas like Teesside… 

    … demonstrating that investment in the right technology can help us deliver both our growth and our clean energy missions. 

    Now is the moment to grasp the opportunity in front of us. 

    By backing a third runway at Heathrow, we can make Britain the world’s best connected place to do business. 

    That is what it takes to make bold decisions in the national interest. 

    That is what I mean by going further and faster to kickstart economic growth. 

    The work of change has begun.  

    We have already made great progress.  

    But I am not satisfied.  

    And I know that there is more to be done.  

    We must go further and faster if we are to build a brighter future.  

    The prize on offer is immense.  

    The next generation with more opportunities than the last. 

    An engineer in Teesside, working in some of the most exciting industries of the future – from carbon capture to sustainable aviation fuel. 

    A scientist in Milton Keynes or Bedford, working in our life sciences industry to solve some of the most important medical challenges in the world.  

    A small business owner in Scotland, knowing that they can expand and export to new markets right across the globe.   

    Wealth created, and wealth shared, in every part of Britain.    

    This is a Government on the side of working people. 

    Taking the right decisions to secure their future, to secure our future. 

    Stepping up to the challenges we face. 

    Ending the era of low expectations. 

    Putting Britain on a different path. 

    Delivering for the British people. 

    And I am determined, this Government is determined, to do just that.  

    Thank you.

    Updates to this page

    Published 29 January 2025

    MIL OSI United Kingdom –

  • MIL-OSI: CALIFORNIA BANCORP REPORTS NET INCOME OF $16.8 MILLION FOR THE FOURTH QUARTER AND $5.4 MILLION FOR THE FULL YEAR OF 2024

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    San Diego, Calif., Jan. 29, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — California BanCorp (“us,” “we,” “our,” or the “Company”) (NASDAQ: BCAL), the holding company for California Bank of Commerce, N.A. (the “Bank”) announces its consolidated financial results for the fourth quarter and full year of 2024.

    The Company reported net income of $16.8 million, or $0.51 per diluted share, for the fourth quarter of 2024, compared to a net loss of $16.5 million, or $0.59 per diluted share for the third quarter of 2024, and net income of $4.4 million, or $0.24 per diluted share for the fourth quarter of 2023. The Company reported net income of $5.4 million, or $0.22 per diluted share, for the full year of 2024, compared to net income of $25.9 million, or $1.39 per diluted share for the full year of 2023.

    “I’m pleased to report our strong fourth quarter earnings of $16.8 million, the result of a full quarter of combined operations after our July 31, 2024, merger close,” said David Rainer, Executive Chairman of the Company and Bank. “We continue to derisk our consolidated balance sheet and are making significant headway in reducing our exposure in the Sponsor Finance portfolio. Additionally, we are rapidly reducing our reliance on brokered deposits, which despite the reduction of the high-yielding Sponsor Finance product, has allowed us to maintain a consistent, strong net interest margin. We are focused on building tangible book value, which increased to $11.71 in the fourth quarter, up $0.43 from the prior quarter, and up $0.79 in the five months since the merger close. While we are pleased to report these strong financial results, we, along with all our fellow Southern California residents, have been through a very difficult period due to the recent wildfires and we are working with all our constituents to assist them in any way we can.”

    “On behalf of the Company and the Bank, I want to express our condolences to all our neighbors, clients and employees that have been affected by the recent Southern California wildfires,” said Steven Shelton, CEO of the Company and the Bank. “You are in our thoughts and prayers and will remain so as we work to rebuild and recover going forward. Except for the one-day closure of one branch as a precautionary measure for the safety of our employees, I’m pleased to report there were no other disruptions to our operations and all other offices remained open. We are fortunate to report that the fires are expected to have a minimal impact on our loan portfolio, and we continue to focus on providing outstanding service to our combined client base throughout California, and on building shareholder value.”

    Fourth Quarter 2024 Highlights

    • Net income of $16.8 million or $0.51 diluted earnings per share for the fourth quarter; adjusted net income (non-GAAP1) was $17.2 million or $0.53 per share for the fourth quarter.
    • Net interest margin of 4.61%, compared with 4.43% in the prior quarter; average total loan yield of 6.84% compared with 6.79% in the prior quarter.
    • Reversal of provision for credit losses of $3.8 million for the fourth quarter, compared with a provision for credit losses of $23.0 million for the prior quarter, of which $21.3 million was due to the day one provision for credit losses on non-purchased credit deteriorated (“non-PCD”) loans and unfunded loan commitments related to the merger with California BanCorp (the “Merger”).
    • Return on average assets of 1.60%, compared with (1.82)% in the prior quarter.
    • Return on average common equity of 13.21%, compared with (15.28)% in the prior quarter.
    • Efficiency ratio (non-GAAP1) of 57.4% compared with 98.9% in the prior quarter; excluding Merger related expenses the efficiency ratio was 55.9%, compared with 60.5% in the prior quarter.
    • Tangible book value per common share (“TBV”) (non-GAAP1) of $11.71 at December 31, 2024, up $0.43 from $11.28 at September 30, 2024.
    • Total assets of $4.03 billion at December 31, 2024, compared with $4.36 billion at September 30, 2024.
    • Total loans, including loans held for sale of $3.16 billion at December 31, 2024, compared with $3.23 billion at September 30, 2024.
    • Nonperforming assets to total assets ratio of 0.76% at December 31, 2024, compared with 0.68% at September 30, 2024.
    • Allowance for credit losses (“ACL”) was 1.71% of total loans held for investment at December 31, 2024; allowance for loan losses (“ALL”) was 1.61% of total loans held for investment at December 31, 2024.
    • Total deposits of $3.40 billion at December 31, 2024, decreased $342.2 million or 9.1% compared with $3.74 billion at September 30, 2024.
    • Noninterest-bearing demand deposits of $1.26 billion at December 31, 2024, a decrease of $111.3 million or 8.1% from September 30, 2024; noninterest bearing deposits represented 37.0% of total deposits, compared with $1.37 billion, or 36.6% of total deposits at September 30, 2024.
    • Total brokered deposits of $121.1 million, a decrease of $101.5 million from September 30, 2024.
    • Cost of deposits was 1.87%, compared with 2.09% in the prior quarter.
    • Cost of funds was 1.99%, compared with 2.19% in the prior quarter.
    • The Company’s preliminary capital exceeds minimums required to be “well-capitalized,” the highest regulatory capital category.

    Full Year 2024 Highlights

    • Merger closed on July 31, 2024, whereby predecessor California BanCorp (“CALB”) merged with and into the Company and California Bank of Commerce merged with and into the Bank. CALB had total loans of $1.43 billion, total assets of $1.91 billion, and total deposits of $1.64 billion. The Merger created a bank holding company with approximately $4.25 billion in assets and 14 branches across California, with approximately 300 employees serving our communities. Total aggregate consideration paid for the Merger was approximately $216.6 million and resulted in approximately $74.7 million of preliminary goodwill, subject to adjustment in accordance with ASC 805.
    • Net income of $5.4 million, down $20.5 million, or 79.0% from the prior year largely due to the after-tax one-time day one provision for credit losses related to non-PCD loans and unfunded loan commitments of $15.0 million and merger related expenses of $12.0 million; adjusted net income (non-GAAP1) was $32.4 million or $1.32 per share for the year.
    • Diluted earnings per share of $0.22, down $1.17, or 84.2% from the prior year.
    • Total loan interest income increased to $160.0 million, up $46.0 million or 40.4% from the prior year largely due to the Merger.
    • Net interest margin of 4.28% for 2024, compared with 4.33% in the prior year; average loan yield was 6.55%, up from 5.94% in the prior year.
    • Efficiency ratio (non-GAAP1) of 76.6%, compared to 61.3% in the prior year; excluding merger related expenses the efficiency ratio was 63.8%, compared with 61.3% in the prior year.
    • Provision for credit losses of $21.7 million, of which $21.3 million was due to the day one provision for credit losses on non-PCD loans and unfunded loan commitments in connection with the Merger, compared to $915 thousand for the year ended December 31, 2023.
    • Total assets of $4.03 billion, up $1.7 billion or 70.8% from December 31, 2023, largely due to the Merger.
    • Total loans, including loans held for sale, increased to $3.16 billion, up $1.2 billion from December 31, 2023, largely due to the Merger, with the fair value of the acquired loans totaling $1.36 billion.
    • Total deposits of $3.40 billion, up $1.46 billion from December 31, 2023, largely due to the $1.64 billion of deposits acquired in the Merger.
    • Noninterest-bearing demand deposits were $1.26 billion, representing 37.0% of total deposits, compared to $675.1 million, or 34.7% of total deposits at December 31, 2023.
    • Cost of deposits was 2.01%, up from 1.37% in the prior year.
    • Tangible book value per common share (“TBV”) (non-GAAP1) of $11.71 at December 31, 2024, down $1.85 from December 31, 2023.

    Fourth Quarter Operating Results

    Net Income

    Net income for the fourth quarter of 2024 was $16.8 million, or $0.51 per diluted share, compared with a net loss of $16.5 million, or a loss of $0.59 per diluted share in the third quarter of 2024. Our third quarter results were negatively impacted by a day one $15.0 million after-tax current expected credit losses (“CECL”)-related provision for credit losses on non-PCD loans and unfunded loan commitments related to the merger, or $0.54 loss per diluted share, and $10.6 million of after-tax merger expenses, or $0.38 loss per diluted share. Pre-tax, pre-provision income (non-GAAP1) for the fourth quarter was $19.4 million, an increase of $19.0 million from the prior quarter. Excluding the merger and related expenses, the adjusted pre-tax, pre-provision income (non-GAAP1) for the fourth quarter was $20.1 million, an increase of $5.0 million from the prior quarter. The net income and diluted earnings per share increases for all of the periods presented were largely driven by the Merger and the operating results since the closing date of the Merger.

    Net Interest Income and Net Interest Margin

    Net interest income for the fourth quarter of 2024 was $44.5 million, compared with $36.9 million in the prior quarter. The increase in net interest income was primarily due to an $8.4 million increase in total interest and dividend income, partially offset by an $832 thousand increase in total interest expense in the fourth quarter of 2024, as compared to the prior quarter. During the fourth quarter of 2024, loan interest income increased $7.3 million, of which $6.1 million was related to accretion income from the net purchase accounting discounts on acquired loans, total debt securities income increased $10 thousand, and interest and dividend income from other financial institutions increased $1.2 million. The increase in interest income was mainly due to reporting a full quarter of combined operations for the fourth quarter of 2024 and primarily driven by the mix of interest-earning assets added by the Merger and the impact of the accretion and amortization of fair value interest rate marks. Average total interest-earning assets increased $526.5 million in the fourth quarter of 2024, the result of a $401.3 million increase in average total loans, a $260.4 million increase in average deposits in other financial institutions and a $5.8 million increase in average restricted stock investments and other bank stock, partially offset by a $1.3 million decrease in average total debt securities and a $139.8 million decrease in average Fed funds sold/resale agreements. The increase in interest expense for the fourth quarter of 2024 was primarily due to a $466 thousand increase in interest expense on interest-bearing deposits, the result of a $217.9 million increase in average interest-bearing deposits, coupled with a $17.2 million increase in average subordinated debt, partially offset by a 22 basis point decrease in average interest-bearing deposit costs, and a $9 thousand decrease in interest expense on Federal Home Loan Bank (“FHLB”) borrowings, the result of a $611 thousand decrease in average FHLB borrowings in the fourth quarter of 2024.

    Net interest margin for the fourth quarter of 2024 was 4.61%, compared with 4.43% in the prior quarter. The increase was primarily related to a 20 basis point decrease in the cost of funds, partially offset by a one basis point decrease in the total interest-earning assets yield. The yield on total average interest-earning assets in the fourth quarter of 2024 was 6.48%, compared with 6.49% in the prior quarter. The yield on average total loans in the fourth quarter of 2024 was 6.84%, an increase of five basis points from 6.79% in the prior quarter. Accretion income from the net purchase accounting discounts on acquired loans was $6.1 million, increasing the yield on average total loans by 76 basis points; the net amortization expense from the purchase accounting discounts on acquired subordinated debt and acquired time deposits premium increased the interest expense by $467 thousand, the combination of which increased the net interest margin by 58 basis points in the fourth quarter of 2024.

    Cost of funds for the fourth quarter of 2024 was 1.99%, a decrease of 20 basis points from 2.19% in the prior quarter. The decrease was primarily driven by a 22 basis point decrease in the cost of average interest-bearing deposits, and an increase in average noninterest-bearing deposits, partially offset by an increase of 26 basis points in the cost of total borrowings, which was driven primarily by the amortization expense of $559 thousand from the purchase accounting discounts on acquired subordinated debt which increased the cost on total borrowing by 320 basis points. Average noninterest-bearing demand deposits increased $251.7 million to $1.28 billion and represented 36.3% of total average deposits for the fourth quarter of 2024, compared with $1.03 billion and 33.6%, respectively, in the prior quarter; average interest-bearing deposits increased $217.9 million to $2.26 billion during the fourth quarter of 2024. The total cost of deposits in the fourth quarter of 2024 was 1.87%, a decrease of 22 basis points from 2.09% in the prior quarter. The cost of total interest-bearing deposits decreased primarily due to the Company’s deposit repricing strategy and the ongoing pay off of high cost brokered deposits and California State certificates of deposit in the fourth quarter of 2024.

    Average total borrowings increased $16.6 million to $69.4 million in the fourth quarter of 2024, primarily due to an increase of $17.2 million in average subordinated debt acquired in the Merger, partially offset by a decrease of $611 thousand in average FHLB borrowings during the fourth quarter of 2024. The average cost of total borrowings was 7.97% for the fourth quarter of 2024, up from 7.71% in the prior quarter.

    (Reversal of) Provision for Credit Losses

    The Company recorded a reversal of provision for credit losses of $3.8 million in the fourth quarter of 2024, compared to a provision for credit losses of $23.0 million in the prior quarter. The decrease was largely related to the third quarter provision for credit losses including the effects of the Merger, and the resulting one-time initial provision for credit losses on acquired non-PCD loans of $18.5 million and unfunded loan commitments of $2.7 million. Total net charge-offs were $154.0 thousand in the fourth quarter of 2024, which included $103 thousand from an acquired consumer solar loan portfolio and $51 thousand from a commercial real-estate loan. The provision for credit losses in the fourth quarter of 2024 included a $1.0 million reversal of provision for unfunded loan commitments related to the decrease in unfunded loan commitments during the fourth quarter of 2024, coupled with lower loss rates, offset by higher average funding rates used to estimate the allowance for credit losses on unfunded commitments. Total unfunded loan commitments decreased $108.6 million to $925.3 million at December 31, 2024, compared to $1.03 billion in unfunded loan commitments at September 30, 2024.

    The reversal of provision for credit losses for loans held for investment in the fourth quarter of 2024 was $2.9 million, a decrease of $22.6 million for the fourth quarter of 2024 from a provision for credit losses of $19.7 million in the prior quarter. The decrease was driven primarily by the third quarter amount including the one-time initial provision for credit losses on acquired non-PCD loans and decreases in legacy special mention loans and loans held for investment. Additionally, qualitative factors, coupled with changes in the portfolio mix and in the reasonable and supportable forecast, primarily related to the economic outlook for California, which were partially offset by an increase in legacy substandard accruing loans, were factors related to the decrease in the provision for credit losses. The Company’s management continues to monitor macroeconomic variables related to increasing interest rates, inflation and the concerns of an economic downturn, and believes it has appropriately provisioned for the current environment.

    Noninterest Income

    The Company recorded noninterest income of $1.0 million in the fourth quarter of 2024, a decrease of $170 thousand compared to $1.2 million in the third quarter of 2024. The Company reported a loss on sale of loans of $1.1 million, related to the sale of certain Sponsor Finance loans, in the fourth quarter of 2024, compared to a gain on sale of loans of $8 thousand in the prior quarter. There was no gain on SBA 7A loan sales in the third and fourth quarters of 2024. Bank owned life insurance income of $823 thousand in the fourth quarter of 2024 increased $425 thousand from the prior quarter. Service charges and fees on deposit accounts of $911 thousand in the fourth quarter of 2024 decreased $225 thousand from the prior quarter, related to the one-time waiver of analysis charges for certain deposit accounts in light of the core system conversion. Other charges and fees income increased to $208 thousand in the fourth quarter of 2024, compared to a loss of $450 thousand in the prior quarter, primarily related to a $614 thousand valuation allowance on other real estate owned (“OREO”) due to a decline in the fair value of the underlying property in the third quarter of 2024. No comparable valuation allowance on OREO was recorded in the fourth quarter of 2024.

    Noninterest Expense

    Total noninterest expense for the fourth quarter of 2024 was $26.1 million, a decrease of $11.6 million from total noninterest expense of $37.7 million in the prior quarter, which was largely due to the decrease in merger related expenses.

    Salaries and employee benefits increased $689 thousand during the quarter to $16.1 million. The increase in salaries and employee benefits was primarily related to the growth in headcount due to the Merger, partially offset by the third quarter amount including the one-time costs associated with non-continuing directors, executives and employees of $1.4 million. Merger and related expenses in connection with the Merger decreased $14.0 million during the quarter to $643 thousand. Data processing and communications of $2.0 million in the fourth quarter of 2024 increased by $424 thousand, due primarily to increases in transaction volume from both organic growth and the Merger. Intangible assets amortization of $1.1 million in the fourth quarter of 2024 increased by $373 thousand, due primarily to a full quarter of amortization of the core deposit intangible asset acquired in the Merger, compared with only two months of amortization of the asset in the prior quarter. Other expenses of $2.1 million in the fourth quarter of 2024 increased by $443 thousand, due primarily to higher loan related expenses, customer service related expenses, travel expenses and insurance expenses.

    Efficiency ratio (non-GAAP1) for the fourth quarter of 2024 was 57.4%, compared to 98.9% in the prior quarter. Excluding the merger and related expenses of $643 thousand and $14.6 million, the efficiency ratio (non-GAAP1) for the fourth and third quarters of 2024 would have been 55.9% and 60.5%, respectively.

    Income Tax

    In the fourth quarter of 2024, the Company’s income tax expense was $6.5 million, compared with a $6.1 million income tax benefit in the third quarter of 2024. The effective rate was 27.9% for the fourth quarter of 2024 and 26.9% for the third quarter of 2024. The increase in the effective tax rate for the fourth quarter of 2024 was primarily attributable to the impact of the non-tax deductible portion of the merger expenses and the vesting and exercise of equity awards combined with changes in the Company’s stock price over time, partially offset by the impact of the tax on the excess executive compensation.

    Balance Sheet

    Assets

    Total assets at December 31, 2024 were $4.03 billion, a decrease of $331.1 million or 7.6% from September 30, 2024. The decrease in total assets from the prior quarter was primarily related to a decrease in cash and cash equivalents of $226.3 million and a decrease in loans, including loans held for sale, of $77.1 million as compared to the prior quarter. These decreases primarily relate to the decreases in wholesale funding sources and the Sponsor Finance portfolio from loan sales and payoffs.

    Loans

    Total loans held for investment were $3.14 billion at December 31, 2024, a decrease of $60.5 million, compared to September 30, 2024, primarily the result of Sponsor Finance loans sales and loan payoffs in the amount of $90.8 million. During the fourth quarter of 2024, there were new originations of $128.5 million and net advances of $25.6 million, offset by loan sales and payoffs of $214.5 million, and the partial charge-off of loans in the amount of $154 thousand. Total loans secured by real estate decreased by $5.1 million, construction and land development loans decreased by $20.6 million, commercial real estate and other loans increased by $11.8 million, 1-4 family residential loans increased by $11.9 million and multifamily loans decreased by $8.1 million. Commercial and industrial loans decreased by $54.5 million, and consumer loans decreased by $1.0 million. The Company had $17.2 million in loans held for sale at December 31, 2024, compared to $33.7 million at September 30, 2024.

    Deposits

    Total deposits at December 31, 2024 were $3.40 billion, a decrease of $342.2 million from September 30, 2024. The decrease primarily consisted of $111.3 million noninterest-bearing demand deposits, $73.9 million interest-bearing non-maturity deposits, and $157.0 million time deposits. Noninterest-bearing demand deposits at December 31, 2024, were $1.26 billion, or 37.0% of total deposits, compared with $1.37 billion, or 36.6% of total deposits at September 30, 2024. At December 31, 2024, total interest-bearing deposits were $2.14 billion, compared to $2.37 billion at September 30, 2024. At December 31, 2024, total brokered time deposits were $121.1 million, compared to $222.6 million at September 30, 2024. The Company offers the Insured Cash Sweep (ICS) product, Certificate of Deposit Account Registry Service (CDARS), and Reich & Tang Deposit Solutions (R&T) network, all of which provide reciprocal deposit placement services to fully qualified large customer deposits for FDIC insurance among other participating banks. At December 31, 2024, total reciprocal deposits were $754.4 million, or 22.2% of total deposits at December 31, 2024, compared to $839.7 million , or 22.4% of total deposits at September 30, 2024.

    Federal Home Loan Bank (“FHLB”) and Liquidity

    At December 31, 2024 and September 30, 2024, the Company had no overnight FHLB borrowings. There were no outstanding Federal Reserve Discount Window borrowings at December 31, 2024 or September 30, 2024.

    At December 31, 2024, the Company had available borrowing capacity from an FHLB secured line of credit of approximately $753.9 million and available borrowing capacity from the Federal Reserve Discount Window of approximately $318.5 million. The Company also had available borrowing capacity from four unsecured credit lines from correspondent banks of approximately $90.5 million at December 31, 2024, with no outstanding borrowings. Total available borrowing capacity was $1.16 billion at December 31, 2024. Additionally, the Company had unpledged liquid securities at fair value of approximately $129.4 million and cash and cash equivalents of $388.2 million at December 31, 2024.

    Asset Quality

    Total non-performing assets increased slightly to $30.6 million, or 0.76% of total assets at December 31, 2024, compared with $29.8 million, or 0.68% of total assets at September 30, 2024.

    There were no loans downgraded to nonaccrual during the fourth quarter of 2024. Non-performing assets in the fourth quarter of 2024 included OREO, net of valuation allowance, of $4.1 million related to a multifamily building, the same balance as the prior quarter.

    Total non-performing loans increased slightly to $26.5 million, or 0.85% of total loans held for investment at December 31, 2024, compared with $25.7 million, or 0.80% of total loans held for investment at September 30, 2024.

    Special mention loans decreased by $24.1 million during the fourth quarter of 2024 to $69.3 million, including $25.5 million of non-PCD loans and $10.1 million of purchase credit deteriorated (“PCD”) loans, at December 31, 2024. The decrease in the special mention loans was due mostly to a $9.0 million payoff, $24.5 million in downgrades to substandard accruing loans and $8.4 million in upgrades to Pass loans, partially offset by $18.1 million in downgrades from Pass loans. Substandard loans increased by $13.6 million during the fourth quarter of 2024 to $117.9 million, including $11.0 million of non-PCD loans, $55.9 million PCD loans and $14.1 million nonaccrual PCD loans, at December 31, 2024. The increase in the substandard loans was due primarily to $29.8 million in downgrades and $2.9 million in net advances, partially offset by a $17.3 million in payoffs, $1.7 million in upgrades to Pass and $103 thousand in charge-offs.

    The Company had $150 thousand in consumer solar loans that were over 90 days past due and still accruing interest at December 31, 2024, compared to $37 thousand in such delinquencies at September 30, 2024.

    There were $12.2 million in loan delinquencies (30-89 days past due, excluding nonaccrual loans) at December 31, 2024, compared to $19.1 million in such loan delinquencies at September 30, 2024.

    The allowance for credit losses, which is comprised of the allowance for loan losses (“ALL”) and reserve for unfunded loan commitments, totaled $53.6 million at December 31, 2024, compared to $57.6 million at September 30, 2024. The $4.0 million decrease in the allowance for credit losses included a $2.9 million and $968 thousand reversal of provision for credit losses for the loan portfolio and reserve for unfunded loan commitments, respectively, partially offset by total net charge-offs of $145 thousand for the quarter ended December 31, 2024.

    The ALL was $50.5 million, or 1.61% of total loans held for investment at December 31, 2024, compared with $53.6 million, or 1.67% at September 30, 2024.

    Capital

    Tangible book value (non-GAAP1) per common share at December 31, 2024, was $11.71, compared with $11.28 at September 30, 2024. In the fourth quarter of 2024, tangible book value was primarily impacted by net income of $16.8 million for the fourth quarter, stock-based compensation expense, and an increase in net of tax unrealized losses on available-for-sale debt securities. Other comprehensive losses related to unrealized losses, net of taxes, on available-for-sale debt securities increased by $3.8 million to $6.6 million at December 31, 2024, from $2.9 million at September 30, 2024. The increase in the unrealized losses, net of taxes, on available-for-sale debt securities was attributable to non-credit related factors , including an increase in bond prices at the long end of the yield curve, even as the Federal Reserve decreased the Fed funds rate by 25 basis points in December 2024. Tangible common equity (non-GAAP1) as a percentage of total tangible assets (non-GAAP1) at December 31, 2024, increased to 9.69% from 8.58% in the prior quarter, and unrealized losses, net of taxes, on available-for-sale debt securities as a percentage of tangible common equity (non-GAAP1) at December 31, 2024 increased to 1.8% from 0.8% in the prior quarter.

    The Company’s preliminary capital exceeds minimums required to be “well-capitalized” at December 31, 2024.

    ABOUT CALIFORNIA BANCORP

    California BanCorp (NASDAQ: BCAL) is a registered bank holding company headquartered in San Diego, California. California Bank of Commerce, N.A., a national banking association chartered under the laws of the United States (the “Bank”) and regulated by the Office of Comptroller of the Currency, is a wholly owned subsidiary of California BanCorp. Established in 2001 and headquartered in San Diego, California, the Bank offers a range of financial products and services to individuals, professionals, and small to medium-sized businesses through its 14 branch offices and four loan production offices serving Northern and Southern California. The Bank’s solutions-driven, relationship-based approach to banking provides accessibility to decision makers and enhances value through strong partnerships with its clients. Additional information is available at www.bankcbc.com.

    CAUTIONARY NOTE REGARDING FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS

    In addition to historical information, this release includes forward-looking statements within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Forward-looking statements relate to expectations, beliefs, projections, future plans and strategies, anticipated events or trends and other matters that are not historical facts. Examples of forward-looking statements include, among others, statements regarding expectations, plans or objectives for future operations, products or services, loan recoveries, projections, expectations regarding the adequacy of reserves for credit losses and statements about the benefits of the Merger, as well as forecasts relating to financial and operating results or other measures of economic performance. Forward-looking statements reflect management’s current view about future events and involve risks and uncertainties that may cause actual results to differ from those expressed in the forward-looking statement or historical results. Forward-looking statements can be identified by the fact that they do not relate strictly to historical or current facts and often include the words or phrases such as “aim,” “can,” “may,” “could,” “predict,” “should,” “will,” “would,” “believe,” “anticipate,” “estimate,” “expect,” “hope,” “intend,” “plan,” “potential,” “project,” “will likely result,” “continue,” “seek,” “shall,” “possible,” “projection,” “optimistic,” and “outlook,” and variations of these words and similar expressions.

    Factors that could cause or contribute to results differing from those in or implied in the forward-looking statements include but are not limited to risk related to the Merger, including the risks that costs may be greater than anticipated, cost savings may be less than anticipated, and difficulties in retaining senior management, employees or customers, the impact of bank failures or other adverse developments at other banks on general investor sentiment regarding the stability and liquidity of banks, changes in real estate markets and valuations; the impact on financial markets from geopolitical conflicts; inflation, interest rate, market and monetary fluctuations and general economic conditions, either nationally or locally in the areas in which the Company conducts business; increases in competitive pressures among financial institutions and businesses offering similar products and services; general credit risks related to lending, including changes in the value of real estate or other collateral, the financial condition of borrowers, the effectiveness of our underwriting practices and the risk of fraud; higher than anticipated defaults in the Company’s loan portfolio; changes in management’s estimate of the adequacy of the allowance for credit losses or the factors the Company uses to determine the allowance for credit losses; changes in demand for loans and other products and services offered by the Company; the
    costs and outcomes of litigation; legislative or regulatory changes or changes in accounting principles, policies or guidelines and other risk factors discussed in the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2023, filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) and other documents the Company may file with the SEC from time to time.

    Additional information regarding these and other risks and uncertainties to which our business and future financial performance are subject is contained in the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2023, and other documents the Company files with the SEC from time to time.

    Any forward-looking statement made in this release is based only on information currently available to management and speaks only as of the date on which it is made. The Company does not undertake, and specifically disclaims any obligation, to update any forward-looking statements to reflect occurrences or unanticipated events or circumstances after the date of such statements or to conform such forward-looking statements to actual results or to changes in its opinions or expectations, except as required by law.

    California BanCorp and Subsidiary
    Financial Highlights (Unaudited)

        At or for the
    Three Months Ended    		     At or for the
    Year Ended    		  
        December 31,
    2024    		     September 30,
    2024    		     December 31,
    2023    		     December 31,
    2024    		     December 31,
    2023    		  
        ($ in thousands except share and per share data)  
    EARNINGS      
    Net interest income   $ 44,541     $ 36,942     $ 22,559     $ 122,984     $ 94,138  
    (Reversal of) provision for credit losses   $ (3,835 )   $ 22,963     $ 824     $ 21,690     $ 915  
    Noninterest income (expense)   $ 1,004     $ 1,174     $ (102 )   $ 4,760     $ 3,379  
    Noninterest expense   $ 26,125     $ 37,680     $ 15,339     $ 97,791     $ 59,746  
    Income tax expense (benefit)   $ 6,483     $ (6,063 )   $ 1,882     $ 2,830     $ 10,946  
    Net income (loss)   $ 16,772     $ (16,464 )   $ 4,412     $ 5,433     $ 25,910  
    Pre-tax pre-provision income (1)   $ 19,420     $ 436     $ 7,118     $ 29,953     $ 37,771  
    Adjusted pre-tax pre-provision income (1)   $ 20,063     $ 15,041     $ 7,118     $ 46,241     $ 37,771  
    Diluted earnings (loss) per share   $ 0.51     $ (0.59 )   $ 0.24     $ 0.22     $ 1.39  
    Shares outstanding at period end     32,265,935       32,142,427       18,369,115       32,265,935       18,369,115  
                                             
    PERFORMANCE RATIOS                                        
    Return on average assets     1.60 %     (1.82 )%     0.75 %     0.18 %     1.12 %
    Adjusted return on average assets (1)     1.64 %     1.01 %     0.75 %     1.05 %     1.12 %
    Return on average common equity     13.21 %     (15.28 )%     6.21 %     1.43 %     9.48 %
    Adjusted return on average common equity (1)     13.57 %     8.44 %     6.21 %     8.53 %     9.48 %
    Yield on total loans     6.84 %     6.79 %     6.08 %     6.55 %     5.94 %
    Yield on interest earning assets     6.48 %     6.49 %     5.85 %     6.26 %     5.69 %
    Cost of deposits     1.87 %     2.09 %     1.81 %     2.01 %     1.37 %
    Cost of funds     1.99 %     2.19 %     1.95 %     2.12 %     1.46 %
    Net interest margin     4.61 %     4.43 %     4.05 %     4.28 %     4.33 %
    Efficiency ratio (1)     57.36 %     98.86 %     68.30 %     76.55 %     61.27 %
    Adjusted efficiency ratio (1)     55.95 %     60.54 %     68.30 %     63.80 %     61.27 %
        As of  
        December 31,
    2024    		     September 30,
    2024    		     December 31,
    2023    		  
        ($ in thousands except share and per share data)  
    CAPITAL      
    Tangible equity to tangible assets (1)     9.69 %     8.58 %     10.73 %
    Book value (BV) per common share   $ 15.86     $ 15.50     $ 15.69  
    Tangible BV per common share (1)   $ 11.71     $ 11.28     $ 13.56  
                             
    ASSET QUALITY                        
    Allowance for loan losses (ALL)   $ 50,540     $ 53,552     $ 22,569  
    Reserve for unfunded loan commitments   $ 3,103     $ 4,071     $ 933  
    Allowance for credit losses (ACL)   $ 53,643     $ 57,623     $ 23,502  
    Allowance for loan losses to nonperforming loans     1.90 x     2.08 x     1.74 x
    ALL to total loans held for investment     1.61 %     1.67 %     1.15 %
    ACL to total loans held for investment     1.71 %     1.80 %     1.20 %
    30-89 days past due, excluding nonaccrual loans   $ 12,232     $ 19,110     $ 19  
    Over 90 days past due, excluding nonaccrual loans   $ 150     $ 37     $ —  
    Special mention loans   $ 69,339     $ 93,448     $ 2,996  
    Special mention loans to total loans held for investment     2.21 %     2.92 %     0.15 %
    Substandard loans   $ 117,926     $ 104,298     $ 19,502  
    Substandard loans to total loans held for investment     3.76 %     3.26 %     1.00 %
    Nonperforming loans   $ 26,536     $ 25,698     $ 13,004  
    Nonperforming loans to total loans held for investment     0.85 %     0.80 %     0.66 %
    Other real estate owned, net   $ 4,083     $ 4,083     $ —  
    Nonperforming assets   $ 30,619     $ 29,781     $ 13,004  
    Nonperforming assets to total assets     0.76 %     0.68 %     0.55 %
                             
    END OF PERIOD BALANCES                        
    Total loans, including loans held for sale   $ 3,156,345     $ 3,233,418     $ 1,964,791  
    Total assets   $ 4,031,654     $ 4,362,767     $ 2,360,252  
    Deposits   $ 3,398,760     $ 3,740,915     $ 1,943,556  
    Loans to deposits     92.9 %     86.4 %     101.1 %
    Shareholders’ equity   $ 511,836     $ 498,064     $ 288,152  
    (1 ) Non-GAAP measure. See – GAAP to Non-GAAP reconciliation.

    California BanCorp and Subsidiary
    Financial Highlights (Unaudited)

        At or for the
    Three Months Ended    		     At or for the
    Year Ended    		  
    ALLOWANCE for CREDIT LOSSES   December 31,
    2024    		     September 30,
    2024    		     December 31,
    2023    		     December 31,
    2024    		     December 31,
    2023    		  
        ($ in thousands)  
    Allowance for loan losses                                        
    Balance at beginning of period   $ 53,552     $ 23,788     $ 22,705     $ 22,569     $ 17,099  
    Adoption of ASU 2016-13 (1)     —       —       —       —       5,027  
    Initial Allowance for PCD loans     —       11,216       —       11,216       —  
    (Reversal of) provision for credit losses (2)     (2,867 )     19,711       1,131       19,520       1,731  
    Charge-offs     (154 )     (1,163 )     (1,267 )     (2,774 )     (1,303 )
    Recoveries     9       —       —       9       15  
    Net charge-offs     (145 )     (1,163 )     (1,267 )     (2,765 )     (1,288 )
    Balance, end of period   $ 50,540     $ 53,552     $ 22,569     $ 50,540     $ 22,569  
    Reserve for unfunded loan commitments (3)                                        
    Balance, beginning of period   $ 4,071     $ 819     $ 1,240     $ 933     $ 1,310  
    Adoption of ASU 2016-13 (1)     —       —       —       —       439  
    (Reversal of) provision for credit losses (4)     (968 )     3,252       (307 )     2,170       (816 )
    Balance, end of period     3,103       4,071       933       3,103       933  
    Allowance for credit losses   $ 53,643     $ 57,623     $ 23,502     $ 53,643     $ 23,502  
                                             
    ALL to total loans held for investment     1.61 %     1.67 %     1.15 %     1.61 %     1.15 %
    ACL to total loans held for investment     1.71 %     1.80 %     1.20 %     1.71 %     1.20 %
    Net charge-offs to average total loans     (0.02 )%     (0.17 )%     (0.26 )%     (0.11 )%     (0.07 )%
    (1 ) Represents the impact of adopting ASU 2016-13, Financial Instruments – Credit Losses on January 1, 2023. As a result of adopting ASU 2016-13, our methodology to compute our allowance for credit losses is based on a current expected credit loss methodology, rather than the previously applied incurred loss methodology.
    (2 ) Includes $18.5 million for the three months ended September 30, 2024 and year ended December 31, 2024 related to the initial provision for credit losses for non-PCD loans acquired in the Merger.
    (3 ) Included in “Accrued interest and other liabilities” on the consolidated balance sheet.
    (4 ) Includes $2.7 million for the three months ended September 30, 2024 and year ended December 31, 2024 related to the initial provision for credit losses on unfunded commitments acquired in the Merger.

    California BanCorp and Subsidiary
    Balance Sheets (Unaudited)

        December 31,
    2024    		     September 30,
    2024    		     December 31,
    2023    		  
        ($ in thousands)  
    ASSETS                  
    Cash and due from banks   $ 60,471     $ 115,165     $ 33,008  
    Federal funds sold & interest-bearing balances     327,691       499,258       53,785  
    Total cash and cash equivalents     388,162       614,423       86,793  
                             
    Debt securities available-for-sale, at fair value (amortized cost of $151,429, $163,384 and $136,366 at December 31, 2024, September 30, 2024 and December 31, 2023)     142,001       159,330       130,035  
    Debt securities held-to-maturity, at cost (fair value of $47,823, $49,487 and $50,432 at December 31, 2024, September 30, 2024 and December 31, 2023)     53,280       53,364       53,616  
    Loans held for sale     17,180       33,704       7,349  
    Loans held for investment:                        
    Construction & land development     227,325       247,934       243,521  
    1-4 family residential     164,401       152,540       143,903  
    Multifamily     243,993       252,134       221,247  
    Other commercial real estate     1,767,727       1,755,908       1,024,243  
    Commercial & industrial     710,970       765,472       320,142  
    Other consumer     24,749       25,726       4,386  
    Total loans held for investment     3,139,165       3,199,714       1,957,442  
    Allowance for credit losses – loans     (50,540 )     (53,552 )     (22,569 )
    Total loans held for investment, net     3,088,625       3,146,162       1,934,873  
                             
    Restricted stock at cost     30,829       27,394       16,055  
    Premises and equipment     13,595       13,996       13,270  
    Right of use asset     14,350       15,310       9,291  
    Other real estate owned, net     4,083       4,083       —  
    Goodwill     111,787       112,515       37,803  
    Intangible assets     22,271       23,031       1,195  
    Bank owned life insurance     66,636       66,180       38,918  
    Deferred taxes, net     43,127       45,644       11,137  
    Accrued interest and other assets     35,728       47,631       19,917  
    Total assets   $ 4,031,654     $ 4,362,767     $ 2,360,252  
                             
    LIABILITIES AND SHAREHOLDERS’ EQUITY                        
    Deposits:                        
    Noninterest-bearing demand   $ 1,257,007     $ 1,368,303     $ 675,098  
    Interest-bearing NOW accounts     673,589       781,125       381,943  
    Money market and savings accounts     1,182,927       1,149,268       636,685  
    Time deposits     285,237       442,219       249,830  
    Total deposits     3,398,760       3,740,915       1,943,556  
                             
    Borrowings     69,725       69,142       102,865  
    Operating lease liability     18,310       19,211       12,117  
    Accrued interest and other liabilities     33,023       35,435       13,562  
    Total liabilities     3,519,818       3,864,703       2,072,100  
                             
    Shareholders’ Equity:                        
    Common stock – 50,000,000 shares authorized, no par value; issued and outstanding 32,265,935, 32,142,427 and 18,369,115 at December 31, 2024, September 30, 2024 and December 31, 2023)     442,469       441,684       222,036  
    Retained earnings     76,008       59,236       70,575  
    Accumulated other comprehensive loss – net of taxes     (6,641 )     (2,856 )     (4,459 )
    Total shareholders’ equity     511,836       498,064       288,152  
    Total liabilities and shareholders’ equity   $ 4,031,654     $ 4,362,767     $ 2,360,252  

    California BanCorp and Subsidiary
    Income Statements – Quarterly and Year-to-Date (Unaudited)

        Three Months Ended     Year Ended  
        December 31,
    2024    		     September 30,
    2024    		     December 31,
    2023    		     December 31,
    2024    		     December 31,
    2023    		  
        ($ in thousands except share and per share data)  
    INTEREST AND DIVIDEND INCOME                                        
    Interest and fees on loans   $ 54,791     $ 47,528     $ 29,968     $ 159,960     $ 113,951  
    Interest on debt securities     1,698       1,687       991       5,827       3,497  
    Interest on tax-exempted debt securities     305       306       353       1,223       1,655  
    Interest and dividends from other institutions     5,764       4,606       1,257       12,788       4,419  
    Total interest and dividend income     62,558       54,127       32,569       179,798       123,522  
                                             
    INTEREST EXPENSE                                        
    Interest on NOW, savings, and money market accounts     12,447       11,073       6,606       37,329       20,161  
    Interest on time deposits     4,179       5,087       2,331       15,432       6,704  
    Interest on borrowings     1,391       1,025       1,073       4,053       2,519  
    Total interest expense     18,017       17,185       10,010       56,814       29,384  
    Net interest income     44,541       36,942       22,559       122,984       94,138  
                                             
    (Reversal of) provisions for credit losses (1)     (3,835 )     22,963       824       21,690       915  
    Net interest income after (reversal of) provision for credit losses     48,376       13,979       21,735       101,294       93,223  
                                             
    NONINTEREST INCOME                                        
    Service charges and fees on deposit accounts     911       1,136       507       3,140       1,946  
    (Loss) gain on sale of loans     (1,095 )     8       —       (672 )     831  
    Bank owned life insurance income     823       398       253       1,748       946  
    Servicing and related income on loans     157       82       17       307       240  
    Loss on sale of debt securities     —       —       (1,008 )     —       (974 )
    Loss on sale of building and related fixed assets     —       —       —       (19 )     —  
    Other charges and fees     208       (450 )     129       256       390  
    Total noninterest income (expense)     1,004       1,174       (102 )     4,760       3,379  
                                             
    NONINTEREST EXPENSE                                        
    Salaries and employee benefits     16,074       15,385       9,598       49,845       39,249  
    Occupancy and equipment expenses     2,314       2,031       1,678       7,242       6,231  
    Data processing     1,960       1,536       1,158       5,832       4,534  
    Legal, audit and professional     817       669       1,161       2,559       3,211  
    Regulatory assessments     436       544       320       1,714       1,508  
    Director and shareholder expenses     458       520       207       1,410       849  
    Merger and related expenses     643       14,605       —       16,288       —  
    Intangible assets amortization     1,060       687       80       1,877       389  
    Other real estate owned expense     220       3       —       5,246       —  
    Other expense     2,143       1,700       1,137       5,778       3,775  
    Total noninterest expense     26,125       37,680       15,339       97,791       59,746  
    Income (loss) before income taxes     23,255       (22,527 )     6,294       8,263       36,856  
    Income tax expense (benefit)     6,483       (6,063 )     1,882       2,830       10,946  
    Net income (loss)   $ 16,772     $ (16,464 )   $ 4,412     $ 5,433     $ 25,910  
                                             
    Net income (loss) per share – basic   $ 0.52     $ (0.59 )   $ 0.24     $ 0.22     $ 1.42  
    Net income (loss) per share – diluted   $ 0.51     $ (0.59 )   $ 0.24     $ 0.22     $ 1.39  
    Weighted average common shares-diluted     32,698,714       27,705,844       18,727,519       24,623,397       18,656,742  
    Pre-tax, pre-provision income (2)   $ 19,420     $ 436     $ 7,118     $ 29,953     $ 37,771  
    (1 ) Included (reversal of) provision for unfunded loan commitments of $(1.0) million, $3.3 million and $(307) thousand for the three months ended December 31, 2024, September 30, 2024 and December 31, 2023, respectively, and $2.2 million and $(816) thousand for the years ended December 31, 2024 and 2023, respectively
    (2 ) Non-GAAP measure. See – GAAP to Non-GAAP reconciliation.

    California BanCorp and Subsidiary
    Average Balance Sheets and Yield Analysis
    (Unaudited)

        Three Months Ended  
        December 31, 2024     September 30, 2024     December 31, 2023  
        Average Balance     Income/
    Expense    		     Yield/
    Cost    		     Average Balance     Income/
    Expense    		     Yield/
    Cost    		     Average Balance     Income/
    Expense    		     Yield/
    Cost    		  
        ($ in thousands)  
    Assets                                                      
    Interest-earning assets:                                                                        
    Total loans   $ 3,184,918     $ 54,791       6.84   %   $ 2,783,581     $ 47,528       6.79 %   $ 1,954,396     $ 29,968       6.08 %
    Taxable debt securities     147,895       1,698       4.57   %     149,080       1,687       4.50 %     113,375       991       3.47 %
    Tax-exempt debt securities (1)     53,607       305       2.87   %     53,682       306       2.87 %     58,644       353       3.02 %
    Deposits in other financial institutions     422,032       5,123       4.83   %     161,616       2,215       5.45 %     56,313       759       5.35 %
    Fed funds sold/resale agreements     3,353       38       4.51   %     143,140       1,886       5.24 %     9,008       125       5.51 %
    Restricted stock investments and other bank stock     30,341       603       7.91   %     24,587       505       8.17 %     16,394       373       9.03 %
    Total interest-earning assets     3,842,146       62,558       6.48   %     3,315,686       54,127       6.49 %     2,208,130       32,569       5.85 %
    Total noninterest-earning assets     326,601                       277,471                       137,193                  
    Total assets   $ 4,168,747                     $ 3,593,157                     $ 2,345,323                  
                                                                             
    Liabilities and Shareholders’ Equity                                                                        
    Interest-bearing liabilities:                                                                        
    Interest-bearing NOW accounts   $ 704,017     $ 3,784       2.14   %   $ 617,373     $ 2,681       1.73 %   $ 362,579     $ 1,860       2.04 %
    Money market and savings accounts     1,192,692       8,663       2.89   %     999,322       8,392       3.34 %     669,391       4,746       2.81 %
    Time deposits     359,111       4,179       4.63   %     421,241       5,087       4.80 %     208,700       2,331       4.43 %
    Total interest-bearing deposits     2,255,820       16,626       2.93   %     2,037,936       16,160       3.15 %     1,240,670       8,937       2.86 %
    Borrowings:                                                                        
    FHLB advances     —       —       — %       611       9       5.86 %     56,380       802       5.64 %
    Subordinated debt     69,420       1,391       7.97   %     52,246       1,016       7.74 %     17,854       271       6.02 %
    Total borrowings     69,420       1,391       7.97   %     52,857       1,025       7.71 %     74,234       1,073       5.73 %
    Total interest-bearing liabilities     2,325,240       18,017       3.08   %     2,090,793       17,185       3.27 %     1,314,904       10,010       3.02 %
                                                                             
    Noninterest-bearing liabilities:                                                                        
    Noninterest-bearing deposits (2)     1,283,591                       1,031,844                       721,169                  
    Other liabilities     55,007                       41,962                       27,178                  
    Shareholders’ equity     504,909                       428,558                       282,072                  
    Total Liabilities and Shareholders’ Equity   $ 4,168,747                     $ 3,593,157                     $ 2,345,323                  
                                                                             
    Net interest spread                     3.40   %                     3.22 %                     2.83 %
    Net interest income and margin           $ 44,541       4.61   %           $ 36,942       4.43 %           $ 22,559       4.05 %
    Cost of deposits   $ 3,539,411     $ 16,626       1.87   %   $ 3,069,780     $ 16,160       2.09 %   $ 1,961,839     $ 8,937       1.81 %
    Cost of funds   $ 3,608,831     $ 18,017       1.99   %   $ 3,122,637     $ 17,185       2.19 %   $ 2,036,073     $ 10,010       1.95 %
    (1 ) Tax-exempt debt securities yields are presented on a tax equivalent basis using a 21% tax rate.
    (2 ) Average noninterest-bearing deposits represent 36.27%, 33.61% and 36.76% of average total deposits for the three months ended December 31, 2024, September 30, 2024 and December 31, 2023, respectively.

    California BanCorp and Subsidiary
    Average Balance Sheets and Yield Analysis
    (Unaudited)

        Year Ended  
        December 31, 2024     December 31, 2023  
        Average Balance     Income/
    Expense    		     Yield/
    Cost    		     Average Balance     Income/
    Expense    		     Yield/
    Cost    		  
        ($ in thousands)  
    Assets                                    
    Interest-earning assets:                                                
    Total loans   $ 2,443,127     $ 159,960       6.55 %   $ 1,918,443     $ 113,951       5.94 %
    Taxable debt securities     136,984       5,827       4.25 %     107,021       3,497       3.27 %
    Tax-exempt debt securities (1)     53,721       1,223       2.88 %     65,674       1,655       3.19 %
    Deposits in other financial institutions     171,939       8,692       5.06 %     46,826       2,434       5.20 %
    Fed funds sold/resale agreements     43,990       2,319       5.27 %     18,114       923       5.10 %
    Restricted stock investments and other bank stock     22,137       1,777       8.03 %     15,930       1,062       6.67 %
    Total interest-earning assets     2,871,898       179,798       6.26 %     2,172,008       123,522       5.69 %
    Total noninterest-earning assets     224,018                       134,225                  
    Total assets   $ 3,095,916                     $ 2,306,233                  
                                                     
    Liabilities and Shareholders’ Equity                                                
    Interest-bearing liabilities:                                                
    Interest-bearing NOW accounts   $ 511,425     $ 10,644       2.08 %   $ 308,537     $ 5,161       1.67 %
    Money market and savings accounts     911,684       26,685       2.93 %     673,176       15,000       2.23 %
    Time deposits     324,249       15,432       4.76 %     180,219       6,704       3.72 %
    Total interest-bearing deposits     1,747,358       52,761       3.02 %     1,161,932       26,865       2.31 %
    Borrowings:                                                
    FHLB advances     19,543       1,103       5.64 %     26,390       1,434       5.43 %
    Subordinated debt     39,479       2,950       7.47 %     17,818       1,085       6.09 %
    Total borrowings     59,022       4,053       6.87 %     44,208       2,519       5.70 %
    Total interest-bearing liabilities     1,806,380       56,814       3.15 %     1,206,140       29,384       2.44 %
                                                     
    Noninterest-bearing liabilities:                                                
    Noninterest-bearing deposits (2)     873,043                       801,882                  
    Other liabilities     36,677                       24,865                  
    Shareholders’ equity     379,816                       273,346                  
    Total Liabilities and Shareholders’ Equity   $ 3,095,916                     $ 2,306,233                  
                                                     
    Net interest spread                     3.11 %                     3.25 %
    Net interest income and margin           $ 122,984       4.28 %           $ 94,138       4.33 %
    Cost of deposits   $ 2,620,401     $ 52,761       2.01 %   $ 1,963,814     $ 26,865       1.37 %
    Cost of funds   $ 2,679,423     $ 56,814       2.12 %   $ 2,008,022     $ 29,384       1.46 %
    (1 ) Tax-exempt debt securities yields are presented on a tax equivalent basis using a 21% tax rate.
    (2 ) Average noninterest-bearing deposits represent 33.32%, and 40.83% of average total deposits for the year ended December 31, 2024 and December 31, 2023, respectively.

    California BanCorp and Subsidiary
    GAAP to Non-GAAP Reconciliation
    (Unaudited)

    The following tables present a reconciliation of non-GAAP financial measures to GAAP measures for: (1) adjusted net income (loss), (2) efficiency ratio, (3) adjusted efficiency ratio, (4) pre-tax pre-provision income, (5) adjusted pre-tax pre-provision income, (6) average tangible common equity, (7) adjusted return on average assets, (8) adjusted return on average equity, (9) return on average tangible common equity, (10) adjusted return on average tangible common equity, (11) tangible common equity, (12) tangible assets, (13) tangible common equity to tangible asset ratio, and (14) tangible book value per share. We believe the presentation of certain non-GAAP financial measures provides useful information to assess our consolidated financial condition and consolidated results of operations and to assist investors in evaluating our financial results relative to our peers. These non-GAAP financial measures complement our GAAP reporting and are presented below to provide investors and others with information that we use to manage the business each period. Because not all companies use identical calculations, the presentation of these non-GAAP financial measures may not be comparable to other similarly titled measures used by other companies. These non-GAAP measures should be taken together with the corresponding GAAP measures and should not be considered a substitute of the GAAP measures.

        Three Months Ended     Year Ended  
        December 31,
    2024    		     September 30,
    2024    		     December 31,
    2023    		     December 31,
    2024    		     December 31,
    2023    		  
        ($ in thousands)  
    Adjusted net income                                        
    Net income (loss)   $ 16,772     $ (16,464 )   $ 4,412     $ 5,433     $ 25,910  
    Add: After-tax Day1 provision for non PCD loans and unfunded loan commitments (1)     —       14,978       —       14,978       —  
    Add: After-tax merger and related expenses (1)     453       10,576       —       11,988       —  
    Adjusted net income (non-GAAP)   $ 17,225     $ 9,090     $ 4,412     $ 32,399     $ 25,910  
                                             
    Efficiency Ratio                                        
    Noninterest expense   $ 26,125     $ 37,680     $ 15,339     $ 97,791     $ 59,746  
    Deduct: Merger and related expenses     643       14,605       —       16,288       —  
    Adjusted noninterest expense     25,482       23,075       15,339       81,503       59,746  
                                             
    Net interest income     44,541       36,942       22,559       122,984       94,138  
    Noninterest income (expense)     1,004       1,174       (102 )     4,760       3,379  
    Total net interest income and noninterest income   $ 45,545     $ 38,116     $ 22,457     $ 127,744     $ 97,517  
    Efficiency ratio (non-GAAP)     57.4 %     98.9 %     68.3 %     76.6 %     61.3 %
    Adjusted efficiency ratio (non-GAAP)     55.9 %     60.5 %     68.3 %     63.8 %     61.3 %
                                             
    Pre-tax pre-provision income                                        
    Net interest income   $ 44,541     $ 36,942     $ 22,559     $ 122,984     $ 94,138  
    Noninterest income (expense)     1,004       1,174       (102 )     4,760       3,379  
    Total net interest income and noninterest income     45,545       38,116       22,457       127,744       97,517  
    Less: Noninterest expense     26,125       37,680       15,339       97,791       59,746  
    Pre-tax pre-provision income (non-GAAP)     19,420       436       7,118       29,953       37,771  
    Add: Merger and related expenses     643       14,605       —       16,288       —  
    Adjusted pre-tax pre-provision income (non-GAAP)   $ 20,063     $ 15,041     $ 7,118     $ 46,241     $ 37,771  
    (1 ) After-tax Day 1 provision for non-PCD loans and unfunded commitments and merger and related expenses are presented using a 29.56% tax rate.
        Three Months Ended     Year Ended  
        December 31,
    2024    		     September 30,
    2024    		     December 31,
    2023    		     December 31,
    2024    		     December 31,
    2023    		  
        ($ in thousands)  
    Return on Average Assets, Equity, and Tangible Equity                              
    Net income (loss)   $ 16,772     $ (16,464 )   $ 4,412     $ 5,433     $ 25,910  
    Adjusted net income (non-GAAP)   $ 17,225     $ 9,090     $ 4,412     $ 32,399     $ 25,910  
                                             
    Average assets   $ 4,168,747     $ 3,593,157     $ 2,345,323     $ 3,095,916     $ 2,306,233  
    Average shareholders’ equity     504,909       428,558       282,072       379,816       273,346  
    Less: Average intangible assets     135,073       104,409       39,035       79,366       39,195  
    Average tangible common equity (non-GAAP)   $ 369,836     $ 324,149     $ 243,037     $ 300,450     $ 234,151  
                                             
    Return on average assets     1.60 %     (1.82 %)     0.75 %     0.18 %     1.12 %
    Adjusted return on average assets (non-GAAP)     1.64 %     1.01 %     0.75 %     1.05 %     1.12 %
    Return on average equity     13.21 %     (15.28 %)     6.21 %     1.43 %     9.48 %
    Adjusted return on average equity (non-GAAP)     13.57 %     8.44 %     6.21 %     8.53 %     9.48 %
    Return on average tangible common equity (non-GAAP)     18.04 %     (20.21 %)     7.20 %     1.81 %     11.07 %
    Adjusted return on average tangible common equity (non-GAAP)     18.53 %     11.16 %     7.20 %     10.78 %     11.07 %
        December 31,
    2024    		     December 31,
    2023    		  
        ($ in thousands except share and per share data)  
    Tangible Common Equity Ratio/Tangible Book Value Per Share                
    Shareholders’ equity   $ 511,836     $ 288,152  
    Less: Intangible assets     134,058       38,998  
    Tangible common equity (non-GAAP)   $ 377,778     $ 249,154  
                     
    Total assets   $ 4,031,654     $ 2,360,252  
    Less: Intangible assets     134,058       38,998  
    Tangible assets (non-GAAP)   $ 3,897,596     $ 2,321,254  
                     
    Equity to asset ratio     12.70 %     12.21 %
    Tangible common equity to tangible asset ratio (non-GAAP)     9.69 %     10.73 %
    Book value per share   $ 15.86     $ 15.69  
    Tangible book value per share (non-GAAP)   $ 11.71     $ 13.56  
    Shares outstanding     32,265,935       18,369,115  

    INVESTOR RELATIONS CONTACT
    Kevin Mc Cabe
    California Bank of Commerce, N.A.
    kmccabe@bankcbc.com
    818.637.7065

    1 Reconciliations of non–U.S. generally accepted accounting principles (“GAAP”) measures are set forth at the end of this press release.

    The MIL Network –

  • MIL-OSI: First Northwest Bancorp Reports Fourth Quarter 2024 Financial Results

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    PORT ANGELES, Wash., Jan. 29, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — First Northwest Bancorp (Nasdaq: FNWB) (“First Northwest” or the “Company”) today reported a net loss of $2.8 million for the fourth quarter of 2024, compared to a net loss of $2.0 million for the third quarter of 2024 and a net loss of $5.5 million for the fourth quarter of 2023. Basic and diluted loss per share were $0.32 for the fourth quarter of 2024, compared to basic and diluted loss per share of $0.23 for the third quarter of 2024 and basic and diluted loss per share of $0.62 for the fourth quarter of 2023.

    In the fourth quarter of 2024, the Company recorded adjusted pre-tax, pre-provision net revenue (“PPNR”)(1) of $1.2 million, compared to a $49,000 adjusted PPNR loss for the preceding quarter and adjusted PPNR of $327,000 for the fourth quarter of 2023.

    The Board of Directors of First Northwest declared a quarterly cash dividend of $0.07 per common share, payable on February 28, 2025, to shareholders of record as of the close of business on February 14, 2025.

    Quote from First Northwest President and CEO, Matthew P. Deines:
    “Although financial results in 2024 were adversely impacted by elevated credit costs, we are optimistic for continued improvement in asset quality in early 2025. During the fourth quarter, our pre-provision net revenue (1) grew to $1.2 million with modest margin improvement as we successfully reduced FHLB borrowings. As we look ahead to 2025, we are laser focused on growing core commercial and retail customer relationships while resolving problem assets, improving profitability and maintaining our strong capital position. Highlights for 2024 include the termination of our compliance Consent Order with the FDIC, reduction of core operating expenses and improvement in our liquidity position with the loan to deposit ratio below 100% at year-end. I’d like to thank all our employees for their efforts and contributions in 2024, and for making a positive impact in the communities we serve.”

    Key Points for Fourth Quarter and Going Forward

    Provision for credit losses:

    • The Company recorded a $3.8 million provision for credit losses on loans in the fourth quarter of 2024, primarily due to charge-offs of six commercial business loans. This compares to loan credit loss provisions of $3.1 million for the preceding quarter and $1.2 million for the fourth quarter of 2023. 
    • We believe the reserve on individually analyzed loans does not represent a universal decline in the collectability of all loans in the portfolio. We continue to work on resolution plans for all troubled borrowers. The provision for credit losses on loans had a significant negative impact on net income for the fourth quarter of 2024.

    First Fed Bank’s (“First Fed” or the “Bank”) balance sheet restructure continues to have a positive impact:

    • The fair value hedge on loans, tied to the compounded overnight index swap using the secured overnight financing rate index, which was established in the first quarter of 2024, added $1.1 million to interest income for the year. The hedge successfully reduced the Bank’s liability sensitivity, and lowered the overall interest rate risk profile. The hedge also enhanced earnings due to a favorable contract position during the 2024 interest rate environment. The Bank expects to maintain a positive carry on its derivative for up to an additional 25-basis points of rate cuts. 
    • During 2024, bank-owned life insurance policies (“BOLI”) were reinvested into higher yielding products. In the fourth quarter of 2024, a $8.5 million policy was surrendered and reinvested into a policy earning 6.01% and a $922,000 policy earning 1.64% was exchanged and reinvested into a policy earning 3.99%. Total policy conversions during 2024 increased the annual pre-tax net yield earned on the total BOLI portfolio by 74-basis points. The remaining surrender transaction is expected to be completed during the first quarter of 2025. 
    • Investment security purchases during the fourth quarter of 2024 totaled $47.1 million, carrying a weighted-average yield of 6.7% at purchase and a weighted-average life of 3.1 years. The annualized interest income on these securities is anticipated to provide $2.6 million in revenue for 2025.

    (1) See reconciliation of Non-GAAP Financial Measures later in this release.

    Selected Quarterly Financial Ratios:

      As of or For the Quarter Ended  
      December 31,
    2024    		   September 30,
    2024    		   June 30,
    2024    		   March 31,
    2024    		   December 31,
    2023    		  
    Performance ratios: (1)                              
    Return on average assets   -0.51 %   -0.36 %   -0.40 %   0.07 %   -1.03 %
    Adjusted PPNR return on average assets (2)   0.22     -0.01     0.10     0.34     -0.06  
    Return on average equity   -6.92     -4.91     -5.47     0.98     -14.05  
    Net interest margin (3)   2.73     2.70     2.76     2.76     2.84  
    Efficiency ratio (4)   92.2     100.3     72.3     88.8     150.8  
    Equity to total assets   6.89     7.13     7.17     7.17     7.42  
    Book value per common share $ 16.45   $ 17.17   $ 16.81   $ 17.00   $ 16.99  
    Tangible performance ratios: (1)                              
    Tangible common equity to tangible assets (2)   6.83 %   7.06 %   7.10 %   7.10 %   7.35 %
    Return on average tangible common equity (2)   -6.99     -4.96     -5.53     0.99     -14.20  
    Tangible book value per common share (2) $ 16.29   $ 17.00   $ 16.64   $ 16.83   $ 16.83  
    Capital ratios (First Fed): (5)                              
    Tier 1 leverage   9.4 %   9.4 %   9.4 %   9.7 %   9.9 %
    Common equity Tier 1 capital   12.4     12.2     12.4     12.6     13.1  
    Total risk-based   13.6     13.4     13.5     13.6     14.1  
    (1 ) Performance ratios are annualized, where appropriate.
    (2 ) See reconciliation of Non-GAAP Financial Measures later in this release.
    (3 ) Net interest income divided by average interest-earning assets.
    (4 ) Total noninterest expense as a percentage of net interest income and total other noninterest income.
    (5 ) Current period capital ratios are preliminary and subject to finalization of the FDIC Call Report.


    Adjusted Pre-tax, Pre-Provision Net Revenue     (1)

    Adjusted PPNR for the fourth quarter of 2024 increased $1.3 million to $1.2 million, compared to an adjusted PPNR loss of $49,000 for the preceding quarter, and increased $1.5 million from an adjusted PPNR $327,000 loss in the fourth quarter one year ago.

        For the Quarter Ended   For the Year Ended  
    (Dollars in thousands)   December 31,
    2024    		   September 30,
    2024    		   June 30,
    2024    		   March 31,
    2024    		   December 31,
    2023    		   December 31,
    2024    		   December 31,
    2023    		  
    Net interest income   $ 14,137   $ 14,020   $ 14,235   $ 13,928   $ 14,195   $ 56,320   $ 61,432  
    Total noninterest income     1,300     1,779     7,347     2,188     (2,929 )   12,614     4,020  
    Total revenue     15,437     15,799     21,582     16,116     11,266     68,934     65,452  
    Total noninterest expense     14,233     15,848     15,609     14,303     16,990     59,993     61,454  
    PPNR (1)     1,204     (49 )   5,973     1,813     (5,724 )   8,941     3,998  
    Selected nonrecurring adjustments to PPNR                                            
    Less: Net gain on sale of premises and equipment     —     —     7,919     —     —     7,919     —  
    Sale leaseback taxes and assessments included in occupancy and equipment     —     —     (359 )   —     —     (359 )   —  
    Net loss on sale of investment securities     —     —     (2,117 )   —     (5,397 )   (2,117 )   (5,397 )
    Adjusted PPNR (1)   $ 1,204   $ (49 ) $ 530   $ 1,813   $ (327 ) $ 3,498   $ 9,395  

    (1) See reconciliation of Non-GAAP Financial Measures later in this release.

    • Total interest income was relatively unchanged at $28.2 million for the fourth quarter of 2024, compared to the previous quarter, and increased $1.9 million compared to $26.3 million in the fourth quarter of 2023. Interest income decreased in the fourth quarter of 2024 primarily due to a decrease in the income earned on the securities derivative combined with lower FHLB dividends and reduced interest income received on Company deposit accounts. Higher yields on performing loans during the fourth quarter of 2024 were partially offset by nonaccrual interest adjustments totaling $46,000. Interest and fees on loans increased year-over-year as the loan portfolio grew. Loan yields increased over the prior year due to higher rates on new originations as well as the repricing of variable and adjustable-rate loans.
    • The net interest margin increased to 2.73% for the fourth quarter of 2024, from 2.70% for the prior quarter, and decreased 11-basis points from 2.84% for the fourth quarter of 2023. The Company reported reduced rates and declining volume of borrowings during the quarter which lowered costs; however, these savings were partially offset by an increase in cost due to a higher volume of customer deposits. The decrease in net interest margin from the same quarter one year ago is due to higher funding costs for deposits and borrowed funds. 
    • Noninterest income included a $1.8 million write down on an equity investment in an organization that is involved in a lawsuit, partially offset by a $1.5 million BOLI death benefit payment received due to the passing of an employee. 
    • Noninterest expense for the fourth quarter of 2024 decreased mainly due to a $1.2 million reduction in compensation related to nonrecurring payouts in the previous quarter combined with a reduced incentive accrual and lower headcount in the fourth quarter of 2024. FDIC assessment, state taxes, advertising and other discretionary spending also decreased from the previous quarter.

    Allowance for Credit Losses on Loans (“ACLL”) and Credit Quality

    The allowance for credit losses on loans (“ACLL”) decreased $1.5 million to $20.5 million at December 31, 2024, from $22.0 million at September 30, 2024. The ACLL as a percentage of total loans was 1.21% at December 31, 2024, a decrease from 1.27% at September 30, 2024, and an increase from 1.05% one year earlier. The pooled loan reserve decreased $1.5 million during the fourth quarter of 2024, primarily due to the decreases in multi-family, construction, and consumer loan balances combined with decreases resulting from lower loss factors applied to commercial business and commercial real estate loans, partially offset by higher loss factors applied to one-to-four family and other consumer loans.

    Nonperforming loans totaled $30.5 million at December 31, 2024, an increase of $139,000 from September 30, 2024. ACLL to nonperforming loans decreased to 67% at December 31, 2024, from 72% at September 30, 2024, and 94% at December 31, 2023. This ratio continued to decline as higher balances of real estate loans are included in nonperforming assets with no significant corresponding increase to the ACLL as these collateral dependent loans were considered adequately reserved for based on information available at each period end.

    Classified loans decreased $4.4 million to $42.5 million at December 31, 2024, from $46.9 million at September 30, 2024, primarily due to charge-offs totaling $3.9 million on six commercial business loans during the fourth quarter. An $11.4 million construction loan relationship, which became a classified loan in the fourth quarter of 2022; an $8.1 million commercial construction loan relationship, which became classified in the second quarter of 2024; and a $6.2 million commercial loan relationship, which became classified in the fourth quarter of 2023, account for 61% of the classified loan balance at December 31, 2024. The Bank has exercised legal remedies, including the appointment of a third-party receiver and foreclosure actions, to liquidate the underlying collateral to satisfy the real estate loans in two of these three collateral-dependent relationships. The Bank is also closely monitoring a group of commercial business loans that have similar collateral, with 15 loans totaling $2.2 million included in classified loans at December 31, 2024, and an additional eight loans totaling $2.8 million included in the special mention risk grading category.

      For the Quarter Ended  
    ACLL ($ in thousands) December 31,
    2024    		   September 30,
    2024    		   June 30,
    2024    		   March 31,
    2024    		   December 31,
    2023    		  
    Balance at beginning of period $ 21,970   $ 19,343   $ 17,958   $ 17,510   $ 16,945  
    Charge-offs:                              
    Construction and land   (411 )   —     (3,978 )   —     —  
    Home equity   —     —     —     —     1  
    Auto and other consumer   (364 )   (492 )   (832 )   (806 )   (655 )
    Commercial business   (4,596 )   (24 )   (2,643 )   (33 )   —  
    Total charge-offs   (5,371 )   (516 )   (7,453 )   (839 )   (654 )
    Recoveries:                              
    One-to-four family   —     42     —     2     5  
    Commercial real estate   2     —     —     —     —  
    Home equity   —     —     —     —     10  
    Auto and other consumer   52     24     198     46     42  
    Commercial business   36     —     —     —     —  
    Total recoveries   90     66     198     48     57  
    Net loan charge-offs   (5,281 )   (450 )   (7,255 )   (791 )   (597 )
    Provision for credit losses   3,760     3,077     8,640     1,239     1,162  
    Balance at end of period $ 20,449   $ 21,970   $ 19,343   $ 17,958   $ 17,510  
                                   
    Average total loans   1,708,232     1,718,402     1,717,830     1,678,656     1,645,418  
    Annualized net charge-offs to average outstanding loans   1.23 %   0.10 %   1.70 %   0.19 %   0.14 %
    Asset Quality ($ in thousands) December 31,
    2024    		   September 30,
    2024    		   June 30,
    2024    		   March 31,
    2024    		   December 31,
    2023    		  
    Nonaccrual loans:                              
    One-to-four family $ 1,477   $ 1,631   $ 1,750   $ 1,237   $ 1,844  
    Multi-family   —     —     708     708     —  
    Commercial real estate   5,598     5,634     14     22     28  
    Construction and land   19,544     19,382     19,292     14,440     14,986  
    Home equity   55     116     118     121     123  
    Auto and other consumer   700     894     746     1,012     786  
    Commercial business   3,141     2,719     1,003     1,941     877  
    Total nonaccrual loans   30,515     30,376     23,631     19,481     18,644  
    Other real estate owned   —     —     —     —     —  
    Total nonperforming assets $ 30,515   $ 30,376   $ 23,631   $ 19,481   $ 18,644  
                                   
    Nonaccrual loans as a % of total loans (1)   1.80 %   1.75 %   1.39 %   1.14 %   1.12 %
    Nonperforming assets as a % of total assets (2)   1.37     1.35     1.07     0.87     0.85  
    ACLL as a % of total loans   1.21     1.27     1.14     1.05     1.05  
    ACLL as a % of nonaccrual loans   67.01     72.33     81.85     92.18     93.92  
    Total past due loans to total loans   1.98     1.92     1.45     1.91     0.94  
    (1 ) Nonperforming loans consists of nonaccruing loans and accruing loans more than 90 days past due.
    (2 ) Nonperforming assets consists of nonperforming loans (which include nonaccruing loans and accruing loans more than 90 days past due), real estate owned and repossessed assets.


    Financial Condition and Capital

    Investment securities increased $29.5 million, or 9.5%, to $340.3 million at December 31, 2024, compared to $310.9 million three months earlier, and increased $44.7 million compared to $295.6 million at December 31, 2023. The market value of the portfolio decreased $5.8 million during the fourth quarter of 2024. The estimated average life of the securities portfolio was approximately 6.9 years at December 31, 2024, 7.4 years at the prior quarter end and 7.7 years at the end of the fourth quarter of 2023. The effective duration of the portfolio was approximately 3.9 years at December 31, 2024, compared to 3.9 years at the prior quarter end and 4.8 years at the end of the fourth quarter of 2023. Investment purchases at the beginning of 2024 were primarily floating rate securities to take advantage of higher short-term rates above those offered on cash at that time and to reduce our liability sensitivity. Purchases in the fourth quarter were primarily fixed to rebalance our securities portfolio position for 2025.

    Investment Securities ($ in thousands)  December 31,
    2024    		    September 30,
    2024    		    December 31,
    2023    		   Three Month
    % Change    		   One Year
    % Change    		  
    Available for Sale at Fair Value                          
    Municipal bonds $ 77,876   $ 81,363   $ 87,761   -4.3 % -11.3 %
    U.S. government agency issued asset-backed securities (ABS agency)   12,876     13,296     11,782   -3.2   9.3  
    Corporate issued asset-backed securities (ABS corporate)   16,122     16,391     5,286   -1.6   205.0  
    Corporate issued debt securities (Corporate debt)   54,491     54,058     51,454   0.8   5.9  
    U.S. Small Business Administration securities (SBA)   8,666     9,317     —   -7.0   100.0  
    Mortgage-backed securities:                          
    U.S. government agency issued mortgage-backed securities (MBS agency)   98,697     78,549     63,247   25.7   56.1  
    Non-agency issued mortgage-backed securities (MBS non-agency)   71,616     57,886     76,093   23.7   -5.9  
    Total securities available for sale $ 340,344   $ 310,860   $ 295,623   9.5   15.1  

    Net loans, excluding loans held for sale, decreased $39.2 million, or 2.3%, to $1.68 billion at December 31, 2024, from $1.71 billion at September 30, 2024, and increased $32.7 million, or 2.0%, from $1.64 billion one year prior. Construction loans that converted into fully amortizing loans during the quarter totaled $18.3 million. Loan payoffs of $73.9 million, regular payments of $35.3 million and charge-offs totaling $5.3 million outpaced new loan funding totaling $55.6 million and draws on existing loans totaling $19.7 million.

    Loans ($ in thousands)  December 31,
    2024    		    September 30,
    2024    		    December 31,
    2023    		   Three Month
    % Change    		   One Year
    % Change    		  
    Real Estate:                          
    One-to-four family $ 395,315   $ 395,792   $ 378,432   -0.1 % 4.5 %
    Multi-family   332,596     353,813     333,094   -6.0   -0.1  
    Commercial real estate   390,379     376,008     387,983   3.8   0.6  
    Construction and land   78,110     95,709     129,691   -18.4   -39.8  
    Total real estate loans   1,196,400     1,221,322     1,229,200   -2.0   -2.7  
    Consumer:                          
    Home equity   79,054     76,960     69,403   2.7   13.9  
    Auto and other consumer   268,876     281,198     249,130   -4.4   7.9  
    Total consumer loans   347,930     358,158     318,533   -2.9   9.2  
    Commercial business   151,493     155,327     112,295   -2.5   34.9  
    Total loans receivable   1,695,823     1,734,807     1,660,028   -2.2   2.2  
    Less:                          
    Derivative basis adjustment   188     (1,579 )   —   111.9   100.0  
    Allowance for credit losses on loans   20,449     21,970     17,510   -6.9   16.8  
    Total loans receivable, net $ 1,675,186   $ 1,714,416   $ 1,642,518   -2.3   2.0  

    Total deposits decreased $23.6 million to $1.69 billion at December 31, 2024, compared to $1.71 billion at September 30, 2024, and increased $11.1 million, or 0.7%, compared to $1.68 billion one year ago. During the fourth quarter of 2024, total customer deposit balances decreased $2.8 million and brokered deposit balances decreased $20.8 million. Overall, the current rate environment continues to contribute to greater competition for deposits. As a result, the Bank continues offering deposit rate specials to attract new funds.

    Deposits ($ in thousands)  December 31,
    2024    		    September 30,
    2024    		    December 31,
    2023    		   Three Month
    % Change    		   One Year
    % Change    		  
    Noninterest-bearing demand deposits $ 256,416   $ 252,999   $ 252,083   1.4 % 1.7 %
    Interest-bearing demand deposits   164,891     167,202     169,418   -1.4   -2.7  
    Money market accounts   413,822     433,307     362,205   -4.5   14.3  
    Savings accounts   205,055     212,763     242,148   -3.6   -15.3  
    Certificates of deposit, customer   464,928     441,665     443,412   5.3   4.9  
    Certificates of deposit, brokered   182,914     203,705     207,626   -10.2   -11.9  
    Total deposits $ 1,688,026   $ 1,711,641   $ 1,676,892   -1.4   0.7  

    Total shareholders’ equity decreased to $153.9 million at December 31, 2024, compared to $160.8 million three months earlier, due to a decrease in the after-tax fair market values of the available-for-sale investment securities portfolio of $4.5 million, a net loss of $2.8 million and dividends declared of $656,000, partially offset by an increase in the after-tax fair market values of derivatives of $952,000.

    Capital levels for both the Company and its operating bank, First Fed, remain in excess of applicable regulatory requirements and the Bank was categorized as “well-capitalized” at December 31, 2024. Preliminary calculations of Common Equity Tier 1 and Total Risk-Based Capital Ratios at December 31, 2024, were 12.4% and 13.6%, respectively.

    First Northwest continued to return capital to our shareholders through cash dividends during the fourth quarter of 2024. The Company paid cash dividends totaling $656,000 in the fourth quarter of 2024. No shares of common stock were repurchased under the Company’s April 2024 Stock Repurchase Plan (“Repurchase Plan”) during the quarter ended December 31, 2024. There are 846,123 shares that remain available for repurchase under the Repurchase Plan.

    Awards/Recognition
    The Company received several accolades as a leader in the community in the last year.

    In September 2024, the First Fed team was recognized in the 2024 Best of Olympic Peninsula surveys, winning Best Bank and Best Lender in Clallam County; Best Bank and Best Financial Advisor in the West End; and Best Lender in Jefferson County. First Fed was also a finalist for Best Bank, Best Customer Service, Best Employer and Best Financial Advisor in Jefferson County; Best Customer Service, Best Employer and Best Financial Advisor in Clallam County; and Best Customer Service and Best Employer in the West End.
    In May 2024, First Fed, along with the First Fed Community Foundation, were honored to be ranked second on the Puget Sound Business Journal Midsize Corporate Philanthropists list.
    In October 2023, the First Fed team was honored to bring home the Gold for Best Bank in the Best of the Northwest survey hosted by Bellingham Alive for the second year in a row.
    In September 2023, the First Fed team was recognized in the 2023 Best of Olympic Peninsula surveys as a finalist for Best Employer in Kitsap County and Best Bank and Best Financial Institution in Bainbridge.


    We recommend reading this earnings release in conjunction with the Fourth Quarter 2024 Investor Presentation, located at http://investor.ourfirstfed.com/quarterly-reports and included as an exhibit to our January 29, 2025, Current Report on Form 8-K.

    About the Company
    First Northwest Bancorp (Nasdaq: FNWB) is a financial holding company engaged in investment activities including the business of its subsidiary, First Fed Bank. First Fed is a Pacific Northwest-based financial institution which has served its customers and communities since 1923. Currently First Fed has 16 locations in Washington state including 12 full-service branches. First Fed’s business and operating strategy is focused on building sustainable earnings by delivering a full array of financial products and services for individuals, small businesses, non-profit organizations and commercial customers. In 2022, First Northwest made an investment in The Meriwether Group, LLC, a boutique investment banking and accelerator firm. Additionally, First Northwest focuses on strategic partnerships to provide modern financial services such as digital payments and marketplace lending. First Northwest Bancorp was incorporated in 2012 and completed its initial public offering in 2015 under the ticker symbol FNWB. The Company is headquartered in Port Angeles, Washington.

    Forward-Looking Statements
    Certain matters discussed in this press release may contain forward-looking statements within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. These forward-looking statements relate to, among other things, expectations of the business environment in which we operate, projections of future performance, perceived opportunities in the market, potential future credit experience, including our ability to collect, the outcome of litigation and statements regarding our mission and vision, and include, but are not limited to, statements about our plans, objectives, expectations and intentions that are not historical facts, and other statements often identified by words such as “believes,” “expects,” “anticipates,” “estimates,” or similar expressions. These forward-looking statements are based upon current management beliefs and expectations and may, therefore, involve risks and uncertainties, many of which are beyond our control. Our actual results, performance, or achievements may differ materially from those suggested, expressed, or implied by forward-looking statements as a result of a wide variety of factors including, but not limited to: increased competitive pressures; changes in the interest rate environment; the credit risks of lending activities; pressures on liquidity, including as a result of withdrawals of deposits or declines in the value of our investment portfolio; changes in general economic conditions and conditions within the securities markets; legislative and regulatory changes; and other factors described in the Company’s latest Annual Report on Form 10-K and Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q under the section entitled “Risk Factors,” and other filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”),which are available on our website at www.ourfirstfed.com and on the SEC’s website at www.sec.gov.

    Any of the forward-looking statements that we make in this press release and in the other public statements we make may turn out to be incorrect because of the inaccurate assumptions we might make, because of the factors illustrated above or because of other factors that we cannot foresee. Because of these and other uncertainties, our actual future results may be materially different from those expressed or implied in any forward-looking statements made by or on our behalf and the Company’s operating and stock price performance may be negatively affected. Therefore, these factors should be considered in evaluating the forward-looking statements, and undue reliance should not be placed on such statements. We do not undertake and specifically disclaim any obligation to revise any forward-looking statements to reflect the occurrence of anticipated or unanticipated events or circumstances after the date of such statements. These risks could cause our actual results for 2024 and beyond to differ materially from those expressed in any forward-looking statements by, or on behalf of, us and could negatively affect the Company’s operations and stock price performance.

    For More Information Contact:
    Matthew P. Deines, President and Chief Executive Officer
    Geri Bullard, EVP, Chief Financial Officer and Chief Operating Officer
    IRGroup@ourfirstfed.com
    360-457-0461

    FIRST NORTHWEST BANCORP AND SUBSIDIARY
    CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS
    (Dollars in thousands, except share data) (Unaudited)
     
        December 31,
    2024    		   September 30,
    2024    		   June 30,
    2024    		   March 31,
    2024    		   December 31,
    2023    		  
    ASSETS                                
    Cash and due from banks   $ 16,811   $ 17,953   $ 19,184   $ 15,562   $ 19,845  
    Interest-earning deposits in banks     55,637     64,769     63,995     61,784     103,324  
    Investment securities available for sale, at fair value     340,344     310,860     306,714     325,955     295,623  
    Loans held for sale     472     378     1,086     988     753  
    Loans receivable (net of allowance for credit losses on loans $20,449, $21,970, $19,343, $17,958, and $17,510)     1,675,186     1,714,416     1,677,764     1,692,774     1,642,518  
    Federal Home Loan Bank (FHLB) stock, at cost     14,435     14,435     13,086     15,876     13,664  
    Accrued interest receivable     8,159     8,939     9,466     8,909     7,894  
    Premises held for sale, net     —     —     —     6,751     18,049  
    Premises and equipment, net     10,129     10,436     10,714     11,028     —  
    Servicing rights on sold loans, at fair value     3,281     3,584     3,740     3,820     3,793  
    Bank-owned life insurance, net     41,150     41,429     41,113     34,681     40,578  
    Equity and partnership investments     13,229     14,912     15,085     15,121     14,794  
    Goodwill and other intangible assets, net     1,082     1,083     1,084     1,085     1,086  
    Deferred tax asset, net     13,738     10,802     12,216     12,704     13,001  
    Right-of-use (“ROU”) asset, net     17,001     17,315     17,627     5,841     6,047  
    Prepaid expenses and other assets     21,352     24,175     23,088     27,141     20,828  
    Total assets   $ 2,232,006   $ 2,255,486   $ 2,215,962   $ 2,240,020   $ 2,201,797  
                                     
    LIABILITIES AND SHAREHOLDERS’ EQUITY                                
    Deposits   $ 1,688,026   $ 1,711,641   $ 1,708,288   $ 1,666,624   $ 1,676,892  
    Borrowings     336,014     334,994     302,575     371,455     320,936  
    Accrued interest payable     3,295     2,153     3,143     2,830     3,396  
    Lease liability, net     17,535     17,799     18,054     6,227     6,428  
    Accrued expenses and other liabilities     31,770     25,625     23,717     29,980     29,545  
    Advances from borrowers for taxes and insurance     1,484     2,485     1,304     2,398     1,260  
    Total liabilities     2,078,124     2,094,697     2,057,081     2,079,514     2,038,457  
                                     
    Shareholders’ Equity                                
    Preferred stock, $0.01 par value, authorized 5,000,000 shares, no shares issued or outstanding     —     —     —     —     —  
    Common stock, $0.01 par value, 75,000,000 shares authorized; issued and outstanding at each period end: 9,353,348; 9,365,979; 9,453,247; 9,442,796; and 9,611,876     93     94     94     94     96  
    Additional paid-in capital     93,357     93,218     93,985     93,763     95,784  
    Retained earnings     97,198     100,660     103,322     106,202     107,349  
    Accumulated other comprehensive loss, net of tax     (30,172 )   (26,424 )   (31,597 )   (32,465 )   (32,636 )
    Unearned employee stock ownership plan (ESOP) shares     (6,594 )   (6,759 )   (6,923 )   (7,088 )   (7,253 )
    Total shareholders’ equity     153,882     160,789     158,881     160,506     163,340  
    Total liabilities and shareholders’ equity   $ 2,232,006   $ 2,255,486   $ 2,215,962   $ 2,240,020   $ 2,201,797  
    FIRST NORTHWEST BANCORP AND SUBSIDIARY
    CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS
    (Dollars in thousands, except per share data) (Unaudited)
     
        For the Quarter Ended   For the Year Ended  
        December 31,
    2024    		   September 30,
    2024    		   June 30,
    2024    		   March 31,
    2024    		   December 31,
    2023    		   December 31,
    2024    		   December 31,
    2023    		  
    INTEREST INCOME                                            
    Interest and fees on loans receivable   $ 23,716   $ 23,536   $ 23,733   $ 22,767   $ 22,083   $ 93,752   $ 84,614  
    Interest on investment securities     3,658     3,786     3,949     3,632     3,393     15,025     13,279  
    Interest on deposits in banks     550     582     571     645     581     2,348     2,126  
    FHLB dividends     273     302     358     282     252     1,215     880  
    Total interest income     28,197     28,206     28,611     27,326     26,309     112,340     100,899  
    INTEREST EXPENSE                                            
    Deposits     11,175     10,960     10,180     10,112     8,758     42,427     27,019  
    Borrowings     2,885     3,226     4,196     3,286     3,356     13,593     12,448  
    Total interest expense     14,060     14,186     14,376     13,398     12,114     56,020     39,467  
    Net interest income     14,137     14,020     14,235     13,928     14,195     56,320     61,432  
    PROVISION FOR CREDIT LOSSES                                            
    Provision for credit losses on loans     3,760     3,077     8,640     1,239     1,162     16,716     2,357  
    (Recapture of) provision for credit losses on unfunded commitments     (105 )   57     99     (269 )   (10 )   (218 )   (1,034 )
    Provision for credit losses     3,655     3,134     8,739     970     1,152     16,498     1,323  
    Net interest income after provision for credit losses     10,482     10,886     5,496     12,958     13,043     39,822     60,109  
    NONINTEREST INCOME                                            
    Loan and deposit service fees     1,054     1,059     1,076     1,102     1,068     4,291     4,341  
    Sold loan servicing fees and servicing rights mark-to-market     (115 )   10     74     219     276     188     676  
    Net gain on sale of loans     52     58     150     52     33     312     438  
    Net loss on sale of investment securities     —     —     (2,117 )   —     (5,397 )   (2,117 )   (5,397 )
    Net gain on sale of premises and equipment     —     —     7,919     —     —     7,919     —  
    Increase in cash surrender value of bank-owned life insurance     328     315     293     243     260     1,179     928  
    Income from death benefit on bank-owned life insurance, net     1,536     —     —     —     —     1,536     —  
    Other (loss) income     (1,555 )   337     (48 )   572     831     (694 )   3,034  
    Total noninterest income     1,300     1,779     7,347     2,188     (2,929 )   12,614     4,020  
    NONINTEREST EXPENSE                                            
    Compensation and benefits     7,367     8,582     8,588     8,128     7,397     32,665     31,209  
    Data processing     2,065     2,085     2,008     1,944     2,107     8,102     8,170  
    Occupancy and equipment     1,559     1,553     1,799     1,240     1,262     6,151     4,858  
    Supplies, postage, and telephone     296     360     317     293     351     1,266     1,433  
    Regulatory assessments and state taxes     460     548     457     513     376     1,978     1,635  
    Advertising     362     409     377     309     235     1,457     2,706  
    Professional fees     813     698     684     910     1,119     3,105     3,738  
    FDIC insurance premium     491     533     473     386     418     1,883     1,357  
    Other expense     820     1,080     906     580     3,725     3,386     6,348  
    Total noninterest expense     14,233     15,848     15,609     14,303     16,990     59,993     61,454  
    Loss before provision (benefit) for income taxes     (2,451 )   (3,183 )   (2,766 )   843     (6,876 )   (7,557 )   2,675  
    Provision (benefit) for income taxes     359     (1,203 )   (547 )   447     (1,354 )   (944 )   549  
    Net (loss) income   $ (2,810 ) $ (1,980 ) $ (2,219 ) $ 396   $ (5,522 ) $ (6,613 ) $ 2,286  
                                                 
    Basic and diluted (loss) earnings per common share   $ (0.32 ) $ (0.23 ) $ (0.25 ) $ 0.04   $ (0.62 ) $ (0.75 ) $ 0.26  
                                                 
    FIRST NORTHWEST BANCORP AND SUBSIDIARY
    ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
    (Dollars in thousands) (Unaudited)
     
    Selected Loan Detail   December 31,
    2024    		   September 30,
    2024    		   June 30,
    2024    		   March 31,
    2024    		   December 31,
    2023    		  
    Construction and land loans breakout                                
    1-4 Family construction   $ 39,319   $ 43,125   $ 56,514   $ 69,075   $ 68,029  
    Multifamily construction     15,407     29,109     43,341     45,776     50,431  
    Nonresidential construction     16,857     17,500     1,015     3,374     3,756  
    Land and development     6,527     5,975     6,403     7,122     7,475  
    Total construction and land loans   $ 78,110   $ 95,709   $ 107,273   $ 125,347   $ 129,691  
                                     
    Auto and other consumer loans breakout                                
    Triad Manufactured Home loans   $ 128,231   $ 129,600   $ 110,510   $ 105,525   $ 105,057  
    Woodside auto loans     117,968     126,129     131,151     128,072     124,401  
    First Help auto loans     14,283     15,971     17,427     8,326     4,516  
    Other auto loans     1,647     2,064     2,690     3,313     4,158  
    Other consumer loans     6,747     7,434     23,845     23,598     10,998  
    Total auto and other consumer loans   $ 268,876   $ 281,198   $ 285,623   $ 268,834   $ 249,130  
                                     
    Commercial business loans breakout                                
    Northpointe Bank MPP   $ 36,230   $ 38,155   $ 9,150   $ 15,047   $ 9,502  
    Secured lines of credit     35,701     37,686     28,862     41,014     35,815  
    Unsecured lines of credit     1,717     1,571     1,133     1,001     456  
    SBA loans     7,044     7,219     7,146     8,944     9,115  
    Other commercial business loans     70,801     70,696     70,803     70,291     57,407  
    Total commercial business loans   $ 151,493   $ 155,327   $ 117,094   $ 136,297   $ 112,295  
    Loans by Collateral and Unfunded Commitments   December 31,
    2024    		   September 30,
    2024    		   June 30,
    2024    		   March 31,
    2024    		   December 31,
    2023    		  
    One-to-four family construction   $ 44,468   $ 51,607   $ 49,440   $ 70,100   $ 60,211  
    All other construction and land     34,290     45,166     58,346     55,286     69,484  
    One-to-four family first mortgage     466,046     469,053     434,840     436,543     426,159  
    One-to-four family junior liens     15,090     14,701     13,706     12,608     12,250  
    One-to-four family revolving open-end     51,481     48,459     44,803     45,536     42,479  
    Commercial real estate, owner occupied:                                
    Health care     29,129     29,407     29,678     29,946     22,523  
    Office     17,756     17,901     19,215     17,951     18,468  
    Warehouse     14,948     11,645     14,613     14,683     14,758  
    Other     78,170     64,535     56,292     55,063     61,304  
    Commercial real estate, non-owner occupied:                                
    Office     49,417     49,770     50,158     53,099     53,548  
    Retail     49,591     49,717     50,101     50,478     51,384  
    Hospitality     61,919     62,282     62,628     66,982     67,332  
    Other     81,640     82,573     84,428     93,040     94,822  
    Multi-family residential     333,419     354,118     350,382     339,907     333,428  
    Commercial business loans     77,381     86,904     79,055     90,781     76,920  
    Commercial agriculture and fishing loans     21,833     15,369     14,411     10,200     5,422  
    State and political subdivision obligations     369     404     405     405     405  
    Consumer automobile loans     133,789     144,036     151,121     139,524     132,877  
    Consumer loans secured by other assets     131,429     132,749     129,293     122,895     108,542  
    Consumer loans unsecured     3,658     4,411     5,209     6,415     7,712  
    Total loans   $ 1,695,823   $ 1,734,807   $ 1,698,124   $ 1,711,442   $ 1,660,028  
                                     
    Unfunded commitments under lines of credit or existing loans   $ 163,827   $ 166,446   $ 155,005   $ 148,736   $ 149,631  
    FIRST NORTHWEST BANCORP AND SUBSIDIARY
    NET INTEREST MARGIN ANALYSIS
    (Dollars in thousands) (Unaudited)
     
        Three Months Ended December 31,  
        2024   2023  
        Average   Interest         Average   Interest        
        Balance   Earned/   Yield/   Balance   Earned/   Yield/  
        Outstanding   Paid   Rate   Outstanding   Paid   Rate  
        (Dollars in thousands)  
    Interest-earning assets:                                      
    Loans receivable, net (1) (2)   $ 1,688,239   $ 23,716     5.59 % $ 1,628,718   $ 22,083     5.38 %
    Investment securities     313,759     3,658     4.64     297,020     3,393     4.53  
    FHLB dividends     11,762     273     9.23     12,514     252     7.99  
    Interest-earning deposits in banks     45,358     550     4.82     41,974     581     5.49  
    Total interest-earning assets (3)     2,059,118     28,197     5.45     1,980,226     26,309     5.27  
    Noninterest-earning assets     146,384                 147,429              
    Total average assets   $ 2,205,502               $ 2,127,655              
    Interest-bearing liabilities:                                      
    Interest-bearing demand deposits   $ 162,954   $ 210     0.51   $ 172,013   $ 197     0.45  
    Money market accounts     442,481     2,773     2.49     362,366     1,351     1.48  
    Savings accounts     206,605     721     1.39     247,744     963     1.54  
    Certificates of deposit, customer     461,136     4,925     4.25     424,722     4,197     3.92  
    Certificates of deposit, brokered     192,018     2,546     5.27     172,214     2,050     4.72  
    Total interest-bearing deposits (4)     1,465,194     11,175     3.03     1,379,059     8,758     2.52  
    Advances     236,576     2,491     4.19     256,560     2,962     4.58  
    Subordinated debt     39,504     394     3.97     39,425     394     3.96  
    Total interest-bearing liabilities     1,741,274     14,060     3.21     1,675,044     12,114     2.87  
    Noninterest-bearing deposits (4)     256,715                 259,845              
    Other noninterest-bearing liabilities     45,953                 36,795              
    Total average liabilities     2,043,942                 1,971,684              
    Average equity     161,560                 155,971              
    Total average liabilities and equity   $ 2,205,502               $ 2,127,655              
                                           
    Net interest income         $ 14,137               $ 14,195        
    Net interest rate spread                 2.24                 2.40  
    Net earning assets   $ 317,844               $ 305,182              
    Net interest margin (5)                 2.73                 2.84  
    Average interest-earning assets to average interest-bearing liabilities     118.3 %               118.2 %            

    (1) The average loans receivable, net balances include nonaccrual loans.
    (2) Interest earned on loans receivable includes net deferred fees (costs) of $103,000 and ($151,000) for the three months ended December 31, 2024 and 2023, respectively.
    (3) Includes interest-earning deposits (cash) at other financial institutions.
    (4) Cost of all deposits, including noninterest-bearing demand deposits, was 2.58% and 2.12% for the three months ended December 31, 2024 and 2023, respectively.
    (5) Net interest income divided by average interest-earning assets.

    FIRST NORTHWEST BANCORP AND SUBSIDIARY
    ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
    (Dollars in thousands) (Unaudited)

    Non-GAAP Financial Measures
    This press release contains financial measures that are not in conformity with generally accepted accounting principles in the United States of America (“GAAP”). Non-GAAP measures are presented where management believes the information will help investors understand the Company’s results of operations or financial position and assess trends. Where non-GAAP financial measures are used, the comparable GAAP financial measure is also provided. These disclosures should not be viewed as a substitute for operating results determined in accordance with GAAP, and are not necessarily comparable to non-GAAP performance measures that may be presented by other companies. Other banking companies may use names similar to those the Company uses for the non-GAAP financial measures the Company discloses, but may calculate them differently. Investors should understand how the Company and other companies each calculate their non-GAAP financial measures when making comparisons. Reconciliations of the GAAP and non-GAAP measures are presented below.

    Calculations Based on PPNR and Adjusted PPNR:

        For the Quarter Ended   For the Year Ended  
    (Dollars in thousands)   December 31,
    2024    		   September 30,
    2024    		   June 30,
    2024    		   March 31,
    2024    		   December 31,
    2023    		   December 31,
    2024    		   December 31,
    2023    		  
    Net (loss) income   $ (2,810 ) $ (1,980 ) $ (2,219 ) $ 396   $ (5,522 ) $ (6,613 ) $ 2,286  
    Plus: provision for credit losses     3,655     3,134     8,739     970     1,152     16,498     1,323  
    Provision (benefit) for income taxes     359     (1,203 )   (547 )   447     (1,354 )   (944 )   549  
    PPNR (1)     1,204     (49 )   5,973     1,813     (5,724 )   8,941     4,158  
    Selected nonrecurring adjustments to PPNR                                            
    Less: Net gain on sale of premises and equipment     —     —     7,919     —     —     7,919     —  
    Sale leaseback taxes and assessments included in occupancy and equipment     —     —     (359 )   —     —     (359 )   —  
    Net loss on sale of investment securities     —     —     (2,117 )   —     (5,397 )   (2,117 )   (5,397 )
    Adjusted PPNR (1)   $ 1,204   $ (49 ) $ 530   $ 1,813   $ (327 ) $ 3,498   $ 9,555  
                                                 
    Average total assets   $ 2,205,502   $ 2,209,333   $ 2,219,370   $ 2,166,187   $ 2,127,655   $ 2,200,138   $ 2,109,200  
    Return on average assets (GAAP)     -0.51 %   -0.36 %   -0.40 %   0.07 %   -1.03 %   -0.30 %   0.11 %
    Adjusted PPNR return on average assets (Non-GAAP) (1)     0.22 %   -0.01 %   0.10 %   0.34 %   -0.06 %   0.16 %   0.45 %
    (1) We believe these non-GAAP metrics are useful to evaluate the relative strength of the Company’s performance.
    FIRST NORTHWEST BANCORP AND SUBSIDIARY
    ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
    (Dollars in thousands) (Unaudited)
     
    Calculations Based on Tangible Common Equity:
     
        For the Quarter Ended   For the Year Ended  
        December 31,
    2024    		   September 30,
    2024    		   June 30,
    2024    		   March 31,
    2024    		   December 31,
    2023    		   December 31,
    2024    		   December 31,
    2023    		  
        (Dollars in thousands, except per share data)  
    Total shareholders’ equity   $ 153,882   $ 160,789   $ 158,881   $ 160,506   $ 163,340   $ 153,882   $ 163,340  
    Less: Goodwill and other intangible assets     1,082     1,083     1,084     1,085     1,086     1,082     1,086  
    Disallowed non-mortgage loan servicing rights     423     489     517     489     481     423     481  
    Total tangible common equity   $ 152,377   $ 159,217   $ 157,280   $ 158,932   $ 161,773   $ 152,377   $ 161,773  
                                                 
    Total assets   $ 2,232,006   $ 2,255,486   $ 2,215,962   $ 2,240,020   $ 2,201,797   $ 2,232,006   $ 2,201,797  
    Less: Goodwill and other intangible assets     1,082     1,083     1,084     1,085     1,086     1,082     1,086  
    Disallowed non-mortgage loan servicing rights     423     489     517     489     481     423     481  
    Total tangible assets   $ 2,230,501   $ 2,253,914   $ 2,214,361   $ 2,238,446   $ 2,200,230   $ 2,230,501   $ 2,200,230  
                                                 
    Average shareholders’ equity   $ 161,560   $ 160,479   $ 163,079   $ 161,867   $ 155,971   $ 161,742   $ 159,413  
    Less: Average goodwill and other intangible assets     1,083     1,084     1,085     1,085     1,086     1,084     1,087  
    Average disallowed non-mortgage loan servicing rights     489     517     489     481     608     494     670  
    Total average tangible common equity   $ 159,988   $ 158,878   $ 161,505   $ 160,301   $ 154,277   $ 160,164   $ 157,656  
                                                 
    Net (loss) income   $ (2,810 ) $ (1,980 ) $ (2,219 ) $ 396   $ (5,522 ) $ (6,613 ) $ 2,286  
    Common shares outstanding     9,353,348     9,365,979     9,453,247     9,442,796     9,611,876     9,353,348     9,611,876  
    GAAP Ratios:                                            
    Equity to total assets     6.89 %   7.13 %   7.17 %   7.17 %   7.42 %   6.89 %   7.42 %
    Return on average equity     -6.92 %   -4.91 %   -5.47 %   0.98 %   -14.05 %   -4.09 %   1.43 %
    Book value per common share   $ 16.45   $ 17.17   $ 16.81   $ 17.00   $ 16.99   $ 16.45   $ 16.99  
    Non-GAAP Ratios:                                            
    Tangible common equity to tangible assets (1)     6.83 %   7.06 %   7.10 %   7.10 %   7.35 %   6.83 %   7.35 %
    Return on average tangible common equity (1)     -6.99 %   -4.96 %   -5.53 %   0.99 %   -14.20 %   -4.13 %   1.45 %
    Tangible book value per common share (1)   $ 16.29   $ 17.00   $ 16.64   $ 16.83   $ 16.83   $ 16.29   $ 16.83  
    (1 ) We believe these non-GAAP metrics provide an important measure with which to analyze and evaluate financial condition and capital strength. In addition, we believe that use of tangible equity and tangible assets improves the comparability to other institutions that have not engaged in acquisitions that resulted in recorded goodwill and other intangibles.

    The MIL Network –

  • MIL-OSI Russia: “Piano Miniatures by S.V. Rachmaninov” in the Central City Youth Library named after M.A. Svetlov

    Translartion. Region: Russians Fedetion –

    Source: Moscow Government – Government of Moscow –

    The Central City Youth Library named after M.A. Svetlov invites you to a concert-lecture “Piano Miniatures by S.V. Rachmaninov”. The works of the Russian composer will be performed by the laureate of all-Russian and international competitions Anna Trushkova. In addition, she will talk about the miniatures. The composer put a special meaning into small works and improved them to the smallest details.

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

    Please Note; This Information is Raw Content Directly from the Information Source. It is access to What the Source Is Stating and Does Not Reflect

    https: //vv.mos.ru/afisha/Event/330040257/

    MIL OSI Russia News –

  • MIL-OSI Russia: “Miracles are Nearby” in the Central City Youth Library named after M.A. Svetlov

    Translartion. Region: Russians Fedetion –

    Source: Moscow Government – Government of Moscow –

    The Central City Youth Library named after M.A. Svetlov invites you to the event “Miracles are Nearby”. A production based on the tale of Pavel Bazhov “Silver Hoof” has been prepared for the guests. The audience will see a performance performed in the format of shadow theater.

    Afterwards, everyone will be able to take part in a master class on creating a postcard called “Fairytale Deer”.

    Entrance by ticket, which is issued only for the child. No more than two accompanying persons may accompany him/her.

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

    Please Note; This Information is Raw Content Directly from the Information Source. It is access to What the Source Is Stating and Does Not Reflect

    https: //vv.mos.ru/afisha/event/330041257/

    MIL OSI Russia News –

  • MIL-OSI United Kingdom: Russia must end its war and return to dialogue: UK Statement to the OSCE

    Source: United Kingdom – Executive Government & Departments

    Ambassador Holland reiterates the UK’s support to Ukraine, and calls on Russia to end its war and return to dialogue and risk reduction – including in the Forum for Security Cooperation.

    Thank you Mr Chair, dear Cristobal, and to your Foreign Minister, for setting out Spain’s priorities for the Forum for Security Co-operation this Trimester.  You can count on the UK’s steadfast support, as you Chair our Forum at this crucial time for Euro-Atlantic Security. 

    Over the winter period, many of us marked Christmas and the New Year.  But the people of Ukraine have had no rest.  Today marks 1069 days of their ongoing defence of their homeland, from a full-scale invasion which continues to violate the UN Charter and to contravene the Helsinki Final Act’s core principles, including those on sovereignty, territorial integrity and the non-use of force.   

    That is why each week, we have met in this Forum to support Ukraine and to hold Russia accountable for breaching its commitments.  And that is why we particularly welcome Spain’s proposed FSC topic on Women, Peace & Security. 

    Mr Chair, our Ministers mandated the Forum to hold a weekly politico-military dialogue, with tasks that include risk-reduction.  They mandated the Chair to ‘ensure the good order and smooth running of meetings’.  To set the agenda.  And to select and invite guest speakers.  We fully support the Chair’s prerogative to execute its mandate. 

    Unfortunately, at the closing session last Trimester, we had to condemn the Russian delegation – for a fourth Trimester in a row – for its attempts to disrupt the FSC from functioning at all.  Once again, I express my thanks to Denmark, and to other previous Chairs, for keeping the Forum functional, despite Russia’s attempts to prevent it. 

    As we said repeatedly, there remains another path.  If the Russian state’s professed wish for peace is genuine, it must end this war by withdrawing all of its forces to outside of Ukraine’s internationally recognised borders.  And from Georgia and Moldova.  If the Russian state is serious about dialogue and risk reduction, it must stop trying to undermine our Ministerial mandate of this Forum meeting each week.   

    I wish to conclude by welcoming Estonia to the FSC Troika, and to thank Croatia for their work as they leave the Troika.  And most importantly, I wish you, Mr Chair, and your able teams here in Vienna and in Madrid the best of luck this Trimester.  You can count on the support of the UK delegation.

    Updates to this page

    Published 29 January 2025

    Invasion of Ukraine

    MIL OSI United Kingdom –

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Joint Statement: Colombia-Sweden Bilateral Partnership

    Source: Government of Sweden

    At the invitation of Colombian Minister of Foreign Affairs Luis Gilberto Murillo, Swedish Minister for Foreign Affairs Maria Malmer Stenergard is making an official visit to Colombia on 28–29 February 2025.

    “In a conversation I had with Ms Malmer Stenergard last November, we agreed to hold the first High-Level Dialogue between Colombia and Sweden during her visit to Colombia, thereby putting the Bilateral Partnership established by President of Colombia Gustavo Petro and the Prime Minister of Sweden in June 2024 into practice. During this meeting, we will identify this Partnership’s concrete benefits for our populations, and we will task our teams with implementing the lines of action to continue moving forward as partners,” said Mr Murillo. 

    In view of the above and in the framework of Ms Malmer Stenergard’s official visit, the first High-Level Dialogue between Colombia and Sweden is taking place at the San Carlos Palace, chaired by Colombia’s Acting Minister of Foreign Affairs Paola Vásquez and with more than 30 institutions from both countries present. 

    Sweden and Colombia are partners for peace. Colombia is grateful for Sweden’s invaluable support for its efforts for peace with a territorial emphasis. Both countries share the values of democracy and respect for human rights, and we reaffirm the importance of multilateralism, international cooperation, respect for international law and support for the UN Charter.

    For the implementation of the Colombia-Sweden Bilateral Partnership, a High-Level Dialogue was agreed between the two Governments, in accordance with the declaration signed during Colombian President Gustavo Petro’s visit to Sweden on 12–14 June 2024 and as part of the commemoration of the 150th anniversary of the establishment of diplomatic relations between the two countries. 

    This first High-Level Dialogue will result in a report on progress of the thematic working groups that form a part of the Agreement, namely: (i) cooperation for peace (with a territorial emphasis), human rights, human security and strengthening institutions; and (ii) economic opportunities, science, innovation and sustainable development. 

    The progress includes:   

    1. Sweden’s addition of USD 1 million to the agreement with UN Women to strengthen collaboration with the private sector for women’s economic empowerment and the implementation of the Action Plan on women, peace and security.
    2. The addition of SEK 2 million to the ongoing agreement with the UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights to promote its work in Colombia. With this addition, Sweden’s contribution totals SEK 49 million. These efforts emphasise the protection of leaders in conflict-affected areas, the Ethnic Chapter’s accompaniment of the peace agreement with the FARC, reconnaissance activities and responsibilities in the framework of the conflict, etc.
    3. The addition of SEK 6 million to the regional agreement with the Nonprofit Enterprise and Self-Sustainability Team to identify, accompany and help accelerate the work of small businesses that can create green and sustainable jobs in the most vulnerable and conflict-affected areas in Colombia.
    4. The launch of the ‘legacy’ project that was initiated at COP16 in Cali with a contribution of USD 5 million with the Colombian NGO Fondo Acción, to support the implementation of the Ministry of the Environment and Sustainable Development’s restoration plan in the Colombian Pacific region. This agreement also supports local Colombian organisations to ensure sustainability of protected areas through conservation and sustainable management of natural resources.
    5. The funding of a study to produce and create a biogas value chain for the transport sector in Bogotá. Sweden has completed the first phase of the study with an investment of USD 700 000, and the second phase will begin during the first half of 2025, with a value of USD 800 000, making a total of USD 1.5 million. This project is financed by Swedfund.
    6. An investment of more than USD 80 million by EQT, a Swedish investment organisation, and Zelestra, which will lead the development of the ‘Wimke’ solar photovoltaic project in San Juan del Cesar in the La Guajira department. ‘Wimke’ joins the ‘La Unión’ and ‘La Mata’ projects, with capacities of 100 MW and 80 MW respectively, strengthening Zelestra’s presence as a leader in the Colombian solar photovoltaic generation sector and its commitment to sustainability and energy transition.
    7. The realisation of the Memorandum of Understanding on law enforcement cooperation between the Colombian Ministries of Defence and Justice and the Swedish Government.
    8. In the area of sustainable mining, Colombia is part of the ‘MARS’ programme for responsible and sustainable mining, a form of cooperation between Sweden and the Latin America and Caribbean region to promote sustainable and responsible mining.  USD 1.3 million is being allocated for a Colombian component of this programme. 
    9. The implementation of a sustainable transport model for the small-scale fishing supply chain in Guapi, in the Cauca department, by the National University of Colombia, the Royal Institute of Technology and Lund University.

    Ms Malmer Stenergard was accompanied by a large business delegation, with the opportunity to discuss and develop the socio-ecological transition portfolio in Colombia and identify the many opportunities for Swedish investors.

    Ms Malmer Stenergard is also visiting Chocó, joined by Vice-Minister for Women at the Colombian Ministry of Equality and Equity Tamara Ospina and others, which will be an opportunity to hold meetings with civil society organisations and the general public, as well as to reaffirm support to initiatives and projects to promote peace and gender equality with territorial impact.  

    Bogotá, 28 January 2025 

    MIL OSI Europe News –

  • MIL-OSI Economics: Threat predictions for industrial enterprises 2025

    Source: Securelist – Kaspersky

    Headline: Threat predictions for industrial enterprises 2025

    Key global cyberthreat landscape development drivers

    Hunt for innovations

    Innovations are changing our lives. Today, the world is on the threshold of another technical revolution. Access to new technologies is a ticket to the future, a guarantee of economic prosperity and political sovereignty. Therefore, many countries are looking for their way into the new technological order, investing in promising research and development in a variety of areas: AI and machine learning, quantum computing, optical electronics, new materials, energy sources and types of engines, satellites and telecommunications, genetics, biotechnology and medicine.

    In terms of cybersecurity, growing interest in innovation means APTs are focusing on institutions and enterprises involved in new tech research and development. As the demand for the technical know-how grows, elite cybercriminal groups – such as top ransomware gangs and hacktivists – are also joining the game, hunting for the leading innovative enterprises’ trade secrets.

    Industrial enterprises should keep in mind that this information might be even easier to access and exfiltrate from the shop floor than from within research lab and office network perimeters. The supply chain and network of trusted partners are also very logical potential targets.

    Intentionally created barriers and sanction wars

    Increasing geopolitical turbulence, sanction wars, and the artificial restriction of access to efficient technology is boosting the drive to violate the intellectual property rights of leading enterprises. This may lead to the following security risks.

    • OT technology developers and suppliers are facing the problem that existing mechanisms built into their products may no longer be effectively safeguarding their intellectual property.
    • Сracks, third-party patches, and various other ways to bypass license restrictions, come at the price of increased cybersecurity risks right inside OT perimeter.
    • In addition to stealing documentation related to cutting-edge technological developments, attackers will continue to hunt for technical know-how – for example, collecting 3D/physical models and CAD/CAM designs as we saw in the attacks by Librarian Ghouls.
    • PLC programs, SCADA projects, and other sources of technological process information stored in OT assets may also become another target for malicious actors.

    New technologies mean new cyber risks

    When trying something completely new, one should always expect some unexpected consequences in addition to the promised benefits. Today, many industrial enterprises are keeping up with organizations in other sectors (for example, financial or retail) in the implementation of IT innovations, such as augmented reality and quantum computing. As in many other fields, the biggest boost in efficiency is expected from the widespread use of machine learning and AI systems, including their direct application in production – when tweaking and adjusting technological process control. Already today, the use of such systems at certain facilities, such as non-ferrous metallurgy, can increase final product output by an estimated billion dollars per year. Once an enterprise experiences such an increase in efficiency, there’s no going back – such a system will become an essential production asset. This may affect the industrial threat landscape in several ways:

    • The improper use of AI technologies in the IT and operational processes of industrial enterprises may lead to the unintended disclosure of confidential information (for example, by being entered into a model training dataset) and to new security threats. The seriousness and likelihood of some of these threats is currently hard to assess.
    • Both the AI systems and the unique enterprise data they use (either in its raw form – historical telemetry data – used as a training dataset, or as neural network weights incorporated into the AI model), if they become crucial assets, may now be new cyberattack targets. For example, if the systems or data get locked by the bad guys, they may be impossible to restore. Additionally, attacking these systems may not pose risks to the safety of the victim facility, unlike for traditional OT systems, meaning malicious actors may be more inclined to go for the attack.
    • Attackers also do not ignore technical progress; their use of AI at various stages of the killchain (for malicious tools development and social engineering, such as text generation for phishing emails) reduces costs, thereby accelerating the development of cyberthreats. This tendency will certainly evolve in 2025.

    Time-tested technologies mean new cyber risks

    Just because a system has not been attacked, it doesn’t necessarily mean that it is well protected. It could be that attackers have simply not reached it yet – perhaps because they already had simpler, more reliable and automated ways to perform attacks, or maybe you’ve just been lucky.

    The expression “if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it” takes on a special meaning in OT infrastructures. Sometimes systems have been running for years or even decades without any modifications, even without installing critical security patches or changing insecure configurations, such as unnecessary network services, debug interfaces and weak passwords. Sometimes systems are still running in the exact same state as when they were put into operation.

    Things get even more complicated when you take into account the poor quality of information about OT product vulnerabilities available from the developers or public sources. Fortunately, malicious actors still very rarely attack industrial assets and industrial automation systems.

    Moreover, in addition to unprotected industrial automation systems such as PLCs and SCADA servers, which are in fact very difficult to keep cybersecure, there are many other types of devices and even entire infrastructures that are somehow connected to the technological network. The security of these systems is often unjustifiably overlooked:

    • Telecom equipment. Its security is usually considered either the responsibility of the telecom operator or thought to be unnecessary for some reason. For example, mobile base stations and technological networks of mobile operators are believed to be already sufficiently protected from cyberattacks, which is why “no one attacks them”. For some reason, this problem is largely ignored by security researchers as well: while the security of endpoints and their key components, such as modems, is thoroughly studied, there are extremely few in-depth publications on the security of base stations or core network equipment. However, the equipment can obviously be compromised, at least from the operator’s side, for example, during maintenance. After all, telecom operators themselves are far from being immune to cyberattacks, as the story of the Blackwood attacks using the NSPX30 implant shows us. Thus, the following must be kept in mind:
      • At the very least, the threat model of industrial enterprises must include “man-in-the-middle” attacks on telecom equipment and the infrastructure of telecom operators.
      • Given how rapidly all kinds of smart remote monitoring and control systems are being implemented – primarily in mining and logistics, but also in other sectors and types of facilities – the priority of securing telecom-related infrastructures will only increase correspondingly. For example, to guarantee the safety of robotized infrastructures and the use of automated transport at facilities, we’re seeing the introduction of wireless communication. Industrial enterprises should clearly invest in telecom security in order to avoid cyberincidents, perhaps as early as this year.
    • The security of smart sensors, meters, measuring and control devices, and other devices in the Industrial Internet of Things is typically neglected by both the enterprises using them and, correspondingly, the developers themselves. However, as the history of FrostyGoop shows, these devices may also become attack targets.
    • The connection points of small remote industrial infrastructure facilities typically use inexpensive network equipment, sometimes not even designed for industrial use (for example, SOHO devices). Their cybersecurity can be extremely difficult to keep in good condition, both due to architectural limitations and the complexity of centralized maintenance. At the same time, such devices can be manipulated not only to distribute general-purpose malware or host botnet agents (as in the case of Flax Typhoon/Raptor Train), but also as an entry point into the IT or OT network.
    • The Windows OS family has been the most popular platform for workstations and automation system servers for decades. However, in recent years, many industrial enterprises have been increasingly installing Linux-based systems in their OT circuits, for various reasons. One of the decisive arguments in favor of choosing Linux is often the belief that such systems are more resistant to cyberattacks. On the one hand, there is indeed less malware that can run on this OS, and the probability of accidental infection is lower than for Windows OS. On the other hand, protecting Linux systems against a targeted attack is just as difficult, and in some cases even more so. The fact is that:
      • Developers of security solutions for Linux have to catch up with solutions protecting Windows infrastructure. For a long time, many functions were not in demand by customers and, therefore, were not implemented. At the same time, implementing new functionality is more expensive because it is necessary to support multiple OS strains developing in parallel, and the integration of security solutions is not a priority for kernel developers. There are two downstream consequences of this: first, a lack of effective standard integration mechanisms, and second, updating the kernel can easily “break” compatibility – and a simple module rebuild may not be enough.
      • On the industrial enterprise side, there are clearly not enough information security specialists who are also Linux experts, so both secure device configuration and monitoring and incident detection may not be that effective.
      • Both Linux OT solutions themselves and their developers often demonstrate insufficient information security maturity and can be an easy target for attackers, as was revealed, for example, during the investigation of a series of Sandworm attacks on Ukrainian critical infrastructure facilities.

    Wrong vendor choice means big trouble

    Insufficient investment of product developers or technology providers in their own information security guarantees that their customers will experience incidents. This problem is especially relevant for providers of niche products and services. An illustrative case is the attack on CDK Global, which led to direct losses of its customers exceeding a total of one billion dollars.

    The situation for industrial enterprises is complicated by a number of factors. Key among these are:

    • Extremely long technology supply chains. Equipment, including automation systems for key production assets, is very complex. An enterprise’s industrial equipment fleet may include both all the main components typical of IT systems and many components created as a result of cooperation between multiple manufacturers of industry-specific technologies. Many of these may be relatively small developers of niche solutions without the necessary resources to satisfactorily ensure their own security and that of their products. Moreover, the installation, initial setup, and regular maintenance of equipment requires the involvement of various third-party specialists, further expanding the attack surface of the supply chain and trusted partners.
    • Almost every large industrial organization is its own vendor. The specifics of the particular industry and enterprise require significant modification of ready-made solutions, as well as the development of new automation solutions tailored for the organization. Often, these developments are carried out either within the organization itself or by subsidiaries or related companies. All of this multiplies almost all of the risk factors described above: such developments are rarely carried out with a high level of security maturity, resulting in solutions full of basic vulnerabilities that even mediocre attackers can exploit. Obviously, these security issues are already being used in cyberattacks and will continue to be.

    Security by obscurity doesn’t work anymore for OT infrastructures

    The availability of so many tools for working with industrial equipment (just count the number of libraries and utilities implementing industrial network protocols posted on GitHub) makes developing and implementing an attack on an industrial enterprise’s main production assets significantly easier than just a few years ago. In addition, industrial enterprises themselves continue to evolve – over the past few years, we’ve seen big efforts to not only automate production, but also to inventory and document systems and processes. Now, to impact an industrial facility on the cyber-physical level, attackers no longer need to carefully study textbooks on the particular type of protective systems (such as SIS or circuit/relay protection) basics and to involve external experts in the particular industry. All the necessary information is now available in convenient digital form in the organization’s administrative and technological network. We have seen cases of attackers telling journalists that after they entered the victims’ network perimeter they studied internal facility’s safety-related documentation for a long time before choosing which OT systems to attack, in order to avoid putting employee’s lives at risk or polluting the environment as a result of the attack.

    MIL OSI Economics –

  • MIL-OSI Australia: Press conference, Commonwealth Parliament Offices, Melbourne

    Source: Australian Treasurer

    Jim Chalmers:

    Headline inflation is now in the mid‑twos and underlying inflation is in the low‑threes. These numbers are better than expected and better than forecasts. What they show is we are making very meaningful, very substantial, and now sustained progress in the fight against inflation. It means that headline inflation is now at an almost four‑year low, and now sits in the middle of the Reserve Bank’s target band, and underlying inflation is now at its lowest in 3 years. These are very welcome developments.

    We don’t pretend that it’s mission accomplished on inflation, but we are making very substantial progress. On every measure, we have now made substantial and sustained progress in this fight against inflation. Inflation was much higher and rising fast under the Liberals when we came to office, and we’ve been able to get on top of this inflation challenge and to get it down in a very meaningful way. Inflation is now almost a third of the 6.1 per cent that we inherited when we came to office.

    Now, if you look at the numbers, headline inflation was just 0.2 per cent in the December quarter. That makes it 2.4 per cent higher through the year, which is around a quarter of its peak, and in the bottom half of the Reserve Bank’s target band. It means our headline inflation is now lower than most major advanced economies, including the US, the UK, and Germany. And if you look at the underlying measure, the trimmed mean measure, it was 3.2 per cent through the year to the December quarter, down from a revised 3.6 per cent. If you look at the trimmed mean number in the quarter, it almost halved. It’s now 0.5 per cent and that makes it around a third of what it was at the time of the election.

    If you look at the big drivers of this moderation in inflation, the big drivers were construction costs, rents, and insurance, and that, I think, is quite an encouraging sign that inflation is moderating more quickly than anticipated, even as recently as the forecast that we released in December. These numbers are better than the market expected, and they are lower than the forecasts for inflation, and both of those developments are very welcome.

    Australians collectively can be really proud of the combination of developments that we have seen in our economy in recent times. Inflation is down, wages are up, unemployment is low, and 1.1 million jobs have been created during the course of this Albanese Labor government. Now the soft landing that we have been planning for and preparing for is now looking more and more likely.

    Many countries around the world have paid for this kind of progress on inflation with much higher unemployment, or with negative quarters of economic growth. What Australians have been able to achieve is an economy where growth has continued to tick over, albeit slowly, where unemployment has stayed incredibly low, jobs are being created, wages are up, but inflation is down considerably and we see that in the numbers again today.

    Our cost‑of‑living pressures aren’t disappearing, but they are easing. We know that the fight against inflation is not yet over, but these are incredibly encouraging signs that we are getting on top of this challenge in our economy. The worst of the inflation challenge is now well and truly behind us, and that’s one of the reasons why we are confident but not complacent about the economy in the year ahead.

    We know that our political opponents will try and dismiss and diminish what Australians have been able to achieve together in their economy. We know that Australians are doing it tough. We know how important our cost‑of‑living help is, and we know that the best thing we can do, the most important focus that we can maintain is on the cost of living and that is the government’s approach.

    The Albanese Labor government is focused on beating inflation and helping with the cost of living and building Australia’s future. Our political opponents, Peter Dutton and the Coalition, are focused on conflict and culture wars, and they would make people worse off and take Australia backwards.

    If we look at the impact of the cost‑of‑living measures over recent years on the pressures that people face right around Australia, it’s worth reminding people that Peter Dutton did not support cost‑of‑living help for Australians doing it tough. If Peter Dutton had his way, Australians would have been thousands of dollars worse off and they would be worse off still if he wins the election and that’s because when he was the Health Minister, he went after Medicare. Coalition governments want lower wages, not higher wages, and he will push up electricity bills with his nuclear insanity that he has been trying to foist on the Australian people.

    So the choice and the contrast is very clear. The biggest risk to inflation and the cost of living and the economy in 2025 is Peter Dutton and a Coalition government. For our part, the Albanese Labor government is focused on getting inflation down, getting wages up, rolling out this cost‑of‑living relief, keeping unemployment low because that is the best way that we can make a meaningful difference to the cost‑of‑living pressures that we know Australians are still confronting. Happy to take a few questions.

    Journalist:

    You talked about, Treasurer, it not being mission accomplished yet, but started off this press conference pretty smiley, talking about an incredibly positive, optimistic set of numbers. Do you see there being an argument, a legitimate argument not to cut rates at this point? Are there pressure points pushing in the other direction still?

    Chalmers:

    I’m not going to make any sort of commentary which can be confused with giving free advice to the independent Reserve Bank, or making predictions about the decision that they will take when they meet on the [18th] of February. I respect the independence of the Reserve Bank too much to try and make predictions or to give them free advice, or to try and colour in for them the decision that they will make independently and announce towards the middle of February.

    I have always seen our responsibility as a government to be the focus on the areas that we can influence, getting inflation down, getting wages up, keeping unemployment low, those have been our objectives and we leave the decision on interest rates to the independent Reserve Bank.

    We’ve had a lot of free advice over the last couple of years from our political opponents and others, who say that we should have cut much harder or we should have done things differently. What these numbers show is we’ve been able to achieve something that other countries cannot, which is to make this remarkable progress on inflation at the same time as we maintain the gains we’ve made in the labour market and keep the economy ticking over.

    Now, the economic and often the political orthodoxy, and what we’ve seen play out in other countries, is that you have to pay for much lower inflation with much higher unemployment. Australia has shown that there is a better way to go about it and we’re seeing the fruits of some of those efforts in the inflation numbers today.

    Journalist:

    Has the government done everything it can to provide the environment for rates to come down?

    Chalmers:

    We take no outcome for granted when it comes to interest rates, and again, it’s not for me to give free advice to the independent Reserve Bank. I respect their independence. They will weigh up these numbers and other numbers that we’ve seen in the economy since they last met. They will come to a decision and communicate that decision in February, and I’m not going to get in the way of that. I’m not going to predict it or pre‑empt it or give them free advice. I’m focused on my job and my job is to roll out this cost‑of‑living help in the most responsible way, get inflation down and wages up, and keep unemployment low. We are encouraged by the numbers that we have seen today, but we take no outcome on interest rates for granted.

    Journalist:

    Are you relatively comfortable, given how much data that we’ve seen now, that the numbers are in or around the band at a sustainable level, or do you think we might see some bumpiness over the next few months?

    Chalmers:

    I think inevitably when you see the inflation numbers here or in other countries, inflation rarely moderates in a perfectly straight line. For example, inflation in the US is higher than it is in Australia and it’s rising in the US again, and that reminds us, I think helpfully, that inflation doesn’t moderate in a perfectly straight line around the world and that’s been the experience here as well. I think that’s an important thing to remember. But the facts of the matter are laid out by these new numbers today. Headline inflation is now in the bottom half of the Reserve Bank’s target band. Underlying inflation is in the low‑threes, both of those outcomes are better than expected and lower than the official forecasts.

    The Reserve Bank will weigh up all of those considerations, they will come to a decision independently, but I think what we’re seeing here is a reminder that the soft landing that we have been planning for and preparing for is looking more and more likely.

    Journalist:

    Would a rate cut influence the Prime Minister’s thinking around election time, and can you actually commit to doing a budget on March 25? We’ve heard language from your Finance Minister about being a budget update. Can you commit now to doing a Budget on March 25?

    Chalmers:

    We’re working towards a Budget on March 25th.

    Journalist:

    Towards or actually doing one?

    Chalmers:

    The reason I put it like that is because it’s a decision for the Prime Minister. It’s not a decision that I take alone. The Prime Minister takes that decision. Our expectation, and all of our work, is heading towards a March 25 Budget. The reality is that the Prime Minister will make that decision, no doubt he will confer with his colleagues about it, but our expectation is that there will be a Budget on the 25th.

    Journalist:

    Would you like – sorry Treasurer, would you like to do a Budget on March 25 and if so, are you aiming as much as possible to find a third surplus?

    Chalmers:

    There’s 2 parts to that question. I hand down budgets when the Prime Minister asks us to, and we’ve handed down 3 already and the fourth one is due on March 25. I’ve seen speculation about a third surplus, and I would urge caution on that front. We are deliberately cautious and conservative when it comes to budgets. We were in the first 3 and we will be in the fourth. But I think there’s cause for additional caution and conservatism because there hasn’t been anything yet that we have seen which would make us think that there would be a substantial difference to the budget bottom line than what we forecast in December in the mid‑year budget update. I know that there’s speculation to the contrary. I know that there’s a lot of global economic uncertainty which can impact the budget bottom line in both directions, but nothing we’ve seen yet has materially changed our expectations.

    Journalist:

    Is the rate decision on February 17–18 the primary factor in the Prime Minister’s decision around when to go with the election?

    Chalmers:

    I wouldn’t have thought so. I wouldn’t have thought so, but you’d have to ask the Prime Minister. You know, an election is due –

    Journalist:

    Surely he’d know that, though?

    Chalmers:

    Well, you’d have to ask him. An election is due by May, so the election will be on us before long and there will be a number of considerations when it comes to timing, and you will have to – it’s not for me to decide on my own.

    Journalist:

    Would a rate cut be – would you feel that it would be personal vindication for your fiscal strategy in the face of a lot of criticism from the media and other politicians?

    Chalmers:

    First of all, I don’t see it in personal terms. The most important thing here is to see some of the price pain that Australians have endured now since before the last election, that that continues to ease, and that we get inflation down at the same time as we get wages growing again in a more meaningful way and we keep that unemployment rate low. Those are the things that I’m focused on. You asked me about the free advice that we get from time to time. You know, there’s been some very strange commentary, you know, people –

    Journalist:

    Such as?

    Chalmers:

    People saying that there were going to be 3 rate hikes last year and there were none. There hasn’t been a rate hike since November in 2023.

    Journalist:

    Warren Hogan?

    Chalmers:

    Well, he’s not the only one. There’s been a lot of strange commentary, and we get a lot of free advice. One of the things that I’m proudest of is we have maintained a focus on the key elements of a soft landing in our economy – inflation coming down, not sacrificing people’s jobs, keeping the economy ticking over. We’ve still got an economy which is soft, softer than is normal. We’ve still got people under pretty extreme pressure. But the sorts of things that we are preparing for and planning for are now unfolding.

    This very substantial and now sustained moderation in inflation is probably the most important part of that, but to be able to do that, while maintaining unemployment at 4.0 per cent, is a pretty remarkable achievement for which all Australians can share in the credit.

    If you think about if you’d said a few years ago that it would be possible for a government, in this case our government, to maintain average unemployment rates, the lowest of any government in 50 years, at the same time as we get inflation from its peak of 7.8 now down to 2.4, I think Australians can be proud of that progress that has been made, and not because cost‑of‑living pressures have disappeared, but because they are easing at the same time as we satisfy some of these other economic objectives.

    Journalist:

    Should Australian tech companies be concerned about this rise in Chinese AI?

    Chalmers:

    Obviously this is a very fast‑moving and volatile part of the economy. It’s one of the reasons why Ed Husic, to his credit, and other colleagues are putting a lot of time and effort and thought into the appropriate guardrails when it comes to AI. We are forward leaning about AI. We think it can be revolutionary in our economy, that it has the capacity to boost productivity and deliver a whole range of economic gains, but we know that there needs to be guardrails as well.

    If you look at DeepSeek, and what we’ve seen in the last couple of days, which have been some pretty extraordinary developments that the market has reacted to in a pretty remarkable way, the advice that Ed has provided, which I would echo now, is we would urge Australians to be cautious about this new technology.

    Obviously we are constantly receiving advice on it. You wouldn’t expect me to go into all of the detail of that here. But what we try to and what our agencies try to, is to work closely with the sector, the private sector, updating the advice when it’s appropriate.

    Journalist:

    National security advice?

    Chalmers:

    All kinds of advice. When there’s a big development in our economy, particularly when it relates to technology, of course we have a look at it. Of course we monitor it closely. Of course we try and get our head around and understand the consequences for our own industries and our own economy. That’s pretty standard for a diligent government and that’s what we will do in this case.

    Journalist:

    But technology that is refusing to provide information about the Tiananmen Square massacre, not answering question the about the state of Chinese politics, potentially gathering data from Western accounts and feeding it back to the Chinese system, does that trouble you? Before receiving national security advice, does that trouble you at a general level?

    Chalmers:

    I don’t want to engage in a hypothetical or pre‑empt the sorts of discussions that we would have as a government. I’d echo Ed’s very wise advice, and Ed’s very wise advice is to be cautious. From a government point of view, we stay across all these kinds of developments, not just this one, and we provide an updated advice as it’s appropriate.

    Journalist:

    Just one very Victorian question given we’re in Melbourne. Airport Rail, it’s been reported by News Corp there’s $2 billion more on the table for that project. Can you explain why you see that as a city‑shaping project and why the federal government appears to be putting priority on that project rather than the Suburban Rail Loop?

    Chalmers:

    I’m not sure I perfectly share your assessment of it. What we’ve said about those 2 projects is that we consider them to be separate. You know, we don’t see a link between funding for one over the other. And all I would do beyond that is to remind you of what I said on Saturday, which is my wonderful colleague, Catherine King, she’s in discussions with States and Territories all the time about the best combination of projects in the infrastructure pipelines, and that’s the case here as well.

    I would also say that I’m looking forward to spending some time this afternoon with the Victorian Treasurer. I had an opportunity to speak with her by phone already, but we will be catching up this afternoon. No doubt some of these sorts of issues will come up.

    Journalist:

    Do you think –

    Chalmers:

    I’m just conscious that we haven’t really perfectly shared the questions. Do you want to go?

    Journalist:

    I’ve just got one that hasn’t been answered already.

    Chalmers:

    Okay, thanks.

    Journalist:

    Your government’s announced –

    Chalmers:

    These 2 are very selfish, mate.

    Journalist:

    One of your government’s measures is about energy bill relief assistance, you spoke about cost‑of‑living assistance for voters. Can people expect that to continue beyond July this year?

    Chalmers:

    Our focus is on rolling out the cost‑of‑living help that we’ve already announced and that we’ve already budgeted for, including the cost‑of‑living help that comes in the form of those electricity rebates. And if you look at the numbers today, when it comes to electricity prices, they fell in – the year to the December quarter – they fell by 25.2 per cent, and they still would have fallen without the energy rebates and so energy rebates are part of the story but not the whole story. We’ve seen electricity prices fall by more than a quarter in the year to December. They still would have fallen 1.6 per cent without the energy rebates that we’re rolling out in conjunction with the states. What that says is our cost‑of‑living help is helping, but electricity prices would have moderated without it as well.

    Journalist:

    So the help isn’t quite as strong then?

    Chalmers:

    What we do from budget to budget is we consider the pressures that people are under, the budget constraints that we’re dealing with, and the economic conditions, and we come to a decision about what, if any, further cost‑of‑living help is appropriate and affordable and responsible. We did that in our first 3 budgets, and we’ll do that in the fourth.

    Journalist:

    Do you expect Jaclyn Symes is going to ask you for a fairer share of the GST for Victoria?

    Chalmers:

    I don’t know. I think that treasurers in every State and Territory are typically interested in more support from the Commonwealth. That wouldn’t make her unique if she did. But I’m looking forward to a discussion with her. I think she’s going to be a wonderful Treasurer here in Victoria and I try and maintain open lines of communications with all of my State and Territory colleagues, and that’s because I believe you get more done when you work together than when you work at cross‑purposes.

    Journalist:

    Absolute last one from me. There’s some good numbers at the start of inflation, but some really dire numbers in a Deloitte report on living standards and real wages. Do you expect to announce more between now and the election on how you will get the economy to grow, how to get productivity up and living standards up?

    Chalmers:

    Yes. And one of the things that we’ve tried to be very disciplined about is at the same time as we manage these near‑term pressures on people, that we don’t drop the ball when it comes to the longer‑term agenda. The productivity agenda around human capital, the energy transformation, adapting and adopting technology, our competition policy agenda, making our economy more dynamic and more productive, we have maintained a focus on these things throughout. We’ll have more to say between now and the election on those important policy areas.

    I also remind you that I’ve tasked the Productivity Commission with some important work on what the next agenda beyond our current agenda would look like when it comes to boosting productivity in our economy.

    We’ve made it really clear that coming out of these 3 economic shocks in the last 15 years, that in more normal times ideally growth in the economy would be private sector led, that remains my view, and in order for that to be the case, we have all got to work together to make our economy more productive and dynamic and competitive. We have done a bunch of things on that front but there will be more to do.

    Thanks very much.

    MIL OSI News –

  • MIL-Evening Report: A marine heatwave in northwest Australia is killing huge numbers of fish. It’s heading south

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Sina Pinter, PhD Candidate in Ocean Dynamics, The University of Western Australia

    Ningaloo Reef is facing the heat James C. Farr/Shutterstock

    Tens of thousands of fish have died off northwestern Australia, as a large and long-lasting marine heatwave intensifies.

    The fish kill at Gnoorea Beach near Karratha is concerning our team of scientists, as the hot mass of water heads south towards Ningaloo Reef and the seagrass gardens in Shark Bay. That’s because we’ve seen this before. An enormous marine heatwave in 2010-11 devastated fisheries and ecosystems further down the WA coast.

    This marine heatwave began in September, with temperatures up to 3°C warmer than usual off Broome. There’s no end in sight.

    The heatwave comes as oceans worldwide experience recordbreaking heat, driven by climate change. More than 90% of all heat trapped by greenhouse gases goes into the oceans.

    The fish kill is a visible way to glimpse a disaster often out of sight and out of mind. But these marine heatwaves do much more, from wiping out seagrass meadows and kelp beds to trashing fisheries.

    Up to 30,000 dead fish have washed up around Gnoorea Beach near Karratha.
    WA Department of Primary Industries and Regional Development

    How bad is this marine heatwave?

    Marine heatwaves are periods of at least five consecutive days when ocean temperatures are significantly higher than the long-term average for the region and season.

    Since September 2024, temperatures off Australia’s northwest coast have been high enough to be considered a heatwave.

    In late December, the area of hotter water expanded southward along the Pilbara coast and became more intense. Temperatures hit 4–5°C above normal at the surface. Our research group has gathered data from satellite measurements, which tells us it’s hotter than usual. Data from autonomous ocean gliders also show unusual levels of heat as far down as 200 metres.

    In January, this heatwave has become bad enough to be classified in some areas as a severe marine heatwave.

    There’s no relief in sight yet. The Bureau of Meteorology forecasts marine heatwave conditions to continue through February.

    figure showing intensity of marine heatwave in northwest Western Australia
    On the left, the marine heatwave on the Northwest Shelf is visible in dark red. On the right, the intensity of the heatwave is shown over time on the Northwest Shelf and further south in Central Western Australia.
    Author provided, CC BY

    Will it be worse than the 2010 heatwave?

    The current marine heatwave is, so far, the second-worst in Western Australia’s recorded history.

    Over the 2010–11 summer, a severe marine heatwave devastated seas off the state. Temperatures hit up to 5°C above average, peaking in February and March.

    The worst-hit areas were seas off the central West Australian coastline, leaving those to the north largely unaffected. But the heatwave stretched 2,000 kilometres, from the Pilbara all the way down to Denmark in the southwest.

    The reason the 2010 heatwave spread so far south was due to the Leeuwin Current, which was stronger than usual due to weak southerly winds linked to a low pressure system off the coast.

    figure showing the 2010-11 marine heatwave in Western Australia
    The 2010-11 marine heatwave hit Central West Australian waters hardest. The Leeuwin Current ferried heat southward.
    Author provided, CC BY

    The heat led to local extinction of kelp species along a 100km stretch of coastline. Scallop and blue swimmer crab fisheries had to close. Seagrass meadows in Shark Bay collapsed. Tropical species were sighted in new areas. And coral bleached at Ningaloo.

    By contrast, this current marine heatwave has concentrated on the northern coastline, but may spread south in coming weeks.

    Unfortunately, there are strong similarities between the 2010–11 heatwave and this one. Both occurred during a La Niña year.

    A similar low pressure system in December 2024 weakened southerly winds during this heatwave, though not as pronounced as in 2010-11. We can expect to see the Leeuwin Current intensify and carry more warm water than usual south, but perhaps not as far as in 2010–11.

    Weather systems at present are developing slightly differently to 2010–11, but they could still lead to weaker southerly winds and produce a stronger current channelling heat.

    What does this mean for ocean life?

    Marine heatwaves at this size and intensity can profoundly damage marine ecosystems and fisheries. The Karratha fish kill is the most visible sign of ecosystem distress.

    We have already seen signs of bleaching in the coral reefs of the Kimberley region, while corals are experiencing heat stress at world-famous Ningaloo Reef.

    The heat is now affecting the Gascoyne region between Carnarvon and Exmouth, and is likely to head further south.

    Damage from the heatwave could threaten valuable industries such as the rock lobster fishery and marine tourism on the Coral Coast.

    bleached coral linked to marine heatwave.
    Bleached corals in Cygnet Bay north of Broome. Photo taken on 16th January.
    Kayleigh Foste, CC BY

    More heatwaves will come

    As the climate changes, modelling indicates marine heatwaves will hit more often and to intensify.

    Worldwide, marine heatwaves have devastated ecosystems. One of the worst, the Pacific “blob” heatwave of 2014-2016, killed an estimated 100 million Pacific cod and four million birds from a single seabird species, as well as contributing to the starvation of about 7,000 humpback whales. The intense heat killed off cold-loving species and paved the way for tropical species to enter and even thrive.

    Right now, 28% of the world’s oceans are in heatwave conditions, based on surface temperatures.

    While there is a clear link between the 2010-11 marine heatwave and climate change, we cannot conclusively say this current heatwave off Western Australia is linked to climate change.

    That’s because we don’t have enough data about what’s happening under the surface. Temperatures in the ocean vary greatly by depth, and a hot surface doesn’t always mean heat has reached deeper water.

    So while we know a marine heatwave is in progress, we don’t know how bad it is or how far down the heat has reached in different regions. We need better ways to measure temperatures at depth, to be able to gauge how bad a heatwave is. Installing more temperature sensors along the WA coastline would allow us to better monitor and respond to temperature extremes.

    The earlier we know about a heatwave, the more we can do to prepare. The 2010-2011 heatwave made many people aware of what damage heat can do to an ocean, as fishing boats sat idle and tourists steered clear of dying coral.

    More, and worse, is likely to come. Better conservation and management of our oceans can help. But tackling the root cause of intensifying heat – unchecked greenhouse gas emissions – is still far and away the most important challenge.

    The Conversation

    Matt Rayson receives funding from the Australian Research Council and the Western Australian government. .

    Nicole L. Jones receives funding from Australian Research Council and the Western Australian government.

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

    – ref. A marine heatwave in northwest Australia is killing huge numbers of fish. It’s heading south – https://theconversation.com/a-marine-heatwave-in-northwest-australia-is-killing-huge-numbers-of-fish-its-heading-south-248139

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-OSI Russia: The Moskino Cinema Park has shown the play “Cathedral Square” 30 times

    Translartion. Region: Russians Fedetion –

    Source: Moscow Government – Government of Moscow –

    The play “Cathedral Square” in the Moskino cinema park continues to arouse the interest of both residents of the capital and guests of the city. After the premiere, viewers quickly bought up tickets and did not stop leaving enthusiastic reviews. It is planned to hold another 16 shows of the multimedia play about the Time of Troubles. The opportunity to see the spectacular performance is available until February 23 inclusive.

    In each performance, one of the famous actors plays alongside the young artists. Thus, on stage you can see Anna Bolshova, Elena Zakharova, Ekaterina Guseva, Dmitry Pevtsov, Gleb Puskepalis, Yulia Takshina, Evklid Kurdzidis, Valentin Klementyev, Valery Nikolaev, Eduard Flerov and others.

    From the first minutes of the production, the audience finds itself in Russia in the 17th century. They observe the insidious plans of the Polish King and Grand Duke of Lithuania Sigismund III, the impostor False Dmitry II and Marina Mnishek, who are striving for power. The main themes of the play are the cohesion of the Russian people, the unity of the Orthodox faith and the strength of spirit.

    “There were traitors in power, there were traitors among the Cossacks, clans fought, princes could not agree with each other. But it was the spiritual power and the common people that did not allow Russia to perish,” emphasized the play’s director Eduard Boyakov.

    Thanks to the historical scenery, the creative goals of the director and his large professional team were brought to life.

    “The play is a reflection on the fact that our strength is in unity and truth. It is the appeal to Russian roots and origins that makes it so understandable and relevant for every viewer. The heroes of the play – Minin and Pozharsky – become living examples of unwavering faith and willpower for the viewer,” shared actress Anna Bolshova.

    The performance lasts one hour and is intended for viewers over six years of age.

    Tickets are available for purchase by link.

    The Moskino Cinema Park is part of Sergei Sobyanin’s Moscow — City of Cinema project and an object of the Moscow film cluster. The first stage of its development has already been completed: 18 natural sites, four pavilions and six infrastructure facilities have been built here. Among them are the sets of Moscow Center, Moscow of the 1940s, Vitebsk Station, Yurovo Airport, Moscow Cathedral Square, Deaf Village, Partisan Village, County Town, Cowboy Town, St. Petersburg Bar and other sites.

    The Moscow Film Cluster is an infrastructure facility, services and facilities for filmmakers, which are being developed by the Moscow Government within the framework of the Moscow — City of Cinema project. Its structure includes the Moskino film park, the Gorky Film Studio (sites on Sergei Eisenstein Street and Valdaisky Proyezd), the Moskino film factory, the Moskino cinema chain, the film commission and the Moskino film platform.

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

    Please Note; This Information is Raw Content Directly from the Information Source. It is access to What the Source Is Stating and Does Not Reflect

    https: //vv.mos.ru/nevs/ite/149376073/

    MIL OSI Russia News –

  • MIL-OSI Global: Global wildlife trade is an enormous market – the US imports billions of animals from nearly 30,000 species

    Source: The Conversation – USA – By Michael Tlusty, Professor of Sustainability and Food Solutions, UMass Boston

    U.S. Fish and Wildlife agents inspect a shipment of reptiles at the Port of Miami. U.S. GAO

    When people think of wildlife trade, they often picture smugglers sneaking in rare and endangered species from far-off countries. Yet most wildlife trade is actually legal, and the United States is one of the world’s biggest wildlife importers.

    New research that we and a team of colleagues published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences shows that, over the last 22 years, people in the U.S. legally imported nearly 2.85 billion individual animals representing almost 30,000 species.

    Some of these wild animals become pets, such as reptiles, spiders, clownfish, chimpanzees and even tigers. Thousands end up in zoos and aquariums, where many species on display come directly from the wild.

    Medical research uses macaque monkeys and imports up to 39,000 of them every year. The fashion trade imports around 1 million to 2 million crocodile skins every year. Hunting trophies are also included in wildlife.

    How many species are legally traded worldwide?
    Benjamin Marshall, et al., 2024, PNAS, CC BY-SA

    The largest number of imported species are birds – 4,985 different species are imported each year, led by Muscovy ducks, with over 6 million imported. Reptiles are next, with 3,048 species, led by iguanas and royal pythons. These largely become pets.

    Not all wildlife are wild

    We found that just over half of the animals imported into the U.S. come from the wild.

    Capturing wildlife to sell to exporters can be an important income source for rural communities around the world, especially in Africa. However, wild imported species can also spread diseases or parasites or become invasive. In fact, these risks are so worrying that many imported animals are classed as “injurious wildlife” due to their potential role in transmitting diseases to native species.

    Captive breeding has played an increasingly dominant role in recent years as a way to limit the impact on wild populations and to try to reduce disease spread.

    However over half the individual animals from most groups of species, such as amphibians or mammals, still come from the wild, and there is no data on the impact of the wildlife trade on most wild populations.

    Trade may pose a particular risk when species are already rare or have small ranges. Where studies have been done, the wild populations of traded species decreased by an average of 62% across the periods monitored.

    Sustainable wildlife trade is possible, but it relies on careful monitoring to balance wild harvest and captive breeding.

    Data is thin in many ways

    For most species in the wildlife trade, there is still a lot that remains unknown, including even the number of species traded.

    With so many species and shipments, wildlife inspectors are overwhelmed. Trade data may not include the full species name for groups like butterflies or fish. The values in many customs databases are reported by companies but never verified.

    Macaques, used in medical research, are the most-traded primates globally, according to an analysis of U.S. Fish and Wildlife data.
    Davidvraju, CC BY-SA

    In our study, we relied on the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s Law Enforcement Management Information System, a wildlife import-export data collection system. However, few countries collate and release data in such a standardized way; meaning that for the majority of species legally traded around the world there is no available data.

    For example, millions of Tokay geckos are imported as pets and for medicine, and are often reported to be bred in captivity. However, investigators cannot confirm that they weren’t actually caught in the wild.

    Why tracking the wildlife trade is important

    Biodiversity has a great number of economic and ecological benefits. There are also risks to importing wildlife. Understanding the many species and number of animals entering the country, and whether they were once wild or farmed, is important, because imported wildlife can cause health and ecological problems.

    Wildlife can spread diseases to humans and to other animals. Wild-caught monkeys imported for medical research may carry diseases, including ones of particular risk to humans. Those with diseases are more likely to be wild than captive-bred.

    The most-traded mammals worldwide are minks, which are valued for their fur but can spread viruses to humans and other species. About 48 million minks are legally traded annually, about 2.8% wild-caught and the majority raised, according to U.S. Fish and Wildlife data.
    Colin Canterbury/USFWS

    Species that aren’t native to the U.S. may also escape or be released into the wild. Invasive species can cause billions of dollars in damage by consuming and outcompeting native wildlife and spreading diseases.

    We believe better data on the wildlife trade could be used to set management goals, such as harvest quotas or no-take policies for those species in their country of origin.

    What’s next

    The researchers involved in this study come from institutes around the world and are all interested in improving data systems for wildlife trade.

    Some of us focus on how e-commerce platforms such as Etsy and Instagram have become hotspots of wildlife trade and can be challenging to monitor without automation. Esty announced in 2024 that it would remove listings of endangered or threatened species. Others build tools to help wildlife inspectors process the large number of shipments in real time. Many of us examine the problems imported species cause when they become invasive.

    In the age of machine learning, artificial intelligence and big data, it’s possible to better understand the wildlife trade. Consumers can help by buying less, and making informed decisions.

    Michael Tlusty is a founding member of the Wildlife Detection Partnership and co-developed the Nature Intelligence System, which assists governments in collecting more accurate wildlife data..

    Andrew Rhyne is currently on sabbatical funded by the Canada Border Services Agency (CBSA), focused on the wildlife trade data. He is a founding member of the Wildlife Detection Partnership and co-developed the Nature Intelligence System, which assists governments in collecting more accurate wildlife data.

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

    – ref. Global wildlife trade is an enormous market – the US imports billions of animals from nearly 30,000 species – https://theconversation.com/global-wildlife-trade-is-an-enormous-market-the-us-imports-billions-of-animals-from-nearly-30-000-species-247197

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –