NewzIntel.com

Category: Fisheries

  • MIL-OSI USA: Congressman Horsford Moderates Roundtable with Local Small Businesses

    Source: United States House of Representatives – Congressmen Steven Horsford (NV-04)

    Nevada small business owners and creators gathered to discuss TikTok’s economic impact

    LAS VEGAS – Congressman Steven Horsford (NV-04) yesterday joined local TikTok small business owners and creators at a roundtable event in Nevada’s Fourth Congressional District. The event highlighted TikTok’s economic impact in the state and featured a panel of local small businesses discussing how they use TikTok to expand their business and reach new customers. 

    “You all are helping to drive job creation; you’re helping to drive wealth generation for families, not just here in Nevada, but all across the country,” said Congressman Steven Horsford (NV-04) to the business owners. “If you are an entrepreneur, creator, small business owner, I encourage you to take advantage of the opportunities and all the unique tools that TikTok provides.”

    The panel included a diverse mix of women-owned, Hispanic-owned, and Black-owned small business owners and creators sharing their experience on the platform and success stories, featuring: 

    • Alexandra Lourdes, creator and owner of several Las Vegas businesses – Café Lola, Saint Honoré, and 3LC
    • Jen Gay, tourism creator behind Vegas Starfish, the go-to source for food, entertainment, gaming, resort and attraction recommendations
    • Kari Garcia, owner of Tsp Baking Company, a bakery serving fresh mini cupcakes, cakes, and cookies
    • Marsean Nelson, owner of Taste Budz Creole Kitchen, a food truck turned viral brick and mortar restaurant serving gumbo, alfredo, famous crab boils, shrimp and grits
    • Vanessa Barreat, owner of La Vecindad, a Mexican restaurant where each dish is a celebration of flavor, tradition, and the artistry of Mexican cuisine.

    “TikTok gives you all the resources for you to have so you don’t have an excuse,” said Marsean Nelson, owner of Taste Budz Creole Kitchen. “When I first started my business, we didn’t have money, but if you go to TikTok, TikTok is your billboard; TikTok is your delivery vehicle; TikTok is your staff; TikTok is your customer base; TikTok is your high school, your college, your honors courses. So everything that you need is right there for you to begin and flourish.” 

    “I never expected the success that we have right now,” said Vanessa Barreat, owner of La Vecindad. “COVID closed our doors, but at the same time, TikTok opened the door to success for us. And thanks to TikTok, I’m proud to say that I can pay for college for my son.” 

    TikTok has been a powerful economic engine across Nevada — driving growth, creating wealth-building opportunities, and strengthening community connections for the 1.1 million Nevadans and 70,000 businesses on TikTok. According to a report from Oxford Economics, Nevada small and midsize businesses (SMBs) use of TikTok contributed $200 million to the state’s gross domestic product (GDP), generated nearly $46 million in federal, state, and local tax revenue, and supported 1,900 Nevada jobs. The report says for small businesses, the impact of the platform is significant — 50% of SMBs in Nevada say that their business needs to continue to use and improve upon TikTok marketing content in order to stay competitive.

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA News: Remarks by President  Biden on Lowering the Cost of Prescription Drugs | Concord,  NH

    Source: The White House

    NHTI Community College
    Concord, New Hampshire

    4:14 P.M. EDT

    THE PRESIDENT:  Thank you, everyone.  Thank you, thank you, thank you.  (Applause.) 

    What’s your name?

    AUDIENCE MEMBER:  (Inaudible.) 

    THE PRESIDENT:  Oh, is that right?

    AUDIENCE MEMBER:  (Inaudible.) 

    THE PRESIDENT:  All right.  Well, thanks for being here.

    Have a seat, everyone.

    AUDIENCE MEMBER:  Thank you, Joe!

    THE PRESIDENT:  (Laughs.)  Well, thank you. 

    Look, Lauren, thanks for that introduction and for sharing your story.  Unfortunately, there are too many stories like yours all across America.  Sadly, it’s a familiar one to many Americans. 

    People lay in bed at night, literally, staring at the ceiling, wondering what would happen if their spouse became seriously ill or got cancer, if their child gets sick, or if something happens to you.  Do you have enough insurance?  Can you afford the medical bills?  Will you have to sell the house?  Will you have to get a mortgage?  “How in God’s name are we going to pay for those prescriptions?  Prescription drugs are so damn high.”

    And you find out a big reason why you’re lying awake at night and asking these questions is because Big Pharma is charging you exorbitant prices for the prescriptions you may badly need — literally, higher prices than anywhere in the world — and that’s not hyperbole; it’s a fact — anywhere in the world. 

    I’ve been fighting, like others, Big Pharma since I was a United States senator, back in the days when we were told they couldn’t be touched.  They had an exemption basically.  Unlike other parts of the health care system, Big Pharma got a special cut- — carveout that prevented Medicare from negotiating prescription drug prices with them.  They weren’t allowed to do that.   

    For years, advocates, like many of you here today, have worked tirelessly to change that and to give Medicare the power to lower prescription drug prices, just like the Department of Veterans Affairs was able to do for veterans.  Same power.  And it matters.  It matters a lot.   

    That’s why one of the proudest things I’ve ever done was pass the Inflation Reduction Act that allowed us to negotiate lower prices for prescription drugs.  Not a single Republican voted for this — not one single Republican in the House or Senate voted.  Not one. 

    But thanks to the Inflation Reduction Act, we finally beat Big Pharma — in no small part because of your delegation.  Not a joke.  (Applause.)

    Because of partners like Senator Jeanne Shaheen and — I tell you what, she’s got a special secret weapon, Billy — (laughter) — you want to be in a foxhole, man, you want Billy in that foxhole with you, man — and Maggie Hassan; Representative Annie — Annie Kuster; and especially Senator Bernie Sanders from Vermont.   

    That’s why we’re here today, to talk about a law that Democrats passed and is lowering prescription drug prices and — I might add, and I’ll explain in a moment — saving the taxpayers billions of dollars.  Not just the individual recipients of the — the benefit, the taxpayers. 

    Americans pay more for prescription drugs, as has been pointed by Bernie, than any other advanced nation in the world.

    I can take you to the airport and put you on Air Force One with me and take you to any pharmacy from Tor- —

    AUDIENCE MEMBER:  I’m in!

    THE PRESIDENT:  All right, man.  (Laughter.)  All right. 

    I can take you to Toronto, Canada; Paris, France; Rome, Italy; Bel- — I can take you anywhere in the world, literally, and you’ll pay half or less than you’d pay in America for the exact same drug made by the exact same pharmaceutical company.  Same drug.  Same pharta- — same pharmaceutical company. 

    But not anymore.  With the help of Democrats in Congress — and Kamala, by the way, pac- — cast the tiebreaking vote to make sure it passed.  (Applause.)  Don’t — don’t tell me one vote doesn’t count. 

    He told us it would — I told them what I — when I wrote this bill that I couldn’t get it passed.  We had a one-vote majority, and I mean — that it wouldn’t — never happen, but we stuck together.  We finally got it done, and it was a hell of a fight. 

    The pharmaceutical company — as Bernie referenced, in another way — spent nearly $400 million — $400 million to defeat this single bill — $400 million — but we beat the special interests and we delivered for the American people.  

    Because of this law, not only could Medicare finally negotiate lower prices but it also capped prescription drug costs for seniors total — this year at $3,500 in 2024 and next — in the next six months —

    By the way, in the first six months of this alone — year alone, on out-of-pocket spending, we saved the people enrolled in Medicare nearly $1 billion in six months — $1 billion less out of your pocket, nationwide, in just the first six months.  

    That means, as of June, 1.5 million Americans who are enrolled in Medicare hit the cap and do not have to pay a dime more for drugs for the rest of the year, no matter what their costs are. 

    And here — (applause) — but this is bill is so extensive people don’t fully understand it. 

    And guess what?  Starting this January — this January, the total cap on prescription drug costs for seniors on Medicare will be even lower.  It will go down to $2,000.  They don’t have to pay more than $2,000, no matter what the cost of their drugs are — no matter what. 

    For example, as some of you unfortunately know, some of the cancer drugs can cost $10-, $12-, $15,000 a year.  That’s not hyperbole.  That’s a fact.  This change is expected to save 19 million seniors and other people on Medicare — save them — just those ones on Medicare — $7.4 billion in out-of-pocket spending starting in January. 

    But here’s the deal.  It’s also going to save the American taxpayers billions of dollars.  I’ll go into this a little more detail, but the fact — the bill we passed — the extent of it is — guess what? — the American taxpayer is going to save $160 billion (inaudible) — (applause)  — $160 billion dollars.  Because they no longer have — and Medicare — have to pay $400 instead of $35 for insulin, for example.

    But that’s not all.  Thanks to the law I signed for — seniors are already saving on their prescription drug costs now.  For example, take insulin to treat diabetes.  One in ten Americans — one in ten Americans has diabetes.  I’m not going to ask you if you — if you’re the one, but I bet — how many of you know someone who needs to take insulin for their diabetes?  Raise your hand.  So, a good c- — you know how much it costs to make that insulin?  Ten dollars.  T-E-N.

    And you know the guy who invented it, who dis- — who discovered the prescription to do it, he made sure that he didn’t patent it, because he wanted it available for everyone — for everyone.  That’s what he did.  That’s what he did for everyone. 

    But guess what?  Now they charge as much as $400 a month. 

    Three years ago, I was down in Northern Virginia and doing a town hall.  And I met a 13-year-old boy named Joshua.  He and his dad both have Type 1 diabetes, which means they needed insulin every day.  I spoke with Joshua’s mom.  Imagine what it’s like to look at your child — and I mean this sincerely.  Think of this in personal terms.  Imagine what it’s like to look at your child who needs insulin and you’re looking and know you have no idea — no idea how you’re going to pay for it.  Not a joke. 

    One woman in that meeting said, “I have two children that need it.  I have to cut their prescription in half.  And some- — sometimes I have to choose which one gets the — gets insulin.”

    What does that do to a parent’s dignity, their sense of self-worth, your ability to look your child in the eye — and I mean this from the bottom of my heart — look your child in the eye and say, “Honey, I’m sorry.  I’m sorry.” 

    Or imagine the senior having to cut your pills in half, to skip doses, or forego your prescriptions altogether because you just can’t afford them.

    Folks, this is the United States of America.  So, when we had — when we got elected, we were told we’d never get anything done.  We have a one-vote majority and h- — anyway, we’d never get anything big done.  We got a hell of a lot big done.  (Applause.)  No — because of this group right here.

    And thanks to one of those laws — (applause) — thanks to one of those laws, the Inflation Reduction Act, seniors with diabetes, as you’ve heard, now pay — and many of you know — $35 a month instead of $400 a month.  Thirty- — that changes someone’s life.

    Growing up with the family I grew up in, my dad used to have an expression.  He’d say, “Joey, family is the” — I mean this sincerely, my word as a Biden — “family is the beginning, the middle, and the end.  And everyone — everyone is entitled to be treated with dignity.” 

    What’s it do to a parent?  What’s it do to a parent when you can’t provide something you know your child and your spouse badly needs and there’s no way you can pay for it?

    But Kamala and I wanted $35 insulin for everyone — not just seniors, for everybody.  (Applause.)  And she’s going to get it done.

    Look, folks, they’re still going to make a profit.  They’re still making 350 percent profit.  Costs them 10 bucks to make it.  Think about that.

    We’re taking on the cost of more than just insulin.  Medicare, in the same bill, which people are only beginning to find out — understandably, because this bill is a bill that’s passed, but it goes on for years.  Medicare is now able to negotiate lower prices for some of the costliest drugs that treat everything from heart disease to arthritis to cancer.  And here’s what the law has already — we’ve already passed has done.

    For the first time ever, every year from this point on — every year, calendar year — Medicare will negotiate the cost of additional prescription drugs.

    Earlier this year, I announced that Medicare reached an agreement with drug manufacturers on 10 new drugs that Medicare picked and said, “We’re going to negotiate.”  The most common, most expensive drugs that treat everything from kidney disease to arthritis to blood cancer and more.

    These new low prices for all 10 drugs will go into effect in January 2026 and cut the prices on the — those 10 drugs by between 40 and 80 percent. 

    Next year — the next year, Medicare will negotiate another price — lower price for 15 additional drugs and every year ther- — thereafter until we get after 20 — and 20 drugs, until every drug is covered that’s on the market — every one.  (Applause.)

    It’s already passed.  And, folks, it isn’t just saving seniors money.  As I said, it’s also saving taxpayers billions of dollars because Medicare will no longer have to pay exorbitant prices to Pharma. 

    Over the next 10 years — just so far — the newer, lower drug prices and other reforms, we’ve cut the federal deficit by $160 billion, while he raised it by $200 billion.  (Applause.)  I’m serious.  Think about it. 

    Look, I’m a capitalist.  I was listed for 36 years as the poorest man in Congress, but I’m still a capitalist.  (Laughter.)  You think I’m kidding.  I got a phone call; I was campaigning for a — a colleague who was — no longer around but was up in this neck of the woods, in Vermont — not Bernie but his predecessor.  And I got a phone call from my wife.  She said, “Joe” — well, actually, I called home.  When I’m away, I’d call b- — see how the kids are doing before she goes off to teach. 

    I said, “Hey, Jill, how are you?”  “Fine.”  (Laughter.)  You know you’re in trouble when you get that answer.  (Laughter.)  This is — I give you my word as a Biden — this is a true story. 

    She said, “Did you read today’s paper?”  I said, “Honey, they don’t have the Wilmington News Journal up here.”  (Laughter.)  She said, “Well, headline: ‘Biden, Poorest Man in Congress.’  Is that true?”  (Laughter.)  I said, “I don’t know,” but I guess I was for 36 years.  (Laughter.)  I never thought — I didn’t have any money, but I had a good salary. 

    Look, but I’m a capitalist.  (Laughs.)  And without competition, it’s not capitalism; it’s exploitation.  When Big Pharma doesn’t play by the rules, competitors can’t offer lower-priced drugs and devices that carry those drugs so prices stay artificially high. 

    And, look — but we’re taking action.  For example, we called out drug companies, as Bernie mentioned, that make inhalers so the people with asthma, they — and some severe asthma — I have asthma, but it’s not severe — that they need to breathe — for charging Americans — and he was right; this was not an exaggeration — 70 times more than companies in ch- — in — in Europe charge for the same exact prescription.  It’s outrageous.  I think it borders on immoral. 

    As a result, three of the largest companies, as I skillfully and very privately and peacefully called their CEOs to tell them — (laughter) — who make these inhalers are saying that instead of charging up to $600 out of pocket for — to cap the cost at $35.  And so, it’s about time. 

    But, again, Bernie is a big reason why this is happening.  You don’t want to screw around with Bernie.  (Laughter.)

    But we have to do more.  Bernie and I said this summer, it’s time for drug manufacturers to lower the prices on anti-obesity medications that you hear so much about these days.  And, by the way, it’s not just cosmetically.  It saves people’s lives, these obesity medicines.  It saves their lives because of — they’re so overweight and there’s so much problems associated with it. 

    You just heard from Bernie about what these drug companies are doing.  The prices of these o- — anti-obesity drugs can be six times higher in America than in other countries, from Canada to Sweden.  This is cr- — where I come from, it’s called price gouging and corporate greed. 

    And I know a little about corporations.  There are more corporations incorporated in Delaware than every other state in the Union combined.  So, I’m used to dealing with corporations. 

    Americans don’t like to be played for suckers.  We don’t like that.  I’m — and we’re tired of it.  And it’s outrageous.  It’s got to stop. 

    Look, today’s announcement follows actions we’ve already taken to reduce the health care costs for average Americans.  Because of Bernie’s leadership, we took action to reduce the cost of hearing aids for 1 million Americans by as much as $3,000.  You see them advertise on television.  You go for the prescription drug hearing aid, it’s $3,060 or some- — whatever the number — over 3,000 bucks.  And you get the same hearing aid and you get it for $3,000 less because you don’t have to go for the prescription; you can go right to the drug — you can go to the drug store for the — right to the counter. 

    In addition, my administration is banning junk health insurance.  These guys are get- — they’ve been co- — coming and going.  There are plans for health insurance that will look affordable but then stick consumers with big, unexpected charges. 

    You know, we ended the — those unfair surprise medical bills.  When I was — years ago, when I was in — in the Senate, and I was a — I had — I had two cranial aneurysms, and I was hospitalized for a long time.  And you have what they call surprise medical bills.  If the insurance you have doesn’t cover a particular provider and not in-network, they charge you significantly more.  And so, you get these surprise hospital bills. 

    So, hospitals that are in-network can’t send you a bill for out-of-network doctors who d- — you didn’t choose and are not part of your — you didn’t n- — you never consulted them.  That’s banned.  I did that by executive order.

    Kamala and I are also protecting and expanding the Affordable Care Act.  Today, there are 21 million Americans — 21 million Americans covered by the Affordable Care Act marketplace.  That’s 9 million more people, individuals, since I’ve been in office that are now covered by the Affordable Care Act. 

    More Americans — (applause) — more Americans have health care today than ever in American history — today — than ever.  And it’s in part because I expanded tax credits that save an average of $800 per person per year, reducing health care premiums for millions of working families who have coverage under the Affordable Care Act. 

    These enhancements expire next year, though.  And I’m calling on Congress to make the expanded health care tax credits permanent.  (Applause.)

    And Trump — Trump and his MAGA Republican friends want to cut the Affordable Care Act out completely.  You know how many times they’ve tried to introdu- — they’ve introduced bills over the last three years to do that?  Fifty-one times.  Fifty-one times.  He wants to replace the Affordable Care Act.  We can’t let that happen.

    Look, he calls — he wants to replace it with hi- — I love his — I love this guy.  (Laughter.)  I’m trying to be a very good fella.  (Laughter.)  I’m not letting my Irish get the best of me.  (Laughter.)

    But my predecessor, the distinguished former president — (laughter) — he wants to replace the Affordable Care Act with — he calls — this is what he refers to it: a “concept of a plan.”  (Laughter.)  I’ve heard that concept of a plan now for almost eight years.  “A concept of a plan.”  What the hell is a concept of a — he has no concept of anything.  (Applause.)  No plan.

    If we don’t elect Kamala and he gets elected, Trump could kick up to 45 million people off their health insurance — 45 million.  Over 100 million people could lose health care coverage because they have a preexisting condition.  The only reason they could get it is because of the Affordable Care Act. 

    Trump and MAGA Republicans want to eliminate the Inflation Reduction Act, which they’re talking — the “big bill” — which made all these savings possible, raising prescription drug prices again for millions of Americans.  They’re — state it.  They’re not — and he b- — this guy means what he says — means what he says.

    Look, during the last administration, my predecessor exploded the national debt more than any previous president in a single term.  This guy raised the national debt by $2 trillion because of a tax cut that overwhelmingly benefitted the very wealthy and the biggest corporations. 

    Now, he’s saying, if elected — remember what he said now.  If elected, he wants another $5 trillion tax cut for the very wealthy.  That’s the tax cut he wants. 

    He won’t just get rid of the Department of Education, which he wants to do, and the Affordable Care Act.  He’ll gut Social Security and Medicare, which he says he wants to do, h- — hurt hardworking people. 

    I’ve got a better idea.  Let’s protect Social Security and Medicare and finally start making the very wealthy pay their fair share to keep these programs (inaudible).  (Applause.)  I mean it.

    By the way, you know what the average tax rate is for a billionaire in America?  There are a thousand billionaires since COVID.  8.2 percent.  Anybody who wants to change places with a billionaire’s tax ra- — rate, raise your hand.  (Laughter.)  I’m serious.  Not a joke.  8.2 percent.

    I proposed raising it to 25 percent, which isn’t even close to the highest rate.  You know how much that would raise?  Five hundred billion dollars over the next five years — (applause) — just paying 25 percent.

    Look, let me repeat what I have said since day one and that Kamala has continued to c- — she’s be- — continued to commit to.  We made a commitment that no one — no one in America earning less than $400,000 a year, which is really high, will pay a single additional penny in federal taxes — not a single penny — $400 million — $400,000.  They haven’t, and they won’t.  If Kamala is president, they will continue not to.

    So, th- — I don’t want to hear this stuff about “Biden going after the rich.”  I did that to make sure we understand what the superrich are paying.

    And, folks, let me close with this.  Bernie and I are going to — going to — have been doing this work for a long time.  I know we both look like we’re 40, but we’re a little older — (laughter and applause) — at least I am.  I can’t even say it anymore.  Anyway.  (Laughter.)

    We know we’ve made historic progress in the last three years: 35 bucks for insulin, 35 bucks for inhalers, $2,000-a-year cap, and things continue to go.

    We’re showing how health care should be a right, not a privilege in America.  That’s why I’ve never been more optimistic about our future, and I mean it. 

    We’re at one of those inflection points, folks.  The decisions we make in the next election are going to determine what this country looks like for the next four or five decades.  And that’s not hyperbole.  That’s a fact. 

    And, folks, I’m — I’m taking too much of your time, but let me say it this way.  We just have to remember who in the hell we are.  We’re the United States of America.  We’re the United States.  There’s nothing beyond our capacity — not a damn thing beyond our capacity.  (Applause.)

    We’re the only nation in history of the world that’s come out of every crisis stronger than we went in — every one.  Because when we act together, there’s nothing beyond our capacity. 

    The rest of the world is looking to us.  We have the strongest economy in the world, and now we just got to make sure it’s available to every single American. 

    So, I leave you by saying I can’t tell you how much I appreciate what you’re about to do in this election.  (Laughs.)  As — as a friend of mine would say, from my lips to God’s ears on that one.  But, look, you’ve got great candidates.  You got great candidates.  And I really mean — we got to get back to the days where we actually can talk to the other team. 

    This is not your father’s Republican Party. 

    AUDIENCE MEMBER:  No.

    THE PRESIDENT:  No, no.  I mean — I mean it’s not even close. 

    I came up in an era — I got elected when I was 29 years old to the United States Senate.  I had to wait 17 days to be able to be sworn in.  I got there as a young civil rights guy in the — when Strom Thurmond and all those guys were still there.  But at least (inaudible) — be — honest to God — you could talk to him.  And people change. 

    After all those years serving with Strom Thurmond, on his deathbed, he — 100 years old, his wife called me from Walter Reed Hospital.  She said, “Joe?”  I said, “Yeah, Nancy.”  And sh- — she said, “Strom asked me to come out.  I’m at the nurse’s station with Doctor” — she named his doctor.  “He asked me if you’d do him a favor.”  And I said, “Sure.”  He said, “Will you do his eulogy?” 

    I did Strom Thurmond’s eulogy.  I didn’t lie.  I started off and I said, “Grandpa Finnegan, please forgive me for what I’m about to do.”  (Laughter.)

    But all kidding aside, even by the time he left, he had the most racially diverse staff in America.  He voted for a lot — he voted for the change in all the laws that he had voted for before.  There was headline in 1946 of Thurmond — “Thurmond: Hope of the South” — because he was against separate but equal.  Not the proposition you couldn’t separate the races but the proposition that if you had separate but e- — you had to spend the exact amount of money in a Black school as a white school. 

    My generic point is: People change.  But these guys just keep getting worse.  (Laughter.)  No, I really mean it.  They mean what they say.  They mean what they say. 

    I’ll conclude by saying that, you know, I — I’ll just say something that’s both revealing and self-defeating.  You know, there is — are only a few advantages of being the oldest guy around.  That is, I have more experience in foreign policy than anybody ever that had this job in American history. 

    I’ve known every major world leader personally in the last 40 years.  Every international meeting I attend, including just being in Germany, as we’re walking out — whether at the G20 or the G7, whatever it is — they’ll pull me aside, one leader after another, quietly, and say, “Joe, he can’t win.  My democracy is at stake.  My democracy is at stake.”

    If America walks away, who leads the world?  Who?  Name me a country.  And we’re doing it without expending American blood by having Americans at war. 

    So, folks, there’s so much at stake.  So, please — I know you’ll all vote, but please call your neighbors, get your friends, get your relatives, get them to vote, because this is — the nation’s democracy, in my view, depends on it. 

    God bless you all.  And may God protect our troops.  Thank you.  (Applause.)

    Thank you.

    Oh, there you are.

    SENATOR SANDERS:  (Laughs.)

    THE PRESIDENT:  We’ve been doing this a long time, pal.

    SENATOR SANDERS:  I know.  (Laughs.)

    THE PRESIDENT:  Thank you, thank you, thank you.  (Applause.)

    4:44 P.M. EDT

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: New Laws Extend Red Light Cameras Across the State

    Source: US State of New York

    Senate Majority Leader Andrea Stewart-Cousins said, “Red light camera programs save lives by enhancing road safety and reducing traffic violations. I gladly sponsored S.9305A in response to a clear need in the Town of Greenburgh, particularly at the intersections of Ardsley and Old Army Roads, where red light-related accidents have occurred. This initiative will protect pedestrians and promote responsible driving. I thank Governor Hochul for signing this legislation into law and for her commitment to making our streets safer.”

    State Senator Neil Breslin said, “The Red Light Camera program has proven to be a strong deterrent for drivers from running red lights. Simply put, these cameras make our streets safer for pedestrians, bicyclists and motorists alike. I applaud Governor Hochul for signing this and these other traffic safety measures into law.”

    State Senator Jamaal Bailey said, “Today marks a monumental day for the safety of all New Yorkers from redlight cameras to other rules and regulations ensuring the safety of drivers and pedestrians alike. I am especially pleased to see the signing of Bill S9735, which I sponsored along with Assembly Member Gary Pretlow on behalf of the City of Mount Vernon expanding these traffic regulations. Thanks to the Mayor of Mount Vernon, Shawyn Patterson-Howard and City Council President, Cathlin Gleason, for their dedicated efforts to ensure the safety of Mount Vernon’s citizens. I extend my gratitude to the many legislative leaders whose tireless efforts ensure a better quality of life for all. And always, thank you to Governor Kathy Hochul for her continued leadership and resolve.”

    State Senator Michelle Hinchey said, “Speeding is a serious danger, especially around our schools, and speed camera programs have proven to make a real difference in preventing fatalities, keeping both students and the wider community safe. I’m proud to sponsor this legislation allowing the City of Kingston to launch a speed camera pilot program in select school zones to better protect our residents. Tragically, we’ve lost too many lives in Ulster County to traffic-related accidents, and this new law is a critical measure that will help make our streets safer within Kingston school zones.”

    State Senator Nathalia Fernandez said, “With the signing of this legislation, we are taking significant steps to keep our roads safer for everyone. Extending New Rochelle’s red light camera program will reduce dangerous driving behavior at critical intersections, protecting pedestrians and drivers alike. This expansion demonstrates our continued commitment to utilizing technology to enhance public safety across New York State. I thank Governor Hochul for keeping New Yorker’s safety a priority.”

    Assemblymember J. Gary Pretlow said, “I fully support Governor Hochul’s legislation to increase red light cameras across New York State and to strengthen penalties for those who illegally pass school buses. These measures are essential to protecting New Yorkers from dangerous drivers and, most importantly, safeguarding our students. By prioritizing public safety and holding reckless drivers accountable, we are creating safer streets for all and ensuring our children can travel to school without fear.”

    Assemblymember Pat Fahy said, “Red light cameras save lives. Motorists, pedestrians, and cyclists are all less likely to be involved in crashes at intersections when red light cameras are present. Ultimately, they save lives and help to correct dangerous driving behavior, keeping everyone on our streets safe.”

    Albany Mayor Kathy Sheehan said, “I want to thank Governor Hochul for signing this piece of legislation. I also want to thank Assemblymember Fahy and Senator Breslin for their tireless efforts in advocating for keeping our streets safe. These cameras work to ensure drivers are slowing down and being more careful. Legislation like this helps us move toward keeping our roads safe for other drivers, pedestrians bicyclists, and those using alternative methods of transportation.”

    Mount Vernon Mayor Shawyn Patterson Howard said, “Thank you, Governor Hochul, for signing the legislation to extend the red-light camera program. Mount Vernon is deeply committed to ensuring safe streets for all. This legislation plays a critical role in our road safety action plan, and these traffic-calming measures will enhance the quality of life, mobility, and accessibility for our youth and seniors as they walk, drive, and bike throughout our community.”

    White Plains Mayor Thomas Roach said, “I am greatly appreciative of Governor Hochul’s support for our efforts to make the streets of White Plains safer. We have seen a reduction in accidents at the intersections covered by the legislation and the extension of the program will help us continue that positive trend.”

    New York City Department of Transportation Commissioner Ydanis Rodriguez said, “Red-light cameras save lives. Red-light running is a major contributing factor to traffic fatalities and the data speaks for itself: where we’ve installed these cameras, red-light running and related crashes have dropped 73 percent. In the coming months, we will be analyzing crash data to determine the most effective and equitable way to expand the use of this critical safety tool. We thank Mayor Adams, Governor Hochul, Assemblymember Dinowitz, Senator Gounardes, and elected officials at both the city and state levels for their support to make our streets safer.”

    Deputy Mayor for Operations Meera Joshi said, “Today we get it right on red! Thanks to Governor Hochul, sponsors Senator Gournardes and Assemblymember Dinowitz, plus all the advocates who showed up in force, New York City is able to expand its red-light camera four-fold—changing traffic behaviors and catching the worst violators red-handed. We are getting vehicular menaces off the road and keeping New Yorkers safe—a true win.”

    Legislation S2812A/A5259A extends authorization for New York City’s existing red light camera program until 2027 and increases the maximum number of intersections with a red light camera from 150 to 600.

    State Senator Andrew Gounardes said, “The logic is simple: most drivers don’t run red lights. And those drivers, along with everyone else, are safer when the ones who do are held accountable,” said State Senator Andrew Gounardes. That’s why I passed legislation to increase the number of cameras to 600 intersections citywide. Three decades of data makes it clear: red light cameras reduce crashes and save lives. Thank you to Governor Kathy Hochul for signing this important expansion into law so more New Yorkers are safe on our streets, however they get around.”

    Assemblymember Jeffrey Dinowitz said, “Today’s signing of A.5259A is a monumental step forward for the safety of New Yorkers. By expanding the number of intersections with red light cameras in New York City from 150 to 600, we are taking strong action to curb reckless driving and reduce traffic fatalities. This legislation reinforces our commitment to using proven technology to protect pedestrians, cyclists, and drivers. I am proud to work with Governor Hochul and State Senator Gounardes to make our roads safer and hold dangerous drivers accountable. With these additional cameras, we will help save lives, prevent tragedies across our city, and reduce the number of interactions between police and motorists.”

    This legislative package also focuses on protecting students by establishing a new speed camera program in Kingston, increasing penalties for passing stopped school buses, and mandating seatbelt requirements for charter buses. These new laws reaffirm New York State’s commitment to protecting students across New York State.

    Legislation S.8607A/A.9359A authorizes the City of Kingston to establish a speed camera program for up to three school zones, protecting children on their way to and from school.

    Legislation S.9504A/A.3120A increases penalties for overtaking and passing a school bus. The fine for a third or subsequent violation within three years will rise from $1,000 to $1,500. This targets repeat offenders specifically.

    Assemblymember William Magnarelli said, “Improving safety on the roads is a constant battle. The bills signed today are our most recent efforts in that regard. This package includes two important bills regarding bus safety. A.3120-A increases the maximum penalty for those that illegally pass a stopped school bus and builds on our successful camera enforcement law. A.8557 requires the use of seatbelts on charter buses introduced in response to last year’s fatal crash in Orange County. It is critical that everyone use seatbelts and safety equipment on every form of transportation. These bills will help save lives. I thank the Governor for signing them into law.”

    Legislation S9361/A8557 requires all passengers on charter buses over the age of 8 to use the seatbelts provided.

    Assemblymember MaryJane Shimsky said, “Today marks a monumental day for the safety of all New Yorkers from redlight cameras to other rules and regulations ensuring the safety of drivers and pedestrians alike. I am especially pleased to see the signing of Bill S9735, which I sponsored along with Assembly Member Gary Pretlow on behalf of the City of Mount Vernon expanding these traffic regulations. Thanks to the Mayor of Mount Vernon, Shawyn Patterson-Howard and City Council President, Cathlin Gleason, for their dedicated efforts to ensure the safety of Mount Vernon’s citizens. I extend my gratitude to the many legislative leaders whose tireless efforts ensure a better quality of life for all. And always, thank you to Governor Kathy Hochul for her continued leadership and resolve.”

    Lastly, Legislation S760B/A402B expands the reckless driving statute to include parking lots. Parking lots will be defined as private property with capacity for four or more cars, contiguous to premises and a roadway, parking lots adjacent to one- or two-family residences are exempt.

    State Senator John Liu said, “Car takeovers in parking lots, where drivers engage in reckless speeding, donuts and burnouts, has long plagued residents of New York. Our bill gives law enforcement greater ability to react quickly and decisively when these dangerous popup takeovers arise so that those responsible face consequences for endangering public safety. Many thanks to Governor Hochul for addressing this important community concern by signing our legislation into law.”

    Assemblymember Nily Rozic said, “No one should get away with driving in a way that endangers others. Our neighborhoods deserve to be safe for everyone,” said Assemblywoman Nily Rozic. “With the signing of this law, law enforcement will be able to hold reckless drivers accountable in these often-overlooked spaces. Thank you Governor Hochul for continuously ensuring the safety of our communities.”

    State Senator Iwen Chu said, “Many residents have raised concerns about reckless driving in our neighborhoods. I am proud to support this important legislation to provide the city with the necessary tools to curb dangerous driving behaviors and enhance safety for seniors, children, cyclists, and pedestrians. It’s a vital step in protecting everyone on the streets in our community.”

    State Senator Kristen Gonzalez said, “The data is clear, automated enforcement works. But it works best when paired with legislation to combat ghost cars, speeding and other traffic violations. Thanks to the Governor for signing these bills into law, and to my colleagues for championing legislation to protect New Yorkers from reckless drivers.”

    Assemblymember Fred Thiele said, “The package of legislation signed by the Governor is an important step to improve public safety on our highways. As a sponsor of legislation to provide greater protections to riders on school and charter buses, I applaud the Governor’s actions today. These safety measures are important initiatives to avoid the kind of tragic accidents that have occurred too often in the past.”

    Assemblymember Deborah J. Glick said, “This package of legislation is critical for keeping New Yorkers safe from the dangers of reckless and unsafe driving. Red light cameras are a proven technology that has significantly reduced crashes in New York City and it is crucial that this life saving tool is used in municipalities across the state. I look forward to the continued growth and success of this and other proven traffic safety programs to put an end to traffic violence. I applaud Governor Hochul for signing these life saving bills into law, and extend my sincere thanks to Families For Safe Streets and the many advocates who have taken their personal pain and used it to create change.”

    Assemblymember Angelo Santabarbara said, “These new laws are important steps to keep our kids safe. By increasing penalties for drivers who pass stopped school buses, we’re tackling a serious issue that puts children in danger every day. This new law, along with the requirement of seatbelts for kids on charter buses, puts safety first. I’m proud to support these measures that will help prevent accidents and save lives. Together, we’re sending a clear message: our children’s safety comes first.”

    Assemblymember Kimberly Jean-Pierre said, “One year ago, a tragic bus crash claimed two lives and injured numerous Farmingdale High School students en route to a band camp. Federal law requires that charter buses be equipped with seatbelts but state laws have not required their use–until now. This new law prevents future tragedies by mandating seatbelt use for passengers over eight years old. I applaud my colleague Assemblymember Magnarelli and Governor Hochul for taking action after this tragic incident to help save lives. We will continue to work towards enhancing safety in all forms of transportation.”

    Assemblymember Jessica González-Rojas said, “It will be a year in January since I experienced a traumatic car crash, as a pedestrian, that left me with a broken arm. I walked away from the crash with my life, but so many others are not as fortunate. Every New Yorker that is killed from a traffic crash is a loved one who will never return home. This year, 88 pedestrians have been killed, 24 of them in Queens. Many of these victims are small children like 8-year-old Bayron Palomino Arroyo of East Elmhurst and 7-year-old Dolma Naadhun from Astoria, both of whom lost their lives. We have to do better. Renewing and expanding the Red Light Camera program across New York City will reinforce the necessary work we are doing to keep everyone safe. I’m proud to join today’s event and to do my part in moving us closer to safer streets for drivers, cyclists and pedestrians. Safer streets save lives.”

    Assemblymember Eddie Gibbs said, “I am proud to stand with my colleagues in ensuring our roads are safe for pedestrians, bicyclists, and drivers alike. New York City started this first-in-the-nation program 30 years ago. Since then, red-light cameras have become a standard enforcement tool across the country and world because of their effectiveness. Intersections that have had red-light cameras installed have seen a 58% decrease in the number of severe injuries caused by collisions compared to prior to the camera’s installation, according to NYC DOT. I want to thank everyone who came together to reauthorize the program including DOT Commissioner Rodriguez, who traveled to Albany to push the bill, Senator Gounardes & Assemblymember Dinowitz, the prime sponsors of the bill, and Governor Hochul for signing the bill today. The reauthorization of the Red-Light Camera program signed today will guarantee a consistent reduction in automotive collisions and prevent further casualties.”

    Assemblymember Manny De Los Santos said, “I applaud the leadership in both chambers and Governor Hochul for prioritizing safer streets this past legislative session, from Sammy’s Law to reduce speed limits to today’s bill sponsored by Assemblymember Dinowitz and Senator Gounardes to expand New York City’s red light camera program. Red light cameras are proven to foster safer driving conditions. Expanding the program from 150 to 600 intersections throughout the city will undoubtedly make our streets safer for pedestrians, drivers, bicyclists, and others who use alternative transport on our streets.”

    Assemblymember Grace Lee said, “These bills are critically important for enhancing safety in our neighborhoods. In Lower Manhattan, where heavy traffic and busy pedestrian areas meet daily, these expanded and newly established programs will reduce accidents and hold reckless drivers accountable. Thank you to Governor Hochul for signing these bills into law. Together, we are building safer streets for all New Yorkers by protecting lives and preventing tragedies.”

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI Security: FBI’s Operation Not Forgotten 2024

    Source: Federal Bureau of Investigation FBI Crime News (b)

    FBI dedicates investigative resources to address violent crime in Indian country

    In its second year, Operation Not Forgotten, a joint operation between the FBI and the Bureau of Indian Affairs-Office of Justice Services (BIA) surged more than 50 personnel to assist with unresolved investigations in Indian country. From June to September 2024, dedicated resources included FBI special agents and intelligence personnel who deployed to support 10 FBI field offices whose regions include Tribal communities that too often are impacted by a crisis of violence. 

    In the past four months, as a result of Operation Not Forgotten, more than 300 cases received increased investigative, intelligence, and victim assistance. The majority of that assistance was surged to cases involving the most vulnerable victims, including investigations of child physical and sexual abuse, child sexual abuse material, serious violent assaults, domestic violence, and death investigations. 

    “We want our Native American communities to know we are committed to combating criminal activity on Tribal land,” said FBI Criminal Investigative Division Assistant Director Chad Yarbrough. “Unfortunately, Native Americans face some of the highest levels of violence. Combating that is among the most important work we do. With the help our partners at BIA and our dedicated agents, analysts and professional staff, we will continue to bring expertise and insight that’s critical to protecting these communities and victims and helping them heal and thrive.” 

    FBI and BIA efforts have currently led to over 40 arrests, over 40 search warrants being executed, 11 violent offenders were indicted, and nine child victims were identified and recovered from situations of abuse or neglect. Additionally, FBI Victim Services Division personnel provided direct support and services to approximately 440 victims and next-of-kin, including, but not limited to, crisis intervention, case status updates, child/adolescent forensic interviews, support during investigative interviews, assistance with Crime Victims Compensation applications, resource referrals, transportation assistance, Child Protective Services coordination, and Emergency Victim Assistance Funding for lodging and other immediate expenses. 

    “The Bureau of Indian Affairs, Office of Justice Services was pleased to have been apart of Operation Not Forgotten,” said Richard Melville, Office of Justice Services director. “Joint investigative efforts between the FBI and BIA increase investigative resources and strengthens our ability to bring closure and justice for families and victims of violent crimes committed in Indian country. This partnership is an effective tool our agencies leveraged throughout Operation Not Forgotten to achieve that important goal.”   

    This joint operation between the two agencies recognizes the importance of an inclusive approach to combating violent crime in Indian country. By working closely with BIA and Tribal law enforcement agencies, the FBI is establishing trusted partnerships with Tribal communities to address crime in Indian country. The FBI has more than 200 dedicated agents and 26 Safe Trails Task Forces consisting of federal, state, local, and Tribal law enforcement partners investigating crimes in roughly 200 Tribal communities nationwide. By expanding our presence in Indian country and working closely with our partner law enforcement agencies and community advocates, the FBI is committed to bringing closure to unresolved cases and bringing justice to victims and their families. 

    Operation Not Forgotten, along with the FBI’s broader violent crime mission, emphasizes the FBI’s continued dedication to address violence impacting Indian country, including Missing and Murdered Indigenous Persons (MMIP). The FBI is committed to maintaining close collaboration with our federal, state, local and Tribal law enforcement agencies, Tribal governments, and community members to build safer communities and protect the rights of all people.   

    Individuals with any relevant information about crimes or crimes in Indian country, are encouraged to visit tips.fbi.gov to submit an online tip or contact their local FBI office.   

    The following FBI field offices received dedicated personnel for Operation Not Forgotten 2024: 

    • Albuquerque
    • Denver
    • Detroit
    • Minneapolis
    • Oklahoma City
    • Omaha
    • Phoenix
    • Portland
    • Salt Lake City
    • Seattle

    Additional resources related to the FBI’s work in Indian country can be found on fbi.gov. 

    MIL Security OSI –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Warner Announces New Federal Application for Individuals Looking to Separate Joint Consolidated Student Loans

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Commonwealth of Virginia Mark R Warner
    WASHINGTON – Today, U.S. Sen. Mark R. Warner (D-VA) issued the statement below in response to a new form released by the U.S. Department of Education, which has begun to accept applications from joint consolidation loan borrowers seeking to separate their loans.
    This announcement and new application follows longtime efforts by Sen. Warner to provide relief for individuals who previously consolidated their federal student loan debt. Borrowers who consolidated their student debt with a spouse, did so under a program that was created by Congress and subsequently eliminated without providing a way for spouses to sever existing loans – even in the event of domestic violence, economic abuse, or an unresponsive partner. In 2022, Sen. Warner secured the passage of the Joint Consolidation Loan Separation Act of 2021 in order to help borrowers who remain liable for their abusive or uncommunicative spouse’s portion of their consolidated debts. In July of 2024, Sen. Warner hailed new Ed implementation guidance that today culminates in the launch of this new application.
    “Two years after getting the Joint Consolidation Loan Separation Act into law, I’m proud to say that borrowers can now apply to separate their joint consolidation loans. While this took longer than I had hoped for, I have no doubt that it brings a sigh of relief to so many borrowers who remain trapped in financial agreements with unresponsive or abusive ex-spouses, and unable to access important loan forgiveness programs. I’m proud to have written the law that’s bringing this process to life and I’m glad to see the Department of Education take such a significant step towards freeing borrowers from these burdensome loans,” said Sen. Warner.
    Through the new Department of Education form, borrowers are able to submit a:
    Joint Application: Both co-borrowers submit individual App/Notes to the Department, which will separate the JCL and create a new, individual Direct Consolidation Loan for each individual; or,
    Separate Application: An individual JCL applicant submits an App/Note to the Department without regard to whether or when the co-borrower applies, if the applicant has experienced an act of domestic violence or economic abuse from the other co-borrower, or if they are unable to reasonably reach or access the loan information of the other co-borrower.
    Once the loans are separated, the applicants’ loan obligation will be consolidated into a Direct Consolidation Loan if both borrowers completed the joint application process. For those who submit a separate application, the loan obligation will follow the same process as the joint application process, but if the remaining co-borrower does not complete an application, their loan obligation will remain a JCL with one borrower.
    Sen. Warner’s Joint Consolidation Loan Separation Act, originally introduced in 2017, was inspired by Sara, a constituent from McLean, Virginia who contacted Sen. Warner to communicate her struggles with a joint consolidation loan. Sara was raising two children on a public school teacher’s salary in Northern Virginia and trying to keep up with payments on her student loans. Unfortunately, her ex-spouse, whom she had divorced and moved thousands of miles away from to start fresh, refused to pay his share of their joint loan. Because joint consolidation loans create joint and several liability for borrowers, Sara faced the threat of having her wages as a public school teacher garnished if she did not pay both her and her ex-husband’s portions of their debt. Sen. Warner did not think this was fair and sought to create a solution, so that constituents like Sara could control their own financial futures. You can hear Sen. Warner tell Sara’s story here.

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Governor Ron DeSantis Announces Investment in Marine Infrastructure to Support Recovery Through the Florida Disaster Fund

    Source: US State of Florida

    Governor DeSantis also announced discounts on fishing licenses and progress on Florida’s efforts to take over management of Red Snapper in the Atlantic.

    STEINHATCHEE, Fla.—Today, Governor Ron DeSantis announced the award of $1,000,000 in funding from the Florida Disaster Fund to the Fish and Wildlife Foundation of Florida to support the rebuilding of fishing and aquaculture infrastructure damaged by Hurricanes Helene and Milton. The funding will go toward the rebuilding of boat slips and docks, the repair of fish houses, impacted aquaculture businesses, and other important infrastructure repairs for Florida’s fishing economy across the Big Bend region.

    “The Big Bend’s fishing industry took a direct hit from hurricanes Debby and Helene, and so did the hardworking Floridians who make their living on the water,” said Governor Ron DeSantis. “Today’s investments will help to rebuild critical waterside infrastructure and help get Floridians in the fishing and aquaculture industries back to full operations.”

    To unlock additional resources from the federal government, Governor DeSantis’ administration also initiated the process of submitting a federal fisheries disaster declaration to the U.S. Secretary of Commerce. This declaration request would provide access to federal funding, subject to appropriation, for offshore, nearshore, and inshore fisheries to rebuild. Governor DeSantis requested a similar federal fisheries disaster declaration following Hurricane Ian and Hurricane Idalia.

    Governor DeSantis has also directed the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) to expedite any permits or approvals for businesses impacted on uplands or on the water to ensure the rebuilding of damaged structures is not delayed by bureaucracy.

    “Governor DeSantis has a proven track record of helping communities recover quickly and rebuild fully after storms,” said Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission Executive Director Roger Young. “We are grateful for his leadership and support in assisting the fishing industry as it recovers from hurricanes Debby, Helene, and Milton.”

    Additionally, the Governor announced several discounts on fishing and hunting licenses, including lifetime licenses, to get anglers back on the water and provide a boon to the industry that serves them. This includes:

    • Half-off short-term licenses for Floridians from October 25, 2024, to January 3, 2025, for the annual and five-year multisport licenses for fishing and hunting; and
    • A 50% discount on lifetime sportsman licenses for children up to 17 years of age.
      • Age 4 or younger – $200 (normally $400)
      • Ages 5 to 12 – $350 (normally $700)
      • Ages 13 to 17 – $500 (normally $1,000)

    Additionally, FWC is offering annual salt water and freshwater combo licenses for just $5.

    Fishing and Florida are inseparable. Florida leads the nation in the number of saltwater fishing anglers, generating a $9.2 billion impact on the State of Florida’s economy. Additionally, the annual dockside value of commercial fisheries was estimated at $244 million. Today’s announcement will help Florida residents regenerate lost income and rebuild their businesses and infrastructure.

    ###

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: In Bipartisan Push, Maryland, Virginia Lawmakers Call on President to Address Venezuelan Crab Imports

    Source: United States House of Representatives – Congressman C.A. Dutch Ruppersberger (2nd District of Maryland)

    WASHINGTON – Today, U.S. Senators Chris Van Hollen, Ben Cardin (both D-Md.), Mark Warner, and Tim Kaine (both D-Va.) along with U.S. Representatives Dutch Ruppersberger (D-Md.), John Sarbanes (D-Md.), Rob Wittman (R-Va.), Andy Harris (R-Md.), Kweisi Mfume (D-Md.), David Trone (D-Md.), and Glenn Ivey (D-Md.) wrote to President Joe Biden outlining their concerns with the recent surge of crabmeat imports from Venezuela and its impact on the Chesapeake Bay region’s seafood economy as well as public health. In their letter, the lawmakers urge the President to launch an investigation through the International Trade Commission into the harm that these imports pose to our domestic seafood industry, and press the Administration to encourage a fairer seafood trade relationship. 

     “We write to express our significant concerns with the influx of crabmeat from Venezuela, which has threatened the viability of local fisheries across the Chesapeake Bay. Domestic seafood producers in Maryland and Virginia have experienced significant strain due to the influx of imported Venezuelan crabmeat, some of which is mislabeled and contaminated. In 2018, Venezuelan crabmeat mislabeled as originating from Maryland caused an outbreak of foodborne illnesses, resulting in multiple hospitalizations,” the lawmakers began.

    Highlighting the economic damage caused by Venezuelan imports, they wrote, “Since then, the supply of imported crabmeat has increased, threatening the future livelihood of domestic industry and creating the conditions for a 62 percent decrease in the domestic supply. This has harmed crab fishing industries throughout the Chesapeake Bay, which produces 50 percent of the United States’ total blue crab harvest, a proportion that is now diminishing year over year. There are now fewer than 20 Maryland crab picking and seafood processing companies, down from 53 in 1995.”

    They go on to urge the President to:

    1. Direct the United States International Trade Commission to conduct an investigation, per Section 201 of the Trade Act of 1974, looking into the harm caused by Venezuelan crabmeat imports and recommending remedies.
    2. Use the full array of informal actions available to you to address this trade issue, including through negotiations, utilization of World Trade Organization Committees, bilateral dialogues, and other activities.

    The full text of the letter is available here and below. 

    Dear President Biden: 

    We write to express our significant concerns with the influx of crabmeat from Venezuela, which has threatened the viability of local fisheries across the Chesapeake Bay. Domestic seafood producers in Maryland and Virginia have experienced significant strain due to the influx of imported Venezuelan crabmeat, some of which is mislabeled and contaminated. In 2018, Venezuelan crabmeat mislabeled as originating from Maryland caused an outbreak of foodborne illnesses, resulting in multiple hospitalizations. Since then, the supply of imported crabmeat has increased, threatening the future livelihood of domestic industry and creating the conditions for a 62 percent decrease in the domestic supply. This has harmed crab fishing industries throughout the Chesapeake Bay, which produces 50 percent of the United States’ total blue crab harvest, a proportion that is now diminishing year over year. There are now fewer than 20 Maryland crab picking and seafood processing companies, down from 53 in 1995. 

    Chesapeake Bay crab fisheries and processors follow a strict set of regulations to ensure that the Bay remains one of the most sustainable crab fisheries in the world, that the blue crabs harvested there are of the highest quality, and that the industry does no harm to other species. Foreign competitors often confront little or no such regulation. Not only does this imbalance put local fisheries and seafood businesses at a steep disadvantage, it can also put consumers at increased risk. Consumers are often misled about what they are eating, and sometimes even made sick, as was the case when imported Venezuelan crabmeat was linked with multiple cases of Vibrio parahaemolyticus infections. 

    We urge your Administration to use all of the tools at its disposal to remedy this unsustainable situation. Specifically, we urge you to: 

    1. Direct the United States International Trade Commission to conduct an investigation, per Section 201 of the Trade Act of 1974, looking into the harm caused by Venezuelan crabmeat imports and recommending remedies.
    2. Use the full array of informal actions available to you to address this trade issue, including through negotiations, utilization of World Trade Organization Committees, bilateral dialogues, and other activities.  

    The Chesapeake Bay crab industry has faced numerous challenges, and the region has worked hard to preserve the blue crab population over the years. This industry carries unique cultural importance for the broader Mid-Atlantic region, enriching and enhancing the regional culinary landscape. Without the federal government stepping in to protect American manufacturers from unfair competition, they might not make it through this crisis. If they do not, Maryland, Virginia, and the country, will be all the poorer for it. 

    Sincerely,

     ###

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Written question – Funding instruments needed to resolve the demographic crisis – E-002124/2024

    Source: European Parliament

    16.10.2024

    Question for written answer  E-002124/2024
    to the Commission
    Rule 144
    Fredis Beleris (PPE)

    In the conclusions adopted by the European Council in June 2023, the Commission was invited to present a toolbox to support Member States in addressing demographic challenges and their impact on Europe’s competitive edge.

    Its philosophy is based on supporting parents through better paid work, ensuring access to high-quality childcare services, access to the labour market and to affordable housing.

    Unfortunately, without the required financial support, these targets cannot reverse the decline in Europe’s population (since 2015, more deaths than births have been registered on our continent). The cohesion policy and the Recovery and Resilience Facility must incorporate the demographic crisis into their priorities, with clear targeting, and must adopt policies based on long-term strategic planning.

    We need to protect our European regions by boosting their infrastructure and incentivising business activity there.

    In view of this:

    • 1.Does the Commission intend to create a special funding strand targeted at the demographic problem?
    • 2.Does it intend to use the above-mentioned resources to boost the European Regional Development Fund and the Recovery and Resilience Facility for initiatives linked to demographics?
    • 3.Does it intend to implement specific de-urbanisation measures and at the same time to focus on regional development through the creation and modernisation of infrastructure?

    Submitted: 16.10.2024

    Last updated: 23 October 2024

    MIL OSI Europe News –

  • MIL-OSI Video: Why actor Edward Norton champions biodiversity | United Nations Goodwill Ambassador | Awake at Night

    Source: United Nations (Video News)

    Acclaimed actor, filmmaker and three-time Academy Award nominee Edward Norton has long been raising his voice on behalf of the planet and its most vulnerable communities. As a UN Goodwill Ambassador for Biodiversity, he is championing the protection of biodiversity for the well-being of all.

    “It’s quite heartbreaking. I started diving, when I was 14, in the Caribbean. The change to the reef environments in the Caribbean in my adult lifetime is staggering and really upsetting. Reefs are in just terrible shape, terrible shape. Bleached, covered with algae, fish a fraction of what they were. What was vibrant and colorful and rich is just sort of denuded. It looks like a burnt forest or something. It’s just not, it’s not as alive.”

    Working closely with communities in East Africa and around the world, Edward Norton is pushing for conservation that also tackles poverty by providing sustainable sources of income for local communities.

    In this special episode, the Hollywood star reflects on his activist upbringing, his hopes for his children, and on balancing a successful acting career with a rich, varied and meaningful life.

    #podcast #unitednations #awakeatnight #biodiversity #edwardnorton
    ——————-
    About Awake at Night:

    Hosted by Melissa Fleming, Under-Secretary-General for Global Communications, the podcast ‘Awake at Night’ is an in-depth interview series focusing on remarkable United Nations staff members who dedicate their career to helping people in parts of the world where they have the hardest lives – from war zones and displacement camps, to areas hit by disasters and the devastation of climate change.

    For more information on Awake at Night, visit Awake at Night: https://www.un.org/en/awake-at-night

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6GOvX4wbriY

    MIL OSI Video –

  • MIL-OSI United Nations: Experts of the Human Rights Committee Welcome France’s Efforts to Combat Homophobia, Raise Questions on Violence in New Caledonia and Rules Governing Identity Checks

    Source: United Nations – Geneva

    The Human Rights Committee today concluded its consideration of the sixth periodic report of France on how it implements the provisions of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, with Committee Experts welcoming France’s national plan combatting hatred against lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and intersex persons and plans to combat homophobia, while raising questions on violence in New Caledonia and rules governing identity checks. 

    One Committee Expert said the Committee welcomed the national plan for equality and against hatred and discrimination against lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and intersex persons (2020-2026) and the government plan (2023-2026) to combat homophobia and discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity. 

    Another Expert said it appeared that the current violence in the non-self-governing territory of New Caledonia was linked to reforms of the Nouméa Accord and a lack of progress in the decolonisation process.  What was the progress made on the issue of self-determination of the non-self-governing territory of New Caledonia as well as that of French Polynesia, and the participation and consultation processes put in place with the indigenous peoples living in these territories to obtain their free and informed consent and access to independence? 

    Another Expert asked if the State party could indicate whether mandatory training on racial and ethnic discrimination and profiling was systematically offered to law enforcement officials, both in metropolitan France and in the overseas territories?  Did the State party systematically collect data to monitor the use of identity checks, both in metropolitan France and in the overseas territories?  Would the State party be prepared to implement a template for all individuals subject to an identity check?  Would it be willing to introduce a centralised record of all identity checks to have an overview of how they were used, with whom and where?

    The delegation said France supported the recognition of indigenous peoples.  New Caledonia was one of the most advanced examples of the French Government recognising the rights of indigenous peoples.  Since the Nouméa Accord, an institutional framework had been put into place allowing for shared governance between the communities, representing the customs of the Kanak people.  On 1 October, the Prime Minister announced the postponement of elections in 2025, which was unanimously agreed by Parliament.  Since 1998, France had been cooperating with the decolonisation committee and the work had been fruitful.

    The delegation said all French citizens were equal before the law. The code of ethics for the police and national gendarmerie prohibited discriminatory identity checks.  When the law authorised an identity check, the police should not rely on any physical trait, unless there were specific grounds. Any act of discrimination could be reported by someone who believed they were a victim of discriminatory profiling. There were several ways to do this, including through the various controlling and monitoring authorities and the judiciary.

    Introducing the report, Isabelle Rome, Ambassador for Human Rights of France and head of the delegation, said human rights were a priority for France.  In December 2023, the President of the Republic announced that a House of Human Rights would be created in Paris to support civil society organizations. France had strengthened its public policies on the judiciary, democracy and the law enforcement agencies since 2022, paying particular attention to conditions for the use of force, and compliance with the rules of ethics during all police operations.  Ms. Rome concluded by saying that France believed in its democratic model, in liberty, equality and fraternity, as illustrated this summer by the Olympic and Paralympic Games.

    In concluding remarks, Ms. Rome thanked the Committee for the dialogue.  France was deeply attached to the rule of law and the Committee’s recommendations would be scrupulously considered.  The country was committed to renewing dialogue with the territory of New Caledonia and its inhabitants. 

    Tania María Abdo Rocholl, Committee Chairperson, thanked the delegation for the dialogue, which had covered a wide range of subjects under the Covenant.   The Committee aimed to ensure the highest level of implementation of the Covenant in France. 

    The delegation of France was made up of representatives of the Ministry for Europe and Foreign Affairs; the Ministry of the Interior and Overseas; the Ministry of Justice; the State Council; the Interministerial delegation to the fight against racism, anti-Semitism, and hatred; the French office for the protection of refugees and stateless persons; and the Permanent Mission of France to the United Nations Office at Geneva.

    The Human Rights Committee’s one hundred and forty-second session is being held from 14 October to 7 November 2024.  All the documents relating to the Committee’s work, including reports submitted by States parties, can be found on the session’s webpage.  Meeting summary releases can be found here.  The webcast of the Committee’s public meetings can be accessed via the UN Web TV webpage.

    The Committee will next meet in public at 3 p.m. on Wednesday, 23 October, to begin its consideration of the second periodic report of Türkiye (CCPR/C/TUR/2).

    Report

    The Committee has before it the sixth periodic report of France (CCPR/C/FRA/6).

    Presentation of Report

    ISABELLE ROME, Ambassador for Human Rights of France and head of the delegation, said human rights were a priority for France.  In December 2023, the President of the Republic announced that a House of Human Rights would be created in Paris to support civil society organizations.  Launched in 2021, the Marianne initiative for human rights defenders aimed to encourage the activities of human rights defenders, both in their country of origin, and by welcoming them in France.  The fight against the death penalty was also a priority for France.  France would host the ninth World Congress against the Death Penalty in Paris in 2026.  France was also contributing to the organization of the first World Congress on Enforced Disappearances in Geneva on 15 and 16 January 2025. 

    The State’s new feminist diplomacy strategy would be published by the end of 2024.  France was proud that the Paris 2024 Olympic and Paralympic Games were the first gender-balanced games in history.  Through its diplomatic and consular network, France supported projects of democratic governance, respect for the rule of law, the fight against impunity, access to justice, and mechanisms to monitor the effective exercise of civil and political rights.  In 2019, France launched the Partnership for Information and Democracy, which was joined by 54 States from all regions, to guarantee freedom of expression.  In May 2024, the President of the French Republic and the Prime Minister of New Zealand announced the creation of a new non-governmental organization, the Christchurch Call Foundation, to coordinate the work of the Christchurch Call to eliminate terrorist and violent extremist content online. 

    France had strengthened its public policies on the judiciary, democracy and the law enforcement agencies since 2022, paying particular attention to conditions for the use of force, and compliance with the rules of ethics during all police operations.  The national law enforcement plan published in 2021 provided for an adaptation of the employment strategies of the republican security companies and the mobile gendarmerie squadrons during public demonstrations.  The right to demonstrate was guaranteed by the Constitution in France.  By getting in touch with the prefects and police units involved in public demonstrations, journalists could be added to communication channels, allowing them to receive live information and ask questions. 

    Between 2020 and 2024, the Ministry of Justice’s budget increased by 33 per cent, from €7.6 billion in 2020 to €10.1 billion in 2024. In five years, the French Ministry of Justice would have recruited as many magistrates as in the last 20 years. To combat prison overcrowding, the Ministry of Justice was implementing a proactive prison regulation policy, based on the development of alternatives to incarceration, the strengthening of early release mechanisms, and an ambitious prison real estate programme creating 15,000 net prison places.  An Interministerial Committee for Overseas Territories was set up in July 2023.  France had mobilised authorities to enable and guarantee the return to calm and security of people in New Caledonia. Emergency measures were deployed last June.  The mediation and work mission continued its work, with the aim of renewing political dialogue. 

    France had been implementing a new interministerial plan for gender equality 2023-2027, which contained 161 measures divided into four priority areas: the fight against violence against women; the global approach to women’s health; professional and economic equality; and the dissemination and transmission of a culture of equality.  The law of July 2023 aimed at strengthening women’s access to responsibilities in the public service.  It increased the mandatory quota of first-time female appointments to senior and management positions to 50 per cent.  On 8 March 2024, France became the first country in the world to enshrine the freedom to have access to voluntary termination of pregnancy in its Constitution. 

    Questions by Committee Experts

    A Committee Expert welcomed that France’s report was prepared in consultation with the National Consultative Commission on Human Rights, whose role was to monitor France’s international commitments and the implementation of recommendations issued by international and regional bodies.  In May 2024, despite the provisions of the Nouméa Accord which provided for a process of gradual transfer of power from France to New Caledonia, the National Assembly voted in favour of expanding the electorate of New Caledonia.  Thousands of Kanak demonstrators mobilised to denounce these reforms, which were allegedly passed without adequate consultation or free, prior and informed consent.  In the absence of sufficient dialogue on the part of the authorities, a violent conflict had been raging since that date. 

    The French Government had deployed considerable military resources to restore order, but at the cost of numerous allegations of excessive use of force that led to several deaths among Kanak protesters and security forces, as well as injuries.  According to information received by the Committee, at least 11 people were shot dead and 169 others were injured; 2658 demonstrators were arrested, many of whom were arbitrarily arrested and detained, dozens of them were also transferred to metropolitan France. 

    It appeared that the current violence in the non-self-governing territory of New Caledonia was linked to reforms of the Nouméa Accord and a lack of progress in the decolonisation process.  What was the progress made on the issue of self-determination of the non-self-governing territory of New Caledonia as well as that of French Polynesia, and the participation and consultation processes put in place with the indigenous peoples living in these territories to obtain their free and informed consent and access to independence?

    There had been several prominent court cases regarding the removal of headscarves in France.  In the opinion of the French State, should the Committee’s Views be followed only in the case where the Committee considered a complaint to be inadmissible or agreed with the arguments presented by the French Government? Were there intentions to lift reservations to the Covenant?  Who currently appointed the magistrates of the courts?  What was the current state of the constitutional reform initiated with a view to making the Prosecutor’s Office independent of the executive?  How could the full independence of judges and prosecutors be guaranteed?

    Since 2015, France had put in place measures to combat terrorism, which had been seen over the years to be increasingly detrimental to people’s rights and freedoms.

    Was the new legislation accompanied by sufficient guarantees against the risk of arbitrary and discriminatory implementation of these measures?  What independent and impartial expertise did public authorities have to assess the impact of new technologies on the exercise of the rights and freedoms recognised by the Covenant? 

    It was understood that mass surveillance technology was used during the Olympic and Paralympic Games.  How did the State party ensure that it did not lead to profiling that disproportionately affected racial, ethnic and religious minorities?  How did the State party ensure that continuous surveillance by algorithm-based systems did not violate the right to privacy and respected the requirements of proportionality and necessity?  For how long could the data collected in this way be kept? 

    What were the current conditions for the communication of information to the intelligence services, particularly in the area of sensitive data? What information could be transmitted and what traceability requirements were in place?  Under what conditions could information provided by the intelligence services be made available to the judicial authority and the Public Prosecutor’s Office?  What means of access was available to defendants and those accused of acts of terrorism?

    Another Expert said the Committee was informed that people of colour were subjected to identity checks by the police about 20 times more often than other citizens.  They also faced discriminatory treatment during police stops and searches, including direct fines, often without objective suspicion and without being informed of the reasons.  What could be done to ensure that the use of identity checks and fines was not left to the discretion of law enforcement agencies, and was based only on objective and individualised conditions, and not on racial origins?  Did the State party have explicit guidelines for law enforcement agencies that clearly prohibited racial profiling in police operations as well as discriminatory identity checks? 

    Could the State party indicate whether mandatory training on racial and ethnic discrimination and profiling was systematically offered to law enforcement officials, both in metropolitan France and in the overseas territories?  Did the State party systematically collect data to monitor the use of identity checks, both in metropolitan France and in the overseas territories?  Would the State party be prepared to implement a template for all individuals subject to an identity check?  Would it be willing to introduce a centralised record of all identity checks to have an overview of how they were used, with whom and where?

    The Committee had received extensive information that showed the persistent problem of systemic racial discrimination, as well as the use of negative stereotypes against minorities.  What measures had the State party taken to effectively combat all forms of hate speech and hate crimes against racial, ethnic and religious minorities? What training was provided to law enforcement officers, judges and prosecutors, and what awareness campaigns were organised to prevent and combat hate crime and hate speech?  Would France develop data collection and research in compliance with data protection rules, to effectively identify cases of racial or ethnic profiling and offences in metropolitan France and overseas?

    The Committee welcomed the national plan for equality and against hatred and discrimination against lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and intersex persons (2020-2026) and the government plan (2023-2026) to combat homophobia and discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity.  How would the State party ensure adequate resources and the active participation of civil society in the implementation of these plans?  Did these programmes sufficiently take into account minorities within minorities, such as lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and intersex asylum seekers? 

    The Committee was informed that some of the measures granting extensive powers to the administrative authorities, developed in the context of the state of emergency, had been granted permanent status.  What measures had the State party taken to ensure that initial emergency measures were in conformity with the Covenant in terms of necessity and proportionality?  How did the State party promote the accessibility of judicial procedures and ensure that they were effective?

    How would France ensure that anti-terrorism legislation did not disproportionately target Muslims and that actions were based on alleged criminal behaviour rather than religious practices?  How did the State party ensure that house searches and dissolution of organizations were conducted by the courts?  What was the percentage of terrorist offences in relation to criminal offences committed in the last five years?  The Committee was informed of the law establishing a new security regime, which subjected the accused to certain obligations, with a view of ensuring their reintegration.  How did France ensure that this monitoring system, which was based on the rather vague notion of “dangerousness”, was not arbitrary and did not disproportionately infringe on the rights of persons who had served their sentences?

    One Committee Expert said the Committee particularly welcomed the State party’s commitment of significant financial resources to address the needs of vulnerable groups during the health crisis of COVID-19. What was the impact of the measures described in the State party’s report, to ensure that the COVID-19 pandemic did not exacerbate inequalities, discrimination and exclusion, including among vulnerable groups?  Specifically, regarding domestic violence against women, which was said to have increased during the pandemic, what was the assessment of the effectiveness and impact of the measures taken? 

    While noting the information provided by the State party, including on the judicial review of the restrictions imposed, could the proportionality of the measures imposed to address COVID-19 be explained, including the ban on any gathering of more than 10 people imposed for a certain period? What assessment did the State party make of this experience for a better consideration of human rights in future crises?      

    Another Expert said the State party had reported on humanitarian repatriations from Syria of women and children of French nationality.  With regard to returns, according to public reports, there was still a significant number of women and children detained or held in camps and rehabilitation centres in Syria.  What was the number, the current situation, and the measures taken by the State party to ensure the full repatriation of all French women and children still in detention camps and rehabilitation centres for minors in Syria? 

    What was the estimated number of detained men and women in Syria who participated as Islamic State fighters?  Had measures been taken to ensure that due process standards were strictly respected in the trials before the Syrian national courts? According to information, in May and June 2019, 11 French nationals had been sentenced to death in Iraq for their involvement as Islamic State fighters.  Could the delegation provide an update on that information and indicate what steps the State party had taken to prevent the continued imposition of death sentences on its nationals in that country?  What other penalties had been applied to these French nationals in lieu of the death penalty?

    The Committee had requested information related to the Arms Trade Treaty, in order to know whether the State party carried out an evaluation for the granting of export licenses aimed at determining that the recipient country used the weapons included in the respective license within the framework of respect for the right to life.  Did the evaluation of an arms export take this into account?  Had any measures been taken to ensure a total ban on arms sales to countries where there was a clear risk that such weapons could be used to violate international human rights law?  Was it possible to access information on arms exports so that civil society could carry out oversight?  What measures had been taken to prevent the negative effects on the right to life of the operations of French companies abroad, especially in the province of Cabo Delgado in Mozambique? 

    A Committee Expert said the Committee was informed that there had been a rise in police violence in recent years, with multiple incidents resulting in fatal outcomes, some of them young boys.   Could more information be provided on trainings on racism for police officers?  Had improvements been made, bearing in mind previous incidents?  The Committee was informed that investigations and legal procedures of unlawful killings by law enforcement officials were not expeditious, sometimes even leading to de facto police impunity, or that sentences were not commensurate with the gravity of the crime. 

    Had there been plans to amend legal norms and review legal conditions for the use of firearms by the police and the gendarmerie, aiming to reduce the risks of disproportionate use of lethal force, and to strike a better balance with the principles of absolute necessity and strict proportionality?  What was the status of investigations of fatalities and injuries, including those related to alleged excessive use of force, which emerged during conflicts that started in May 2024 in New Caledonia? Had trainings been undertaken for those operating in France’s overseas territories? 

    The Committee welcomed the reported introduction of the new right to appeal introduced by article 803-8 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, as a step forward.  However, Experts had been informed that there were several challenges preventing its full use and benefits.  Since the right to a judicial remedy against undignified conditions of detention was introduced in 2021, what were the steps taken by the State party to disseminate it within the incarcerated population?  Was the information on the creation of a new legal tool easily reachable in all penitentiaries under the jurisdiction of the State party?  Had legal aid been introduced to those incarcerated persons who could not afford a lawyer or judicial taxes?  Were there plans to introduce wider use of alternatives to detention or a more restricted use of detention as a last resort?

    Responses by the Delegation

    The delegation said France supported the recognition of indigenous peoples.  New Caledonia was one of the most advanced examples of the French Government recognising the rights of indigenous peoples.  Since the Nouméa Accord, an institutional framework had been put into place allowing for shared governance between the communities, representing the customs of the Kanak people.  On 1 October, the Prime Minister announced the postponement of elections in 2025, which was unanimously agreed by Parliament.  Since 1998, France had been cooperating with the decolonisation committee and the work had been fruitful.

    Since 2015, the technical intelligence community had been working on a specific legal framework.  The law included respect for the private lives of citizens and had a strict principle of proportionality.  The law set forth the procedures to be respected when it came to implementing intelligence techniques, including prior authorisation by the Prime Minister.  There were restrictions on how long the data could be held.  The enhanced video surveillance was enacted in advance of the Olympics and Paralympics Games.  France chose to engage in a rigorous oversight mechanism regarding this surveillance.  This was a tool for detecting events without having to resort to facial recognition. 

    All French citizens were equal before the law.  The code of ethics for the police and national gendarmerie prohibited discriminatory identity checks.  When the law authorised an identity check, the police should not rely on any physical trait, unless there were specific grounds.  Any act of discrimination could be reported by someone who believed they were a victim of discriminatory profiling.  There were several ways to do this, including through the various controlling and monitoring authorities and the judiciary.

    At the end of the state of emergency, which followed the attacks carried out on France in 2015, the Government acknowledged the need to keep these tools in place due to the possibility of other attacks.  Four new measures had then been created.  These laws were only for preventing terrorism and were accompanied with significant guarantees for citizens.  The law of 30 July 2021 on preventing acts of terrorism gave these measures permanency.  The Constitutional Council believed this was a balanced approach that ensured achieving the goal of preventing terrorism while respecting private life.  House searches could not be instigated unless there was prior authorisation from a judge; 1,447 remedies were presented for the state of emergency.  The law of 2021 applied to people who had been sentenced to acts of terrorism. Sentences for terrorist activities represented around 0.04 per cent of all criminal activities. 

    A plan had been developed to prepare the plan on combatting lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and intersex hatred, involving members of civil society.  The plan contained 16 key measures, including a ten-million-euro fund by 2027 to improve the host centres for these individuals.  The goal was to have two centres per region in France.  For hate speech, the legislation provision had recently been strengthened.  In 2021, there was a vote to govern the digital space and that law had a set of provisions on combatting online hate speech to better regulate illegal behaviour. There had been significant progress made in this area, given that a bill had been introduced in the European Parliament to regulate heinous content online. 

    In France, 2020 was the year that the State had the lowest rate of femicide.  This meant that the measures set up were effective, and that the police and justice systems were able to act swiftly to combat family violence.  There were also provisions which allowed complaints to be raised. 

    Measures adopted during the pandemic were considered to be proportional.  The measures taken to address the pandemic did not overturn other measures in place. During COVID-19, the number of calls to victim support groups for violence had increased.  The accelerated measures implemented by France to support victims included electronic bracelets to ensure restraining orders were complied with.   In 2021, emergency plans were implemented to ensure people were protected.  At the end of the pandemic, the State provided hotlines 24/7 and reception centres in shopping malls.  More specialised support was also provided in courts. 

    International commitments by France to human rights did not involve a repatriation of citizens in an area where France had no control.  Authorities responded systematically to requests for repatriation made by French citizens.  Since 2019, repatriation efforts for minors had been organised.  France exported weapons to countries that wished to strengthen their armies, only with strict national oversight. 

    Force was only used when necessary in cases set forth by law and in a manner which was proportional to the threat.  A police or member of the gendarmerie would only use force if it was essential in their work, such as in cases of self-defence.  Police had additional guidelines on the use of weapons.  There should never be doubt regarding the reasons of an arrest warrant. 

    France had a law which allowed for all inmates to request guarantees for their detention conditions, ensuring they were dignified. A provision was in place which allowed individuals to benefit from jurisdictional support, in place since 2023. Template forms for this purpose were provided to all detainees upon their detention. 

    Questions by Committee Experts

    A Committee Expert said the problem with the New Caledonia information was the outcome of the projects which arose in France in 1984. The idea of postponing elections to 2025 was a positive sign as this would allow for mediation between the local and French authorities.  Over recent years, there had been a considerable strengthening of anti-terrorist measures.  However, the majority of terrorist threats were foiled by international cooperation efforts.  Were the measures justified by the threats the State faced?  How could this be transmitted between different intelligence branches?  How long was intelligence data stored and what measures were provided to keep the information secure? 

    Another Expert asked for disaggregated data on what law enforcement officials had been charged with?  Were inmates allowed to apply to a collective appeal so that others could benefit? 

    An Expert said there were laws which prohibited discrimination in identification checks; how was it ensured that this legislation was implemented?

    Another Committee Expert asked for the delegation to bear in mind the matter of redress granted to victims of violence. 

    One Expert asked for a more specific response to the measures adopted to comply with the rulings of the European courts against certain cases against France?  How did the State party ensure effective judicial control and parliamentary oversight in weapon exportation? 

    Responses by the Delegation

    The delegation said the French overseas territories met all international criteria under the law.  France had completed the decolonisation process and no longer administered non-self-governing territories.  As for French Polynesia, in 2023, France decided to speak before the General Assembly, illustrating ongoing dialogue between the State and French Polynesia. France supported the development of French Polynesia. 

    The French Government followed the individual communications procedure before the Committee.  Any communications were the subject of broad consultations among many ministries and institutions. 

    When France ended the state of emergency of 2015 to 2017, the risk of terrorism in the country was still high.  While this risk had come down, threats still persisted; 45 attacks had been foiled between 2017 and now. 

    In 2022, over 700 people brought cases to court regarding acts of violence committed by people in public authority.  Over 200 of these led to convictions. 

    The Ministry of Education and Youth was currently creating a programme to consider the new kinds of racism and anti-Semitism which had cropped up in recent years. 

    The French law enforcement force represented the population and was diverse.  Inmates could ask for specific improvements to detention conditions which impacted their dignity.  Improvements had been carried out in several penitentiaries as a result of this. Several inmates could present these complaints together.   

    Questions by Committee Experts

    A Committee Expert said since the end of the state of health emergency on 10 July 2020, the situation of exiled people in Calais had deteriorated.  The nearly 1,200 homeless men, women and children in Calais had seen their living conditions deteriorated due to the brutal “evacuations” of several large camps, and the dramatic reduction in vital services such as food distributions, and lack of access to showers and water points.  Additionally, around 100 unaccompanied minors had settled in tents in Jules Ferry Square to highlight that they had been abandoned by the State. Could the State party comment on this?

    According to information received, journalists and media organizations were reportedly facing increasing challenges in carrying out their duties, including restrictions on reporting, potential abuses of power, and other pressures that undermined press freedom.  Reporters without Borders reported that police reportedly assaulted several “clearly identifiable” journalists.  There were several cases cited to support these allegations, including journalists in New Caledonia who stated they were constantly harassed for their coverage of the riots.  Could the delegation comment on these allegations?  What measures did the State party intend to take to better protect journalists and human rights defenders in the exercise of their work? Had the perpetrators of the mentioned cases been prosecuted and what was the outcome, including convictions and reparations?

    Another Expert noted the numerous allegations of prison overcrowding in the State party and the serious health risks during the most critical period of the COVID-19 pandemic, asking what were the reasons for providing, through decree-law 2020-303, for the full continuation of pre-trial detention, which even affected minors?  What were the conditions for the application of the measure of full maintenance of pre-trial detention to children and how many children were affected by this measure? How did law no. 2021-646 of 25 May 2021 on global security preserving freedoms effectively guarantee respect for privacy, especially in the use of portable cameras by law enforcement officers and cameras installed on unmanned aerial vehicles?  Did it include the principles of proportionality and necessity? In the case of the use of surveillance devices in public demonstrations by law enforcement officers, were there safeguards or limitations to prevent their use from affecting the right to peaceful assembly and freedom of expression? 

    It was alleged that four former national secretaries of the General Confederation of Labour were being investigated for defamation and public slander following a complaint filed against them by the Directorate of the National School of Prison Administration.  Could information on this be provided?  The Committee would also like information on the processes followed against various union, political and community leaders for the crime of glorifying terrorism after the Hamas attacks of 7 October 2023.  It was reported that during the recent Olympic Games, there were many cases of systematic Islamophobia that mainly affected Muslim athletes and communities, a situation exacerbated by the security measures adopted. Could the delegation comment on this? What measures had the State party taken to combat hate speech against lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and intersex persons?

    One Expert said the Committee had unfortunately been informed that the situation of migrants in Calais and Grande-Synthe was still very worrying, with authorities continuing to apply the “zero point of fixation” policy, under which temporary shelters were systematically dismantled, sometimes with excessive use of force, every 48 hours.  How were migrants informed of the 48 hour rule and the possible dismantling of their temporary shelters?  Could the State consider the use of more humane and proportionate alternatives to dismantling these shelters, including increasing the capacity of reception centres?  What measures had been adopted to facilitate reporting on police abuses? 

    The Committee was concerned by reports that migrants had been detained at the French-Italian border without having obtained legal documents explaining their detention.  How did France ensure that such detentions were not arbitrary and that all migrants were informed of their procedural rights?  The Committee was also informed that the immigration law of 2 January 2024 expanded the criteria for expulsion to include minor offences, and allowed authorities to place a foreign person in administrative detention for reasons related to a potential threat to public order without justification, as well as allowing detention to be extended and reducing procedural rights.  How was it ensured that these measures were compatible with the provisions of the Covenant? 

    The Committee had received information that the State party continued to issue expulsion notices for the return of persons to countries where they were at risk of serious violations of their rights.  How did the State party ensure respect for the principle of non-refoulement in all cases of expulsion?  Regarding the internal borders of the Schengen area, in particular the issue of rapid refoulement at the border between France and Italy, the Committee noted with appreciation the State party’s follow-up to the conclusion of the Court of Justice of the European Union.  The Committee welcomed the annulment by the Council of State, in February, of certain parts of the Code on the Entry and Residence of Foreigners and the Right of Asylum. 

    However, information had been received that foreign nationals continued to be forcibly returned to Italy without having had access to a proper asylum procedure.  How did France ensure the individualised examination of all applications and effective access to asylum procedures?  Did the State intend to end the use of bone tests in law and in practice?  What was the objective of the January 2024 law to establish files to identify unaccompanied minors suspected of a criminal offence?  Who controlled these files and who kept them?  What measures had been taken to ensure adequate temporary accommodation and emergency accommodation for unaccompanied minors?

    One Committee Expert said France had adopted the third national action plan against human trafficking (2024-2027) at the beginning of 2024.  Could the evaluation of achievements from the second action plan be provided and what goals were set for the third plan?  What were the measures developed to combat trafficking?  Could victims receive compensation within the criminal procedure, or did they have to undergo civil suits for compensation?  What safeguards were in place to protect victims themselves from criminal accountability?  What methods had been developed for victims’ identification?  Had trainings been organised for prosecutors, judges and lawyers on human trafficking? 

    The Committee was concerned by numerous reports that the ban on manifestation of religious beliefs by means of clothing, headgear or other religious symbols was a source of tension in French society and was seen by some as disrespect for multiculturism, fuelling the sense of discrimination, racism, anti-Semitism, and Islamophobia.  What measures were being taken to ensure that the ban on expressing religion by means of religious clothing, headgear or symbols did not have a discriminatory effect in practice?  How was it ensured that all visible religious symbols were treated equally? What criteria was used to decide what symbol should be treated as conspicuous and thus be banned, while others were treated as discrete and allowed?  How did the State party avoid that the ban on manifestation of religious beliefs by means of clothing affected predominantly Muslim girls and women? 

    What safeguards were in place to ensure that provisions on the dissolution of association would not be broadly interpreted and end in violating the right to freedom of assembly?  There had been examples of associations, such as Uprisings of the Earth, labelled as eco-terrorists.  Could the delegation provide its views on this?  The Committee was concerned at the expansion of police powers to stop and check persons in the vicinity of protests, and the effect that this could have on the effective enjoyment of the right of peaceful assembly.  A significant number of protesters had been arrested and detained and a small percentage of the protesters arrested had been charged.  What was the position of the State party on these allegations?  How were personal dignity and respect understood by the courts?

    Another Expert said the year 2023 was marked by a succession of bans on demonstrations, particularly related to the mobilisation against the pension reform, or those carried out in support of the Palestinian people.  In October 2023, the Minister of the Interior issued a memo calling on local authorities to pre-emptively ban all demonstrations of solidarity with the Palestine people.  The ban was challenged before the Council of State, which determined that local authorities had to judge on a case-by-case basis the risks to public order and thus avoid repression by invoking public order, excessive force or arbitrary arrest.  This had had repercussions, even in the area of the right to information, which was concerning.

    Did the National Law Enforcement Scheme adopted in September 2020 mention the path of “de-escalation”, as a strategic principle for policing political manifestations in Europe, supported by the European Union?  The Committee had expressed concern about allegations of ill treatment, excessive use of force, and disproportionate use of intermediate force weapons, in particular during arrests, forced evacuations, and law enforcement operations.  A 2017 law (the Cazeneuve law) created a common framework for the use of weapons, allowing police to use armed force in five different cases.  However, the number of deaths had increased fivefold after the 2017 law, causing France to become the country in the European Union with the largest numbers of people killed or injured by shots fired by police. 

    Could the delegation explain the extent to which law enforcement agencies followed the applicable protocols in practice, with supporting statistics, and respected the principles of necessity, proportionality, precaution, non-discrimination and self-defence in the use of weapons?  What measures, in terms of training for law enforcement agencies, were envisaged?  Would the State party be willing to review the legal framework on the use of weapons and limit the use of firearms within the Security Code?  What follow-up had been given to decision 2020-131 of the Defender of Rights on general recommendations on law enforcement practices with regard to the rules of ethics? 

    According to a decision by the Ombudsman, France was the only country in Europe to use stun grenades to keep demonstrators at bay. Would grenades continue to be used despite the serious mutilations and injuries they caused?  Could the delegation provide updated information on the number of persons who had died as a result of police operations during arrests, including through the excessive use of force, and on the outcome of investigations into such deaths, sanctions imposed, and reparations provided to victims and their families?  Could statistics be provided on the number of proposals for sanctions presented by the Defender of Rights and what became of them, in particular the number of prosecutions? 

    Would the Brigades for the Repression of Motorised Violent Actions be dissolved?  The State party’s report provided information on complaints and investigations initiated concerning members of the security forces.  What measures would be taken to make the relevant statistical data more reliable, disaggregated and complete?

    Responses by the Delegation

    The delegation said the evacuations of camps in Calais which took place were done through either a legal or an administrative decision. These decisions were carried out with proper supervision and were overseen by the Government and social organizations.  Unaccompanied minors were housed in emergency shelter systems when possible and the same for adults when possible. 

    France guaranteed the right to protest and freedom of collective speech and expression of ideas.  The French State allowed journalists free circulation.  France was seeking to strike a balance because there were now many journalists without press identification who ran risks, placing themselves between protesters and law enforcement officials.  Law enforcement officers were called on to show professional behaviour at all times, including in situations where protests were violent. 

    Videos in public spaces were used to call attention to pre-determined actions; they did not have any impact on the right to protest. France supported the European plan for protecting journalists against violence.  This had allowed for additional guarantees to be provided in certain cases. 

    French authorities were mobilised to support efforts against hate speech, and there were efforts to address this phenomenon within the Ministry of Justice.  When cases were thrown out, they could be appealed before the appeals court.  Investigations into allegations of hate speech were underway. 

    The administrative police were evacuating camps, which were aimed at putting an end to illegal occupation and squatting of lands.  These operations on the ground involved parameters being established.  Regarding expulsions in Calais, 36 operations had taken place.  They were based on the same legal foundations; the anti-squat laws had been utilised to proceed with the evacuation.  Minors were always supported.  The State was aware of the situation of unaccompanied minors in Calais. Systems had been put in place to address these realities and identify the unaccompanied minors.  Work was being done with associations on the ground in Calais, including Doctors without Borders.  The shelters were only 20 minutes from Calais and allowed for daily operations and support.  This distance was far enough to protect unaccompanied minors from traffickers found in these camps. 

    When foreigners were not eligible for asylum seeking procedures, they could then be placed under administrative detention in administrative detention centres.  These decisions were subjected to oversight by judges.  During the detention period, foreigners benefitted from health care support and legal counsel.  Voluntary returnees received financial support.  Some countries were not considered to be safe, and therefore returns were only on a voluntary basis.  Since October 2022, the Government was active in Mayotte, allowing active participation in the asylum-seeking process. 

    There were 2,100 victims of trafficking and exploitation in 2023, a six per cent increase compared to 2022.  Around 882 people had been sentenced for exploitation and trafficking.  France thanked civil society for helping contribute to the National Action Plan against Trafficking.  Training was an important part of the strategy to combat trafficking; there was a training course on human trafficking with a focus on modern slavery. Training was provided to 150 different professionals.  To care for the victims of human trafficking, several mechanisms were in place, including an early detection mechanism.

    France guaranteed the rights of citizens at the highest level, and any restrictions applied to all religions equally.  There was freedom for an individual to display religious signs, but this needed to be assessed on a case-by-case basis.  Any restriction on a religious symbol was only imposed if they were identified as a risk to the public service. 

    Freedom of expression was guaranteed in France, but this could result in some groups promoting racist and hate speech.  The law of 2021 amended the list of cases where a dissolution could take place, broadening the list of discriminatory measures which could lead to a dissolution. 

    The Public Ministry could carry out prosecutions.  Sometimes the Prosecutor could enact educational measures instead, which was used in some cases of minors.  The judges of France were required to argue for their decisions, given that there were no automatic sentences in the State.  This was also true for those found guilty of threatening public order. 

    France was one of the first countries to call for a ceasefire in Gaza.  There had been a significant increase in anti-Semitic acts since October 2023. Freedom to demonstrate was a fundamental right protected by the Constitution and protests were not subjected to authorisation.  There should be a notification to law enforcement around 15 days before to protect the safety of those participating and those living in the area.  The prohibition of protests was only carried out if it was believed they were a threat to public order, and this was done with the oversight of a judge.  Exceptionally, some protests had been prohibited due to the risk they posed to public order. 

    The use of firearms in France was regulated by the Criminal Code. This allowed a gradual response to respect necessity and proportionality to the violence and the threat.  The goal was to reduce the risk of threatening life and the integrity of people.  The police and gendarmerie were trained on how to use these weapons.  Regarding the brigades, several changes in the practices of demonstrators, including the increase in use of social media, had meant that for three years, the strategy had changed.  On average, there were two to three protests every day in Paris.  To meet this challenge, the brigades were developed and had been used to break up certain disruptive groups.  Since October 2023, the Ministry of Justice had circulated a document on combatting offences related to terrorist activities. 

    The fight against Islamophobia was a strong State policy. The strong Muslim community in France should be able to live with their beliefs peacefully to enjoy their religion. Any law which might be seen as a restriction did not target any specific population or any specific religion. 

    Questions by Committee Experts

    A Committee Expert asked if minors in Mayotte could be afforded the same protections as in metropolitan France? 

    Another Expert said hate speech online affected artists and activists in the lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and intersex community. What had been done to prevent this? 

    An Expert said there had been a significant increase in those killed or wounded during protests or police operations.  Were grenades and defensive bullets still used?  What happened when police used these weapons? Was there a compulsory inquiry? Was there oversight regarding each use of weapons? 

    Responses by the Delegation

    Minors were subjected to an age evaluation before they were recorded as minors.  If recorded as a minor, they should not undergo another evaluation.  The dismantling of camps was based on public legal rulings.  The individuals were informed, and efforts were made to help them find shelters or to change their immigration status.  Readmission into the Schengen space was a complex issue. 

    There was a doctrine for the use of medium weapons which allowed gradual and proportionate use.  Recent changes allowed France to address the risk of wounds with these weapons.  Law enforcement officers needed to be clearly trained on each type of weapon on a regular basis.  There was a proposal to replace grenades with non-lethal “flash-bangs”. Random visits were undertaken to police and gendarmerie stations as a form of auditing.  Efforts were made to identify the amount of time weapons were used. 

    Closing Remarks

    ISABELLE ROME, Ambassador for Human Rights of France and head of the delegation, thanked the Committee for the dialogue.  France was deeply attached to the rule of law and was a living democracy; the Committee’s recommendations would be scrupulously considered.  France would continue to progress with an open-minded spirit, in partnership with civil society and the national human rights institution.  The country was committed to renewing dialogue with the territory of New Caledonia and its inhabitants. 

    TANIA MARÍA ABDO ROCHOLL, Committee Chairperson, thanked the delegation for the dialogue, which had covered a wide range of subjects under the Covenant.  The Committee aimed to ensure the highest level of implementation of the Covenant in France. 

    __________

    CCPR.24.024E

    Produced by the United Nations Information Service in Geneva for use of the information media; not an official record.

    English and French versions of our releases are different as they are the product of two separate coverage teams that work independently.

    MIL OSI United Nations News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Administrator Samantha Power in Phnom Penh, Cambodia

    Source: USAID

    The below is attributable to Spokesperson Benjamin Suarato:

    Today, Administrator Samantha Power was in Phnom Penh for the second day of her visit to Cambodia. She met with Prime Minister Hun Manet at the Peace Palace, where they discussed the U.S. and Cambodia’s shared interest in fostering a deeper bilateral relationship. Noting that her visit marked the first time a USAID Administrator had traveled to Cambodia, Administrator Power recognized the significant progress achieved through collaboration between USAID and the Government of Cambodia in areas such as health, education, and environmental protection. 

    Administrator Power also recognized Cambodia’s achievements on reducing deaths from tuberculosis and malaria. Administrator Power and Prime Minister Manet discussed the importance of the U.S. and Cambodia working together to address the online scam industry, demining and the removal of unexploded ordnance, global health security, reducing lead exposure for children, and other issues of mutual concern. Administrator Power underscored the strong U.S. support around the world and in Cambodia for workers’ rights and civil society, as well as concerns about issues such as closing civic space and press freedoms. 

    Administrator Power met with Yeang Chheang, a medical entomologist who saved countless lives by distributing malaria medication during the deadly Khmer Rouge regime in the mid-1970s, and who subsequently helped rebuild Cambodia’s National Malaria Program. She congratulated Mr. Chheang for receiving the “Unsung Hero” award at the United Nations Climate Change Conference (COP28) in Dubai in December 2023 for his efforts to eliminate malaria and shared her appreciation for his valuable contributions to the U.S. President’s Malaria Initiative (PMI). With U.S. government support through PMI, by 2025 Cambodia is on track to become the first PMI bilateral country to reach malaria elimination.  

    Administrator Power participated in meetings to hear from Cambodians about how the U.S. can best support progress on rights, governance, and rule of law. These meetings included engagements with civil society leaders, as well as other individuals with perspectives on these issues.

    Administrator Power also visited the Mekong River, along with USAID partners, Cambodian government officials, researchers, students, conservationists, and fisherpeople. Traveling by boat down the Tonle Sap River to the confluence with the Mekong River, Administrator Power released endangered fish into the river waters to demonstrate USAID’s support for healthy and thriving inland waterways that promote livelihoods, economic independence, autonomy, and food security. She underscored the U.S. government’s support under the Mekong-U.S. Partnership for autonomy, protecting endangered aquatic marine life, and safeguarding the ecosystem of the Mekong watershed and other natural resources in Cambodia. USAID will continue to support Mekong conservation efforts in Cambodia and their expansion to the broader Mekong sub-region.

    Additionally, Administrator Power met with U.S. Embassy Phnom Penh and USAID/Cambodia staff to celebrate their efforts and achievements to advance the U.S.-Cambodia relationship. To close out her trip, Administrator Power held a press conference and announced more than $50 million in new USAID and U.S. government programs and initiatives to assist farmers, expand the Wonders of the Mekong, support civil society and media, and more.

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Administrator Samantha Power at a Press Conference in Phnom Penh

    Source: USAID

    ADMINISTRATOR SAMANTHA POWER: Thank you all. It is great to see everyone this evening. 

    It has been a great pleasure for me to be back in Cambodia for my fourth visit. In previous visits, of course, I have been awed by the majesty and rich culture of Angkor Wat, the incredible power and importance of the Tulsa Lang Genocide Museum, and, of course, the beauty of the Mekong River.

    Being back here and discussing the deepening engagement between our two countries has been very enlightening for me. The partnership of today builds on several decades of investment by USAID in support of the dignity and prosperity of the Cambodian people. 

    I feel, personally, very fortunate to be the first USAID Administrator to visit Cambodia while in this role, and I have taken many notes about the priorities of the Government officials, students, and civil society leaders that I’ve had the chance to engage with.

    Over the past few decades, the Cambodian people have made really remarkable strides to improve health, education, and economic growth. We, in the United States, again, have been able to support these efforts, including with a total of $3 billion in assistance over the past more-than-30 years. 

    We, in these years, supported the efforts of public health heroes like Mr. Yang Chiang, this country’s first entomologist, who I had the honor of meeting today. A man who has dedicated his life to trying to eliminate malaria here in Cambodia, and an individual who has been able to see with so many of you that Cambodia now has marked six straight years without a single death from malaria, and thus, again, is on the cusp of meeting this goal of eliminating malaria in this country.

    We also have supported Cambodia’s education system to get more kids into school. Since 2007, the number of children enrolled in preschool programs has more than doubled, and Cambodia is close, in fact, to achieving universal access to primary education. USAID programs have doubled reading scores among the children that we have worked with, and we are now seeing the Cambodian Government using these same approaches to help even more young people. 

    We worked as well to increase trade between our two countries, and today, the United States is Cambodia’s largest export market. Over the past five years, indeed, Cambodia’s exports to the United States have more than doubled. There is meaningful progress like this to celebrate, and on this trip, I am glad to announce over $50 million in new funding from across the U.S. government to try to build on some of this progress.

    With these funds, we will invest in helping Cambodian farmers connect with markets and adopt new technologies to keep producing plentiful and safe food, even as the climate changes. We will invest in keeping the Cambodian people safe by clearing landmines and other unexploded ordinances, building on decades of efforts to address the dangerous legacies of war. And importantly, we will invest in supporting civil society, labor, and independent media, investments that will not only support Cambodia’s democratic future but its economic future, as well. 

    On this visit, I have met with Cambodians from all walks of life – families fostering kids with disabilities, students and environmentalists, workers who care for some of this country’s most sacred sites, doctors, nurses and community health workers, labor activists, and brave individuals who seek to hold those with power accountable to the principles enshrined in this country’s constitution: democracy, human rights, transparency. 

    There is great potential for the relationship between the United States and Cambodia to grow stronger, and, as is the case in all of our important relationships, there are also concerns, including about unjustified arrests and threats to basic rights. We are following the case of journalist Mech Dara very closely, including some potential developments today. I had a chance to both meet with Dara’s family, and to raise this issue, along with other concerning cases, in my meeting with the Prime Minister today. 

    All of these cases are sensitive, but I will just underscore that we have emphasized our support for finding positive resolutions. More broadly, as I discussed with Prime Minister Hen Mannet earlier today, American and international companies see real opportunity here in Cambodia. But, in order to invest here, they want to see meaningful improvements in the business enabling environment, to tackle corruption, to improve respect for labor rights, and to address the cyber scam operations plaguing Cambodia’s international reputation. 

    Working toward greater transparency, accountability and protection of human rights can unlock extraordinary prosperity for the Cambodian people. That can be the promise of a new generation, and we, in the United States, will be eager partners in working together to achieve it. 

    Thank you so much, and I look forward to taking your questions.

    QUESTION: Thank you. Hi, I’m Prak Chan Thul from Kiripost. So, you said you announced $50 new million for Cambodia. What? What have you heard from the authorities of the Cambodian government that in return of this new aid and what have you – what will you promise in the case of Mech Dara, will he be released? Thank you.

    ADMINISTRATOR POWER: Thank you. I’m not going to comment further on Mech Dara’s case beyond to stress the importance of independent media, of checks and balances, and of the rule of law. 

    With regard to the new investments that have been announced. They range from an additional investment in the prevention of tuberculosis. I was able, yesterday in Siem Reap, to witness a very energetic effort to reach at least some of the Cambodians who have tuberculosis, but often do not know they have TB until it is not only too late for them, but too late for others, given how the disease spreads. So, USAID is partnering with community-based organizations that will reach citizens where they are, not expecting citizens to experience a symptom and then travel a long way to get a diagnosis, but an effort really to make the diagnostic technology more mobile and more readily available. And, this is with an eye to helping Cambodia and Cambodians reach the goal that the government has set to eliminate TB by 2030. So, this is a $4 million investment in a local organization that is driving some of this community based work to get rid of TB. 

    In addition, just to stay in the area of public health, we have announced an additional $1 million to invest in doing a survey for the Cambodian people of blood lead levels. There is significant lead poisoning among children in many developing countries, including Cambodia, but understanding exactly where those elevated levels of lead in the blood are clustered, understanding the sources of lead poisoning is absolutely critical to eliminating lead poisoning going forward. 

    And, this was something – both this and TB and, of course, all of the work we have done together on malaria, were each topics that I had a chance to discuss with the Prime Minister, and sensed a lot of enthusiasm to go forward again with the efforts to eliminate TB, and the effort now to get a handle on precisely what the sources of lead poisoning are so as to embark on a multi-faceted effort to regulate lead and to ensure that Cambodia’s children are no longer exposed to something that can be very harmful to educational attainment, and can ultimately even cause premature death. 

    We also are announcing an investment of an additional $5 million to support workers, civil society, and independent media. And here, let me just note, obviously these are investments in non-governmental actors. But, one of the topics that we discussed at length with the Prime Minister was his broad ambition to attract more foreign investment, to take steps that will ensure that the economy continues to grow and even grows more, and creates jobs for all of the young people who are looking for jobs every year. But, it is really, really important for investors to have confidence in the rule of law, for corruption to be tackled, so that, for example, American companies can feel confident that they can invest here without having to pay bribes or engage in kickbacks, which are illegal in the United States. 

    And so, these investments in civil society, in media, in the dignity of work and workers – all of these are investments as well in Cambodia’s economic development and that broad ambition that so many Cambodians have for their children to enjoy a more prosperous future than they themselves.

    QUESTION: Hi, my name is Danielle Keaton Olson. I’m a freelance journalist based in Phnom Penh, and I was wondering so, Cambodian-based labor rights organization called Central has gotten under fire for receiving foreign funding. The Cambodian government has criticized it for receiving foreign funding. And, of course, there’s been the arrest of our colleague and the U.S. recognized Trafficking-In-Persons report hero, Mech Dera. Are these raising alarms or concerns within USAID at this moment?

    ADMINISTRATOR POWER: Well, I have had the chance on this visit to sit down with individuals from Central and to hear firsthand about the experiences that they have been having, the level of the scrutiny of their operations, and the concerns that they have about being able to continue doing the work that has proven so important for workers rights here in Cambodia. I also had a chance in Siem Reap to meet with individuals who have helped organize, those who actually maintain these cherished tourist sites, and who themselves have organized in order to secure better wages, better working conditions, better hours, et cetera. 

    President Biden is laser-focused on labor rights at home and indeed has shown tremendous initiative and leadership on promoting global labor rights. And so, it was very important in having this visit for us to sit down and dig into just those issues. And, one of the arguments that I made today with the government, and it’s an argument again that U.S. officials are making all around the world, is that labor rights and workers abilities – a worker’s ability and workers’ abilities to advocate for themselves without fear of persecution, is absolutely critical to growing the economy in a manner that expands livelihoods and prosperity for all Cambodians. 

    So, this is not simply an issue of human rights, which it is, it is also absolutely critical that the freedom to organize, the freedom to associate, the freedom to express one’s concerns, be protected. And, I think that is the foundation to an economy that will not only grow but grow in an inclusive manner that benefits ordinary Cambodians and not merely those who have benefited from growth in prior generations.

    QUESTION: Sorry. Has it – just to clarify – Has it raised some concerns about USAID ability to support these values that, in terms of labor rights and independent media, that the U.S. government values?

    ADMINISTRATOR POWER: Well, as I indicated in announcing additional support, you know, when these rights are challenged, it becomes all the more important for USAID to be working in partnership with those who are bravely defending those rights. And so, I actually think it underscores the importance of these investments, and I think that is certainly the message that I heard from the labor organizers that I’ve spoken with over the last few days – is both the resources to support those who are organizing, but also what we call the development diplomacy, you know, raising these – raising with senior government officials, the importance of these rights being protected and respected. And, the United States is not alone in raising these concerns. Obviously, other democracies are intent as well in raising concerns about, again, some of what appear to be the growing pressures on workers and on unions and on labor organizers. 

    QUESTION: Good evening, madam. My name is Hul Reaksmey. I am reporter from Voice of America. My question is, what is your observation about Chinese growing in Cambodia, when you talk about Cambodia effort to improve democracy?

    ADMINISTRATOR POWER: Sorry, just a little bit hard to hear. Maybe just slow down, and I heard the first part, but just the last part of your question?

    QUESTION: Does the Chinese growing influence undermine efforts of Cambodia to improve democracy?

    ADMINISTRATOR POWER: Thank you. Well, one of the things that the United States stresses in the countries where it works around the world is the importance of transparency, a spirit of partnership, the importance of natural resources being protected and preserved. As we just discussed, the importance of civil society and non-governmental actors, holding government accountable, and maybe this is a point I would stress even the most strongly, the importance of the investments we make, strengthening a country’s path to independence, rather than any kind of dependence. And so, one of the things that really stands out for me in terms of the U.S. development model is that we provide our support by-and-large through grants. 

    It’s extremely important to us that when we invest in health programming or education programming or food security efforts, like the USDA program that I’ve announced on this visit; or demining, like the additional $12 million that I announced on this visit, that the Cambodian people understand that these resources are invested in a spirit of partnership. 

    We are listening to our Cambodian partners and trying to mobilize resources in support of their objectives. What we do not want is for Cambodia or the Cambodian people to be somehow indebted to us in a manner that actually impedes this country’s economic development. 

    So, just to give you one statistical example of this. The United States invests about nine dollars in grants for every dollar of loan that the United States provides. The PRC invests about nine dollars in loans for every dollar in grants. And, one of the challenges – and these numbers are lower, I think, than the actual number, but at least that is the ratio, at least – one of the challenges that can saddle future generations with the obligation to repay debt, often at high interest, debt that was incurred long before.

    Again, our goal is for Cambodia to move, once and for all, from aid to trade. We know the capability of the Cambodian people. We see it in the incredible economic growth that this country has enjoyed. We see it in the resilience of the people who have gone through so much over the generations. And, what we seek to do is to be catalytic and responsive to our partners objectives, but the ultimate objective is for a sovereign and independent Cambodia to make its own choices about how to deploy its own resources, including its tremendous human capital.

    QUESTION: Hello, good evening ma’am. And my name is Ko Ratha from the Cambodia-China Times, and we call in Khmer the CC-Times. And, I have some questions for you. I just would like to say, this is very busy trip to Cambodia. And my first question is, how do you think about the development in Cambodia? As you mentioned that this is your fourth trip to Cambodia. And the second one is, why Americans decided to support more aid to Cambodia? And the last one, what is your encouragement in order to use aid in the right way and now the U.S. purpose?

    ADMINISTRATOR POWER: Well, I have only been USAID Administrator now for more than three and a half years, let’s say, but one of the things that is wonderful about visiting Cambodia is to see the way in which previous investments by USAID and really from the American people, have produced such significant results here. 

    I gave the example of the elimination of malaria. The work done to eliminate malaria was done by Cambodians. It’s Cambodia that achieved, is on the verge, I should say, of achieving that very, very significant accomplishment. But USAID has been present over the last several decades in supporting that work. I mentioned in education that USAID has made investments in looking to see what forms of education are having the greatest impact with students. That’s a, you know, relatively small program, but that produced really valuable information, and now the Ministry of Education is using that information to inform its decisions about curriculum. 

    I think these are two really important examples of how this assistance can flow. It starts with respecting the judgment and the priorities of the Cambodian people. One of the things about USAID that is not well known, and even that I was not aware of before I came to USAID, is that three quarters of our staff in the countries in which we work are nationals of the countries in which we work. So, here, of course, that means that the vast majority of our staff here in Cambodia are Cambodians who live in their communities – who listen to their neighbors, who understand the importance of making health progress, and also understand the importance of fighting corruption, and ensuring that political reform and economic development go hand in hand. 

    So, I think that is our posture going forward – as we have been present in the country in some form since just after the Paris Peace Agreements, since 1993-1994 – we have learned a lot, and the people from whom we have learned the most are the Cambodian people. So, I think our presence here is not about, you know, geopolitical competition, it is about advancing the dignity, prosperity, and peace for Cambodians. 

    QUESTION: I wanted to follow up on the aid that was rescinded and then reinstated last year after the election, which the State Department called the Cambodian election last year, neither free nor fair, and then $18 million U.S. aid was withheld. Then that decision was reversed two months later. The U.S. Embassy told Cambodian news at the time that the aid was reinstated to, “encourage the new government to live up to its stated intentions to be more open and democratic.” So, a year later, I just wanted to follow up and ask, do you think it worked?

    ADMINISTRATOR POWER: Well, first, I think it’s important to discuss the aid itself, and I don’t need to repeat what we’ve already discussed here today, but when we invest $12 million in demining, that means fewer kids are going to run into unexploded ordinances. When we invest in moving diagnostic equipment that does X-rays of the lungs, that means fewer people are going to carry TB without knowing it. And, when we invest after COVID-19 and the horrible toll that that took here, not only on human health, but on the economy. When we invest in lab equipment and surveillance to prevent future global health security threats, that’s a really important investment in Cambodia’s health and stability, but also in America’s health. Every investment in global health security that we make internationally ultimately benefits us all, since we are connected. 

    So, I think that there absolutely is an effort to engage the government that has been now in office for 14 months, and to raise concerns about individuals who have, in some cases, exposed challenges in Cambodia that the Cambodian people benefit from seeing exposed like the scamming centers, like corruption, like human rights abuse by police or others. 

    We over this last or really over these last decades, but including with the new government, have made investments in labor organizing, in independent media, in these civil society organizations. At the same time, we have pressed these issues through our development diplomacy. 

    I don’t think that the United States, anywhere in the world, gives up on its efforts to promote human rights, to stress the linkage between economic progress and checks and balances, and again, the protection and promotion of human rights. And, of course, there are issues of concern, just as there were when the pause was put in place. 

    But, our programming resources do not go to the government. They go to non-governmental organizations. They go to the very organizations that, in many cases, are holding government accountable. In health, of course, goes to community based organizations that, yes, work alongside the Ministry of Health, but it is really important to take note that our assistance is to the people of this country, and that assistance, as we examine it, if it is advancing dignity, advancing checks and balances, it’s important to sustain those investments over time. 

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: The United States Announces New Programs and more than $38 Million in Additional Funding for Cambodia

    Source: USAID

    Today in Phnom Penh, Administrator Samantha Power announced new investments and support for the Cambodian people through a range of new and expanded U.S. activities in food security, the environment, civil society, media, and labor. Cambodia remains an essential partner to the United States as we work to achieve a shared vision for a free and open, prosperous, and secure Indo-Pacific region. 

    As part of the U.S. government’s commitment to strengthening agriculture and food systems, Administrator Power highlighted a new Food for Progress award of more than $29 million from the U.S. Department of Agriculture. This funding will help Cambodia improve implementation and development of food safety regulations by improving post-harvest handling of soybean meal, increasing adoption of climate smart technologies, providing training on best food safety practices, and strengthening market linkages. Under the Mekong-US Partnership, USAID will also support new efforts to conserve the rich biodiversity of the lower Mekong River basin, which is home to more than 1,000 species of fish but increasingly threatened by the effects of climate change and infrastructure development. Underscoring the strong U.S. commitment to protecting biodiversity, USAID will extend and expand for the next five years its work with the government and local communities in Cambodia to conserve and sustain the wonders of the Mekong, as well as work with other countries of the lower Basin. 

    In a meeting with members of Cambodian civil society, Administrator Power also announced more than $6 million in new USAID funding for civil society, media, and labor in support of Cambodia’s constitutional commitments to democratic rule, respect for human rights, and support for civil society. Additionally, Administrator Power announced $3 million in funding from the U.S. Department of Labor to increase collaboration and partnerships between and among persons with disabilities. This funding will help address the prevalence of child labor, forced labor, and human trafficking among persons with disabilities and reduce barriers that impede their access to decent work. USAID will also continue to support Cambodian returnees from the United States as they reintegrate into Cambodian society and establish stable, constructive, and independent lives. 

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: January 24th, 2025 Heinrich Joins Luján, Hawley to Reintroduce RECA to Give Nuclear Radiation Victims Compensation

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for New Mexico Martin Heinrich
    WASHINGTON – Today, U.S. Senator Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.) joined U.S. Senators Ben Ray Luján (D-N.M.) and Josh Hawley (R-Mo.), along with U.S. Senators Eric Schmitt (R-Mo.), and Mark Kelly (D-Ariz.) to reintroduce their Radiation Exposure Compensation (RECA) Reauthorization Act to compensate Americans exposed to radiation by government nuclear programs. 
    Despite the Senate passing this bill last Congress, the House of Representatives failed to pass RECA reauthorization before its expiration deadline.  
    “It’s long overdue for Congress to pass an extension and expansion of the Radiation Exposure Compensation Act (RECA) that includes the Tularosa Basin Downwinders whose communities and families were harmed by the fallout from the 1945 Trinity Test, the uranium miners exposed to radiation in service to our national defense, and all other Americans who were directly impacted by our nation’s nuclear testing program,” said Heinrich. “Unfortunately, RECA languished in the House of Representatives last Congress due to Republicans’ refusal to put the bill on the floor. I remain determined to finally deliver justice, recognition, and compensation to the Americans whose livelihoods and health have been devastated by the long-term consequences of radiation exposure.”
    “In New Mexico and across the country, thousands sacrificed to contribute to our national security. Today, individuals affected by nuclear weapons testing, downwind radiation exposure, and uranium mining are still waiting to receive the justice they are owed,” said Luján. “It is unacceptable that so many who have gotten sick from radiation exposure have been denied compensation by Congress. Despite having passed RECA legislation twice through the Senate with broad bipartisan support, and securing the support of the previous administration, I was disheartened that Speaker Johnson refused a vote on RECA to help victims. This Congress, I am proud to partner with Senator Hawley again to extend and expand RECA. RECA is a bipartisan priority and I am hopeful that we will once again get it through the Senate and hope the Speaker commits to getting victims the compensation they are owed.”
    “The time to reauthorize RECA is now. The Senate has done this twice before and must do it again. For far too long, Missourians and others across America have suffered without compensation from their government. It is vital that we unite to pass this legislation now, and that the President sign it into law,”said Hawley. 
    Heinrich has reintroduced legislation to extend and expand RECA since his first Senate term, starting in 2013.
    Last fall, Heinrich joined Luján, U.S. Representatives Teresa Leger Fernández (D-N.M.), Melanie Stansbury (D-N.M.), and Gabe Vasquez (D-N.M.), and advocates and survivors who traveled all the way across the country from New Mexico for a press conference calling on House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) to hold a vote on a Senate-passed bill that would strengthen the Radiation Exposure Compensation Act (RECA).
    Heinrich also pressed Speaker Mike Johnson to immediately take up the Senate-passed and fully comprehensive RECA extension in bipartisan, bicameral letter. The letter, led by Luján, said in part: “We urge action immediately to strengthen the RECA program before its impending sunset in June 2024. The United States government exposed these Americans to radiation as part of our national security efforts through World War II and the Cold War. It is long past time that RECA is strengthened to give these Americans their recognition and compensation. Their livelihoods, often devastated by the long-term consequences of radiation exposure, depend on your leadership and commitment to rectifying past injustices. Let us honor the commitment we made to these citizens by ensuring they receive the support and recognition they so rightly deserve.”
    Last March, Heinrich delivered remarks on the Senate floor urging his colleagues to pass bipartisan legislation to reauthorize and expand RECA. Later that day, Heinrich secured Senate passage of bipartisan legislation to reauthorize and expand RECA to compensate individuals exposed to radiation while working in uranium mines or living downwind from atomic weapons tests. 

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: “America’s Best Deserves the Best” – Senator Hassan Outlines Risk Pete Hegseth Poses to U.S. National Security in Senate Floor Speech

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for New Hampshire Maggie Hassan
    WASHINGTON – In a speech on the Senate floor, U.S. Senator Maggie Hassan (D-NH) today outlined how Pete Hegseth’s lack of qualifications to serve as Secretary of Defense would put U.S. national security, and our men and women in uniform, at risk.
    Some key quotes from the Senator’s remarks include:
    “Unfortunately, it is clear that Mr. Hegseth does not have the skills, experience, record, or character to lead a department that has a budget of more than $800 billion, and is the largest employer of men and women in our country, and is tasked with safeguarding our nation’s security and freedom.”
    “If Mr. Hegseth could not and did not effectively manage organizations with around 100 employees, surely no one can actually believe that he is ready to manage one of 3.4 million people.”
    “In the past, when we have looked for leaders of our armed forces, we have searched for our country’s best and brightest; the most gifted minds of America’s boardrooms, the brightest stars to come out of West Point, the most revered public servants to serve in these halls… we did not need then, nor do we need now to turn to the green rooms of cable TV networks for the Secretary of Defense.”
    “Surely the armed forces of the United States of America…the victors of the Ardennes, of Gettysburg, and Midway and a thousand places in between and since…surely, they need a leader who they can have full faith in; surely America’s best deserves the best.”
    “There are strong, experienced, and able members of the President’s party whose views align with his who could be exceptional leaders of the Department of Defense. Mr. Hegseth is not one of them.”
    Click here to see Senator Hassan’s remarks, or see a transcript below:
    Mister President, I rise right now and today for the purpose of joining my colleagues from both sides of the aisle in opposing Mr. Hegseth’s nomination as Secretary of Defense. I appreciate Mr. Hegseth’s military service, indeed when evaluating his nomination, his service was what I appreciated most about his background.
    But unfortunately, it is clear that Mr. Hegseth does not have the skills, experience, record, or character to lead a department that has a budget of more than $800 billion, and is the largest employer of men and women in our country, and is tasked with safeguarding our nation’s security and freedom.
    We take pride as Americans in the fact that our military is the very best. The standard of excellence and professionalism set by the men and women of our armed forces is central to our military’s success and our country’s success.
    This high standard of competency and character, of both unmatched ability and uncommon virtue, is why America’s armed forces command the respect of our friends, the fear of our foes, and the abiding faith of freedom-loving people everywhere.
    America boasts the greatest fighting force in the history of the world…the heroes who serve in our armed forces deserve a leader who is worthy of that greatness. And Mr. Hegseth is plainly not up to that task.
    Like many of my colleagues, I have concerns regarding Mr. Hegseth’s character – the documented accusations about his excessive and uncontrolled drinking, his sexual harassment, sexual assault, and now, accusations of being abusive to his ex-wife.
    It is ironic that Mr. Hegseth and some of my colleagues have dismissed these concerns as partisan, because sadly if this wasn’t a partisan confirmation process – for example, if my Republican colleagues were considering hiring Mr. Hegseth to join their staffs – we would all agree that these accusations would immediately be disqualifying.
    Mr. Hegseth dismisses these multiple accusations from disparate people as “a coordinated smear campaign.” I don’t think that the concerns of his former colleagues, friends, and family should be quickly dismissed as smears. And many other of the nominees who are being considered by this body aren’t facing similar accusations even though there are people who vehemently oppose their confirmation. Which begs the question of why Mr. Hegseth continues to face multiple, similar accusations from different sources. But for a moment, let’s do as Mr. Hegseth asks and put aside these accusations.
    Let us say for a moment that those who occupy the highest positions in public life shouldn’t be above reproach, though indeed they should;
    Let us say that our service members do not deserve a leader whose strength of character matches their own, though I believe they do;
    And let us say for a moment that character does not count, though indeed it surely always does.
    Let us, in short, ignore everything that Mr. Hegseth demanded we ignore in his hearing. Even if we did that, I would submit that based on experience alone, Mr. Hegseth is plainly unqualified for the job as Secretary of Defense.
    The Secretary of Defense is responsible for a budget of more than $800 billion and responsible for 3.4 million employees who serve on every continent across the globe. To lead the Defense Department is a daunting task that requires leadership and managerial skills of the highest order.
    However, Mr. Hegseth’s managerial experience begins and ends with his leadership at two small nonprofits. And his tenure at both resulted in concerns about his financial mismanagement at their helm. If Mr. Hegseth could not and did not effectively manage organizations with around 100 employees, surely no one can actually believe that he is ready to manage one of 3.4 million people. 
    We live in a dangerous and uncertain world. Iran and its proxies continue to menace our forces in the Middle East. Vladimir Putin is on the march in Europe. North Korea persists in testing our allies and testing its missiles. And China…China looks with a conqueror’s gaze toward Taiwan.
    To my Republican colleagues, I understand that you wish to support President Trump. But Presidents are sometimes wrong. We are talking about our nation’s vital security. We are considering the confirmation of the person who will be entrusted to marshal our resources as the enemy approaches, attacks our cyber defenses, or invades an ally.
    It matters. It matters that we have the right person in this job. It matters that we get this one right. Surely there is someone in this great country of brilliant and brave people of all political stripes who is more capable; who has the experience and character necessary to forge under pressure the judgement that will keep us safe and free.
    This is America, we have the finest fighting force ever assembled, we have more strength and power than any fighting force has had in human history.
    And in the past, when we have looked for leaders of our armed forces, we have searched for our country’s best and brightest; the most gifted minds of America’s boardrooms, the brightest stars to come out of West Point, the most revered public servants to serve in these halls… we did not need then, nor do we need now to turn to the green rooms of cable TV networks for the Secretary of Defense.
    Tomorrow marks the 80th anniversary of the [end of the] Battle of the Bulge, a campaign in which my father served. In freezing temperatures, outnumbered and often undersupplied, our forces held the line against Hitler’s onslaught. Our soldiers won because they were brave, they won because they were skilled, and they won because they were well led.
    Surely the armed forces of the United States of America…the victors of the Ardennes, of Gettysburg, and Midway and a thousand places in between and since…surely, they need a leader who they can have full faith in; surely America’s best deserves the best.
    Government’s most important task is to keep America safe, secure, and free. It is a complex, fast moving, and evolving challenge. It is a job that at times presents its occupant, the Secretary of Defense, no good or easy options. It is, in short, a deadly serious job where both success and failure have enormous ramifications. It’s a job that depends on experience and character – the prerequisites for good judgement – like no other.
    No Senator should vote for someone who they can only hope will learn on the job. Not for the Secretary of Defense. No Senator should vote for a nominee on the hope that he will display more personal discipline once he gets the job.
    There are strong, experienced, and able members of the President’s party whose views align with his who could be exceptional leaders of the Department of Defense. Mr. Hegseth is not one of them. I urge my colleagues to reject this nominee, and I yield the floor.

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Cornyn Praises Pres. Trump for Dismantling Biden’s Discriminatory DEI Regime

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Texas John Cornyn

    WASHINGTON – Today on the floor, U.S. Senator John Cornyn (R-TX) tore into the Biden-Harris administration’s DEI regime and praised President Trump for dismantling it as one of his first actions of this new administration. Excerpts of Sen. Cornyn’s remarks are below, and video can be found here.

    “It’s been four days… since President Trump took the oath of office as the 47th President of the United States.”

    “I’m particularly pleased to see him dismantling the Biden-Harris administration’s DEI regime throughout the federal government.”

    “DEI initiatives do the exact opposite of what they purport to do, and they fly directly in the face of everything that America stands for.”

    “The policies that were intended to end racial discrimination have evolved into the modern DEI apparatus, creating a new kind of discrimination, something we sought to avoid but which has now crept back into our country.”

    “President Trump’s actions earlier this week are not a reversal of the progress we’ve made since the civil rights movement. They are better understood as the righting of the ship back to what Congress and the nation intended to accomplish: a nation where all people have a chance to succeed or fail based on their merit and not on race.”

    “This action by President Trump, rather than reversing progress, is a return to the ideal that the United States of America should have always stood for but unfortunately did not, which is that the equal dignity and equal treatment of every American under the law.”

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Lummis Leads Legislation to Streamline Federal Permitting Process  

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Wyoming Cynthia Lummis

    WASHINGTON, D.C. – U.S. Senator Cynthia Lummis (R-WY) and Senator Ted Budd (R-NC) introduced the Full Responsibility and Expedited Enforcement (FREE) Act to address the current federal permitting system plagued with ambiguous, time-consuming, and costly policies. Permit by rule is proposed as a more efficient alternative, allowing for specific written standards and streamlined approval processes.

    “Under four years of the Biden administration’s failed leadership, our permitting process is woefully backlogged and incredibly difficult to navigate,” said Lummis. “The federal permitting process has become years-long, which discourages investment and innovation all together. Implementing permit by rule processes will streamline approvals and help us address backlogs.”

    “All too often, the federal permitting process is slow, expensive, and confusing,” said Budd.“That is why President Trump directed federal agencies to consider a ‘permit by rule’ system in his day one Unleashing American Energy Executive Order. Now Congress should make this policy permanent to reduce bureaucratic delays and compliance costs, and create a transparent and predictable regulatory environment. I’m proud to partner with Senator Lummis and Representative Maloy in this effort to implement a ‘permit by rule’ system to federal permitting.” 

    “Utah is growing rapidly,” said Maloy. “Unfortunately, executive agencies are often excruciatingly slow at granting permits, delaying critical projects that support rapid growth– especially in states like Utah where the majority of the land is federally controlled. The time is now to reform and streamline the permitting processes. I’m excited to see that President Trump, by executive order, has already directed his administration to begin that reformation– including through Permit by Rule– and I look forward to working with Senator Lummis and Senator Budd on advancing this bill.” 

    Senators Thom Tillis (R-NC), Pete Ricketts (R-NE), Rick Scott (R-FL) and Tim Sheehy (R-MT) also cosponsor this legislation. 

    Rep. Celeste Maloy (R-UT-02) has introduced companion legislation in the House of Representatives.

    Full text can be found here.

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI Submissions: Innovation – A robot cleaning up the Hofvijver in The Hague

    Source: The Hague

    And a new electric boat cleans up the bigger pieces of waste in the canals

    The Hague, the Netherlands, 24 January 2025 — The Municipality of The Hague has launched a pilot project to keep the historic Hofvijver plastic-free. Using the remote-controlled Jellyfishbot, plastic and other litter are being efficiently removed from this iconic body of water in the heart of the city.

    The initiative was introduced following an increase in complaints about litter in the Hofvijver, the famous lake located in front of the Dutch parliament buildings. The pilot project, which began at the end of 2024 and will run for one year, aims to determine the effectiveness of the Jellyfishbot in improving water quality. If successful, the technology may be deployed to other locations in the city, such as canals, where it could assist in cleaning water surfaces and even mapping underwater areas and quay walls. This project is led by the Urban Management team of the Municipality of The Hague, which is dedicated to enhancing the local living environment throughout the city.

    Alderman Robert Barker (Animal Welfare, Outdoor Space, and Environment) stated: “Unfortunately, too much waste still ends up in the Hofvijver. This is bad for the water quality and all plants and animals in and around the water. That is why we do our best to keep this historic piece of water in the middle of the city clean. This innovative robot can make a great contribution to that.”

    Stella Polaris

    Alongside the Jellyfishbot project in the Hofvijver, another new boat is now being used to clean up larger debris in the city’s waters. The service vessel is deployed for monitoring and maintenance purposes, retrieving large objects such as reels and planks from the water, and installing signs or mirrors when necessary. The previous service vessel, named Die Haghe, was built in 1986 and featured a Hatz diesel engine. The use was no longer viable due to CO2 emissions and height restrictions preventing it from passing under movable bridges. As a result, a new electrically powered service vessel, Stella Polaris, has been introduced. This eco-friendly boat can navigate all inner waters of The Hague and is stationed at its dedicated berth in the Poolsterhaven.

    Alderman Arjen Kapteijns (Energy Transition, Mobility and Raw Materials): “It is important that we keep our beautiful city clean, not only for nature, but also for our residents. This innovative technology offers us the opportunity to dispose of waste effectively and sustainably.”

    Read the full story about cleaning up the waters in The Hague on Stories of Purpose from The Hague:  https://storiesofpurpose.thehague.com/impact/robot-mission-jellyfishbot-cleaning-hofvijver

    About The Hague & Partners  

    The Hague & Partners is the official marketing & acquisition organisation for the promotion of The Hague, focused on residents, visitors, conferences, businesses, and institutions. www.thehague.com  

    MIL OSI – Submitted News –

  • MIL-OSI Security: Coast Guard rescues 4 from sinking boat after collision south of Block Island

    Source: United States Coast Guard

     

    01/24/2025 01:09 PM EST

    The Coast Guard rescued four people Thursday night from a fishing boat after a collision between two fishing boats occurred approximately 10 miles south of Block Island, Rhode Island. Click the link to view the full release.

    MIL Security OSI –

  • MIL-OSI United Kingdom: Visitor levy will be big boost for Edinburgh

    Source: Scottish Greens

    24 Jan 2025 Culture

    A visitor levy will raise vital funds for services.

    More in Culture

    The Scottish Greens have welcomed Edinburgh City Council’s vote to support a 5% visitor levy on hotels and overnight accommodation. It is similar to schemes already in place in popular tourist destinations across the world including Paris, Barcelona and New York.

    The power to apply a levy was secured by Scottish Green MSPs during previous budget negotiations. Edinburgh’s Green Councillors have led calls for such a levy since 2011, and presented proposals for an 8% rate.

    Edinburgh Green Cllr Alys Mumford said:

    “The idea of a visitor levy was first raised by Edinburgh’s Greens councillors more than a decade ago, and today the Council has approved an ambitious plan with green values at its heart – raising investment for public services and affordable housing.

    “While we’re disappointed that the Labour administration didn’t take the opportunity to set a more ambitious rate for the levy, as well as caving in to the demands of corporate lobbyists around the implementation timeline, it shouldn’t detract from the major step forward it represents.

    “Green Councillors across Scotland are working to implement visitor levies for their areas, and the decision Edinburgh has made will set the model for that. We look forward to visitor levies being standard practice around the country, as they are in many European countries.”

    Scottish Green MSP Lorna Slater welcomed the news, saying:

    “This will be a big boost for Edinburgh.

    “We’re incredibly fortunate that so many people want to visit our city. Tourism brings a lot of money into local economies, but our councils see very little benefit from it.

    “I’m delighted that Scottish Green Cllrs have led the call for the levy and that Green MSPs were able to deliver the powers to apply it.

    “It is a simple step that will ensure that tourists are able to contribute to the services that they are using, while providing vital funding for our local authorities.”

    MIL OSI United Kingdom –

  • MIL-OSI Asia-Pac: Union Home Minister and Minister of Cooperation Shri Amit Shah addresses the inaugural function of the International Year of Cooperatives-2025 in Mumbai, Maharashtra

    Source: Government of India (2)

    Union Home Minister and Minister of Cooperation Shri Amit Shah addresses the inaugural function of the International Year of Cooperatives-2025 in Mumbai, Maharashtra

    Under the leadership of Prime Minister Narendra Modi, cooperatives will pave the way for employment and prosperity for agriculture and rural areas in the coming days

    Under the leadership of PM Modi, the double engine government of Maharashtra will make the state a hub of cooperatives in a true sense

    Celebrating Year of Cooperatives in India will significantly expand cooperatives across the country

    During the International Year of Cooperatives, efforts will be made to increase the reach of cooperatives and to connect every person with cooperatives

    Under the leadership of PM Modi, the cooperative sector of India is moving forward with the principles of social harmony, equality and inclusiveness

    The cooperative sector running on the principle of ‘Cooperation Amongst Cooperatives’ will be economically self-reliant across the country 

    The ‘umbrella organization’ will integrate activities like digital banking, mobile banking, online transactions and trade with foreign countries with the Urban Cooperative Bank

    Soon, all cooperative banks will be equipped with the services of regular banks, which will lead to the development of cooperative banking

    Posted On: 24 JAN 2025 8:53PM by PIB Delhi

    Union Home Minister and Minister of Cooperation Shri Amit Shah today addressed the inaugural function of International Year of Cooperatives 2025 in Mumbai, Maharashtra. Shri Amit Shah also inaugurated the corporate office of the National Urban Cooperative Finance and Development Corporation (NUCFDC). On this occasion, Minister of State for Cooperation Shri Murlidhar Mohol, Maharashtra Deputy Chief Ministers Shri Eknath Shinde and Shri Ajit Pawar, along with the Secretary of the Ministry of Cooperation, Dr. Ashish Kumar Bhutani, and several other dignitaries were present.

     

     

    In his address, Union Home Minister and Minister of Cooperation Shri Amit Shah said that Prime Minister Shri Narendra Modi recently inaugurated the International Year of Cooperatives 2025. He mentioned that the Ministry of Cooperation has outlined a 12-month program to celebrate the Year of Cooperatives in India, which is being inaugurated today. He said that India will celebrate the Year of Cooperatives in a way that will significantly advance the cooperative movement across the country. He emphasized that during the International Year of Cooperatives, efforts will be made to expand the cooperative sector, bring transparency within it, strengthen cooperative institutions, increase the reach of cooperatives to new areas, and connect every individual in India to some form of cooperation.

    Shri Shah stated that by December 31, 2025, when the UN International Year of Cooperatives concludes, the growth of India’s cooperative movement will be both symmetric and inclusive, and the goal of “Sahkar Se Samriddhi” will be largely achieved. He further noted that the cooperative sector will play a significant role in achieving the two major goals set by Prime Minister Shri Narendra Modi: becoming the third-largest economic power in the world and transforming into a fully developed nation by 2047. He added that the cooperative sector will advance on the principles of social harmony, equality, and inclusivity.

     

     

    The Union Home Minister and Minister of Cooperation said that the virtual inauguration of the umbrella organization for cooperative banks, the National Urban Cooperative Finance and Development Corporation (NUCFDC), took place today. He stated that this organization will provide multidimensional benefits to the urban cooperative sector. He added that within the next three years, all our scheduled cooperative banks will be equipped with services equivalent to those offered by national and private banks, which will significantly expand the scope of their services. Along with this, the focus will also be on better utilization of resources, improving banking processes, and unifying the accounting systems of all cooperative banks. Shri Shah mentioned that India currently has a total of 1,465 urban cooperative banks, nearly half of which are located in Gujarat and Maharashtra. The country also has 49 scheduled banks and over 8.25 lakh cooperative institutions.

    Union Minister of Cooperation stated that in the coming days, the principle of ‘Cooperation Amongst Cooperatives’ will be implemented across the nation. The ‘umbrella organization’ will do the work of integrating activities like digital banking, mobile banking, online transactions and trade with foreign countries with the Urban Cooperative Bank. All transactions and financial activities of cooperative institutions will be conducted exclusively through cooperative banks. Shri Shah emphasized that once the principle of Cooperation Amongst Cooperatives is effectively grounded in all states, it will lead to significant success, enabling the cooperative sector to achieve economic self-reliance.

    Shri Amit Shah stated that the Modi government has resolved several issues concerning urban cooperative banks with the Reserve Bank of India. He mentioned that in the coming days, strengthening the umbrella organization will help increase trust and business while removing all obstacles. He also highlighted that the training program for the 10,000 M-PACS (Multipurpose Primary Agricultural Cooperative Societies) formed under the new bylaws is starting today, marking a new beginning. He further mentioned that the goal is to establish a PACS in every village panchayat across the country. To ensure the viability of PACS, model bylaws have been created, which have been accepted by all states.

    Shri Shah stated that under the model bylaws, PACS can now engage in a variety of new activities. He mentioned that the Modi government has spent Rs. 2,500 crore to provide computers and software to each PACS and has made efforts to link these various activities with PACS. He emphasized that to make this initiative successful, technology must be adopted. He also said that by bringing professionalism into PACS, the entire cooperative sector can be strengthened through them.

    Union Minister of Cooperation emphasized the importance of involving youth proficient in modern technology to make cooperatives self-reliant, whether in banks or PACS. He expressed confidence that the combined efforts of the ‘double engine government’ led by Prime Minister Shri Narendra Modi, along with Shri Devendra Fadnavis, Shri Eknath Shinde, and Shri Ajit Pawar, would transform Maharashtra into a true hub of cooperative excellence. He said that cooperatives can be a source of employment in every village.

    Shri Amit Shah highlighted the significant support extended by the Modi government to the cooperative sector, noting that the introduction of ethanol production has boosted the profitability of sugar mills. He mentioned that to ensure better prices for sugar, Prime Minister Modi recently approved the export of 10 lakh tonnes of sugar, benefiting Maharashtra’s cooperative sugar mills the most. He further stated that the Modi government is committed to advancing the cooperative sector and has introduced a ranking system to achieve this goal. The rankings will cover seven key areas: PACS, dairy, fisheries, urban cooperative banks, housing credit societies, credit cooperatives, and Khadi Village Industries. Shri Shah explained that the ranking system is based on several parameters, including audits, activities, services, financial performance, infrastructure, and branding, collectively weighted for 100 marks. This system aims to enhance transparency and reliability, ensuring that banks can confidently provide funding to PACS based on these rankings in the future.

    Union Home Minister and Minister of Cooperation stated that under the leadership of Prime Minister Shri Narendra Modi, the government is advancing with the vision of ‘Sahkar Se Samriddhi’ (Prosperity through cooperation) and “Samriddhi se Aatmanirbharta” , which is self-reliance through prosperity. He announced the initiation of three key projects at the event: the inauguration of the International Year of Cooperative (IYC) 2025 related event calendar, the launch of the office for the umbrella organization of Urban Cooperative Banks – NUCFDC, and the first training session for 10,000 new MPACS members. Shri Amit Shah also revealed that in the upcoming budget session, the government will announce the establishment of the Tribhuvan National Cooperative University, named after the eminent cooperative leader of Gujarat, Shri Tribhuvan Das Patel. This university will focus on producing skilled professionals for various sectors. He expressed confidence that, under Prime Minister Modi’s leadership, the cooperative sector will drive employment and prosperity in agriculture, rural areas, and among the youth in the coming days.

    *****

    Raj / Vivek / Priyabhanshu / Pankaj

    (Release ID: 2095982) Visitor Counter : 74

    Read this release in: Hindi

    MIL OSI Asia Pacific News –

  • MIL-OSI Asia-Pac: Union Home Minister and Minister of Cooperation, Shri Amit Shah addresses the ‘Cooperative Conference’ in Nashik, Maharashtra and launches various works related to cooperatives

    Source: Government of India (2)

    Union Home Minister and Minister of Cooperation, Shri Amit Shah addresses the ‘Cooperative Conference’ in Nashik, Maharashtra and launches various works related to cooperatives

    Modi ji’s mantra of ‘Sahakar se Samriddhi’ is being realised by the Ministry of Cooperation, which is providing new opportunities for progress to the sisters and brothers associated with cooperatives

    ‘Cooperatives’ is the most beautiful definition of self-reliance and cooperatives are the powerful means to make farmers self-reliant and prosperous

    National Co-operative Organics Ltd (NCOL) is selling the organic produce of the farmers and transferring the profit directly to the farmers account

    Three new multistate cooperatives are increasing farmers’ income and ensuring their access to the global market

    There was an income tax dispute of 15 thousand crore rupees in cooperative sugar mills of Maharashtra, which Modi government ended

    The Modi government reduced the income tax of sugar mills and introduced the ethanol blending scheme, which gave economic strength to industries and farmers

    Venkateshwara Cooperative increased the income of thousands of farmers cultivating cashew under the cooperative brand, leading them to prosperity

    The state-of-the-art soil testing laboratory set up in Nashik will be beneficial to the local farmers

    Posted On: 24 JAN 2025 6:49PM by PIB Delhi

    Union Home Minister and Minister of Cooperation, Shri Amit Shah, today participated as the Chief Guest at the ‘Cooperative Conference’ held in Nashik, Maharashtra. During the event, Shri Shah inaugurated multiple initiatives aimed at strengthening the cooperative sector. The conference witnessed the presence of several distinguished personalities, including Union Minister of State for Cooperation Shri Murlidhar Mohol and Maharashtra Deputy Chief Minister Shri Eknath Shinde.

    In his address, Union Home Minister and Minister of Cooperation highlighted that former Prime Minister Lal Bahadur Shastri had coined the slogan “Jai Jawan, Jai Kisan,” emphasizing the empowerment of farmers, agricultural labourers, and the armed forces. He said that Shastri Ji had begun strengthening farmers, agricultural laborers, and the army simultaneously. He further stated that here, through a single cooperative, “Jai Jawan Jai Kisan” and a soil testing laboratory have been established together, integrating “Jai Vigyan” in the same place.

    Shri Amit Shah remarked that while farming was often considered unprofitable in the past, he firmly believes that combining the cooperative movement with scientific advancements can make agriculture a lucrative business even today. He explained that farmers previously relied on traditional methods and were unaware of the specific nutrient composition of their soil. When Prime Minister Modi emphasized soil testing, it revealed that farmers were using fertilizers unnecessarily or neglecting essential nutrients. Shri Shah highlighted the benefits of the newly established state-of-the-art soil testing laboratory in Nashik, emphasizing its potential to transform local farming practices. The laboratory will provide detailed insights, such as the pH level of water used by farmers, whether sulphur needs to be added, what is the appropriate quantity of DAP, and which crops can yield higher profits. He emphasized that this facility would significantly benefit farmers by enabling informed and efficient agricultural practices.

    Union Minister of Cooperation highlighted the multiple initiatives undertaken by the Venkateshwara Society. He announced the virtual inauguration of the Venkateshwara Cashew Processing Factory in Belgaon, which will process 24 tonnes of cashews daily, ensuring fair prices for 18,000 farmers engaged in cashew cultivation. He further mentioned that over 1,500 Gir cows have been introduced to produce various products while promoting organic farming using cow dung and cow urine. These initiatives, he emphasized, will not only enhance farmers’ prosperity but also contribute to the protection of Mother Earth.

    Shri Amit Shah encouraged farmers to adopt organic farming and emphasized the importance of obtaining organic certification to secure better prices for their produce. He highlighted that National Co-operative Organic Limited (NCOL), established under the Ministry of Cooperation by Prime Minister Shri Narendra Modi, is designed to directly transfer profits from the sale of certified organic produce to farmers’ bank accounts. He explained that this multinational organization purchases all certified organic produce from farmers, sells it in the market, and ensures that the profits are directly credited to the farmers’ accounts, thereby supporting their economic well-being.

    Union Minister of Cooperation stated that for many years, those involved in the cooperative sector had been demanding the creation of a separate ministry, but their plea had gone unheard. It was only 75 years after independence that Prime Minister Shri Narendra Modi established the Cooperative Ministry, aiming to boost farmers’ incomes across the nation. He emphasized that cooperation is the most profound expression of self-reliance. Without it, farmers cannot achieve self-reliance or prosperity. He highlighted that Prime Minister Modi has introduced the slogan “Sahkar Se Samriddhi” (Prosperity through Cooperation), and the Ministry of Cooperation has been entrusted with the responsibility of turning this vision into reality.

    Shri Amit Shah said that now apart from cashew, the cultivation of pomegranate, grapes, sapodilla (chikoo), turmeric, onion, custard, apple, saffron and mango will work to bring all the farmers at one platform so that the farmers can get a good price for their produce in the coming days.

    The Union Minister of Cooperation said that Venkateshwara Cooperative has done a commendable job of connecting farmers under solar energy, biofuel, CNG, water storage, fisheries, panchgavya agarbatti, organic farming and government brands, as well as they have worked to connect the jawans of the country. He said that jawans and farmers are the only two sections who live with Mother Earth without worrying about rain, sun, cold. He said that today both the jawans and the farmers came together through this program of cooperatives.

    Shri Amit Shah said that the Government of India has created three new Multi-state Cooperatives for exporting farmers’ products, preserving authentic sweet seeds, producing high-yielding seeds, and packaging, marketing, and branding of organic products. He said that the three cooperative institutions on the pattern of Amul, KRIBHCO and IFFCO will prove to be very important for the farmers of this country in the next 10 years. He said that all the Primary Agricultural Credit Society (PACS) are being computerized, godowns are being built in the country through the cooperative sector and work has also been done to make the PACS multifunctional.

    The Union Minister of Cooperation said that there was a dispute over income tax of 15 thousand crore rupees in cooperative sugar mills of Maharashtra, that we resolved. He said that the Modi government also reduced new taxes worth Rs 46 thousand crores.

    He said that loans worth 10 thousand crore rupees have also been given to many cooperative sugar mills of the country through the National Cooperative Development Corporation (NCDC). He also said that profitable units created through ethanol blending. Shri Shah questioned the opposition leaders for what have they done for the cooperative sector, PACS, sugar mills and farmers when their government was in power.

    Shri Amit Shah said that Prime Minister Shri Narendra Modi ji formed the Ministry of Cooperation, came up with the scheme of ethanol blending for sugar mills, resolved the issue of income tax, computerized PACS, made model bylaws of PACS and linked PACS with multidimensional activities.

    *****

    Raj/Vivek/Priyabhanshu/Pankaj

    (Release ID: 2095916) Visitor Counter : 124

    Read this release in: Hindi

    MIL OSI Asia Pacific News –

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Debates – Thursday, 23 January 2025 – Strasbourg – Revised edition

    Source: European Parliament
    Verbatim report of proceedings
     344k  764k
    Thursday, 23 January 2025 – Strasbourg
    1. Opening of the sitting
      2. Combating Desertification: 16th session of the Conference of the Parties (COP16) of the United Nations Convention (debate)
      3. Resumption of the sitting
      4. Cryptocurrencies – need for global standards (debate)
      5. Resumption of the sitting
      6. Composition of new committees
      7. Composition of committees and delegations
      8. Voting time
        8.1. Case of Jean-Jacques Wondo in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (RC-B10-0069/2025, B10-0065/2025, B10-0069/2025, B10-0070/2025, B10-0072/2025, B10-0078/2025, B10-0081/2025, B10-0084/2025) (vote)
        8.2. Systematic repression of human rights in Iran, notably the cases of Pakhshan Azizi and Wrisha Moradi, and the taking of EU citizens as hostages (RC-B10-0066/2025, B10-0063/2025, B10-0066/2025, B10-0067/2025, B10-0073/2025, B10-0082/2025, B10-0085/2025, B10-0086/2025) (vote)
        8.3. Case of Boualem Sansal in Algeria (RC-B10-0087/2025, B10-0087/2025, B10-0088/2025, B10-0089/2025, B10-0090/2025, B10-0091/2025, B10-0092/2025, B10-0093/2025) (vote)
        8.4. Russia’s disinformation and historical falsification to justify its war of aggression against Ukraine (RC-B10-0074/2025, B10-0074/2025, B10-0075/2025, B10-0076/2025, B10-0077/2025, B10-0079/2025) (vote)
        8.5. Situation in Venezuela following the usurpation of the presidency on 10 January 2025 (RC-B10-0064/2025, B10-0064/2025, B10-0068/2025, B10-0071/2025, B10-0080/2025, B10-0083/2025) (vote)
      9. Resumption of the sitting
      10. Approval of the minutes of the previous sitting
      11. Major interpellations (debate)
      12. Explanations of votes
      13. Approval of the minutes of the sitting and forwarding of texts adopted
      14. Dates of forthcoming sittings
      15. Closure of the sitting
      16. Adjournment of the session

       

    PRÉSIDENCE: YOUNOUS OMARJEE
    Vice-Président

    		  
    1. Opening of the sitting

       

    (La séance est ouverte à 09h01)

    		  

    2. Combating Desertification: 16th session of the Conference of the Parties (COP16) of the United Nations Convention (debate)


    		 

      Jessika Roswall, Member of the Commission. – Mr President, honourable Members, healthy soils are fundamental for our collective future. Without rich and fertile soils, we have no food and many farmers have their livelihoods affected. We must pay more attention to combating land degradation and enhancing drought resilience for our economy and for our security.

    Europe is not immune to these issues. One of our key political priorities for the coming mandate, the new water resilience strategy, comes from the realisation that our European and global waters are under unsustainable pressure. At the same time, our Joint Research Centre Soil Observatory notes that at least 62 % of EU soils are affected by degradation.

    Droughts have substantial impacts on nearly all regions of the EU. This is why I travelled to Riyadh for the opening of the desertification COP16 on my first day as European Commissioner. I wanted to send a strong signal of the EU’s clear commitment to multilateralism and to cooperation with international partners on our key environmental challenges.

    The desertification COP followed the two meetings of the climate and biodiversity COPs. The day before it started, countries failed to agree on a global treaty on plastic pollution. On desertification, despite the EU’s strong engagement, we reached a mixed result in Riyadh. Parties were not able to reach a compromise on the main topic on the agenda – an instrument to address droughts. It is disappointing that we cannot bridge our differences and reach consensus on such critical issues.

    We were also disappointed in the outcome on gender and civil society organisations. The participation of these organisations increases transparency and democratic accountability. Their contribution is essential. However, some countries increasingly challenge the role and contributions of civil society organisations.

    Finally, we were disappointed that the parties were reluctant to embrace synergies across the three Rio Conventions on desertification, climate and biodiversity.

    However, we did also make progress on several fronts, and every bit of multilateral success is worth celebrating. We reached an agreement on establishing the Science-Policy Interface as a permanent body. We also adopted decisions on land tenure, on migration related to desertification, land degradation and droughts, and on avoiding, reducing and reversing degradation on agricultural land. It was the first time in the history of the Convention that agricultural land degradation was addressed. We must look at sustainable agricultural practices and healthy land together.

    Finally, after a 10‑year freeze, the parties agreed to increase the core budget of the Convention. This is an important step to ensure that global challenges like desertification, drought and water scarcity are properly addressed in the multilateral agenda.

    The EU is contributing to the concrete implementation of the Convention, particularly through our continued support for the Great Green Wall, an inspiring UNCCD flagship initiative that the EU is proud to champion. Building on this commitment, the EU has launched the second phase of the UN World Restoration Flagship, Regreening Africa, which is a key contribution to the Green Wall Initiative.

    Honourable Members, the EU and its Member States will need to step up efforts to protect our values and implement international commitments in the UNCCD and within the EU. In this regard, I am happy to report that the Commission is responding to the commitments of the European Court of Auditors by developing a methodology to assess land degradation and certification for the EU. This will require careful preparation and strategic alliances. We need to address land use, climate change, biodiversity loss, water scarcity and pollution in a coherent manner.

    Honourable Members, these are reflections from my first ever COP, and I am convinced that this COP on desertification needs to be more central. We also cannot look at the outcome of Riyadh without acknowledging that international negotiations have become more difficult, more complex and interconnected when the world is facing several ecological crises. Biodiversity, climate, food, water and energy challenges are all interconnected with land use.

    I’m now looking forward to hearing your views.

    		  
       

    		 

      Carmen Crespo Díaz, en nombre del Grupo PPE. – Señor presidente, señora comisaria, gracias por el empuje al tema del agua desde la nueva Comisión. Creemos que es fundamental. Yo soy de una tierra desértica, al lado del desierto de Europa de Tabernas, y allí se demuestra con la huerta de Europa —porque el 80 % del producto de frutas y hortalizas se exporta desde allí —que es posible abordar esta cuestión. ¿Por qué? Porque hay veinte veces menor huella hídrica en todos los productos agroalimentarios.

    Ese es el gran milagro: que para las infraestructuras hidráulicas se utilicen los fondos Next Generation, el Banco Europeo de Inversiones y se creen infraestructuras donde la ciencia, con todo lo que se está investigando, permita. Creo en estos momentos que es fundamental prestar atención a todas las fuentes hídricas: todas son necesarias, algunas en prevención y otras adecuadas a las cuestiones agrarias. Creo que es importantísima la economía circular, y las aguas residuales nos dan una oportunidad en Europa de tener agua regenerada, que incluso podemos inyectar a nuestra hucha del futuro, que son, en este caso, todas las aguas subterráneas.

    Por ello, creo que se puede hacer, que tenemos la obligación de hacerlo y que, además, en este momento, los países como España, como el mío, deberían trabajar en estas infraestructuras hidráulicas de prevención —también adaptadas a lo que es el tema agrario— y, por supuesto, bajar los impuestos, el IVA de los alimentos, que la rebaja no se ha prorrogado en este momento en ese decreto trampa que ayer llevaron al Congreso de los Diputados. Creo que es fundamental la seguridad alimentaria y, para conseguirla, tenemos que trabajar en las infraestructuras hidráulicas, como la nueva Comisión y la nueva comisaria están haciendo en este momento en Europa.

    		  
       

    		 

      Marta Temido, em nome do Grupo S&D. – Senhor Presidente, Senhora Comissária, Caros Colegas, a desertificação e a degradação dos solos, tal como as alterações climáticas, são uma realidade que põe em causa os direitos humanos mais básicos, como o direito à alimentação ou o direito ao acesso à água limpa e segura. Atingem, em especial, as comunidades mais vulneráveis, as mulheres, as crianças, os povos indígenas, mas, potencialmente, vão atingir-nos a todos.

    E a COP 16, que decorreu em Riade no passado mês de dezembro, reforçou a urgência do combate a estes fenómenos, através da intensificação da colaboração internacional e de uma abordagem integrada. A União Europeia reafirmou o seu compromisso com a meta global de neutralidade da degradação da terra e o empenho em atingir este objetivo até 2030, através de incentivos aos Estados-Membros para que adotem políticas que favoreçam a restauração das terras e a implementação de práticas agrícolas sustentáveis.

    Por isso, a União Europeia tem de continuar a incentivar a adoção destas práticas agrícolas regenerativas, que respeitem os ecossistemas naturais e contribuam para a restauração de solos degradados, e deve bater-se pela implementação da Lei do Restauro da Natureza. Mas a inclusão da sociedade civil e do setor privado neste combate são essenciais, e isso exige iniciativas de apoio.

    Quero referir, aqui, uma iniciativa da sociedade civil do meu país, Portugal, que exemplifica bem esta luta que precisamos de levar a cabo com ela. E é a iniciativa Pró-Montado Alentejo, um projeto que visa promover a construção de uma barreira florestal ativa na região sul de Portugal, baseada no montado de sobreiro e azinheira, com o objetivo de mitigar os efeitos das alterações climáticas, combater a desertificação, proteger a diversidade e, enfim, combater o despovoamento.

    		  
       

    		 

      Julien Leonardelli, au nom du groupe PfE. – Monsieur le Président, la COP16 a été, sans aucun doute, la plus grande réunion d’États à ce jour sur le sujet de la désertification. Elle se tenait à Riyad, ce qui a permis aux participants de constater à quel point ce problème bouleverse des puissances régionales qui reposaient autrefois sur l’agriculture, comme l’Éthiopie ou l’Égypte. Ce véritable fléau est aujourd’hui à nos portes. On l’observe déjà en Grèce, en Italie, mais aussi dans ma région au sud de la France, en Occitanie, où l’eau courante des habitants est désormais rationnée en été, lors des canicules, où les agriculteurs ne peuvent pas toujours arroser leurs cultures et où les feux de forêt se font de plus en plus fréquents.

    Aujourd’hui, le temps n’est plus aux belles intentions et aux fausses promesses, mais au changement. Les Européens touchés par l’artificialisation des sols et la sécheresse méritent mieux que les ânonnements suffisants de ceux qui se tiennent dans des tours de verre et de béton. Pour répondre à ce défi, il faut privilégier les circuits courts, réduire le libre-échange débridé qui pollue notre air et nos océans et se tourner vers l’innovation et la recherche, à l’image des pays du Golfe. Ne restons pas spectateurs, soyons les acteurs de notre salut avant qu’il ne soit trop tard.

    		  
       

    		 

      Francesco Ventola, a nome del gruppo ECR. – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, dal rapporto COP16 la desertificazione e la siccità rappresentano non solo emergenze ambientali, ma anche minacce sociali ed economiche per intere regioni.

    I dati forniti sottolineano che oltre il 40 % delle terre globali è degradato e che la siccità provoca perdite economiche annuali che superano i 300 miliardi. In Italia, questo si traduce in una crisi che colpisce soprattutto il comparto agricolo.

    Si rende sempre più necessaria e indispensabile la realizzazione di infrastrutture che ottimizzino il sistema di raccolta, conservazione e distribuzione della risorsa acqua. È necessario investire in impianti di riuso delle acque reflue. Nessuna goccia deve essere dispersa: non ce lo possiamo permettere.

    Non possiamo più accettare false politiche ambientali ideologizzate, che bloccano sui territori la realizzazione di progetti innovativi e realmente sostenibili. Bisogna intraprendere tutte le strade che la scienza e la tecnologia ci offrono per fronteggiare il rischio desertificazione.

    Cari colleghi, non limitiamoci solo a parlare dei problemi: agiamo per risolverli e facciamolo con determinazione, per il bene dei nostri territori, dell’Europa e delle generazioni future.

    		  
       

    		 

      Martin Hojsík, za skupinu Renew. – Vážený pán predsedajúci, vážená pani komisárka, vážené kolegyne, vážení kolegovia, aj keď sa takpovediac symbolicky konferencia dohody OSN o dezertifikácii konala v Saudskej Arábii uprostred púšte, nie je to téma, ktorá sa týka len Arabského polostrova a Afriky. Je to téma, ktorá sa veľmi bytostne týka aj nás v Európe. Dezertifikácia je každodenným problémom na Cypre, v Španielsku, v Taliansku, ale aj uprostred Európy. U nás doma na Slovensku každým rokom vidíme väčší a väčší podiel pôdy, ktorú už farmári nedokážu obhospodarovať, ktorá sa nám stráca takpovediac priamo pred očami, pretože sa vysušuje. O tom je dezertifikácia. Sucho a nedostatok vody sa stali fenoménom našej doby a keď prídu, tak prídu ako záplavy. Klimatická kríza sa mení na klimatickú katastrofu. Ničíme biodiverzitu a meníme krajinu v púšť. V niektorých častiach Slovenska farmári prišli až o 40 % svojich výnosov kvôli dezertifikácii. Taký obrovský to je problém. Preto ako spravodajca Európskeho parlamentu pre zákon o pôde, naozaj vás chcem vyzvať, aby ste ho podporili. Dúfam, že sa nám spolu s Komisiou a Radou podarí dosiahnuť čoskoro v trialógu dohodu. Základom je mať kvalitné informácie. V Rijáde sa dohodla medzinárodná platforma. V Európe takú nemáme, zákon o pôde ju vie poskytnúť.

    		  
       

    		 

      Pär Holmgren, för Verts/ALE gruppen. – Herr talman! Kommissionär Roswall! Klimatförändringarna handlar verkligen inte bara om att det blir varmare på planeten, utan ett mycket större hot i stora delar av världen är förändringarna i nederbördsklimatet. Det blir mer nederbörd, kraftigare nederbörd på de platser där vi redan har mycket vatten. Men framför allt, i det här sammanhang som vi diskuterar nu, på många platser, inte minst där vi har en stor del av mänskligheten, där vi har en stor del av jordbruk och matproduktion, blir det nu sakta men säkert torrare.

    Det är ett enormt stort akut hot mot oss och vår matproduktion. Det här gäller inte bara andra delar av världen, det gäller här hemma i Europa också. Vi ser delar av framför allt Sydeuropa, hur skördar av till exempel majs och vete redan har sjunkit med storleksordningen 60 %.

    Vi vet också att det torrare klimatet, det torrare, lokala och regionala klimatet, medför en massa riskkonsekvenser. Till exempel de förskräckliga översvämningar som vi såg i Valencia senast förvärrades så mycket av att marken där först hade blivit så torr och hård att den inte kunde ta emot vatten.

    Som kommissionär Roswall konstaterade: På COP16, visst i vissa steg, i vissa sammanhang tog vi steg framåt, men som ofta i sådana här sammanhang var det lite blandade resultat. Det största problemet är att vi återigen misslyckades med att få ett bindande globalt ramverk när det gäller att bekämpa torka.

    Hade ansvariga politiker redan i slutet på 1900‑talet tagit hänsyn till den forskning som fanns då hade vi förhoppningsvis inte varit där vi är nu. Men nu är vi där vi är, och det innebär att vi, inte minst här i EU, måste höja ambitionerna, både när det gäller att minska utsläppen och arbeta ännu mer aktivt med klimatanpassning.

    		  
       

    		 

      Catarina Martins, em nome do Grupo The Left. – Senhor Presidente, nos próximos 25 anos, três em cada quatro pessoas será afetada pela seca a nível mundial. É uma catástrofe e está aqui. A Europa está a aquecer mais rápido do que o resto do mundo e a seca prolongada chegou décadas antes do que estava previsto.

    Por isso mesmo, e apesar do veto dos Estados Unidos e do Japão a um acordo para um regime global de resiliência à seca, a União Europeia não pode desistir desse objetivo e deve agir a todos os níveis.

    Venho de um país, Portugal, onde a agricultura superintensiva condena boa parte da população alentejana e algarvia, incluindo os pequenos agricultores, a uma vida sem água. O que produzem não alimenta essas populações nem deixa riqueza no país. Tudo é exportado, incluindo os lucros. Por lá, ficam só os solos degradados.

    Por isso, bem sei que esta não é a luta da ecologia contra a agricultura, é a das nossas vidas, incluindo a produção alimentar, contra a voragem das multinacionais do agronegócio. E por isso, Senhora Comissária, vai ser mesmo preciso coragem para enfrentar alguns dos mais poderosos interesses económicos.

    		  
       

    		 

      Zsuzsanna Borvendég, a ESN képviselőcsoport nevében. – Tisztelt Elnök Úr! Magyarország termőföldjei az emberi tevékenység miatt száradnak ki. A Kárpát-medence természetes vízháztartása elegendő vizet biztosítana, ha a tájnak megfelelő módon gazdálkodnánk.

    De ma mindent a profitéhség határoz meg, amely kizsákmányolja a környezetet. Ártereink helyén zöldhasút termő szántóföldek vannak. Hagyjuk, hogy a folyók átvágtassanak az országon, ahelyett, hogy átitatnák a talajt az éltető vízzel.

    Az uniós döntéshozatal a klímaválság kapcsán a levegő összetételére fókuszál, és erre hivatkozva betarthatatlan emissziós szabályokat alkot, de az ennek érdekében használt új technológiák a talaj és a talajvizek elszennyeződését fokozzák.

    Magyarországon az aszállyal párhuzamosan az akkumulátorgyárak vízszennyező hatásával is számolni kell, vagyis nálunk is a gazdasági lobbik írják felül a környezetvédelmet.

    A Föld egy komplex rendszer, amely komplex válaszokat igényel, nem lehet kiragadni egyes problémákat. Ha valós megoldásokat akarunk, akkor a lokalitás felé kell mozdulnunk, és uniós forrásokból is a helyi sajátosságoknak megfelelő természetközeli megoldásokat kell támogatnunk.

    		  
       

    		 

      Christine Schneider (PPE). – Herr Präsident, Frau Kommissarin, meine sehr geehrten Damen und Herren! Wüstenbildung ist eine globale Herausforderung, und Europa ist immer stärker betroffen. Unsere Ernährungssicherheit, die wir lange für selbstverständlich hielten, ist bedroht. Eine Lösung kann nur mit und nicht gegen unsere Landwirtinnen und Landwirte gefunden werden. Was passiert, wenn wir über ihre Köpfe hinweg entscheiden, das haben die letzten Jahre gezeigt. Bauernproteste sind zwischenzeitlich vor diesem Haus zum Alltag geworden. Daher mein dringender Appell: Beziehen Sie von Anfang an den Berufsstand mit ein, insbesondere bei der angekündigten Water Resilience Strategy.

    Drei Aspekte möchte ich hervorheben: Wir brauchen erstens ein intelligentes Wassermanagement. Nutzen wir die künstliche Intelligenz, um Wasserressourcen effizient zu verteilen. Setzen wir auf Wiederverwendung von Grauwasser und Abwasser, und bauen wir wassersparende Infrastruktur aus. So können wir Wasser nachhaltig zwischen den Regionen und Sektoren nutzen. Zweitens: dürreresistentes Saatgut. Es ist unverzichtbar, um Erträge selbst unter extremen Klimabedingungen zu sichern. Dazu brauchen wir neue Züchtungstechnologien, und die Blockade im Rat muss beendet werden. Drittens: Innovative Bewässerungslösungen, Tröpfchen- und Präzisionsbewässerung nutzen Sensorendaten, setzen Wasser ganz gezielt ein und vermeiden dadurch Verluste. Diese Technologien müssen wir stärker fördern, um unsere Landwirtschaft noch effizienter und nachhaltiger zu machen.

    Kurz zusammengefasst: Wenn wir Ernährungssicherheit wollen, brauchen wir neue Technologien und innovative Lösungen in enger Zusammenarbeit mit unseren internationalen Partnern, mit unseren Landwirten, aber auch mit uns Verbraucherinnen und Verbrauchern.

    		  
       

    		 

      Σάκης Αρναούτογλου (S&D). – Κύριε Πρόεδρε, η Γη μας, πηγή ζωής για αιώνες, αντιμετωπίζει τον κίνδυνο να μετατραπεί σε πηγή αφανισμού. Οφείλουμε να αποτρέψουμε τη μετατροπή εύφορων περιοχών σε ερημωμένα τοπία. Όταν το έδαφος καταστρέφεται, διακυβεύεται το μέλλον της ανθρωπότητας. Η ζωή δεν μπορεί να ευδοκιμήσει σε καμένη γη. Η Ευρωπαϊκή Ένωση καλείται να αναλάβει ηγετικό ρόλο, διακηρύσσοντας την ανάγκη για ορθολογική διαχείριση των φυσικών πόρων και τερματισμό επιτέλους της αδράνειας. Η συνέχιση της παρούσας πορείας θα οδηγήσει στη συγκομιδή των συνεπειών της αδιαφορίας μας και όχι των καρπών της γης. Προτείνω τη σύναψη ενός Συμφώνου για Ζωντανή Γη, μια συμφωνία που θα προβλέπει την αντιστάθμιση κάθε χαμένης έκτασης με την αναγέννηση διπλάσιας έκτασης μέσω βιώσιμων επενδύσεων. Μια τέτοια πρωτοβουλία θα μπορούσε να αποτελέσει ένα νέο παγκόσμιο πρότυπο για τη βιώσιμη διαχείριση των εδαφών. Δεν πρόκειται για μια ουτοπική ιδέα, αλλά για μια επιτακτική ανάγκη. Παρά τις προσπάθειες για την προστασία του πλανήτη, παρατηρούμε την εστίαση ορισμένων στην εξερεύνηση διαστημικών προορισμών, παραβλέποντας την ανάγκη για άμεση δράση στη Γη. Φαίνεται να προκρίνεται η κατάκτηση ενός απομακρυσμένου κόκκινου πλανήτη εις βάρος της διαφύλαξης του πράσινου πλανήτη μας. Επιπλέον, διαπιστώνεται η ενίσχυση ρητορικών που αμφισβητούν την κρισιμότητα της κατάστασης, υποβαθμίζοντας τις περιβαλλοντικές προκλήσεις σε πολιτικά παιχνίδια. Η φύση μάς απευθύνει επείγουσα έκκληση. Ας την αφουγκραστούμε, πριν η σιωπή της γίνει πιο εκκωφαντική από οποιαδήποτε φωνή. Ο χρόνος για δράση είναι τώρα. Και σε όσους αναζητούν καταφύγιο σε άλλους πλανήτες, ας τους υπενθυμίσουμε ότι εκεί οι συνθήκες είναι ήδη ερημικές και θα έρθει η ερημοποίηση και στον πλανήτη μας, αν αυτό επιζητούν.

    		  
       

    		 

      Mireia Borrás Pabón (PfE). – Señor presidente, señora comisaria, señorías, voy a ser muy clara: la CP16 ha sido otro espectáculo bochornoso de hipocresía, con líderes mundiales que vuelan en sus jets privados a Arabia Saudí; un país, por cierto, que incumple el 75 % de las restricciones medioambientales que ustedes desde aquí, desde Bruselas, imponen sin piedad a nuestros agricultores. Sí, aquellos mismos que evitan la desertificación del territorio. ¿Y qué resultados hemos obtenido? Ninguno, ningún compromiso vinculante.

    Nos enfrentamos a un gran problema, señora comisaria: casi el 70 % de las tierras agrícolas mediterráneas están en riesgo de desertificación y solo en España —en mi país— dos millones de hectáreas ya están clasificadas como desérticas. ¿Y qué hace la Comisión al respecto? Lo de siempre: culpabilizar al cambio climático. Pero ¿se han planteado, por un momento, que el principal problema fuera, por ejemplo, la falta de inversión en infraestructuras hídricas? En Europa se pierden millones de toneladas de agua de riego debido a infraestructuras hídricas que están tremendamente anticuadas.

    Miremos a Israel —un país que tiene recursos hídricos muy escasos y condiciones casi desérticas—, que ha revolucionado su agricultura con tecnología muy avanzada; mientras ellos aumentan su productividad un 30 %, aquí en Europa nuestros agricultores se ven obligados a abandonar sus tierras. Desde Vox ya seguimos en esta línea y propusimos un plan: un gran Plan Hidrológico Nacional para garantizar el agua y cohesionar el territorio. ¿Y qué es lo que votó toda la izquierda en bloque? Un no rotundo. ¿Y qué es lo que votó el Partido Popular? Pues se abstuvo, como siempre, cuando le gustan nuestras iniciativas, pero tienen complejo en admitirlo.

    Miremos ahora a Jaén: Marmolejo, Arjona, Lopera. ¿Les suenan, señores del PP? Son lugares de España donde el Partido Popular está expropiando tierras cultivadas con olivos para construir masivamente plantas fotovoltaicas. ¿Les preocupa de verdad la desertificación, señores del PP? 100 000 olivos a la basura, en nombre de la sostenibilidad. Empezamos a pensar que ustedes prefieren el aceite de Marruecos al aceite de Jaén, pero lo cierto es que no me extrañaría ver dentro de muy poco tanto al Partido Popular como a la izquierda manifestándose juntos en contra de sus propias políticas, esta vez no en apoyo de las nucleares, sino en su falsa solidaridad con los agricultores de Jaén, tan falsa como la sostenibilidad que defienden.

    		  
       

    		 

      Laurence Trochu (ECR). – Monsieur le Président, Madame la Commissaire, mes chers collègues, face aux enjeux climatiques, il est triste de voir que les solutions idéologiques prennent trop souvent le pas sur le bon sens. La question de la désertification n’y fait pas exception et les réponses apportées à ce problème, que personne ne nie d’ailleurs, sont souvent illusoires. À ce titre, l’opposition féroce et même, parfois, violente des écologistes français à des solutions de bon sens telles que les mégabassines, qui stockent le surplus d’eau de l’hiver pour le réutiliser l’été, est un exemple éloquent.

    Alors, plutôt que de voir en l’homme uniquement un prédateur-pollueur, l’homme doit être la solution, par l’innovation, le progrès technique et la recherche. La désertification ne peut être combattue par une écologie punitive et normative à outrance, ruineuse pour notre compétitivité, comme l’a d’ailleurs souligné le rapport Draghi.

    Nos agriculteurs, qui ont façonné nos paysages, sont las d’être désignés comme les principaux responsables et d’être écrasés de normes. Dernier artefact idéologique, le changement climatique est aussi utilisé comme prétexte pour justifier une immigration de masse venue du Sud dont plus personne ne veut. Alors, chers collègues, pour relever le défi du climat, sortons enfin de l’idéologie.

    		  
       

    		 

      Billy Kelleher (Renew). – Mr President, as I stand here, my home country of Ireland is preparing to be battered by one of the strongest storms in decades. And if you look at the weather forecasts across Europe, there’s rain in many areas. So it’s a concept that is very hard to understand when we sometimes speak about desertification.

    But, in reality, the scale of this problem – the desertification – should be everyone’s concern. It affects the land of homes to 1.5 billion people. The UN estimates that 135 million people have already been displaced due to desertification, and this could rise to 700 million by 2050. This land is also important agricultural land, and the UN estimates that 40 % of agricultural land has already been degraded.

    The consequences are far-reaching: humanitarian, migration, environmental problems, food and water security, political stability or political instability, for global security, for trade and supply chains there are significant challenges. And each of these consequences will have an impact also on Europe and the daily lives of our citizens.

    We cannot reverse the problems in the very short term, but we have to plan and we must make real collective efforts to halt its spread and to address its long-term implications. So while I welcome the commitments at the COP16 of the United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification, especially regarding the financial commitments from both the public and private sector, we do need to ensure that we make a common effort to bring forward the challenges regarding drought and the protocols with regard to tackling the same.

    If we are going to halt this runaway train, we need to have a common, coherent plan for tackling drought and that involves governments, businesses, local people, scientists and engineers.

    		  
       

    		 

      Kai Tegethoff (Verts/ALE). – Mr President, the summer of 2024 is the hottest on record in the EU and globally. Thirteen Member States, meaning almost 50 % of the Member States of the EU, are affected by desertification and almost 25 % of the territory is sensitive to desertification. Still, while the EU promotes the leadership role globally, we are not prepared ourselves.

    The desertification COP16 failed to agree on a global drought framework, and the Commission promised to present a water resilience strategy already a year ago. I hope this will come very soon.

    And Commissioner Roswall, in your introduction, in your first sentence you said that we need to focus on helping farmers, and in the second sentence it was ‘focus on economy’. I think what we really need in that water resilience strategy is water saving targets. We need to improve efficiency and reuse of water. We need to protect and restore our water supplies and the whole catchment area.

    And then at the same time, considering the wildfires and the flooding that we deal with here every single plenary session, we have to make sure that this water resilience strategy is accompanied and embedded into a real European climate adaptation law.

    		  
       

    		 

      João Oliveira (The Left). – Senhor Presidente, o problema da desertificação é um problema ambiental ou climático, mas é essencialmente um problema da relação do ser humano com a natureza, é um problema humano, social e económico.

    As conclusões da COP16 contêm muitos dos elementos relevantes para o debate sobre o combate à desertificação, mas revelam também as muitas dificuldades que é preciso ainda superar.

    Há muito por fazer para que haja verdadeiramente soluções, relativamente ao uso e à gestão eficientes da água e dos recursos hídricos, relativamente à ocupação e ordenamento equilibrado do território, relativamente à promoção de práticas produtivas sustentáveis, equilibradas, seja na agricultura, na pecuária, na silvicultura. Há muito por fazer no investimento público que é preciso nos territórios rurais, para travar o abandono da população e a consequente desertificação do território.

    Permitam-me trazer, aqui, um aspeto que é relevante em Portugal, que é o montado de sobreiros e azinheiras, que é característico do meu país. O montado não é apenas um conjunto de árvores que retêm carbono e resistem melhor aos incêndios. O montado é um sistema agrosilvopastoril que tem de ser encarado como tal em todas as suas dimensões, não apenas pelo valor ambiental, mas pelo enorme valor social que tem, porque cria emprego, fixa as populações, permite práticas produtivas sustentáveis e equilibradas, garante um adequado ordenamento do território na compatibilização da sua utilização para fins produtivos, mas também tem preocupações ambientais.

    Este é um exemplo do investimento que precisamos de fazer em áreas e em recursos que, sendo naturais de cada país, naturalmente permitem uma resposta mais eficaz ao combate à desertificação.

    		  
       

    		 

      Daniel Buda (PPE). – Domnule președinte, doamnă comisară, doamnelor și domnilor colegi, deșertificarea este o realitate care nu poate fi contestată, iar la COP 16 s-a subliniat acest lucru. Potrivit datelor oficiale, deșertificarea generează costuri globale de peste 300 de miliarde de euro și afectează mai mult de 1,5 miliarde de oameni, crescând presiunile migraționiste și alimentând războaiele pentru resurse.

    Uniunea pierde anual 74 de miliarde de euro din cauza degradării terenurilor, iar lipsa acțiunii va reduce randamentele culturilor cu cel puțin 10 % până în 2050, generând o penurie, atât pentru apă, cât și pentru alimente. România, țara mea, se confruntă din plin cu aceste fenomene. Avem nevoie urgent de acțiuni curajoase, care nu doar să prevină acest fenomen, ci chiar să-l inverseze pe termen lung.

    Pentru a ne proteja securitatea alimentară, trebuie să investim în tehnologii și soluții inovatoare, precum noile tehnici genomice în gestionarea durabilă a apei și dezvoltarea unor sisteme inteligente de irigații la prețuri accesibile pentru toți fermierii, și subliniez acest lucru: la prețuri accesibile pentru toți fermierii.

    În același timp, se impune utilizarea eficientă a apelor uzate, mai ales în jurul marilor centre urbane, și investiții serioase în ceea ce înseamnă desalinizarea apei marine, toate acestea trebuind să devină o prioritate strategică și o obligație față de cetățenii noștri.

    Investițiile din sectorul privat trebuie încurajate, iar Comisia trebuie să se asigure că statele membre utilizează eficient și rapid banii pentru împăduriri și perdele forestiere. Europa are la dispoziție soluții, însă fără investiții direcționate și finanțare adecvată, nu va putea face față acestor provocări.

    Stimați colegi, alegerea este a noastră: să acționăm acum sau generațiile viitoare vor suporta consecințele imobilismului nostru destructibil.

    		  
       

    		 

      Maria Grapini (S&D). – Domnule președinte, doamnă comisară, stimați colegi, sigur, dezbatem o problemă foarte importantă, păcat că sunt așa de puțini membri ai Parlamentului European în sală. Așa cum s-a declarat și aici, cum a fost și în declarația Convenției, se degradează anual terenul. S-a ajuns la 70 % din terenuri care au fost transformate din starea lor naturală.

    Secetele cauzează pagube și costuri și daune, peste 300 de miliarde pe an. Unde merg aceste daune și pagube? Evident, la fermieri și, până la urmă, la cetățeni. Doar în perioada 2015-2019, circa 100 de milioane de hectare de terenuri sănătoase și productive au fost degradate anual, amenințând evident, securitatea alimentară a globului, precum și disponibilitatea apei.

    Ce trebuie făcut, doamnă comisară? Ne-ați relatat ce a fost la Convenție și că nu s-a ajuns la compromisuri importante. Eu cred că Uniunea Europeană trebuie să fie preocupată mai ales de ce se întâmplă în Uniunea Europeană, sigur, și global. Eu cred că trebuie să îmbunătățim instrumentele politice naționale și europene pentru abordarea productivă de gestionare a secetei. Aici avem foarte mult de făcut. Este nevoie de alocarea de bugete pentru finanțarea restaurării terenurilor, creșterea rezistenței la secetă, prin cercetare și inovare.

    Comisia Europeană trebuie să aibă un plan de acțiuni la nivelul Uniunii Europene care să combată degradarea terenurilor în colaborare cu statele membre. Și mai trebuie făcut ceva, doamnă comisară: politicile Uniunii Europene, ale Comisiei, nu trebuie să se anuleze ca la algebră – plus și minus – sunt mii de hectare acum, cu parcuri fotovoltaice, terenuri care nu mai sunt recuperate zeci de ani.

    Trebuie să vedem cum corelăm politica energetică cu această politică de protejare a terenurilor și cred foarte mult că este nevoie să vă gândiți, în principal, la cum să nu creăm presiune asupra fermierilor din Uniunea Europeană, asupra cetățenilor din Uniunea Europeană, atât timp cât în restul globului, Statele Unite, Japonia și celelalte state, nu au votat la această Convenție.

    		  
       

    		 

      Mathilde Androuët (PfE). – Monsieur le Président, à l’issue de la COP16 consacrée à la désertification qui a eu lieu à Riyad, 12 milliards ont été sécurisés d’ici 2030 pour améliorer les terres, dont dix proviennent de la Banque islamique de développement. Dans un rassemblement international, les pétromonarchies sont donc venues au secours des déserts de sable, déserts où parfois on construit, en dépit de tout souci environnemental et économique, des pistes de ski.

    Voilà, une fois de plus, la démonstration qu’aux problèmes environnementaux, qui sont des problèmes localisés, on ne peut avoir de réponse globalisée. Les COP sont des rassemblements de déblocage ou de création de fonds financiers, aucunement des lieux de réflexion et d’apport de solutions environnementales. Aussi, sur le problème majeur de la désertification et de l’assèchement des sols, ayons une vision et des solutions locales. La gestion de l’eau est une question sensible et différente d’un pays à l’autre et, parfois, d’une région à l’autre dans un seul et même pays. L’an passé, dans le nord de la France, les cultures ont souffert de trop de pluies, soit l’inverse exact des Pyrénées orientales, en manque d’eau permanent.

    Si vous vous refusez au traitement local pour n’opérer qu’à l’échelle européenne, prenons des problèmes communs. En Bulgarie comme en Guadeloupe, 60 % de l’eau est perdue tant les infrastructures sont vétustes et fuyardes. De même, encouragez le reboisement, le replantage des haies pour favoriser la captation de l’eau par les sols. Bref, appuyez-vous sur ceux qui connaissent le mieux leur environnement, à savoir les paysans, plutôt que sur les financiers des pétromonarchies pour régler nos problèmes d’eau et de désertification en Europe. À problème local, solution nationale.

    		  
       

    		 

      Marie Toussaint (Verts/ALE). – Monsieur le Président, la désertification, c’est l’autre nom de l’injustice climatique et de la vulnérabilité. C’est d’ailleurs peut-être parce qu’elle a d’abord touché les pays les plus pauvres que les pays les plus riches n’y ont, pendant si longtemps, prêté que si peu d’attention. La désertification est aujourd’hui sur nous. La Corse et les parties les plus pauvres de la Méditerranée, Perpignan et ses quartiers parmi les plus précaires de France, ou encore la dévastée Mayotte, n’ont plus d’eau. En Guadeloupe, l’érosion côtière frappe, puisant dans l’assèchement des terres. Quand dans le Massif central, ce sont évidemment les petits paysans qui souffrent le plus et qui n’ont pas les moyens d’acheter du foin pour leurs élevages lorsque celui-ci vient à manquer.

    Au fond, la désertification continue dans l’indifférence, parce qu’elle frappe d’abord et de manière évidente les plus vulnérables. Mais ne soyons pas naïfs: nous réaliserons bientôt que la désertification est notre affaire à tous. Espérons qu’alors il ne sera pas trop tard. En Afrique, c’est déjà 16 % du PIB qui s’est évaporé du fait de la désertification.

    Madame la Commissaire, nous ne sommes pas impuissants, ici, sur le territoire européen, pour un enjeu qui est bien un enjeu planétaire. La désertification est liée au dérèglement climatique et aux énergies fossiles. Alors sortons-en, et plus vite qu’aujourd’hui. Elle est aussi liée à l’agriculture intensive et à la déforestation que nous pouvons, que nous devons combattre. Alors agissons! Il n’y a plus de temps à perdre.

    		  
       

    		 

      Valentina Palmisano (The Left). – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, non è necessario guardare al Sahara per comprendere la desertificazione: i deserti si trovano ormai dietro casa. Sempre più spesso, immagini surreali, e allo stesso tempo drammatiche, mostrano paesaggi trasformati, fiumi ridotti a sentieri e laghi completamente prosciugati.

    Il 40 % del suolo del Sud Italia è già a rischio, come tanti paesi del Mediterraneo. In questo modo, stiamo trasformando paesaggi millenari.

    E questo non è soltanto il risultato del cambiamento climatico, ma anche di pratiche agricole non sostenibili, che hanno impoverito il nostro suolo. Ecco, il nostro approccio deve cambiare, privilegiando la qualità delle produzioni e la rigenerazione del suolo.

    Il degrado non è inevitabile, per fortuna: possiamo invertire la rotta. Servono però incentivi per modelli agricoli basati sulla qualità e sulla rigenerazione del suolo. La politica deve smettere di finanziare pratiche obsolete e supportare invece l’innovazione.

    Colleghi, la desertificazione, infatti, non è soltanto una sfida tecnica, ma è anche una questione di giustizia verso i nostri territori e soprattutto verso le generazioni future.

    Il mio monito è che non sia la COP17 a salvare il suolo europeo, ma il nostro impegno concreto, oggi.

    		  
       

    		 

      Salvatore De Meo (PPE). – Signor Presidente, signora Commissaria, onorevoli colleghi, la desertificazione è una delle sfide più urgenti del nostro tempo, aggravata dal cambiamento climatico e dalle attività dell’uomo.

    Non è solo una crisi ambientale, ma un problema sociale ed economico che minaccia la biodiversità, la sicurezza alimentare e la stabilità delle nostre comunità, alimentando tensioni e migrazioni forzate.

    Pensate che, ogni anno, 12 milioni di ettari vengono degradati, mettendo a rischio la sopravvivenza di oltre un miliardo di persone. Questo dato ci allarma e ci ricorda che la desertificazione, insieme alla crescente scarsità dell’acqua, richiede risposte immediate, coordinate e ambiziose.

    La COP16 è stata un’occasione per riflettere sulle nostre responsabilità, perché l’Unione europea manca di un’azione comune adeguata e le risorse dedicate sono ancora troppo limitate rispetto alla portata degli interventi.

    Dobbiamo impegnarci e sostenere lo sviluppo di politiche sostenibili, promuovendo pratiche agricole rigenerative e resilienti, un uso responsabile delle risorse idriche e l’innovazione tecnologica per ripristinare gli ambienti degradati.

    La cooperazione internazionale, inoltre, è importante perché nessun paese può affrontare da solo questa battaglia. La desertificazione non conosce confini e le sue conseguenze si ripercuotono su scala globale. Solo lavorando insieme possiamo affrontare la complessità di questa sfida. Ciò significa condividere conoscenze, tecnologie e risorse, oltre a costruire – come si sta facendo – partenariati solidi tra governi, organizzazioni internazionali, società civile e settore privato.

    Combattere la desertificazione significa investire nel futuro, nella nostra diversità, nella sicurezza alimentare e nella stabilità delle generazioni future.

    		  
       

    		 

      Thomas Bajada (S&D). – Mr President, desertification is not a story from far, far away. Its serious implications have long been affecting the Mediterranean region due to its unique ecosystems, economic dependencies and limited natural resources.

    In southern Spain, over-irrigation has led to soil erosion. In Crete, aquifers have been overexploited, leading to salinisation. In the neighbouring Sahel region, desertification has displaced millions of people, increasing migratory pressures towards Europe. And in Malta, increased pressure on desalinisation plants raised energy consumption and costs, which are passed on to households and businesses.

    Today this is not a story only for southern Europeans. It is also a story shared with other Europeans from temperate and humid climates like Bulgaria. In fact, last year 45 % of the EU’s territory faced drought, threatening food production and water security.

    Desertification is about humanity, our dependence on water for survival, and our need for water security and food security. Therefore, our response must be people-centred. The fight against desertification demands global cooperation, but it also starts at home in this very House. We need to dramatically increase our political commitment to water – we need to preserve our lands, help our nature to recover and conserve our water. And, dear Commissioner, we need to act now, with an ambitious European water resilience strategy before it is too late.

    As rapporteur of the Parliament’s initiative, I call for decisive action to protect our people and resources and build a sustainable future of a liveable world for future generations to come.

    		  
       

    		 

      France Jamet (PfE). – Monsieur le Président, la désertification est une menace importante, mais il en est une dont on ne parle pas assez, c’est la désertification de nos fonds marins. Déplorer l’acidification de nos océans, le réchauffement des eaux ou la hausse du niveau de la mer ne suffit pas. Il faut aussi dénoncer les causes de ce désastre. En France, par exemple, dans le Morbihan, on les trouve dans la construction stérilisante de parcs éoliens offshores ou dans les ravages de bateaux-usines sans-frontiéristes. Deux activités nocives, deux activités pourtant encouragées par l’Union européenne, qui témoignent de l’hypocrisie générale, voire de l’imposture pseudo-écologiste sur la préservation et la pérennité de nos écosystèmes.

    Depuis quinze ans, on constate la dégradation alarmante de nos océans, qui menace nos richesses maritimes, les métiers qui en dépendent, au premier rang desquels nos pêcheurs, et nos ressources alimentaires. Cet équilibre si fragile, aggravé par la pollution terrestre qui se déverse dans nos mers, a aussi un impact sur nos climats et sur la désertification terrestre. La pluie salvatrice qu’attendent nos agriculteurs et les populations touchées par la sécheresse, cette pluie salvatrice ne tombe pas du ciel, elle vient de nos océans.

    Alors tous ces vœux pieux et autres déclarations d’intention ne résoudront rien si nous ne remettons pas en cause l’écosystème mondialiste que vous avez mis en place, basé sur un libre-échangisme dérégulé au détriment d’un localisme raisonné et national.

    		  
       

    		 

      Vicent Marzà Ibáñez (Verts/ALE). – Señor presidente, en los últimos diez años, la superficie desertificada en la península ibérica se ha multiplicado por veintitrés. Es especialmente preocupante en el sur de Alicante, en la Vega Baja, un territorio de transición, precisamente donde la presión urbanística es salvaje, donde la presión del sobreturismo es salvaje, y donde ahora ya no ocurre de forma aislada que se corte el agua, sino que ya es de forma recurrente. Y no solo se corta en verano, también en otros periodos del año. Ni pasa solo con el agua destinada a la gente y, por lo tanto, con el agua de boca, sino también con la que usan los agricultores.

    En el mismo territorio también ya hay una lucha que se va viviendo en toda Europa, que es por la privatización del agua. Tenemos cada vez menos agua y cada vez está gestionada por menos manos y mirando siempre hacia el negocio. Por eso, hacen falta de una vez por todas políticas valientes que custodien el territorio, que nos adapten al cambio climático y que protejan a la ciudadanía, por ejemplo, ante situaciones como la dana que hemos vivido en Valencia. Y hace falta que el agua sea gestionada de forma pública para que sea un derecho garantizado para el conjunto de la ciudadanía.

    (El orador acepta responder a una pregunta formulada con arreglo al procedimiento de la «tarjeta azul»)

    		  
       

    		 

      João Oliveira (The Left), Pergunta segundo o procedimento «cartão azul». – Senhor Deputado, o Governo de Portugal avançou recentemente com uma lei chamada Lei dos Solos, que tem como objetivo permitir a construção em solos onde até hoje essa construção não era permitida. Esta decisão, naturalmente, favorece a especulação imobiliária, mas cria também problemas de desordenamento do território.

    O senhor deputado vem da região de Valência — onde ainda recentemente houve uma tragédia, na sequência de umas cheias —, por isso, queria colocar-lhe uma questão precisamente a partir da sua experiência.

    Considerando a experiência na região de Valência, decisões como esta do Governo português, de desordenamento do território e de favorecimento da especulação imobiliária, permitem a solução de algum problema, por exemplo, o problema da habitação — que é o pretexto que o Governo português utiliza —, ou o combate à desertificação dos territórios? Ou, pelo contrário, opções destas de desordenamento do território agravam ainda mais as consequências de catástrofes naturais, como aquelas que atingiram a região de Valência?

    		  
       

    		 

      Vicent Marzà Ibáñez (Verts/ALE), respuesta de «tarjeta azul». – Sí, señor diputado Oliveira, la presión urbanística y la urbanización salvaje de hoy son las víctimas del mañana. Lo hemos visto en nuestra tierra con la dana: se ha construido donde no se podía construir, porque se ha visto que el territorio solo era un espacio de especulación y no para que la gente tuviera garantizado su espacio vital y se protegieran sus vidas.

    La gente ha muerto por estar, entre otras cosas, urbanizando territorios que no se pueden urbanizar. Ha habido una dana que ha llegado con esa cantidad de agua brutal porque estaba absolutamente todo cimentado, porque la tierra no ha podido acoger toda el agua también. Por eso es tan importante que se combatan esas iniciativas como la del Gobierno portugués que usted dice, porque urbanizar, insisto, de forma salvaje es crear víctimas en el futuro.

    		  
       

    		 

      Sebastian Everding (The Left). – Herr Präsident, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! „Wälder gehen den Völkern voran, die Wüsten folgen ihnen“. Das sagte schon im 17. Jahrhundert der französische Schriftsteller Chateaubriand. Der Klimawandel und der massive Einsatz von Düngemitteln verstärken die Bodenerosion und auch das Artensterben. Grundwasserentnahmen für Bergbautätigkeiten, die industrielle Massentierhaltung und die Bewässerung in der Landwirtschaft entziehen Wäldern das Grundwasser, das dringend für die Regeneration in Dürrezeiten benötigt wird. Sie tragen zur Bodenversandung bei, schädigen das Ökosystem und trocknen CO2-Senken wie Moore aus. Hier muss dringend durch mehr Schutzzonen und mehr Entnahmeeinschränkungen gehandelt werden.

    Ein weiteres Mittel gegen Wüstenbildung könnte ein stärkerer Fokus auf die Agroforstwirtschaft sein. Dürren bedrohen bereits jetzt die Lebensgrundlage von rund 1,8 Milliarden Menschen weltweit und bringen gefährdete Gemeinschaften immer weiter an den Rand des Abgrundes. Darüber hinaus kosten sie 300 Milliarden US‑Dollar pro Jahr und bedrohen wichtige Wirtschaftssektoren wie die Landwirtschaft, Energie und Wasser. Liebe Frau Kommissarin, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, wie bei allen anderen Aspekten des Klimawandels gilt auch hier: Es ist weitaus günstiger, jetzt zu handeln, als später zu versuchen, die Folgen zu kompensieren.

    (Der Redner ist damit einverstanden, auf eine Frage nach dem Verfahren der „blauen Karte“ zu antworten.)

    		  
       



    		 

      Gabriella Gerzsenyi (PPE). – Tisztelt Elnök Úr! A teve helyes állat, de nem szeretnénk közlekedési eszközként használni. Az éghajlatváltozás miatt az elsivatagosodás Magyarországon is egyre nagyobb probléma. Duna-Tisza közi homokhátság hazánk területének mintegy 10%-a, most már az ENSZ szerint hivatalosan is félsivatag.

    Ez a kormányzati tétlenségnek a szimbóluma. Csökkennek a terméshozamok, megnehezül a megélhetés, homokviharok előfordulnak, tavak száradnak ki és élőhelyek szűnnek meg. S nem csak környezeti, hanem társadalmi és gazdasági válság is, hiszen veszélyben az élelmiszer-ellátás és elnéptelenedik a vidék.

    Már két évtizede tudományos tanulmány és program készült a problémára. Az akkori kormány elfogadta, a Fidesz-kormány azonban tudatosan figyelmen kívül hagyja a szakértők figyelmeztetéseit, elhanyagolja a vízgazdálkodást, a talajvédelmet, ellenben százmilliárdokat költ presztízsberuházásokra, például stadionokra.

    A megoldás kulcsa az uniós, nemzeti és a helyi összefogás. Úgy véljük, hogy európai szinten átfogó stratégiára van szükség a fenntartható földhasználat és a vízvisszatartó technológiák támogatására.

    A Tisza Magyarország legnépszerűbb pártja. Kormányra kerülésünk után vissza fogjuk állítani az önálló környezetvédelmi minisztériumot. Kiemelten foglalkozni fogunk a talajvédelemmel, vízgazdálkodással, európai forrásokat irányítunk az érintett közösségekhez, és támogatni fogjuk a gazdákat ebben a küzdelemben is.

    		  
       

    		 

      César Luena (S&D). – Señor presidente, señorías, es un debate en un contexto bastante difícil, porque tenemos al nuevo inquilino de la Casa Blanca y su negacionismo, y un Grupo PPE retardista, ya lo siento. El discurso de ayer del señor Tusk nos lleva por esos senderos peligrosos.

    Presento dos ideas que son como dos evidencias. El suelo es un recurso no renovable, es importante no olvidarlo. ¿Saben cuánto han aumentado las sequías en los últimos 25 años? Un 30 %. Y, en este contexto, señora comisaria, ¿qué puede hacer la Unión? Le digo que defender las políticas verdes —al paso que vamos— va a ser algo casi contracultural. Pues mire, en primer lugar, una evaluación de riesgo de desertificación y degradación de las tierras, como sugirió el Tribunal de Cuentas Europeo en el año 2018. No sabemos nada de ese informe. La Ley de vigilancia del suelo, por favor, se lo pido a sus colegas del Grupo PPE, porque la están rebajando y rebajando, como todas las normativas medioambientales. Podemos declararnos como región en riesgo de desertificación en el marco de la Convención de las Naciones Unidas. Para eso no tenemos que esperar a ninguna cumbre internacional, eso podemos hacerlo ya nosotros. Y, sobre todo, presente una estrategia específica de desertificación, como le ha dicho este Parlamento.

    Fíjese: hasta cuatro grandes medidas podemos hacer nosotros solos —la Unión Europea— y dar ejemplo en el mundo. Pero claro, hay demasiado retardismo en la derecha. No caiga en eso, señora comisaria, hay muchos Grupos que la vamos a apoyar.

    (El orador acepta responder a una pregunta formulada con arreglo al procedimiento de la «tarjeta azul»)

    		  
       


    		 

      César Luena (S&D), respuesta de «tarjeta azul». – Estaba mirando, señor presidente, por si era alguien de la extrema derecha, porque no hubiera aceptado nunca nada, ni tarjeta azul ni verde.

    Mire, todo lo relacionado con los fondos europeos, a pesar de su Grupo y de su política en España, lo estamos sacando adelante bien. Y no quiero recordar aquí lo que han intentado ustedes hacer con la vicepresidenta primera, Teresa Ribera. Es decir, que a pesar de que ustedes aquí estén en contra de todo y siempre estén poniendo obstáculos y problemas, nosotros estamos aplicando muy bien los fondos NextGenerationEU en España y lo seguiremos haciendo. Solo le pido una cosa: está bien que me haga esa pregunta, pero después, en España, ayuden, que siempre están en contra de todo.

    		  
       

    		 

      Jutta Paulus (Verts/ALE). – Herr Präsident, Frau Kommissarin, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Als ich ein Kind war, war Wüste die Sahara oder die Gobi. Ferne, beeindruckende Orte, beschrieben in den Romanen von Karl May oder den Schilderungen von Sven Hedin. Und heute, nur wenige Jahrzehnte später, sehen wir Wüstenbildung in Spanien, in Portugal, in Italien, in Griechenland, in Ungarn, in Bulgarien. Wer sich da wundert, hat die Wissenschaft ignoriert oder den Einflüsterern der fossilen Industrie geglaubt. Die haben Milliarden investiert, um Zweifel zu säen – Zweifel an den Erkenntnissen, die Exxon selbst schon in den 70ern ermittelt hatte, um sie dann in den Giftschrank zu legen und öffentlich die Wissenschaft zu diskreditieren.

    Die Leugner sitzen auch in diesem Haus bei den Rechten, den noch Rechteren und den noch noch Rechteren, und bei der Welt‑Wüsten‑Konferenz haben wir leider auch keine großen Fortschritte gemacht, denn auch hier sitzen ja die Petrostaaten mit am Tisch. Deshalb: Europa muss handeln. Wir brauchen ein Klimaanpassungsgesetz, das naturbasierte Lösungen in den Mittelpunkt stellt, und eine glaubwürdige Unterstützung für die Länder, die am stärksten betroffen sind.

    (Die Rednerin ist damit einverstanden, auf eine Frage nach dem Verfahren der „blauen Karte“ zu antworten.)

    		  
       


    		 

      Jutta Paulus (Verts/ALE), Antwort auf eine Frage nach dem Verfahren der „blauen Karte“. – Vielen Dank, Frau Kollegin, für die Frage. Es ist mir ein Rätsel, wo Sie Ihre Anschuldigungen und Informationen hernehmen, denn wir sind ja durchaus die Partei, die für eine bäuerliche, kleinbäuerliche, familienzentrierte Landwirtschaft eintritt, die für eine nachhaltige Landwirtschaft eintritt, die im Einklang mit dem steht, was uns die Wissenschaft empfiehlt.

    Da brauchen Sie bloß mal in die Berichte unserer eigenen Agentur zu schauen – die Europäische Umweltagentur ist eine Agentur dieser Europäischen Union. Da sitzen hochmögende Wissenschaftlerinnen und Wissenschaftler, die sich seit Jahren und Jahrzehnten mit diesen Fragen beschäftigen. Und das, was wir in unseren Programmen, in unseren Vorschlägen aufgreifen, entspricht dem, was diese Wissenschaft uns vorschlägt, denn wir stehen auf dem Boden der Wissenschaft und nicht auf dem Boden der Lobbyinteressen, die hier leider ihre Papiere verbreiten.

    		  
       


    		 

      Borja Giménez Larraz (PPE). – Señor presidente, el agua es vida y el agua es desarrollo. Hoy vemos como la desertificación avanza. La falta de agua se ha convertido en una amenaza, especialmente para los países y las regiones del sur de Europa. Aunque algunos somos más vulnerables, este desafío nos afecta a todos. Hablamos del acceso a un bien básico. Hablamos de un recurso fundamental para la agricultura y para la ganadería, para la industria, para crear empleo y fijar la población.

    La Unión Europea debe implicarse de lleno en el impulso de un pacto europeo del agua que establezca medidas integrales para garantizar una gestión sostenible y eficiente de los recursos hídricos. Y ese pacto hay que dotarlo de fondos: necesitamos fondos para construir y modernizar infraestructuras hidráulicas, como embalses y presas que permitan regular cauces y gestionar periodos de sequía de forma más eficaz. Necesitamos fondos para mejorar y modernizar los sistemas de regadío. Todo ello acompañado de políticas de gestión eficiente del agua. Y hay que actuar con urgencia.

    En España, en mi región, Aragón, que tiene zonas profundamente áridas y desérticas, el Parlamento autonómico aprobó por unanimidad en 1992 el llamado Pacto del Agua, un acuerdo que reivindica las obras hidráulicas necesarias para garantizar las necesidades presentes y futuras de la comunidad. Pues bien, en estos treinta años hemos avanzado muy poco: tenemos más de treinta obras pendientes. Sabemos desde hace décadas qué es lo que queremos, lo que necesitamos, pero la falta de voluntad y fondos lo ha dejado en el olvido. Ante la inacción del Gobierno de España, la Unión Europea debe adoptar un papel activo. Debe contribuir a financiar estas obras. Hoy ya no es una opción: es una obligación.

    		  
       

    		 

      Camilla Laureti (S&D). – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, la desertificazione va affrontata a livello globale, perché mette a rischio biodiversità, risorse idriche e sicurezza alimentare e fa tremare la giustizia sociale.

    Spaventa pensare che, anche a causa degli effetti della desertificazione e della siccità, entro il 2050 oltre 200 milioni di persone potrebbero essere costrette a migrare.

    Lo vediamo anche in Europa: il Sud soffre sempre di più per siccità e carenza di acqua. In Italia abbiamo intere regioni che restano per lunghi periodi senz’acqua, anche a causa di una scorretta gestione della risorsa idrica. L’acqua – il nostro bene più prezioso – non è una merce, ma è un diritto, e dobbiamo incentivarne conservazione e riuso e lavorare sulle reti idriche.

    Dobbiamo proteggere e ripristinare i nostri suoli, favorire con finanziamenti ad hoc e risorse il passaggio da metodi di coltivazione intensivi a pratiche agricole sostenibili. Se perdiamo i nostri suoli, perdiamo il pianeta.

    La desertificazione l’abbiamo vista arrivare e porta anche, e soprattutto, la nostra impronta: per questo, dobbiamo smettere di far finta che non esista e dobbiamo agire sin da ora.

    		  
       

    		 

      Marco Falcone (PPE). – Signor Presidente, signora Commissaria, onorevoli colleghi, in un momento in cui larga parte del continente fronteggia l’inverno, potrebbe apparire fuori contesto parlare di desertificazione e carenza idrica. Eppure, questo dovrebbe essere l’atteggiamento che qui in Europa dovremmo tutti avere: occuparci per tempo di questa enorme sfida, di questa enorme emergenza, prima che sia troppo tardi.

    E ve lo dice chi arriva qua a Strasburgo da una delle due più importanti isole del Mediterraneo, la Sicilia, e rappresenta due delle più importanti isole – assieme alla Sicilia, anche la Sardegna – entrambe fortemente a rischio. Si immagina che più del 50 % del territorio delle due regioni, addirittura entro i prossimi trent’anni, potrebbe essere a rischio desertificazione.

    Certo, il cambiamento climatico è un fattore decisivo. Purtroppo, però, la lotta alla desertificazione non può essere affidata solo alle misure collegate in qualche modo al Green Deal. Anzi, questo grande contenitore potrebbe diventare un luogo in cui tutto si perde, e già la Corte dei conti europea, nel 2018, aveva invitato l’Unione europea ad avere una visione completa e a porre in essere dei programmi di pianificazione.

    Ecco perché noi del Partito Popolare Europeo siamo per la difesa del territorio, certamente, e riteniamo che le isole debbano essere guardate con grande attenzione. Come? Tramite un serio programma di investimenti e, se vogliamo, di infrastrutture, non solo di transizione energetica.

    L’Europa deve avere il coraggio di varare un grande piano di stanziamenti strutturali per la lotta all’avanzare del deserto.

    (L’oratore accetta di rispondere a una domanda “cartellino blu”)

    		  
       


    		 

      Marco Falcone (PPE), risposta a una domanda “cartellino blu”. – Noi del Partito Popolare Europeo guardiamo a un approccio molto pragmatico. Certamente, la transizione ecologica diventa per noi il faro, ma al contempo riteniamo che un serio programma di investimenti debba essere calibrato alle esigenze del territorio. Non dobbiamo eccedere in un senso, ma nemmeno in un altro.

    Certamente, gli interventi in agricoltura, gli interventi tecnologici e, se vogliamo, anche un serio piano di investimenti, soprattutto in condutture idriche di adduzione e, se vogliamo, di approvvigionamento, possono rappresentare certamente una soluzione.

    Lo dico per la Sicilia – io provengo dalla Sicilia – dove l’acqua non manca, ma mancano le infrastrutture. Per cui, grazie per il suo input.

    		  
       

    		 

      Leire Pajín (S&D). – Señor presidente, señorías, se ha dicho aquí reiteradamente, nos enfrentamos a una crisis aparentemente silenciosa, pero profundamente devastadora: la desertificación, la pérdida de suelos fértiles y de recursos hídricos. De nuevo, es una crisis global que nos afecta a todos, también en Europa, especialmente en el Mediterráneo, en países como España, en regiones como Alicante.

    Hasta el 40 % de las tierras del mundo —casi la mitad— están degradadas. Esto supone una amenaza a la biodiversidad, pero también a la seguridad alimentaria. Las cifras lo dejan bien claro: el 90 % de la población mundial pasa hambre; es decir, más de 700 millones de personas, por no hablar de los cientos de miles de desplazados y de refugiados por la desertificación y por el cambio climático.

    El derecho a la alimentación es fundamental. Señorías, no podemos estar hablando aquí de las sequías y de la desertificación, pero luego intentar retrasar y retardar las normas que protegen contra la degradación de los suelos o que protegen la biodiversidad. No podemos hablar aquí de las cifras, pero después querer ser más laxos con las leyes que luchan contra eso.

    Por eso, señorías, como dijo el Tribunal de Cuentas, como dijo Naciones Unidas y como ha dicho el Consejo, necesitamos un plan ambicioso, transversal, que se coordine con otras Convenciones de las Naciones Unidas, con presupuesto y con objetivos, sin más demora.

    		  
       

    		 

      Manuela Ripa (PPE). – Herr Präsident! Die Wüstenbildung ist eines der drängendsten Probleme unserer Zeit – nicht nur etwa in Afrika oder in Asien, auch in Europa. 13 EU‑Länder in Süd‑, Mittel‑ und Osteuropa sind nach eigenen Angaben bereits betroffen. Auch in anderen Teilen Europas schreitet die Austrocknung von Böden voran. Zukünftig könnten auch hier Wüsten entstehen. Dass es dringenden Handlungsbedarf gibt, dieses Bewusstsein war nicht ausreichend vorhanden bei der COP16 in Riad. Auch in der EU wird definitiv nicht genügend getan. Probleme sind voranschreitende Bodenversiegelung, Entwaldung, zu intensive Landnutzung, falsche Bewirtschaftung. Der Klimawandel mit Dürren und Starkregenereignissen beschleunigt zudem noch den Verlust fruchtbarer Böden.

    Daher ist es von entscheidender Bedeutung, dass wir in Europa neben einer effektiven Wasserstrategie das EU‑Bodengesetz verabschieden – als erster wichtiger Schritt hin zu mehr Bodenschutz und gegen Wüstenbildung. Bei der Wüstenbildung ist es wie beim Klimawandel. Es ist viel kostengünstiger und einfacher, jetzt Gegenmaßnahmen zu ergreifen, als die Dinge umzukehren, wenn der Schaden schon eingetreten ist. Denn dann ist es zu spät.

    		  
       

    		 

      Jean-Marc Germain (S&D). – Monsieur le Président, mes chers collègues, Bakou, Cali, Riyad, les différentes COP se suivent et se ressemblent. Elles sont toujours utiles par leur existence même, mais jamais à la hauteur: 40 % des sols seraient dégradés dans le monde et 75 % de la population mondiale en sera affectée d’ici à 2050, 75 %. On le sait, les plus vulnérables en sont les premières victimes.

    Appelons un chat un chat: cette COP fut une déception. Et si l’Europe a fait preuve de volontarisme sur la promotion de la résilience à la sécheresse, son rôle a été plus ambigu: en s’opposant à un protocole juridiquement contraignant sur la sécheresse, en portant insuffisamment les pratiques agricoles durables et par une contribution financière insuffisante. Le Partenariat mondial de résilience à la sécheresse et ses 12 milliards de promesses a le mérite d’exister. Mais c’est une goutte d’eau, si je puis dire, par rapport aux 2 500 milliards nécessaires pour restaurer le milliard d’hectares de terres dégradées.

    Alors que Donald Trump vient de sortir de l’accord sur le climat, faisons preuve de leadership. Allons en Mongolie pour la COP17 avec des propositions et des aides concrètes, faute de quoi la planète et les générations futures ne nous le pardonneront pas.

    		  
       

    		 

      Dan-Ştefan Motreanu (PPE). – Doamnă comisară, domnule președinte, stimați colegi, deșertificarea afectează deja 13 state membre, iar seceta cauzează pierderi de 9 miliarde de euro anual. Doar în România, 400 de mii de hectare sunt afectate de deșertificare. Adoptarea Regulamentului privind restaurarea naturii impune statelor membre să refacă 20 % din terenurile degradate până în 2030.

    Din păcate, regulamentul nu a fost însoțit de alocări bugetare suplimentare. Drept urmare, solicit Comisiei Europene ca în următorul exercițiu financiar să abordeze această insuficiență și să pună fonduri concrete la dispoziția țărilor din Uniune.

    Totodată, pentru menținerea securității alimentare, este esențial să sporim investițiile în dezvoltarea sistemelor de irigații inteligente, utilizarea apelor urbane reziduale tratate, captarea apei pluviale și construirea de rezervoare.

    În plus, rezultatele cercetării privind desalinizarea apei marine din programul Orizont Europa trebuie să fie accesibile statelor membre pentru implementarea acestor tehnologii moderne la costuri reduse.

    		  
       

    		 

      Stefano Bonaccini (S&D). – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, siccità, incendi e pratiche produttive che minano la fertilità dei suoli stanno innalzando il rischio di desertificazione anche qui in Europa, dove 13 paesi, tra cui il mio e altri sei nel bacino del Mediterraneo in particolare, sono colpiti da questo fenomeno.

    A rimetterci sono produzione e sicurezza alimentare, tessuto sociale ed economico delle aree colpite, e i nostri agricoltori, prime vittime dei cambiamenti climatici che qualcuno, addirittura ancora oggi, nega.

    L’Unione europea deve essere protagonista in questa sfida a livello globale, diffondendo nei paesi più a rischio buone pratiche – ad esempio, irrigazione di precisione o depurazione e riuso agricolo delle acque reflue – e con un piano europeo per le acque, e per l’acqua, che con più risorse per le politiche di sviluppo regionale e rurale – confido per delega nel Commissario Fitto – sostenga e semplifichi investimenti per una maggiore capacità di accumulo – dighe invasi, bacini e reti di distribuzione più efficienti – e autorizzi nuove colture che necessitano di meno acqua.

    Il prossimo bilancio pluriennale, allora, deve diventare l’occasione per migliorare alcune politiche dell’Unione e sostenere con i fatti, e non le parole, cittadini e imprese nel contrasto al cambiamento climatico.

    		  
       

    		 

      Ştefan Muşoiu (S&D). – Domnule președinte, doamnă comisară, dragi colegi, la nivelul Uniunii, deșertificarea afectează 8 % din teritoriu, așa cum au precizat și colegii mei antevorbitori. Zonele cele mai prejudiciate însă sunt cele din Europa Centrală, de Sud și de Est. Și țara mea, România, suferă din cauza acestui proces nesănătos al naturii. 40 % din suprafața sa agricolă este în pericol să se transforme în dune de nisip.

    De aceea, nu trebuie să permitem ca acest neajuns major să devină o amenințare la adresa siguranței alimentare a generațiilor viitoare de europeni. Acest fenomen grav trebuie decelerat prin strategii comunitare concrete și ferme.

    Trebuie să avem în vedere că micii fermieri din toate aceste zone de pe continent, afectate de deșertificare, sunt și ei în pericol. Nu au cum să se lupte singuri împotriva naturii și trebuie să le venim în ajutor. Au nevoie de susținere financiară europeană care să dubleze eforturile mai mari sau mai mici ale guvernelor naționale. Mizez pe înțelepciunea noastră comună și pe o reacție mai bine conturată a Comisiei pentru frânarea acestui fenomen natural periculos.

    		  
       

       

    Interventions à la demande

    		  
       


    		 

      Hélder Sousa Silva (PPE). – Senhor Presidente, Senhora Comissária, a desertificação é um desafio crescente que se coloca à União Europeia, especialmente nos Estados-Membros do Sul e, particularmente, próximos do Mediterrâneo.

    A falta de água, a exaustão dos solos e as alterações climáticas são, hoje, uma dura realidade nalgumas zonas da União e, além disso, assistimos também ao despovoamento de algumas regiões do interior por falta de atratividade e de competitividade.

    Portugal enfrenta cumulativamente estes dois problemas. As regiões do Alentejo e do Algarve evidenciam uma brutal falta de água, quer para agricultura, quer para consumo humano. E as regiões próximas da fronteira com Espanha sofrem de despovoamento.

    Em resultado destas duas situações, assistimos a fluxos migratórios do interior para o litoral, das zonas rurais para as zonas urbanas, que são verdadeiros problemas. Por isso, considero que o próximo quadro financeiro plurianual deve responder à desertificação e ao despovoamento e, assim, resolver o problema de coesão territorial que enfrentamos na nossa União.

    		  
       

    		 

      Seán Kelly (PPE). – (Níor phioc an micreafón suas tús na hóráide) … labhairt ar an ábhar tábhachtach seo, gaineamhlú an domhain.

    And depending on who you’re listening to, between 20 % and 40 % of land is threatened with desertification, particularly in places like the Sahel, Gobi Desert, South America. I think it’s good that the European Union are now emphasising that deforestation, in particular, has to end in any free trade deals we’ll be doing.

    Within Europe, we will be shortly discussing the next CAP and, obviously, protection of the soil, nature restoration are going to be key in that. And I would make one suggestion: give every farmer in Europe a minimum of 50 trees native to their own area to set on their farm. This would help to restore nature, protect the soils and be a small step to end desertification.

    Bímis ag dul ar aghaidh de réir a chéile, mar de réir a chéile a dhéantar na caisleáin.

    		  
       

       

    (Fin des interventions à la demande)

    		  
       

    		 

      Jessika Roswall, Member of the Commission. – Mr President, honourable Members, your interventions show how important it is for the EU to continue tackling the interconnected challenges of droughts, land use, climate change, biodiversity loss and water scarcity together for our economy, our security and our livelihoods. They show that we are not ignoring the difficulties we face in the current geopolitical climate. And as many of you have also mentioned, we are all affected.

    I just also want to say – and this is to César Luena – that the Commission is not ignoring this. And I just want to repeat one thing that I said in my first remark: the Commission is responding to the recommendation of the European Court of Auditors by developing a methodology to assess land degradation and desertification for the EU.

    Although we didn’t leave Riyadh with all our desired outcomes, we should still acknowledge and build on the important progress that was made. So now we need to keep up the momentum. We need to accelerate implementation at national and international levels, and continue our work to agree on the outstanding COP16 decisions, especially on droughts.

    Many of you have underlined the importance of water and the need to make progress on strengthening our water resilience, so I also want to say – as I said earlier, and I know you know – that the Commission has made it a priority to present a new strategy on this.

    I know Parliament is already making progress on its reports on this. I thank you today for your input, and I look forward to close dialogue with you, with your rapporteur, Thomas Bajada, and all of you on this important topic, and of course, on continuing fighting desertification.

    		  
       


       

    (La séance est suspendue quelques instants)

    		  
       

       

    IN THE CHAIR: CHRISTEL SCHALDEMOSE
    Vice-President

    		  

    3. Resumption of the sitting

       

    (The sitting resumed at 10:29)

    		  

    4. Cryptocurrencies – need for global standards (debate)


    		 

      Magnus Brunner, Member of the Commission. – Madam President, honourable Members, first of all, sorry I’m a couple of minutes late – I was in the office, actually, but I didn’t make it here on time, I’m sorry about that. Also, thank you for the opportunity to contribute to this debate on the need to agree on global policy standards for crypto. As you may well know, these standards, of course, do exist and have been agreed in international fora. Let me give you a brief overview of how they came about and where the EU stands in their implementation.

    International regulatory and policy organisations have been working on international crypto standards for a number of years now. Early on, there was an international understanding that crypto markets are global markets and are largely unregulated and pose, of course, also risks that need to be addressed. And then in 2023 the G20 unveiled the crypto-asset policy implementation roadmap, which reflected the policy and regulatory responses developed primarily by the International Monetary Fund, the Financial Stability Board and standard-setting bodies covering specific areas of finance such as the International Organization of Securities Commissions on investor protection, or also the Financial Action Task Force on anti-money laundering.

    The core of these international standards on crypto are the FSB recommendations on crypto-asset markets and activities, and recommendations for global stablecoin arrangements. The European Union is the first major jurisdiction to have reflected those standards in law. We have done this by adopting the regulation on markets in crypto-assets (MiCA), which has now started to apply, and we have also amended other legislation such as the Anti-Money Laundering Directive and also the Transfer of Funds Regulation.

    We are strongly committed to ensuring the global implementation of international standards. We regularly advocate this in the relevant international fora in which we as a European Union participate.

    Implementation of international standards of course is necessary, not only to ensure a minimum level of policy and regulatory convergence internationally, but also to ensure that jurisdictions follow a sensible common denominator in addressing the risks also posed by the crypto markets. This is particularly important in crypto markets, which are global in nature, of course – yes, everyone knows that, with crypto exchanges and platforms operating across borders and assets also moving on open networks that are widely accessible.

    The adoption of international crypto standards has so far been incremental. Indeed, jurisdictions have made progress also in implementing the policy and also the regulatory responses developed by, as I said, the IMF, the FSB and the standard‑setting bodies. Almost all FSB jurisdictions have plans to develop new – or at least revise existing – regulatory frameworks for crypto.

    Information gathered at the international level suggests that the majority of FSB member jurisdictions expect to achieve alignment with the FSB framework by this year, by 2025. And this is of course very good news. We will continue to support relevant international organisations to ensure that the momentum we have now in implementing international standards on crypto is maintained. And we stand, of course, ready to work with jurisdictions that wish to benefit from our experience with MiCA. This includes the US. The US has been heavily involved in defining, together with other partners, the international standards on crypto, and I’m convinced that the new administration is fully aware of the fact that a robust policy response to crypto requires also an international effort.

    We therefore look forward, of course, to continuing working with the US authorities as they consider their policy approach to crypto assets and related service providers, and we would view it as a positive development if the US were to make progress on crypto‑specific legislation that would provide greater legal clarity on the treatment of crypto assets and related service providers, while at the same time also addressing the risks we are facing. And we believe existing international standards should form the basis of any crypto framework, including, of course, the one in the US, not least because they ensure international convergence in this area and contribute to a level playing field.

    Our experience in the European Union has shown that ensuring legal clarity is the right way to support innovation in these markets, while mitigating, on the other hand, of course, also the risks we are facing. Developments in the crypto market since the adoption of MiCA have only strengthened the case for legal clarity. Whatever approach the US ultimately takes, we do hope it will ensure that innovation flourishes while allowing, of course, on the other hand, also bad actors to be weeded out.

    		  
       

    		 

      Markus Ferber, im Namen der PPE-Fraktion. – Frau Präsidentin, Herr Kommissar, liebe Kolleginnen, liebe Kollegen! Diverse Kryptowährungen, allen voran Bitcoin, haben in den vergangenen Tagen Rekordkurse erklommen. Der Grund ist klar: Die neue Administration in den Vereinigten Staaten ist diese Woche ins Amt gekommen, und sie wird sehr viel kryptofreundlicher sein als die Vorgängerverwaltung. Der neue US-Präsident spricht gar davon, eine strategische Bitcoin-Reserve aufzubauen und die USA zum Krypto-Mekka der Welt machen zu wollen. Dass Donald Trump es wohl ernst meint, sieht man auch daran, dass er selbst einen eigenen Meme Coin aufgelegt hat, der wohl nur ein Ziel hat: seinen Reichtum noch etwas zu vergrößern. Ich glaube, die Anleger werden nichts davon haben.

    Unabhängig davon, wie man zu Kryptowährungen steht, unterstreicht diese Entwicklung ein grundsätzliches Problem: Obwohl Kryptowährungen ein globales Phänomen sind, haben wir keinen internationalen Ordnungsrahmen. Ein Regierungswechsel in den USA führt deshalb sehr schnell dazu, dass sich die Marktlage rapide verändert und da auch der Verbraucherschutz, auch für europäische Anleger, massiv unter die Räder kommt. In anderen Teilen des Finanzmarkts, vom Bankensektor bis zum Clearing, haben wir uns aus guten Gründen auf internationale Standards verständigt. Die haben wir im Kryptosektor bisher nicht, und das rächt sich jetzt auch.

    In der Europäischen Union sind wir mit der Verordnung über Märkte für Krypto-Assets, der MiCAR, weltweit Vorreiter. Wir haben in der EU ein glaubwürdiges Regelwerk geschaffen, das den Wildwest-Auswüchsen wie in den USA einen Riegel vorschiebt und gleichzeitig Vorhersehbarkeit und Planbarkeit für alle Marktteilnehmer schafft. Es gäbe also bereits eine Blaupause für internationale Mindeststandards. Deswegen, lieber Herr Kommissar, sollten wir von dieser Blaupause Gebrauch machen und auf internationale Lösungen hinwirken. Dass das nicht einfach ist, ist klar. Aber wenn wir nicht anfangen, werden wir es nie schaffen.

    		  
       

    		 

      Jonás Fernández, en nombre del Grupo S&D. – Señora presidenta, señor comisario, sin duda, yo creo que todos podríamos convenir en la necesidad de esas normas internacionales para el mercado de las cripto. Así he entendido las palabras de la Comisión apelando a la necesidad de fijar esos estándares mínimos.

    Pero, ciertamente, viendo lo que estamos viendo al otro lado del Atlántico, yo creo que deberíamos empezar a reconsiderar los buenos propósitos y empezar a trabajar más para proteger Europa, en un tiempo en que Donald Trump e incluso su mujer emiten su propia moneda —como decía mi colega Markus Ferber— en los días previos a tomar posesión, mostrando poco respeto, en mi opinión, por la propia institucionalidad. Deberíamos recibir el mensaje en Europa, y yo creo que el mensaje que tenemos que recibir es que no podemos contar con la Administración estadounidense en los próximos años para llegar a ningún tipo de acuerdo mínimo sobre criptomonedas.

    Por lo tanto, en vez de apelar a los buenos propósitos en los que llevamos empeñados años, deberíamos tener una posición mucho más asertiva y ser conscientes de que ese escenario va a ser casi imposible y que, por lo tanto, tenemos que aplicar el Reglamento MiCA —claro que hay que aplicar el Reglamento MiCA—, pero tenemos que también proteger a nuestro sector financiero, a nuestros bancos y a nuestros seguros de posibles impactos de inestabilidad financiera derivada de las cripto más allá de Europa. Y debemos también acelerar la negociación para tener un euro digital en Europa que permita ofrecer una respuesta propia a las necesidades, al parecer, de algunos inversores.

    		  
       


    		 

      Marlena Maląg, w imieniu grupy ECR. – Szanowni Państwo. Unia Europejska dzięki wprowadzeniu przepisów MICA stała się globalnym pionierem w regulacji rynku kryptoaktywów, wyzwalając je tak naprawdę z szarej strefy. Należy docenić fakt, że regulacja MICA wprowadza obowiązek raportowania, zapewnia mechanizmy kontroli wewnętrznej oraz wymaga separacji aktywów klienta od aktywów dostawców usług kryptowalutowych. To podstawy, które zapewniają większą przejrzystość, bezpieczeństwo inwestorów. Co ważne, zabezpieczone są także interesy państw członkowskich spoza strefy euro.

    Kryptowaluty, jak wiemy, nie mają granic. Musimy sobie jednak jasno powiedzieć, że różnice między krajami znacząco obniżają atrakcyjność tego rynku i spowalniają jego rozwój. Dlatego konieczne jest wypracowanie globalnych standardów regulacyjnych. Unia Europejska, choć jest liderem w tej dziedzinie, musi uważać, by nie przyjąć jak zwykle zbyt restrykcyjnego podejścia, które mogłoby wepchnąć innowacje, inwestycje w bardziej elastyczne rynki spoza Unii Europejskiej.

    Jeszcze niedawno kryptowaluty ożywiały marzenia części inwestorów o infrastrukturze finansowej niezależnej od banków centralnych. Dziś te marzenia nieco osłabły. Ale kryptowaluty są i będą trwałym elementem globalnej gospodarki. Naszym zadaniem jest traktowanie kryptowalut jako narzędzi finansowych, które wymagają odpowiedniej regulacji, ale bliskich rynkom tradycyjnym, takich regulacji, które zapewnią bezpieczeństwo inwestorom, nie tłumiąc jednocześnie innowacji. Nie możemy przespać tej rewolucji. Przyszłość rynku kryptowalut wymaga równowagi między ochroną interesów klienta a umożliwieniem przede wszystkim dalszego rozwoju.

    		  
       

    		 

      Stéphanie Yon-Courtin, au nom du groupe Renew. – Madame la Présidente, Monsieur le Commissaire, aux États-Unis, Donald Trump se rêve en président de la crypto. Résultat, la cryptosphère s’enflamme, une cryptomonnaie créée à son effigie et une autre dédiée à Melania, le bitcoin qui s’envole et la démission du président de l’Autorité des marchés financiers américains. Pendant ce chaos, en Europe, nous avons fait un choix différent: réguler pour protéger.

    Avec le règlement MiCA, nous avons posé les bases d’un marché des cryptomonnaies sécurisé, imposant des mesures solides contre le blanchiment d’argent et contre le financement du terrorisme, comme par exemple la vérification des identités et le signalement des activités suspectes. Car oui, les cryptomonnaies ont des avantages. Elles offrent de nouvelles opportunités d’investissement, encouragent les plus jeunes à venir investir, et permettent un soutien vital face à des systèmes corrompus ou en zone de guerre, comme pour la diaspora ukrainienne.

    Mais elles ne doivent pas devenir une jungle mondiale au service des fraudeurs et des criminels. À ceux qui, en Europe, flirtent avec les leaders américains du bitcoin: savez-vous que leur véritable objectif est de contourner nos devises officielles, à commencer par l’euro, et de saboter notre système monétaire en Europe? Drôles de souverainistes. Comme pour l’intelligence artificielle ou la taxation minimale, l’Europe doit pousser pour un cadre mondial. Les cryptomonnaies ne doivent pas devenir un eldorado pour les tricheurs, mais un outil au service de tous les investisseurs 2.0.

    Monsieur le Commissaire, agissez maintenant pour adopter au plus vite des normes mondiales minimales. Il y va de la souveraineté de l’Europe, de celle de l’euro et de la protection de nos concitoyens européens.

    		  
       

    		 

      Rasmus Andresen, im Namen der Verts/ALE-Fraktion. – Frau Präsidentin! Seit knapp einer Woche gibt es den Trump Meme Coin – ökonomisch wertlos und für Trump‑Fans vor allem eine emotionale Bindung zu ihrem großen Idol. Der TrumpCoin ist eine Betrugsmaschine, das zum Teil auch ausländische Geld geht in die Kassen der Trump‑Familie. Während Ex‑US‑Präsident Jimmy Carter Ende der 70er-Jahre noch seine Erdnussfarm verkaufen musste, als er gewählt wurde, betrügt Trump auf der ganzen Linie. Aber der TrumpCoin ist vor allem auch eine Symbolik für eine andere US‑Politik im Bereich der Kryptowährungsregulierung, und das sollte uns Sorgen machen. Wir sollten hier ganz klar feststellen, dass Anlagen in Kryptos mit hohen Risiken verbunden sind und dass wir auch wissen, dass das Geldwäscherisiko bei Kryptowährungen deutlich höher ist als in anderen Bereichen.

    Der Mehrwert, der durch Kryptowährungen geschaffen wird, ist fraglich. US‑Präsident Trump öffnet mit blinder Deregulierung und auch, indem er Krypto‑Ultras in wichtige Finanzämter in seiner Administration befördert, der Privatisierung des Währungssystems Tür und Tor. Lassen Sie mich ganz klar sagen: Das darf nicht der europäische Weg sein. Ich bin froh, dass eigentlich aus den großen Fraktionen fast alle Redner auch Skepsis zum Ausdruck gebracht haben und deutlich gemacht haben, dass wir auf der einen Seite internationale Standards brauchen – ja –, aber dass wir nicht den Kurs einschlagen sollten, den die Trump‑Administration hier auf den Weg bringt.

    		  
       


    		 

      Pasquale Tridico, a nome del gruppo The Left. – Signora Presidente, signor Commissario, onorevoli colleghi, mentre negli Stati Uniti, con l’insediamento di Trump, il Bitcoin raggiunge valori storici e persino una moneta meme di Trump guadagna miliardi di capitalizzazione, in Europa il dibattito sulle valute digitali resta fermo, specialmente per quanto riguarda l’euro digitale.

    L’euro digitale emesso dalla Banca centrale europea rappresenterebbe una risposta pubblica, sicura e indipendente, a sostegno della nostra autonomia strategica ed economica rispetto alle criptovalute, che, a causa della loro volatilità e della mancanza di regolamentazione, non possono offrire un metodo di pagamento stabile.

    Questo progetto, però, rimane bloccato per alcuni paesi che mettono il veto e gruppi politici. Noi, invece, sosteniamo con forza l’introduzione di questo strumento, perché garantirebbe l’indipendenza strategica dell’Europa dai colossi stranieri, principalmente americani, che monopolizzano i pagamenti elettronici, permetterebbe la costruzione di un’infrastruttura europea per i pagamenti digitali, ridurrebbe i costi di transazione per consumatori e venditori e, inoltre, aumenterebbe la stabilità finanziaria.

    L’euro digitale rappresenterebbe anche una risposta cruciale nella lotta all’evasione, che ogni anno priva il welfare europeo di 824 miliardi di euro di gettito fiscale.

    Commissario, Le chiediamo un passo in avanti rispetto all’euro digitale.

    		  
       

    		 

      René Aust, im Namen der ESN-Fraktion. – Frau Präsidentin! In den vergangenen Jahren sind weltweit die staatlichen Möglichkeiten gewachsen, uns Bürger zu überwachen. Der Wunsch, sich gegen diese Überwachung zu schützen, wächst jedoch ebenso. Darum erleben Kryptowährungen wie Bitcoin einen solchen Aufschwung. Während der Coronazeit haben wir beispielsweise in Kanada erleben müssen, wie unliebsamen Regierungskritikern die Konten gesperrt wurden. Manche Betroffene hatten nach diesen Kontoschließungen nicht einmal mehr die Möglichkeit, ihre Mieten zu bezahlen. Kryptowährungen schützen durch Verschlüsselungstechnologien unsere Bürger vor übergriffigen Staaten. Gut so!

    Darüber hinaus wollen wir, dass unser Geld sicher ist vor staatlicher Manipulation. Immer mehr Gelddruckerei durch Zentralbanken entwertet das Geld weltweit. Der Euro hat seit dem Jahr 2001 um mehr als ein Drittel seiner Kaufkraft verloren. Darum wollen viele Bürger eine manipulationssichere Währung. Auch das versprechen Kryptowährungen. Im Übrigen: Wenn hier gerade davon gesprochen wird, dass Terrorfinanzierung und Drogenfinanzierung durch Bitcoin begangen wird: 90 Prozent aller Terrorfinanzierungen finden nach wie vor durch Dollar oder Euro statt. Wir setzen uns für die Souveränität unserer Nationen ein, aber genauso setzen wir uns ein für die Souveränität unserer Bürger. Wir trauen ihnen zu, für sich selber zu entscheiden. Darum wollen wir Neuerungen wie Bitcoin und Co. auch weiterhin zulassen, und zwar so, dass nicht Politiker, die keine Ahnung von diesen Dingen haben, darin rummanipulieren. Die neue Trump‑Regierung macht es vor: keine Angst vor Innovation, sondern die Chancen ergreifen. Technologieoffenheit also auch im Finanzbereich.

    		  
       

    		 

      Regina Doherty (PPE). – Madam President, colleagues, we have spent the last few months since I’ve been here intensively talking about the importance of innovation, and it is clear that, despite all of the risks it entails, crypto stems from a desire to innovate and operate outside traditional norms and structures.

    In general, legislators and regulators should focus on creating the conditions for innovation and sectors to thrive. But in this case, there’s vital issues of trust, consumer protection and there is obviously the serious potential for financial crime that still exists.

    And yet, on the other side of the Atlantic, we hear the promises of the new administration of the sector, even as the President’s own meme coins were launched and then crashed and lost half their value in the space of one weekend.

    I think there are serious questions that have to be asked about a situation where the most powerful politician and one of the richest men in the world can self‑enrich himself through a scheme while purporting to be in charge of the regulators of that particular innovation? And while these questions go unaddressed, the cryptocurrency industry will continue to face serious pushback by some of us in this Chamber and outside.

    The EU’s legal framework for the sector seeks to promote innovation while tackling market abuse and the very large elements of criminality, and its full implementation has literally only just begun, it’s in its infancy. So, I hope that when we eventually come to review and have an international standard, that our efforts will be used for that global standard.

    		  
       

    		 

      Eero Heinäluoma (S&D). – Madam President, despite the hurray mood in parts of the crypto world since the election of Trump, it’s important to look at the facts. I see at least three reasons to remain concerned about this bubble.

    Firstly, despite all the measures adopted, crypto seems to remain the favourite tool for sanctions evaders and gangsters, including cocaine cartels, North Korean hackers, Iranian and Russian spies and fentanyl smugglers. If we want to tackle these problems seriously, let’s hit them where it hurts. Secondly, as well outlined by the ECB, the recent rise in Bitcoin value benefits mainly a happy few at the expense of the many. From an investor protection perspective, this is far from optimal. Finally, in times of high energy prices and energy scarcity, investing in infrastructure to mine bitcoins is wasting energy.

    Therefore, it is good to have this debate. We indeed need global standards for crypto to tackle these challenges, and the EU should take the lead as MiCA and the AML package can give some inspiration. But we should go further and we need a MiCA 2 to close remaining regulatory loopholes, for example, around NFTs and decentralised finance applications. We count, therefore, on this new commission to pick up this role and push this agenda forward.

    		  
       

    		 

      Aleksandar Nikolic (PfE). – Madame la Présidente, comme avec Internet, le cloud et l’IA, nous sommes une fois encore à la charrette des grandes puissances sur la cryptomonnaie. 10 % des Européens détiendraient des cryptomonnaies. En France, ils seraient déjà 12 %, soit plus de 8 millions de Français. Et cela continue d’augmenter.

    Et vous? Votre premier réflexe, c’est d’avoir peur. Ce n’est pas de savoir comment investir dans cette nouvelle technologie, la fameuse chaîne de blocs, mais comment la réguler, comment taxer les profits de monsieur Tout-le-Monde et comment la contrôler. Car au fond, c’est ça qui vous terrifie dans le monde de la crypto: il échappe aux technocrates. Quand il y a une nouvelle technologie, immédiatement vous en avez peur et vous voulez la réguler.

    Nous, on se demande comment s’y adapter et comment en tirer profit. Nos préoccupations sont: pourquoi l’Europe n’innove plus et comment utiliser ces technologies pour booster notre compétitivité. Plutôt que de taxer, favorisons l’investissement dans l’industrie européenne et l’économie réelle, incitons les détenteurs de crypto à transformer les plus-values en actions dans des entreprises innovantes, faisant en sorte que les futurs Nakamoto ou Musk soient européens et créent des technologies de rupture sur notre sol. Soyons enfin un continent d’avenir. Oui, il faut rendre la crypto utile et pour cela, il faut se débarrasser des technos inutiles.

    		  
       

    		 

      Guillaume Peltier (ECR). – Madame la Présidente, partout, le socialisme mène à la ruine. Il y eut, certes, l’URSS, Cuba, l’Angola ou le Brésil qui se réveillèrent pauvres comme jamais. Mais aujourd’hui, c’est l’Europe que les gauches tentent d’asservir. Pas un jour qui ne passe sans que les politiciens de gauche n’inventent, en France ou ailleurs, une nouvelle norme, une nouvelle taxe, une nouvelle contrainte. Pas un jour qui ne passe sans que les vieilles gauches sur ces bancs ne hurlent contre le mérite, l’effort, le succès, le travail. Alors, je le dis à tous ces politiciens: laissez-nous tranquilles. Quand laisserez-vous respirer les entrepreneurs et les originaux de tout poil dont vous sabordez le talent?

    Le pénible babil technocratique de ce débat sur les cryptomonnaies est le symptôme d’une Europe en dormition, épuisée par la fièvre socialiste. Dépassée et déclassée, voilà l’Europe que vous proposez au monde, transformant la terre de Jacques Cœur en mouroir de l’esprit d’entreprise. Pire: à l’heure où le monde entier fait le choix de la liberté avec Donald Trump, Elon Musk ou Javier Milei, vous voulez nous contraindre à la relégation. Pourtant, l’histoire est têtue. En connaissez-vous beaucoup des gens de gauche qui, à la chute du mur de Berlin, se sont enfuis à l’Est? Le monde entier s’éveille et vous, la gauche, vous voulez continuer à dormir de vos vieilles lunes ou, pire, vous ronflez de vos impôts fatigués. Alors écoutez bien: nous ne voulons plus de vous, nous ne voulons plus être ni taxés ni spoliés, nous voulons être libres!

    		  
       

    		 

      Gilles Boyer (Renew). – Madame la Présidente, Monsieur le Commissaire, les cryptomonnaies gagnent d’évidence en popularité. Elles fonctionnent en dehors de toute législation financière et dans l’anonymat le plus total. Comme tout instrument de spéculation, elles feront la fortune des uns et l’infortune des autres, sans jamais contribuer à l’économie réelle. Mais n’oublions pas, et c’est notre rôle, que c’est avant tout à la puissance publique d’organiser la circulation des monnaies en s’adaptant aux nouveaux usages et de garantir la stabilité et l’utilisation de l’euro.

    C’est le sens du projet d’euro numérique, un équivalent à l’argent liquide dans un portefeuille numérique, émis et garanti par la Banque centrale européenne, à l’inverse des cryptomonnaies. Ce sera un moyen de paiement gratuit, sécurisé, accepté partout en Europe, même dans les zones sans connexion Internet et avec, dans certains cas, un niveau d’anonymat similaire à l’argent liquide. L’euro numérique permettra à l’Union européenne de préserver et de renforcer sa souveraineté monétaire dans un secteur des paiements de plus en plus numérisé. Les colégislateurs doivent s’y atteler sans tarder, au premier rang desquels notre Parlement.

    		  
       


    		 

      Catarina Martins (The Left). – Senhora Presidente, todas as épocas tiveram as suas bolhas e fraudes financeiras. Hoje, são as criptomoedas, uma burla disfarçada de investimento, que gera uma montanha de poluição sem produzir um alfinete.

    Sem surpresa e sem escrúpulos, Trump acaba de anunciar a criação da sua própria criptomoeda, que será regida pelas regras que o próprio criará como presidente dos Estados Unidos. Como em qualquer esquema de pirâmide, só os criadores, como Trump, sairão sempre cheios de dinheiro, mas, neste caso, dinheiro real, euros, dólares. Os incautos e deslumbrados vão perder tudo.

    Senhor Comissário, ao permitir as criptomoedas a pretexto da regulação, as instituições europeias estão a normalizar a burla, contribuindo para enganar cidadãos e, ao permitir aos bancos a constituição de carteiras de criptoativos, estão a criar um mecanismo crescente de contágio aos mercados, ignorando até os avisos do FMI. Na crise do Silicon Valley Bank, já tivemos um cheiro deste mecanismo.

    Sejamos claros: regular as criptomoedas tem de ser proibir as criptomoedas, impedir os bancos de as comprar, proteger as pessoas da burla, evitar a próxima crise financeira.

    		  
       


    		 

      Kateřina Konečná (NI). – Paní předsedající, vážený pane komisaři, vážené kolegyně, vážení kolegové, kryptoměny s sebou nesou příslib inovací, ale také celou řadu rizik. Miliony lidí v nich vidí příležitost, ale bohužel je zde i mnoho těch, kteří kvůli podvodům a nejasným pravidlům již přišli o své celoživotní úspory. A to vyžaduje od států a jejich institucí velkou opatrnost. Kryptoměny nelze apriori odmítat. Přináší nové možnosti v oblasti financí, nezávislosti i v investicích. Nicméně je nezbytné, aby jejich rozvoj byl ukotven v jasných principech. Jedním z těch klíčových je i právo občanů platit hotově, což považuji za základní svobodu, kterou musíme chránit. Nové metody oběhu finančních prostředků nemohou vést k zániku těch stávajících, které slouží právě jako pojistka celého systému. Kryptoměny a blockchain mohou ohrozit například prudký vývoj kvantových počítačů. Na toto všechno musíme být připraveni. Proto vyzývám k vytvoření globálních standardů, které zajistí ochranu uživatelů, jejich případné odškodnění v případě podvodů, transparentnost trhu, pravidla zdanění a zároveň respekt k finančním právům občanů.

    		  
       

    		 

      Kinga Kollár (PPE). – Tisztelt Elnök Asszony! Világszinten növekedik a kriptoeszközökbe való befektetések volumene. Ugyanakkor az nem kérdés, hogy ez a befektetési forma különösen kockázatos. Ezért az ilyen termékekkel való kereskedéshez nagyfokú pénzügyi jártasság és tudatosság szükséges.

    Legyünk reálisak! Egy OECD-jelentés szerint a befektetők kevesebb, mint fele érti a kamatos kamat számítását, így azt gondolom, jól tettük, hogy Európa megfelelő időben a szabályozás mellett tette le voksát, és globális standardokért harcol.

    Hiszen jól tudjuk a kétezres évekből, hogy a pénzügyi válságok nem állnak meg a határokon. Az áttekintő szabályozást az is indokolja, hogy a kriptoeszközök a feketegazdaság valutájaként is funkcionálnak.

    Ugyanakkor a túlszabályozást is el kell kerülnünk, mert az sem elfogadható, hogy a szabályozás akadályozza az európai innovációt, és ezáltal az európai vállalkozások lemaradnak a globális piacokon.

    Versenyképesség, prudencia, fogyasztóvédelem és a magas standardok globális kiterjesztése. Ez az irány, amit követnünk kell, de még inkább a pénzügyi ismeretek és tudatosság növelésére van szükség, mert ez a kulcs ahhoz, hogy az európai állampolgárok jó befektetési döntéseket hozzanak, és ezáltal növeljék vagyonukat, Európa vagyonát.

    		  
       

    		 

      Aurore Lalucq (S&D). – Madame la Présidente, Monsieur le Commissaire, chers collègues, parce que sans régulation, le marché des crypto-actifs, ce ne sont pas des monnaies, ce ne sont pas des technologies, ce sont des actifs financiers. Ce serait fait d’arnaques, de financements, de pratiques illicites en tout genre, dont celle du financement de groupes terroristes tels que Daesh. Nous avons choisi de les réglementer dans un climat hostile, violent, toxique, fait de menaces et de cyber-harcèlement.

    Il est donc cocasse de voir aujourd’hui que ceux-là mêmes qui nous harcelaient à l’époque et hurlaient qu’ils allaient partir aux États-Unis à cause de nous, se plaignent des pratiques actuelles de l’administration de Donald Trump, lequel a déstabilisé le marché avec le lancement de son «coin». Ils sont en train d’expérimenter ce qu’est la loi du plus fort quand elle ne leur est pas favorable. Donc oui, évidemment, comme nous l’avons toujours dit, il nous faut des réglementations au niveau international. Il faut aussi protéger la nôtre, se renforcer sur la question de la stabilité financière, mais surtout, par pitié, ne perdons pas trop de temps avec ce débat. On sait ce qu’il faut faire dans le domaine des cryptomonnaies. En revanche, on doit avancer en ce qui concerne l’euro numérique et la création de nos propres «big tech».

    		  
       

    		 

      Mathilde Androuët (PfE). – Madame la Présidente, l’essor des cryptomonnaies est un défi majeur pour nos États et pour l’Union européenne. Ces systèmes alternatifs, échappant souvent au contrôle des banques centrales, ne doivent pas compromettre un principe fondamental: la souveraineté monétaire des nations. La monnaie est un attribut régalien indispensable pour garantir la stabilité économique et protéger nos concitoyens.

    Pourtant, pendant que l’Europe s’interroge, d’autres pays avancent à grands pas. Les États-Unis, par exemple, ne se contentent pas d’encadrer ces nouvelles technologies; ils les soutiennent, les développent et les utilisent comme un levier d’influence stratégique à l’échelle mondiale. De leur côté, la Chine et d’autres puissances investissent massivement pour asseoir leur domination numérique.

    Face à cela, l’Europe ne peut rester figée dans une culture de la surréglementation. Certes, il est essentiel de garantir un cadre sûr, transparent et respectueux de nos valeurs. Mais réglementer sans agir, c’est accepter de subir. Nous devons changer de paradigme. Investissons dans les technologies numériques comme la chaîne de blocs, soutenons les entreprises innovantes et encourageons l’émergence de solutions européennes compétitives. Il en va de notre souveraineté économique et monétaire.

    Nous ne pouvons pas laisser des acteurs extérieurs imposer leurs règles, dicter leurs normes et nous asservir à des technologies qu’ils contrôlent seuls. Soyons ambitieux, bâtissons une Europe qui ose, qui innove et qui s’affirme comme un leader mondial. Oui, l’avenir de notre souveraineté ne s’écrira pas dans l’attentisme; l’Europe doit être forte, visionnaire et audacieuse.

    		  
       

    		 

      Adrian-George Axinia (ECR). – Doamnă președintă, un aforism care a devenit celebru în ultimii ani este că regulile fizicii se aplică indiferent dacă noi credem sau nu în ele. Parafrazând și luând în considerare propunerea de reglementare Markets in Crypto Assets (MiCA) putem spune că aceste monede virtuale vor exista, indiferent dacă Uniunea Europeană sau orice alt stat membru crede că sunt bune sau încearcă să le controleze total. Ceea ce nu înțelege Comisia Europeană, ține de rațiunea de a exista a acestor criptomonede.

    Li se aplică logica unei monede bazate pe încredere, a cetățenilor sau a piețelor. Or, apariția acestor monede virtuale este mai degrabă rezultatul neîncrederii în modul de funcționare a economiei și al sistemelor politico-administrative complexe. Mulți se refugiază în cripto pentru a-și proteja valoarea proprietății în fața inflației, a turbulențelor financiare și economice, dar și ca tentativă de ocolire a unui sistem Big Brother care vrea să știe la secundă ce face fiecare cetățean cu banii.

    În forma actuală, Markets in Crypto Assets va eșua tocmai din dorința prea mare de a intra în intimitatea oamenilor și de a verifica și controla fluxurile financiare. Exact cum s-a întâmplat și cu tentativa de interzicere sau limitare a plăților cash.

    Abordarea propusă de Comisie este deci mai aproape de China, unde tranzacțiile cripto sunt interzise, decât de un sistem financiar deschis spre inovație. Inclusiv în această privință, Bruxelles-ul ar avea de învățat de la noua administrație de la Washington.

    		  
       

    		 

      Cynthia Ní Mhurchú (Renew). – A Uachtaráin, criptea-airgeadraí. Forbairt mhór teicneolaíochta, gan dabht, le deiseanna dearfacha ar nós córas airgeadais níos ionchuimsithí, idirbhearta trasteorann níos tapúla agus féidearthachtaí réabhlóideacha trí theicneolaíocht bhlocshlabhra. Níor chóir dúinn san Eoraip neamhaird a dhéanamh de chriptea. Ach, ná ligimis orainn go mbeidh sé seo brea éasca.

    Tá fíordhúshlán ag baint leis na deiseanna seo. Guagacht praghsanna, gníomhaíochtaí mídhleathacha agus easpa cosaintí láidre do thomhaltóirí. Ábhair imní dhlisteanacha iad seo a éilíonn freagairt láidir shoiléir, ach, ag an am céanna, níor cheart dúinn rialú iomarcach a dhéanamh ar bhonn eagla na heagla. Má dhéanaimid nuálaíocht a thachtadh, tá an baol ann go gcaillfimid an borradh díreach céanna a d’fhéadfadh ceannaire domhanda a dhéanamh den Eoraip sa gheilleagar digiteach.

    Seachas sin, caithfidh ár gcur chuige a bheith cliste, ag féachaint chun tosaigh agus réidh le lúbadh mar a oireann. Tá rialacha ag teastáil a chuireann trédhearcacht chun cinn, mar shampla cosaintí láidre i gcoinne sciúradh airgid agus cosaintí do thomhaltóirí. Ar an gcaoi chéanna, ní mór dúinn an nuálaíocht a chothú trí oibriú le nuálaithe príobháideacha, trí chreataí solúbtha a chruthú. I ndeireadh na dála, tá deis ar leith ag an Eoraip anseo le criptea. Ba chóir dúinn an deis a thapú.

    		  
       

    		 

      Giuseppe Antoci (The Left). – Signora Presidente, signor Commissario Brunner, onorevoli colleghi, Europol ci segnala un incremento nell’uso criminale delle criptovalute nel riciclaggio di denaro e per la richiesta dei riscatti dopo gli attacchi informatici. La blockchain facilita trasferimenti rapidi di capitali a livello globale, offrendo ai criminali un vantaggio significativo.

    Nel campo della cibercriminalità emergono tecniche avanzatissime, che richiedono competenze elevate degli investigatori. Tali competenze necessitano di personale adeguatamente formato.

    Inoltre, cresce l’uso di criptovalute ancorate al valore delle materie prime, apprezzate dai capi criminali per la loro stabilità e facile comprensione.

    La mancanza di strumenti adeguati per il tracciamento delle criptovalute in alcuni Stati membri sta facendo aumentare le richieste di supporto investigativo a Europol.

    Di fronte a queste sfide – e conoscendo la Sua grande sensibilità – è essenziale un impegno coordinato per sviluppare standard globali e condivisi, al fine di combattere efficacemente l’uso illegale di questa tecnologia.

    		  
       

    		 

      Marcin Sypniewski (ESN). – Pani Przewodnicząca! Noblista Fryderyk von Hayek powiedział, że nie ma odpowiedzi, dlaczego monopol na emisję pieniądza jest taki niezbędny w dzisiejszym świecie. I gdy po kryzysie w 2008 roku chroniliście banki przed upadkiem, do którego pośrednio doprowadziliście, to programista czy grupa programistów, znani jako Satoshi Nakamoto, powiedzieli „dość”. Powiedzieli dość pokusie nadużycia, z której korzystają rządy i banki, dość psucia pieniądza przez jego emisję, dość fałszywemu pieniądzowi. I w ten sposób powstał bitcoin. Jest to najlepszy kandydat do stania się pieniądzem. Jest rzadki, podzielny, trudny do podrobienia, a przede wszystkim nie uznaje nad sobą dyktatów rządów i banków. Jest też antykruchy. I wszystkie te zakusy, żeby go ograniczyć, tylko go wzmacniają. I patrząc na te wszystkie proponowane ograniczenia, wiem chyba, jaka jest odpowiedź na pytanie Hayeka. Powiedział on, że najgorszym monopolem w rękach rządów jest monopol na pieniądz. I te dążenia do ograniczenia kryptowalut wynikają z tego, że są to niepaństwowe środki wymiany, które wygrywają z inwigilowanym, przeregulowanym pieniądzem dekretowym. Pamiętajmy o tym, że pieniądz powinien służyć ludziom, a nie – elitom.

    		  
       

    		 

      Luis-Vicențiu Lazarus (NI). – Doamnă președintă, stimați colegi, România a fost teatrul unor operațiuni financiare absolut tragice pentru poporul român în anii 90. Scheme Ponzi implementate de tipi care erau manipulați de servicii secrete și politicieni au reușit să devalizeze buzunarele poporului român.

    Ulterior, sigur, societatea a evoluat. În 2001 au apărut avioanele care au dărâmat blocurile gemene și, sigur, a început războiul împotriva terorismului. În 2008 a apărut Bitcoin pe fondul crizei din America, criză ce s-a transferat și în Europa, desigur, și ulterior criptomonedele au luat avânt.

    V-ați gândit, poate, că acest imbold al statelor împotriva cetățeanului de a bloca deținerea cash-ului a favorizat acest avânt al criptomonedelor? Și acum, noi vrem să reglementăm. A apărut acest regulament MiCA ce reglementează anumite lucruri, dar nu reușește să facă o diferență între oamenii care au rea-voință de la început și oamenii care într-adevăr vor să facă proiecte serioase în criptomonede.

    		  
       


    		 

      Lídia Pereira (PPE). – Senhora Presidente, mais do que exportar legislação, a Europa tem de exportar inovação. Mas vamos ser claros: não fomos pioneiros na tecnologia que suporta os criptoativos e devíamos ter sido, mas para criar o regulamento, obrigações e burocracias, aí não perdemos tempo.

    É evidente que os criptoativos precisam de um quadro legal. São um ativo financeiro, por isso, há mínimos de transparência e, muito importante, de proteção do investidor. Mas é também evidente que essas leis têm de garantir segurança e previsibilidade para quem quer inovar e investir.

    Se aqui na Europa não estamos a garantir nem uma coisa nem outra, como vamos defender uma regulação global? Primeiro, temos de garantir que o regulamento de mercado de criptoativos é bem implementado. Segundo, temos de apoiar a inovação em blockchain com a consciência de que é uma tecnologia que não se esgota em criptomoedas, mas que pode e deve ser aplicada noutras áreas. Terceiro, temos de perceber que criptomoedas são hoje ativos financeiros como qualquer outro.

    Tentar uma regulação global tem impacto na concorrência livre, na dinâmica do mercado e na liberdade financeira das pessoas. Não podemos viver num faroeste financeiro, quando falamos de criptomoedas, mas também não podemos aprisionar novos projetos, novas ideias e novos investimentos que criam emprego e oportunidades.

    Este já não é o tempo de desconfiar de tudo quanto é novo, é o tempo de confiar naqueles que inovam, que investem, que fazem futuro no presente.

    		  
       


    		 

      Nikos Papandreou (S&D). – Madam President, Commissioner, from this discussion I think the answer is staring us in the face.

    We have two distinct philosophies, one on one side of the Atlantic and one on the other side. The US is a free market, let it bloom, let’s have the $TRUMP coin and then we regulate. Ours is let’s regulate and see what happens.

    What’s happening now is, besides the criminal activities with crypto, it’s also used by poor people in countries with inflation. So they put it into crypto, a very unsafe coin, and then turn it back into their currency.

    What we need to do is to create the Spinelli coin, which is the digital euro, and to have our own digital crypto competing so that we can impose international standards with safe asset from Europe.

    We will not be able to regulate the huge space from the rest of the world, unless we have our own digital coin that people will trust in, not only in Europe but internationally. MiCA helps on that. The way we will impose international standards and MiCA is by having our own innovation and our own Europe.

    (The speaker agreed to take a blue-card question)

    		  
       

    		 

      Diana Iovanovici Şoşoacă (NI), întrebare adresată conform procedurii „cartonașului albastru”. – Ați vorbit de regulamentul MiCA. Aici avem o regulă în care se menționează că ofertanții sau persoanele care solicită admiterea la tranzacționare cu criptoactive, altele decât jetoanele de referință la active și jetoanele de bani electronici, trebuie să fie persoane juridice, să publice o carte albă, iar următoarea regulă este: să acționați cinstit, corect și profesional. Puteți să-mi spuneți, vă rog frumos – și în calitate de avocat, vă întreb – cum veți ajunge la concluzia că persoana respectivă acționează cinstit, corect și profesional, înainte de a fi în calitatea lor de ofertanți sau persoanele care solicită admiterea la tranzacționare?

    		  
       


    		 

      Angéline Furet (PfE). – Madame la Présidente, la chaîne de blocs et les cryptomonnaies sont nées d’une idée simple: redonner le contrôle aux individus, renforcer la transparence et garantir un accès équitable à des systèmes ouverts. Décentralisation, transparence et sécurité sont donc les valeurs fondamentales de cette révolution. Mais aujourd’hui, la chaîne de blocs va bien au-delà des transactions financières. Elle révolutionne la gestion des données, la traçabilité et la confiance numérique en transcendant les frontières et en appelant à une coopération mondiale. Cependant, avec cet immense potentiel viennent aussi des défis: fraudes, inégalités d’accès et manque de réglementations claires.

    C’est donc ici que réside notre responsabilité collective. Il faut bâtir des normes mondiales, non pas pour étouffer l’innovation, mais pour l’encadrer et l’amplifier. Ces normes doivent donc 1) sécuriser les utilisateurs; 2) préserver la décentralisation; 3) favoriser un cadre propice à l’innovation.

    L’Europe, avec des initiatives comme le règlement MiCA, a démontré qu’une réglementation, bien que partielle, est envisageable. Elle doit donc maintenant agir comme un pont pour initier un dialogue mondial. La chaîne de blocs est une chance unique de construire des systèmes plus justes et équitables. Ensemble, nous pouvons orienter cette révolution vers un avenir plus ouvert et prospère.

    		  
       

    		 

      Ondřej Krutílek (ECR). – Vážená paní předsedající, vážený pane komisaři, ke kryptoměnám musíme přistupovat konstruktivně. Od loňského roku platí nařízení MiCA a já věřím, že jeho zavádění do praxe probíhá bez větších problémů.

    V Česku se díky našemu poslanci Jiřímu Havránkové podařilo prosadit jak automatické právo na zřízení bankovního účtu pro kryptopodnikatele, tak osvobození od daně při prodeji kryptoměn po třech letech. Myslím si, že tímto přístupem by se mohly inspirovat i další evropské státy. Naopak nápady typu zdanění nerealizovaných zisků z kryptoměn, které slyšíme z některých zemí, bych opravdu nedoporučoval.

    Američané mají k regulaci kryptoměn odlišný přístup, a tak se domnívám, že dosažení globálních standardů minimálně v tuhle chvíli nepřichází v úvahu. I proto bychom měli být opatrní s jakoukoli další možnou regulací od nás z Evropské unie. Důležité je, aby přehnaná regulace a nepředvídatelné právní prostředí nemotivovaly startupy a další firmy k úprku z Evropy.

    Pokud se bavíme o blockchainu, je to technologie budoucnosti, která nabízí řadu praktických aplikací. Příští týden v úterý pořádám v Bruselu akci, na kterou bych vás chtěl všechny pozvat. Bude na ní mimo jiné představen i projekt Českého vysokého učení technického a půjde o inovativní blockchainovou platformu pro decentralizované vydávání dluhopisů pro malé a střední podniky. Tak se stavte.

    		  
       


    		 

      Adnan Dibrani (S&D). – Fru talman! Kommissionär! Kryptovaluta, som en gång varit väldigt nischat, har snabbt fått genomslag i hela världen. Det är också en digital revolution som öppnat upp nya möjligheter inom andra sektorer.

    Det finns en stor potential i blockchain‑tekniken som kan innebära vinster för till exempel offentlig sektor, för mer robusta och effektiva system. Just nu undersöks därhemma till exempel hur vi ska använda den här tekniken inom vården, för att kunna säkrare hantera och dela personlig hälsodata.

    Det är viktigt att vi främjar ny teknik när den kommer, men samtidigt är det viktigt att den nya tekniken har en viss kontroll. Teknik får inte användas för att skada konsumenter, för terrorismfinansiering, för penningtvätt och så vidare. Här har EU gått före och reglerat krypto. Men krypto existerar på global nivå och därav behöver vi standarder på global nivå, så att vi kan dra nytta av potentialen, inte hämma den, och se till så att tekniken används på rätt sätt och inte används av suspekta nationer för att skada konsumenter och våra system som vi håller så kärt.

    		  
       

    		 

      Diego Solier (NI). – Señora presidente, señor comisario, el Reglamento MiCA, aunque presentado como un avance hacia la regulación de los criptoactivos, representa una amenaza directa a los derechos de los ciudadanos.

    Bajo el pretexto de proteger al consumidor y garantizar la estabilidad financiera, este marco podría socavar la privacidad, la libertad financiera y la innovación. Imponer estándares globales en un sistema creado para ser descentralizado es, literalmente, ponerle puertas al campo.

    Medidas como la recopilación masiva de datos personales, requisitos de capital inalcanzables para start-ups y la prohibición de ciertos criptoactivos no solo ahogan la innovación, sino que limitan la libertad de elección de los ciudadanos. Además, la vigilancia y la supervisión excesiva abren la puerta a un control digital sin precedentes.

    Mi pregunta es clara: ¿estamos regulando para proteger al ciudadano o para reforzar el control de los grandes poderes económicos y políticos sobre sus vidas? No podemos permitir que este Reglamento traicione la esencia de las criptomonedas: descentralización, autonomía y libertad.

    		  
       

    		 

      Andrey Kovatchev (PPE). – Madam President, Commissioner, dear colleagues, the European tech sector faces challenges that create a perception of stagnation compared to dynamic regions like South‑East Asia and the US. The EU is a global pioneer in the introduction of regulations such as the MiCA, with the aim to protect customers, but without hamper the growth. Yes, we need global standards, and the EU must be in the lead of this introduction. But also, we need to wake up.

    Talent migration is a big concern, with 90 % of the EU tech workers willing to relocate to the US for better salaries and funding opportunities. To reclaim the position of Europe, we need innovation‑friendly policies, including clear regulatory frameworks and sandbox environments for start-ups that will promote prosperity and growth.

    The rapid development of cryptocurrency markets highlights the urgent need to educate people on how to navigate the evolving landscape responsibly. Without proper knowledge, individuals and businesses risk falling victim to scams, fraud, financial crimes or malign global players. Europe needs to act now and act fast, if we are serious about our fostering competitiveness, and to act together with the responsible crypto community and not in a war with them.

    Are we ready to take bold decisions to ensure our success or will we risk again being left behind as others seize opportunities which we hesitate to explore? Commission and Council and colleagues, we need to act now.

    		  
       

    		 

      Waldemar Buda (ECR). – Doregulować, przeregulować i zabić. Taka jest regulacja i takie są działania Unii Europejskiej w wielu sprawach. Tak było z przedsiębiorcami, tak było z rolnikami. I teraz dokładnie tak samo podchodzimy do blockchain i kryptowalut. Za chwilę się okaże, że cały świat na tym zarabia, cały świat się rozwija, a my nie traktujemy tego jako szansy, tylko traktujemy to jako zagrożenie. Dzisiaj największe aktywa w kryptowalutach mają Chiny i Stany Zjednoczone, a Europa zastanawia się, jak to ograniczyć? Jak to zwalczyć? Za chwilę miliard osób na świecie będzie miało kryptowaluty.

    W Polsce 12% osób w wieku produkcyjnym ma już kryptowaluty. Ja się więc bardziej boję tego, że wy będziecie doregulowywać niż że nie będziecie robić nic, bo to pewnie zabije ten rynek i inni będą na tym zarabiać. Oczywiście nieprawidłowości trzeba ścigać, ale rozsądnie. Dzisiaj jak w Polsce się próbuje to uregulować, to lobbyści obsiedli urzędy i instytucje i ciężko cokolwiek zrobić. I ci, co mają na tym zarobić, i tak zarobią. A zwykli ludzie niestety nie mogą inwestować i się w tej sprawie rozwijać.

    		  
       

    		 

      Caterina Chinnici (PPE). – Signor Presidente, signor Commissario Brunner, onorevoli colleghi, “follow the money”: è questo il metodo per contrastare davvero la criminalità organizzata, come l’esperienza investigativa e giudiziaria italiana ci insegna da oltre quarant’anni. E “focus on the money” è oggi il motto della Procura europea nel solco di quell’insegnamento.

    Quando il denaro si fa virtuale, le sfide per le autorità di regolamentazione e di contrasto si complicano, mentre invece si moltiplicano le opportunità per le organizzazioni criminali: decentralizzazione, anonimato, bassa tracciabilità, scarsità di controlli, possibilità di effettuare rapidi trasferimenti di denaro transfrontalieri e di creare catene complesse di transazioni sono solo alcune delle ragioni che rendono criptovalute e blockchain strumenti sempre più utili per la criminalità organizzata transnazionale e per le organizzazioni terroristiche globali.

    In criptovalute si pagano i traffici di droga, armi ed esseri umani e, attraverso le operazioni che le criptovalute consentono, i capitali illeciti vengono riciclati e reinvestiti agevolmente nell’economia legale.

    Per questo, è necessario regolamentare il fenomeno. Certo, con il regolamento sui mercati delle cripto‑attività, le norme sui trasferimenti di cripto‑attività e le nuove norme su antiriciclaggio e confisca abbiamo iniziato a farlo, però l’Unione deve continuare a sostenere l’adozione di regole uniformi e standard globali, per impedire alle organizzazioni criminali di sfruttare a proprio vantaggio lacune e differenze normative, arginare il jurisdiction shopping e, così, contrastare davvero il crimine economico e finanziario.

    		  
       

    		 

      Seán Kelly (PPE). – Madam President, digital and cryptocurrencies present an important opportunity for Europe, provided we establish the necessary safeguards. We must strike the right balance between regulating to enhance consumer protection and promote financial stability, while ensuring we do not hinder innovation or impede the financial inclusion that cryptocurrencies can offer.

    The MiCA Regulation demonstrates Europe’s willingness to lead in establishing best-in-class regulatory frameworks. Recent events, such as the collapse of the FTX in November 2022, have shown why proper standards are essential to protect our citizens from irresponsible, and even fraudulent, market behaviour.

    However, the new Trump administration’s pro-crypto stance provides an opportunity for us to reflect. We hear from the crypto industry that the US is now becoming a more attractive jurisdiction than the EU, with its regulatory approach expected to be looser than ours. On this I make two points.

    One: here in Europe we must approach this industry with the same competitiveness lens we apply to all sectors. It is vital to monitor the impact of our regulations and remain adaptable enough to amend them if needed, ensuring we maintain the right balance.

    Two: those in the crypto industry eyeing Trump’s America with enthusiasm might reflect on the Trump coin debacle before this week’s inauguration. Be careful what you wish for!

    Ultimately, the cross-border and decentralised nature of cryptocurrencies demands international cooperation to address clear regulatory gaps, as was stated by the Commissioner and my colleague Markus Ferber. So let us collaborate closely with our global partners to establish clear and enforceable global standards.

    		  
       

       

    Catch-the-eye procedure

    		  
       

    		 

      Niels Geuking (PPE). – Frau Präsidentin, Herr Kommissar! Die ursprüngliche Idee von Kryptowährungen, ein globales und dezentrales Finanzsystem aufzubauen, hatte schon ihren Reiz und war leicht faszinierend, aber selbst der Bitcoin ist heute eine Riesenmogelpackung: 60 Prozent aller Bitcoins werden gerade mal von weniger als 18 000 Adressen verwahrt. Wo ist da der dezentrale Gedanke geblieben?

    Auf dem Kryptomarkt insgesamt herrscht dann auch eine Wildwest-Mentalität. Die Meme Coins sind Betrug mit Ansage. Vom Hawk Tuah Girl bis zum TrumpCoin – es mangelt schlicht und ergreifend überall an Substanz. Am Ende versucht dann jeder, jemand Dümmeren zu finden, der bereit ist, mehr zu bezahlen, als man selbst investiert hat. Es ist ein Spiel mit Verlierern und ein modernes Beispiel der Tulpenmanie, getrieben von Profitgier und Dummheit. 2021 sagte Trump selbst noch, Kryptowährungen seien eine potenzielle Katastrophe, gar Betrug – zumindest, bis er selbst einen Deal machen konnte. Weltweit durchsetzbare Regeln ohne die USA? Schwierig. Dabei braucht es sie, und zwar vor allem für die Technologie und den Fortschritt brauchen wir die globalen Standards. Zur Not …

    (Die Präsidentin entzieht dem Redner das Wort.)

    		  
       

    		 

      Maria Grapini (S&D). – Doamnă președintă, domnule comisar, de teama evaziunii nu trebuie să ne opunem inovației. Sigur, criptomonedele sunt rezultatul unei inovații. Ați spus foarte bine, avem regulament, avem directivă, ne gândim la standarde internaționale, pentru că da, nu suntem singuri pe lume, avem o piață globală.

    Problema este că, din punctul meu de vedere, nu trebuie să obstrucționăm cetățenii în a-și folosi veniturile, nu trebuie să obstrucționăm întreprinderile să investească așa cum doresc, ci trebuie să avem reguli pe care să le respecte.

    Ați spus, domnule comisar, între altele, că doriți să scoateți actorii dăunători. Trebuie să vedeți și cum, trebuie să spuneți ce măsuri, trebuie foarte multă transparență. Nu știu dacă aveți o statistică în Uniunea Europeană, în statele membre: Câte cazuri avem de evaziune, de înșelătorii prin criptomonede?

    Dar trebuie făcute aceste lucruri și cred că trebuie să rămânem cu această inovație – criptomonede – și în Uniunea Europeană, însă cu o reglementare și o supraveghere corectă.

    (Președinta a retras cuvântul vorbitoarei)

    		  
       

    		 

      Alexander Jungbluth (ESN). – Frau Präsidentin! Ich glaube, diese heutige Debatte hat wieder gezeigt, dass es unterschiedliche Menschenbilder gibt, die in diesem Parlament hier vertreten werden. Und eigentlich werden hier in diesem Haus immer Debatten darüber geführt, dass man Dinge regulieren muss, Dinge steuern muss. Freie Meinungen werden über den DSA eingeschränkt, und bei den Kryptowährungen ist es auch das Ziel, das möglichst an die kurze Leine zu legen.

    Ich glaube, wir sollten hier an dieser Stelle mal feststellen, dass unser Menschenbild ist, dass wir freie, mündige Bürger haben. Und freie, mündige Bürger sind auch in der Lage, sich eine freie Währung zu suchen. Und aus dem Grund, glaube ich, sind Kryptowährungen genau das Mittel, sich gegen staatliche Repressionen zu wehren, sich abzukoppeln von Staaten und einer Europäischen Union, die immer übergriffiger werden.

    		  
       


    		 

      Vytenis Povilas Andriukaitis (S&D). – Gerbiama pirmininke, komisare G. Braunai, labai malonu pasveikinti ir labai tikrai geras sumanymas ir teisinga linkme. Čia vienas kolega kalbėjo apie Dievo laiminimą, tai jam priminsiu, kad Dievas ne tik laimino, bet davė Dekalogą ir davė virš trijų šimtų įsakų ir įsakymų. Taigi, reguliavimas prasidėjo nuo Dievo. Tai visiems linkiu to nepamiršti. Toliau, antras dalykas, noriu atkreipti dėmesį – taip, godumas, spekuliacijos, pinigų plovimas, visos šitos bėdos yra didžiulės. Prisiminkite, kas atsitiko su finansų krize, kai griuvo didieji bankai. Tuomet su privačiais lėktuvais važiavo gelbėtis pas ką? Pas vyriausybes. Kai įvyko didžiulės krizės jau su kripto bankais vėl gi buvo tas pats. Todėl išties tie, kurie per daug kalbate apie laisvę, atminkit vieną, kai būna skaudžios pasekmės, tuomet ir tenka ieškoti pagalbos ne kitur, o valstybėse ir reguliuojamuose bankuose.

    (posėdžio pirmininkė iš kalbėtojo atima žodį)

    		  
       

    		 

      Diana Iovanovici Şoşoacă (NI). – Am văzut că vă deranjează foarte mult că Donald Trump și-a făcut propriul Bitcoin. Bravo lui! De ce nu faceți și dumneavoastră? Dumneavoastră sunteți cu băncile, băncile opresive! Ca avocat, am văzut cum băncile și-au bătut joc de clienții lor, i-au lăsat fără case, fără pământuri, fără nimic, oameni care s-au sinucis din cauza băncilor – cămătari legali.

    În acest context, bitcoinul – vreți și pe acesta să îl monopolizați, să îi faceți regulamente, oricum, extrem de proaste, pentru că niciodată nu o să puteți să garantați că o persoană sau o companie acționează cinstit, corect și profesional. În fapt, nicio companie nu poate acționa cinstit, corect și profesional din cauza impozitelor voastre.

    Mi-aduc aminte, statul român, ca să mă oprească, în „plandemie”, să mai lupt împotriva măștii și a vaccinării, mi-au blocat toate conturile și mi-au luat toți banii din bănci și mi-au dat 30 000 de euro amendă. Așa, ca să fiu controlată, să nu mai am cu ce să-mi cresc copiii. Bitcoinul este libertate și …

    (Președinta a retras cuvântul vorbitoarei)

    		  
       

       

    (End of catch-the-eye procedure)

    		  
       

    		 

      Magnus Brunner, Member of the Commission. – Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, what an interesting discussion and God bless Europe, I would say. I would like to conclude maybe this discussion by saying that we, of course, remain strong supporters of international standards for crypto. These represent a common set of principles around which jurisdictions around the world can converge.

    These standards ensure, at the end, an appropriate policy framework for crypto markets allowing innovation – yes, that is very important – to take place while ensuring that risks are appropriately mitigated. And with this EU MiCA Regulation all of you and most of you were talking about, Europe is the first major jurisdiction to achieve compliance also with international crypto standards.

    However, the Commission is well aware that our efforts alone, or even a partial international effort, cannot ensure that the risks posed by these global crypto markets are adequately addressed, and it is therefore crucial that the adoption of international crypto standards continues to grow.

    The US, that was mentioned as well as a key partner, of course, in promoting the adoption of international standards. We therefore do hope that the new administration will act as a catalyst for further progress in bringing regulatory clarity to crypto asset markets in the United States. And we would expect that any new policy and regulatory developments in the US fully, of course, reflect international standards.

    Thanks again for the discussion and for giving the Commission also the opportunity to participate in this very important exchange.

    		  
       


       

    (The sitting was suspended at 11:48)

    		  
       

       

    IN THE CHAIR: SABINE VERHEYEN
    Vice-President

    		  

    5. Resumption of the sitting

       

    (The sitting resumed at 11:59)

    		  

    6. Composition of new committees

    		 

      President. – Following the creation of the standing committees on security and defence and public health, and the special committees on the European Democracy Shield and on the housing crisis in the European Union, the political groups and the non-attached Members have notified the President of appointments to these new standing and special committees as of 23 January 2025.

    The list of the committees’ members will be published online and in the minutes.

    		  

    7. Composition of committees and delegations
























    		 

      President. – Sorry. We have clear rules on what are points of order. Some colleagues are very generous when there are actual accidents or things that are happening. But sorry, we have to stick to the points of order, because on Monday we have the one-minute speeches so you can make your position on special issues you want to raise.

    But we are here exactly for points of order. And that is what I exercise, clearly to the Rules. And there is no discussion about what has happened yesterday or the week after, or 20 weeks before or later. Sorry, we have clear order to rule it like it is.

    (Applause)

    		  

    8. Voting time

    		 

      President. – The next item is the vote.

    		  

    8.1. Case of Jean-Jacques Wondo in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (RC-B10-0069/2025, B10-0065/2025, B10-0069/2025, B10-0070/2025, B10-0072/2025, B10-0078/2025, B10-0081/2025, B10-0084/2025) (vote)

    		 

      President. – The first vote is on the joint motion for a resolution tabled by five groups on the case of Jean-Jacques Wondo in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (see minutes, item 8.1).

    		  

    8.2. Systematic repression of human rights in Iran, notably the cases of Pakhshan Azizi and Wrisha Moradi, and the taking of EU citizens as hostages (RC-B10-0066/2025, B10-0063/2025, B10-0066/2025, B10-0067/2025, B10-0073/2025, B10-0082/2025, B10-0085/2025, B10-0086/2025) (vote)

    		 

      President. – The next vote is on the joint motion for a resolution tabled by five groups on the systematic repression of human rights in Iran, notably the cases of Pakhshan Azizi and Wrisha Moradi, and the taking of EU citizens as hostages (see minutes, item 8.2).

    		  

    8.3. Case of Boualem Sansal in Algeria (RC-B10-0087/2025, B10-0087/2025, B10-0088/2025, B10-0089/2025, B10-0090/2025, B10-0091/2025, B10-0092/2025, B10-0093/2025) (vote)

    		 

      President. – The next vote is on the joint motion for a resolution tabled by five groups on the case of Boualem Sansal in Algeria (see minutes, item 8.3).

    		  

    8.4. Russia’s disinformation and historical falsification to justify its war of aggression against Ukraine (RC-B10-0074/2025, B10-0074/2025, B10-0075/2025, B10-0076/2025, B10-0077/2025, B10-0079/2025) (vote)

    		 

      President. – The next vote is on the joint motion for a resolution tabled by five groups on Russia’s disinformation and historical falsification to justify its war of aggression against Ukraine (see minutes, item 8.4).

    		  

    9. Resumption of the sitting

       

    (Sēde tika atsākta plkst. 15:00.)

    		  

    10. Approval of the minutes of the previous sitting

    		 

      Priekšsēdētājs. – Ir pieejams vakardienas sēdes protokols un pieņemtie teksti. Vai ir kādas piezīmes? Protokols ir apstiprināts.

    		  

    11. Major interpellations (debate)

    		 

      Priekšsēdētājs. – Nākamais darba kārtības punkts ir debates par plašu interpelāciju, uz kuru jāatbild rakstiski un kurai seko debates, un kuru ECR vārdā iesniedza Charlie Weimers, Sebastian Tynkkynen, Kristoffer Storm, Jaak Madison, Carlo Fidanza, Adam Bielan, Alexandr Vondra, Patryk Jaki, Johan Van Overtveldt, Roberts Zīle, Emmanouil Fragkos, Georgiana Teodorescu, Geadis Geadi, Marion Maréchal, Ivaylo Valchev, Kosma Złotowski, Mariusz Kamiński, Maciej Wąsik, Dick Erixon, Joachim Stanisław Brudziński, Beatrice Timgren, Nicolas Bay, Jadwiga Wiśniewska, Ondřej Krutílek, Guillaume Peltier, Michał Dworczyk, Laurence Trochu, Şerban-Dimitrie Sturdza, Tobiasz Bocheński un Gheorghe Piperea Komisijai par ES finansējumu fiziskiem robežu aizsardzības elementiem, piemēram, sienām, žogiem vai citām barjerām, pie ES ārējām robežām (G-001002/2024).

    		  
       

    		 

      Jaak Madison, author. – Mr President, first of all, we are pretty many Members here on the last day of the week.

    First of all, in September, on September 20, 30 Members of the Parliament, so pretty many, have addressed written questions to the Commission. Unfortunately, we haven’t got any answer in six weeks. So, c’est la vie, and the result is that we have to discuss the question here.

    And I’m even more happy that on this very important topic, we can ask directly from the new Commissioner from Austria, who understands probably very well about the consequences of the illegal migration, about security, about the defence questions.

    The question was about the EU funds and is there any kind of consideration in the European Commission to finance also the projects to protect our external borders physically? For example, in February 2023, the European Council implored the Commission to immediately mobilise substantial EU funds and means in order to help countries bolster their border protection capabilities and infrastructure.

    Commission President von der Leyen has said that the EU will act to strengthen our external borders, specifically by providing an integrated package of mobile and stationary infrastructure from cars to cameras, from watchtowers to electronic surveillance.

    Unfortunately, we understand very well that it’s not enough to fight against, for example, the hybrid attacks by Russia, where they are using thousands of people as a weapon against Finland, against Poland, Lithuania, maybe next day to Estonia. And if those people are used by Russia’s hybrid attack, how can we stop to move them to Germany, to Austria, to the inside of the European Union, thanks to the Schengen free movement that we have?.

    That is why we had only two concrete questions: why has the Commission not yet recognised the reality on the ground at the EU’s external borders and moved to lift its anachronistic moratorium on EU funding for physical border barriers?

    And secondly, considering the ongoing hostile activities at the eastern border and the Member States have taken to constructing border barriers to counter the instrumentation of migrants, will the Commission change its approach and support Member States’ external border barrier projects financially via the EU budget?

    		  
       

    		 

      Magnus Brunner, Member of the Commission. – Mr President, honourable Members, thank you, first of all, for bringing this very important topic to the agenda this afternoon. Let me start by saying that I fully agree with the imperative of reinforced management of our external borders. It must be, of course, us and not the smugglers who decide who comes to our European Union and under what circumstances. This is all the more imperative given precisely the hybrid threats you mentioned. Our response must be as united as it is resolute.

    Coming from a ministry of finance for the last three years, allow me to start my intervention with some figures. In 2024, we saw a 38 % drop in irregular arrivals compared with the previous year. So it’s 239 000 compared with 386 000. And this includes a sharp 78 % drop on the Western Balkan route and 59 % fall on the central Mediterranean route. And that’s stated, as you mentioned, by President von der Leyen in her latest letter also to the European Council. This is the result of the EU’s active engagement with our partner countries, and it is working. We see that and we must continue to pursue these efforts.

    But, as you rightly mentioned, in parallel, we are very much aware that some regions are still under pressure, of course. In particular, there was a threefold increase in irregular crossings at the eastern border, in part as a result, as you mentioned, of the instrumentalisation of migrants by Russia and Belarus in their attempt to destabilise the European Union and undermine also our security. As a response, last month, the Commission issued a communication on countering hybrid threats from the weaponisation of migration and also strengthening security at the EU’s external borders. The Commission recognised that Member States can take proportionate, on the one hand, and also temporary measures to address the threat posed by both Russia and Belarus.

    Member States have the responsibility, of course, also to maintain law and order and safeguard national security. That’s pretty obvious. But they do so with the support of the European Union and also its budget on a European Union level. Those Member States bordering Russia and Belarus have recently received additional funding of EUR 170 million to enhance border surveillance altogether.

    This is just part of the broader picture of EU budgetary support to border management. All EU funding for border management has more than tripled over the past three multiannual financial frameworks (the famous MFF), with up to 7.7 billion allocated for border management and also visa instrument in the current 2021 to 2027 period. With these funds, the European Union is building one of the most advanced border management systems in the world and the largest share of this amount – that’s EUR 4.3 billion – is allocated directly to Member States under their national programmes.

    Also the EU’s decentralised agencies – Frontex, eu-LISA, the EUAA, of course, the asylum agency – they also play a key role when it comes to border management, and their budget for the current period amounts to EUR 9.8 billion. In the future, the strengthening of Frontex with increased operational capabilities, including a tripling of its standing corps, will also further contribute to supporting the Member States – because that’s what Frontex is here for – in addressing the challenges at the external borders.

    I would therefore argue that not only has the Commission recognised the reality on the ground, but it is actively also supporting enhanced border management with substantial means, actually. I would also underline that this remains a key priority for me and for the Commission in general. And we are committed to continuing to strengthen the EU’s external borders and supporting the Member States, of course, both operationally and financially, to boost border surveillance.

    I am also very keenly aware, however, that budgets are limited, and the EU budget, of course, is no exception here. It is essential to make the most of every single euro, channelling it to where it is most effective at the end of the day and has the biggest impact, of course. Given these considerations, the Commission has so far focused funding, where the needs are the most urgent and where European money can have a real added value. This has included financing for mobile and stationary units, for border surveillance systems and equipment, for refurbishment of border crossing points, new installations for IT systems, plus also, of course, the maintenance of the equipment. All this increases situational awareness on border control capabilities, which are, of course, crucial for effective border protection, combined, as I said before, with continued support and also continued deployment by Frontex.

    That is the picture of today: EU funding is available to Member States to provide well‑equipped and also modern infrastructure for a very high level of security at the European external borders and to help also combat irregular migration. These things must go hand in hand. On top of this, Member States can decide, of course, themselves to finance structures such as fences, for instance, themselves, while always ensuring, of course, respect for fundamental rights.

    Now, the next step – and this is very important what I’m going to say now – going forward, Mr Madison, and following the trend also observed in the last years, it is clear that the overall needs for border management must be reassessed as part of the preparation of the next multiannual financial framework. This process is currently underway and should of course not be pre-empted. We will, of course, take into account the border management needs we have for the next months and years to come, which must be considered in a holistic manner for the different needs, priorities and resources available, whilst always ensuring that measures are, of course, proportionate and also respect fundamental rights.

    The views of the European Parliament in preparation of that process are, of course, incredibly important. At the same time, constant engagement is necessary to achieve results on external border management, and the European Union will continue to deepen these comprehensive and strategic relations that it is building with key countries of origin, but also key countries of transit, including migration in the spectrum of key interests covered by these agreements.

    		  
       

    		 

      Lena Düpont, on behalf of the PPE Group. – Mr President, Commissioner, I’d like to address the topic of today on two levels: on a procedural one and on a content one.

    On the procedure, as a representative of this House, of course, I also need to underline the request towards the Commission to respect the timelines and, of course, to adhere to the timelines. There’s a reason why we set timelines for the answering of the questions, and I think that we can do more actually also to work together to come closer again in that sense.

    On content, as it is mainly about instrumentalism – where, by the way, the ECR had the rapporteurship in the previous term – I think the question here at stake does not necessarily reflect the dynamic in the policy field. The Commission, the Commission President, they are in close debate with the Member States concerned. There are proposals on the table, both with financial support and additional money, but also in the adaptation of the policy response.

    As a general remark, Europe is the strongest when we act together and we, as the EPP, will make sure to do so further down the road. And while I say that some here in the House need to accept that there is a thing such instrumentalism – that it is part of hybrid attacks, and it needs to be seen in the geopolitical context – other parts here in the House also need to accept that as well, because the very same reason why we are speaking about this cynical, state-sponsored and state-accepted smuggling business is Moscow and Minsk attacking – trying to pressure – the European Union.

    So at least actors, some here in the House, want to align closer with. I would call that cognitive dissonance, but solve that out on your own. Rest assured that we, as the EPP, will go forward working on a common solution as a European Union that is strong and proud of its roots and values.

    		  
       

    		 

      Ana Catarina Mendes, em nome do Grupo S&D. – Senhor Presidente, Senhor Comissário, Caros Colegas, fiquei muito preocupada com o final da sua intervenção, Senhor Comissário, permita-me partilhar isto consigo.

    Em 2021, quando se aumentou a verba para o Fundo de Gestão Integrada das Fronteiras, a Senhora Presidente da Comissão afirmou — e cito — «a União Europeia não financiará nem muros, nem arame, nem cercas». O Senhor Comissário terminou a sua intervenção a dizer: «vamos aumentar o financiamento para as cercas».

    E queria dizer-lhe, em nome dos Socialistas e Democratas, que estamos totalmente de acordo que é preciso gerir as nossas fronteiras, mas gerir as nossas fronteiras não significa violação dos direitos humanos, como temos assistido frequentemente.

    Por isso, as verbas que foram atribuídas — mais verbas —, para as fronteiras, para este fundo, não podem ser para as câmaras de vigilância, para as cercas, para os muros, porque isso é ao arrepio daquilo que tem sido a política de migrações da União Europeia ao longo dos anos.

    E, por isso, Senhor Comissário, aquilo que lhe queria dizer é que tenha em conta os dados que aqui referiu, que eu, ontem, referi na minha outra intervenção, e que são verdade: em 2024, houve um decréscimo da imigração irregular em 38 %.

    Isso significa, Senhor Comissário, que nós temos de continuar a estar atentos à implementação do Pacto das Migrações e ter uma visão humanista daquilo que é a imigração. Nós não vamos parar a imigração com a mão, como não paramos o vento com as mãos, é impossível. Os fluxos migratórios existem desde sempre.

    A Frontex tem sido, muitas vezes, acusada de violar direitos fundamentais e, recentemente, a plataforma para a cooperação sobre cidadãos não documentados alertou para a violação sistemática, nas fronteiras, dos direitos humanos destes cidadãos, por isso, aquilo que lhe peço é que continue a ser o guardião dos tratados e a tratar as pessoas com dignidade.

    		  
       

    		 

      András László, on behalf of the PfE Group. – Mr President, EU countries want border walls and other barriers against illegal immigration, and the EU should pay for it. The majority of European leaders demanded that the European Commission immediately mobilise substantial funding for this. This was two years ago and Ursula von der Leyen did nothing.

    What did the Commission do instead? They sued Hungary for defending the EU’s external borders. For not allowing illegal entry into the EU, Hungary received a EUR 200 million fine. In addition, they demand that we pay a fine of EUR 1 million for each and every day that we refuse to give up our efforts to keep illegal migrants out of the EU.

    European citizens don’t want a Christmas like in Magdeburg. They don’t want a New Year’s Eve like in Brussels or Cologne. Europeans want tough border protection on the outer borders of the European Union. The radical ideology of Brussels elites about open borders is a failure. It goes against the will of EU governments, it goes against the will of European citizens and it goes against common sense.

    Ultimately, European citizens pay the highest price for it. In 10 years, Hungary has already spent EUR 2 billion to defend the EU’s borders on the south. In the east, several countries are now spending vast resources to keep illegal immigrants out.

    Pay for the fence in Hungary; pay for the fence in Finland; pay for the fence in Poland and all other countries that defend our external borders. This was the demand of the European governments so that European citizens won’t have to pay with their blood.

    		  
       

    		 

      Joachim Stanisław Brudziński, w imieniu grupy ECR. – Panie Przewodniczący! Szanowni Państwo, od czerwca 2021 roku Polska, Łotwa i Litwa doświadczają kryzysu na swojej granicy z Białorusią, gdzie dziesiątki tysięcy migrantów i osób ubiegających się o azyl, głównie z Afryki i Bliskiego Wschodu, próbowały przedostać się i próbują przedostać się do Unii Europejskiej przy wsparciu władz białoruskich. Od 2023 roku dołączyła tutaj również Finlandia. Już bezpośrednio Rosja, bez pomocy swojego pomocnika, jakim jest Łukaszenka, tak samo próbuje wepchnąć na terytorium Unii Europejskiej nielegalnych imigrantów.

    Tymczasem nowe rozporządzenie kryzysowe, które jest częścią Paktu o Azylu i Migracji, odnosi się do problemu instrumentalizacji migracji jedynie z perspektywy prawa azylowego i jedynie poprzez zapewnienie bardzo ograniczonego katalogu odstępstw od obowiązujących przepisów, które mają być stosowane przez państwa członkowskie zaatakowane w ten hybrydowy sposób. Oczekujemy jednak, jako Europejczycy od Unii Europejskiej bardziej asertywnych rozwiązań, skupiających się przede wszystkim na bezpieczeństwie obywateli Unii Europejskiej. Rozwiązania takie powinny obejmować wzmocnienie infrastruktury granicznej, budowę barier fizycznych i modernizację systemu granic, współpracę organów ścigania i odpowiednie wsparcie Europolu i Frontexu z wykorzystaniem również narzędzi współpracy międzynarodowej, w tym skutecznej współpracy z państwami trzecimi w zakresie powrotów i umów o readmisji.

    Szanowni Państwo, chciałbym przypomnieć też o sytuacji, która miała miejsce, kiedy ta hybrydowa wojna Putina się rozpoczęła. Byliśmy świadkami w tej Izbie festiwalu hipokryzji i wystąpień zgoła kabaretowych. Przedstawiciele nie tylko lewicy, ale również PPE atakowali w sposób grubiański i skrajnie niemądry ówczesny rząd polski, rząd Prawa i Sprawiedliwości za budowę muru na granicy polsko- białoruskiej i za ochronę granicy zewnętrznej Unii Europejskiej. Ba, nawet został zdymisjonowany ówczesny szef Frontexu, za to tylko, że wsparł ówczesne działania rządu polskiego. Nie kto inny, jak ówczesny lider PPE, sam Donald Tusk, grzmiał, że migranci zwiezieni przez Łukaszenkę to biedni ludzie, których należy wpuścić, bo przybywają oni tutaj w poszukiwaniu lepszego życia.

    Europosłowie Platformy Obywatelskiej, którzy dzisiaj zasiadają w tej Izbie, pajacowali na granicy, atakując werbalnie funkcjonariuszy polskiej Straży Granicznej, policji czy wojska. A dzisiaj jesteśmy świadkami cudu. Nie kto inny, a ten sam Donald Tusk wczoraj z tego miejsca mówi, że najważniejsze jest bezpieczeństwo i wzywa do ochrony granic zewnętrznych.

    Szanowni Państwo, jego kolega, pan Max Weber z tego miejsca gratuluje Tuskowi odsunięcie Prawa i Sprawiedliwości od władzy i wysyła premiera Jarosława Kaczyńskiego na emeryturę. Panie Weber, gdyby nie premier Jarosław Kaczyński, którego siła i wola polityczna powstrzymała ten nielegalny proceder, to te setki tysięcy migrantów miałby Pan dzisiaj w Berlinie, w Monachium i w innych miastach niemieckich. Jeżeli ktoś ma iść na emeryturę to Pan, Ursula von der Leyen i zabierzcie Tuska, dzięki Wam ma już wysoką emeryturę europejską.

    		  
       

    		 

      Fabienne Keller, au nom du groupe Renew. – Monsieur le Président, cher Roberts Zīle, Monsieur le Commissaire Magnus Brunner, nous avons eu ce débat de très nombreuses fois et, en dépit d’arguments logiques, factuels, et de statistiques démontrant que construire des murs aux frontières non seulement ne marche pas, mais que ce n’est pas non plus dans notre ADN européen, nous y voilà encore.

    Contrairement à ce qu’aime prétendre l’extrême droite, il ne suffit pas de construire des murs à nos frontières pour régler la question de l’immigration illégale. Bien sûr que nous devons protéger nos frontières, nous organiser pour les faire respecter, comme vous l’avez expliqué, Monsieur le Commissaire; nous nous y employons. Mais la meilleure gestion de la migration et la meilleure protection de nos frontières, elle passe aussi par l’application de ce pacte, qui n’est pas encore en œuvre. En effet, un volet majeur de la mise en œuvre du pacte est consacré à cette protection des frontières.

    Cela passe par la création de procédures accélérées aux frontières, d’un filtrage rigoureux, d’une base de données sur l’asile et la migration et de moyens budgétaires supplémentaires. Le pacte comprend également un volet de coopération avec les États tiers afin de prévenir les départs irréguliers, de lutter contre le trafic des migrants, de coopérer en matière de réadmission et de promouvoir des voies d’accès légales. Ce sont ces mesures novatrices que nous devons financer avec le budget européen.

    Ce budget doit être utilisé pour rassembler. Il doit être mis au service des citoyens et de la solidarité. Le budget européen, chers collègues, doit construire des ponts, pas des murs.

    		  
       

    		 

      Mélissa Camara, au nom du groupe Verts/ALE. – Monsieur le Président, Monsieur le Commissaire, chers collègues, barrières, barbelés, divisions. Là est l’obsession d’une partie de la classe politique européenne. Partout où des États ont dressé des murs, ils n’ont semé que souffrance et désespoir. Aujourd’hui, une soixantaine de murs parsèment le globe de cicatrices de béton. Depuis une vingtaine d’années, les barrières physiques se multiplient aux frontières de l’Union européenne, en Hongrie, en Espagne, en Grèce, en Bulgarie. Ce sont désormais 13 % des frontières terrestres de l’Union européenne qui sont clôturées.

    Les murs, donc, comme seule perspective politique, partout. Regardez ce mur entre les États-Unis et le Mexique érigé sous Bush, toujours plus haut sous Trump, plus de 1 000 kilomètres d’acier et de méfiance. Ce mur que, chaque année, des centaines de milliers de personnes cherchent à franchir, poussées par l’espoir d’une vie meilleure. Et ici, en Europe, c’est la même histoire. Ceuta et Melilla, par exemple. Une porte close, des regards détournés. Ces barrières ne résolvent rien. Elles brisent des vies, elles éteignent les rêves et tuent. Souvenons-nous du 24 juin 2022 à Melilla: le gaz lacrymogène, les balles en caoutchouc, des migrants piégés entre les clôtures, blessés, abandonnés, sans soins… 23 vies fauchées. Et combien d’autres en Europe?

    Les murs n’arrêtent pas les pas. Ils allongent les routes. Ils poussent les exilés vers des chemins plus périlleux où l’ombre de la traite les guette. Les murs ne stoppent pas non plus les catastrophes humanitaires et climatiques, les guerres, les persécutions qui ont lieu partout dans le monde. Je l’ai dit hier dans une autre intervention et je souhaite le rappeler aujourd’hui: personne ne quitte son pays, ses repères, sa famille et ses proches par choix. Les murs ne protègent pas, ils séparent, ils creusent des fossés entre les peuples. Ils nourrissent la peur et la haine.

    Puisque les murs ne suffisent pas, désormais, des caméras, des drones de surveillance et tout un arsenal numérique sont déployés aux frontières de l’Europe. Mais les gens continueront d’essayer. Leur permettre de franchir les frontières n’est ici qu’une question d’humanité et de solidarité.

    Cette Europe forteresse n’est pas la mienne. Mon Europe est celle d’un accueil digne et inconditionnel, celle des droits humains et de l’égalité. Jamais nous n’accepterons la surenchère des moyens sécuritaires contre les personnes exilées, comme la droite et l’extrême droite de ce Parlement le réclament. Des milliards qui partent en fumée chaque année, pour quelle protection? Pour quel résultat, sinon la mort et le désespoir? Cessons enfin l’apathie morale. L’Europe doit choisir l’humanité, la solidarité, les ponts et refuser les murs.

    		  
       

    		 

      Christine Anderson, im Namen der ESN-Fraktion. – Herr Präsident! Europa wird angegriffen – nicht durch Panzer oder Raketen, sondern durch den Migrantenansturm auf unsere Grenzen, der als Waffe gegen uns eingesetzt wird. Und das funktioniert, weil wir uns von linken Spinnern haben einreden lassen, Pushbacks seien illegal. Pushbacks – also das konsequente Zurückweisen von Migranten an den Grenzen – sind aber das effektivste Mittel, um illegale Grenzübertritte zu verhindern und diesen Angriff auf unsere Heimatländer abzuwehren.

    Dass wir sie nicht nutzen dürfen, verdanken wir einer massiven Lobbyarbeit von Pro-Migrations-NGOs, finanziert von exzentrischen Milliardären, die sich als moralische Instanz aufspielen. Tatsächlich aber gefährdet deren Agenda nicht nur die Sicherheit Europas, sondern Europa an sich. Jedes souveräne Land hat das Recht, ja, die Pflicht, seine Grenzen zu schützen. Die Behauptung, dass dies rechtswidrig sei, ist eine dreiste Lüge, die Europa jeder Möglichkeit der Selbstverteidigung beraubt.

    Und natürlich brauchen wir physische Barrieren an den Außengrenzen – sie wirken, sie schützen, sind legal und legitim. Diese Zäune und Mauern sind nichts anderes als ein in Stacheldraht und Beton gegossener Pushback. Also bauen wir sie endlich, diese physischen Barrieren, und schützen wir endlich unsere Heimatländer und unsere Bürger.

    Auch Sie, Herr Kommissar Brunner, sollten doch inzwischen zur Kenntnis genommen haben, dass die politische Landschaft im Wandel ist. Ihre christdemokratische Partei wird bald Juniorpartner der FPÖ sein. Sie werden Ihren Kurs ohnehin ändern müssen. Warum nicht jetzt? Und wenn nicht jetzt, wann dann?

    Aber die nächsten Wahlen werden ohnehin zeigen, dass die Bürger keine Parteien mehr wählen werden, die sich weigern, die Grenzen zu schützen. Sie werden keine Parteien mehr wählen, die die Sicherheit der eigenen Bürger auf dem Altar imaginärer Rechte und Ansprüche von Millionen von rückständigen Masseninvasoren opfern und – mehr noch – sie ihnen erbarmungslos zum Fraß vorwerfen.

    Kommen Sie endlich zur Besinnung. Handeln Sie – und zwar entschieden und jetzt!

    		  
       


    		 

      Murielle Laurent (S&D). – Monsieur le Président, Monsieur le Commissaire, chers collègues, «structures physiques de protection des frontières», il s’agit là du titre de ce débat. Ce n’est en réalité que du verbiage politiquement correct pour parler de murs, de barrières, de barbelés. Cette sémantique nous renvoie à une période bien sombre de notre histoire.

    La Communauté européenne a été bâtie sur un idéal de paix, d’union et d’ouverture. Notre but n’est pas d’ériger des murs, mais de les faire tomber, comme ce fut le cas le 9 novembre 1989 avec la chute du mur de Berlin. Financer de telles infrastructures serait une insulte à la construction européenne. Plutôt que de construire des murs, nous devrions consacrer notre budget à défendre la démocratie, menacée par les populistes et non par les migrants. Comme je l’ai dit hier, ici même, lors du débat sur les liens entre la criminalité et la migration: il n’y a qu’en assumant une migration positive, en mettant en place des voies légales de migration et en engageant des partenariats sérieux avec les autres pays que nous pourrons y parvenir. Non, ce ne sont pas des idioties, c’est du bon sens. Le respect des droits fondamentaux, c’est du bon sens.

    		  
       

    		 

      France Jamet (PfE). – Monsieur le Président, 30 000 personnes. 30 000 personnes sont mortes en tentant de traverser la Méditerranée, à la poursuite d’un eldorado fictif, à la poursuite d’un eldorado que vous leur avez vendu. Ces morts tragiques, elles ne sont pas à mettre sur le compte de la lutte contre l’immigration illégale, mais sur celui de votre idéologie sans-frontiériste, des pompes aspirantes que vous avez mises en place et de votre mansuétude vis-à-vis des réseaux mafieux de passeurs. On voit d’ailleurs à Mayotte, sur notre sol, aujourd’hui, le résultat de cette politique du laissez-faire.

    Alors c’est vrai, construire des infrastructures pour stopper cette pression migratoire, qui pèse sur nos comptes publics, notre économie et la sécurité de nos compatriotes, ne sera pas suffisant sans un arsenal juridique et la volonté politique. Pour cela, il faut d’abord avoir le courage de dire: «Sachez que si vous entrez illégalement sur notre territoire, ce sera l’expulsion et le retour.»

    		  
       


       

    Brīvais mikrofons

    		  
       


    		 

      Bogdan Rzońca (ECR). – Panie Przewodniczący! Chciałem zabrać głos, żeby oddać hołd 21 letniemu Mateuszowi Sitkowi. Polski żołnierz, 21 letni żołnierz, został zabity przez bandytów na granicy polsko-białoruskiej. Zabity, zamordowany. I chcę o tym tu powiedzieć, bo wtedy, kiedy my, Polacy, broniliśmy granicy Unii Europejskiej, kiedy Putin i Łukaszenka wpychał uchodźców do Polski, prowadząc wojnę hybrydową, wy świetnie tu bawiliście się w Parlamencie Europejskim na fałszywym filmie polskiej reżyserki, która ośmieszała polską policję, polskich żołnierzy, tych wszystkich, którzy bronili granicy Unii Europejskiej.

    Musicie się za to wstydzić. Będę wam o tym zawsze przypominał, dlatego że dzisiaj oczywiście ta debata jest ważna, cieszę się, że komisarz przyjął takie, a nie inne stanowisko, ale wołaliśmy o te pieniądze na granicy, o to bezpieczeństwo w poprzednich latach i się nie udawało. A wczoraj oklaskiwaliście Donalda Tuska, który tutaj, w Brukseli, powiedział tak: To, co robi polski rząd Prawa i Sprawiedliwości, to szpetna propaganda. A myśmy po prostu zwyczajnie bronili granicy Unii Europejskiej. (przewodniczący odebrał mówcy głos)

    (Przewodniczący przerwał mówcy)

    		  
       

    		 

      Siegbert Frank Droese (ESN). – Herr Präsident! Ich hatte selber die Gelegenheit, als Bundestagsabgeordneter die litauische Außengrenze, die bulgarische Außengrenze zu besuchen, und es gab immer Kritik an den Finanzierungsmöglichkeiten durch die EU, dass eben zu viel humanitäre Maßnahmen gefördert wurden, aber kein robuster Grenzschutz. Insofern sind die Ausführungen von Politkommissar Brunner ein kleiner Fortschritt.

    Alleine mir fehlt der Glaube an den Willen. Wir brauchen den Willen zur Festung Europa. Wir brauchen einen, wenn Sie so wollen, neuen Eisernen Vorhang an den Außengrenzen Europas. Aber wir brauchen auch im Inneren Europas Ordnung. Wir werden daher nicht umhin kommen, Millionen von Straftätern und illegalen Migranten auszuweisen. Also wir brauchen millionenfache Remigration innerhalb Europas.

    Und das ist leider in Ihren Worten, Herr Politkommissar Brunner, überhaupt nicht vorgekommen. Solange dieses Thema nicht zentral als Aufgabe von Ihnen angesehen wird, kann ich leider Ihren schönen Worten keinen Glauben schenken.

    		  
       

       

    (Brīvā mikrofona uzstāšanos beigas.)

    		  
       

    		 

      Magnus Brunner, Member of the Commission. – Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, honourable Members, thank you very much, first of all, for your interventions.

    Border protection, I think we all agree, is a shared responsibility. We know the dimension of the challenge, definitely. And we will continue to dedicate also massive resources to meet it in cooperation, of course, with national authorities, with the EU agencies dealing with the topic, and with partner countries of origin and also of transit, as I said in my former statement.

    EU funds will have a strong role to play in this, and the preparation of the next MFF will be the moment to reassess the needs for border management and how these can be better addressed, whilst always ensuring – and this is also very important – that measures are proportionate and of course respect fundamental rights.

    I stand ready to engage with you on this in the weeks to come. I think that is very important. And I stand, of course, also ready to listen to you all.

    		  
       

    		 

      President. – Thank you very much, Commissioner.

    The debate is closed.

    		  

    12. Explanations of votes

    		 

      Priekšsēdētājs. – Nākamais darba kārtības punkts bija paredzēts balsojumu skaidrojumi, bet tā kā neviens balsojuma skaidrojums nav saņemts, tad pāreju pie šīs sēdes nobeiguma.

    		  

    13. Approval of the minutes of the sitting and forwarding of texts adopted

    		 

      Priekšsēdētājs. – Šīs sēdes protokols tiks iesniegts Parlamentam apstiprināšanai nākamās sēdes sākumā.

    Ja nav iebildumu, šodienas sēdē pieņemtās rezolūcijas nosūtīšu tajās norādītajām personām un struktūrām.

    		  

    14. Dates of forthcoming sittings

    		 

      Priekšsēdētājs. – Nākamā sesija notiks 2025. gada 29. janvārī Briselē.

    		  

    15. Closure of the sitting

       

    (Sēde tika slēgta plkst. 15:41.)

    		  

    16. Adjournment of the session

    		 

      Priekšsēdētājs. – Eiropas Parlamenta sesiju pasludinu par pārtrauktu.

    		  

    MIL OSI Europe News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: In Case You Missed It: Capito, Colleagues Introduce Bill to Dismantle Unlawful IRS Direct File Program

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for West Virginia Shelley Moore Capito
    WASHINGTON, D.C. – Recently, U.S. Senator Shelley Moore Capito (R-W.Va.) joined a group of 10 Senate Republican colleagues—led by U.S. Senator Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.)—to introduce the Fostering Autonomy in Independent Returns by Prohibiting Redundant and Extralegal Programs (FAIR PREP) Act.
    This legislation would terminate the Internal Revenue Service’s (IRS) unauthorized “Direct File” tax filing program. By further barring the agency from unlawfully preparing taxpayer returns without Congressional approval, the bill would establish crucial safeguards to prevent future attempts to sidestep Congress.
    “Unfortunately, this program was a solution for a problem that doesn’t exist in a universe where free filing options are already available for millions of Americans. The IRS was not authorized to create this program, and the funds being used to prop it up should be redirected toward improvements for existing issues within the agency. By passing the FAIR PREP Act, we can reassert Congressional authority, demand accountability and oversight, and restore institutional integrity for the taxpayers of our nation,” Senator Capito said.
    BACKGROUND:
    In 2024, the Biden-Harris IRS launched the “Direct File” tax-preparation program without congressional authorization. Roughly 140,000 taxpayers utilized the new filing option – less than 1% of the estimated 19 million eligible taxpayers.
    Last year, Attorneys General from 13 states, sent a letter to the U.S. Department of Treasury suggesting that the IRS’s unilateral decision to create the program was “unnecessary and unconstitutional.” Despite low utilization rates and objections from congressional Republicans, including Senator Capito, the IRS announced that it would make the program permanent.
    The IRS estimates the program could cost up to $249 million annually, diverting resources from addressing longstanding agency shortfalls. Last month, a U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) report revealed the agency has already abandoned plans to hire additional staff and is reallocating hundreds of employees from its taxpayer-services account.
    WHAT THE FAIR PREP ACT DOES:
    Section 6020 of the Internal Revenue Code provides authority for the IRS to “prepare” or “execute” tax returns in limited, defined circumstances. This legislation would:
    Add a new subsection to Section 6020 explicitly prohibiting the IRS from preparing tax returns in unauthorized instances, beginning 30 days after the bill’s enactment;
    Name the Direct File program as an example of unlawful preparation; and
    Bar the Treasury Department and IRS from circumventing the rule by contracting with or awarding grants to third parties to operate such a program, unless explicitly authorized by Congress.
    Under this bill, longstanding programs and functions of the IRS would not be prevented, including the Volunteer Income Tax Assistance Program, Tax Counseling for the Elderly, the Free File partnership, fillable forms, and the correction of math errors. 
    Companion legislation was introduced in the U.S. House of Representatives by U.S. Reps. Adrian Smith (R-Neb.) and Chuck Edwards (R-N.C.)
    Full text of the bill can be found here. 

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Klobuchar, Cramer Introduce Bipartisan Legislation to Support Firefighters with Service-Related Cancers

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn)

    WASHINGTON – U.S. Senators Amy Klobuchar (D-MN) and Kevin Cramer (R-ND) reintroduced the Honoring Our Fallen Heroes Act. The bipartisan legislation, which passed unanimously (21-0) out of the Senate Judiciary Committee last year, would expand access to federal support for the families of firefighters and other first responders who pass away or become permanently disabled from service-related cancers. Currently, firefighters are only eligible for support under the Public Safety Officer Benefits (PSOB) program for physical injuries sustained in the line-of-duty, or for deaths from duty-related heart attacks, strokes, mental health conditions such as post-traumatic stress disorder, and 9/11 related illnesses.

    The legislation is being introduced in honor of Michael Paidar, a St. Paul fire captain who died of an aggressive form of Acute Myeloid Leukemia on August 26, 2020 while still working for the fire department. In 2021, after strong advocacy from the Paidar family, the Minnesota Department of Public Safety awarded line-of-duty benefits to Captain Paidar’s widow Julie. This was the first time that a firefighter’s family had received benefits for cancer incurred in the line-of-duty through Minnesota’s state Public Safety Officer Benefits program. The Honoring Our Fallen Heroes Act would ensure that firefighters and other first responders across the country are eligible to receive similar benefits under the federal PSOB program. 

    This legislation is co-sponsored by Senators Banks (R-IN), Barrasso (R-WY), Blackburn (R-TN), Blumenthal (D-CT), Coons (D-DE), Cornyn (R-TX), Cruz (R-TX), Duckworth (D-IL), Durbin (D-IL), Fetterman (D-PA), Fischer (R-NE), Graham (R-SC), Hirono (D-HI), Hoeven (R-ND), Justice (R-WV), Kelly (D-AZ), Markey (D-MA), Padilla (D-CA), Rounds (R-SD), Schiff (D-CA), Shaheen (D-NH), Sheehy (R-MT), Smith (D-MN), Warner (D-VA), Warren (D-MA), Welch (D-VT), Whitehouse (D-RI), and Wyden (D-OR). 

    “As we are seeing in California and throughout the country, our firefighters put their lives on the line every day to keep us safe, often exposing themselves to carcinogens that can have lethal long-term effects. It’s unacceptable that firefighters who succumb to cancer from work-related exposure or become permanently and totally disabled don’t receive the same treatment as others who die in the line of duty,” said Klobuchar. “That’s why I’m working with Senator Cramer to ensure that firefighters get the support they deserve. Our bipartisan legislation will honor the memory and sacrifice of St. Paul Fire Department Captain Mike Paidar and so many others who risk their lives in service of their communities.”

    “Our first responders epitomize courage and selfless sacrifice, confronting both the immediate perils of their duty and lingering health risks associated with their service,” said Cramer. “The exposure to dangerous carcinogens happens on our behalf. When these heroes make the ultimate sacrifice, their families should not bear these burdens alone.”

    “Firefighters and first responders put their lives on the line without a second thought to protect California communities from the devastating Southern California wildfires,” said Padilla. “When they sacrifice their lives or face severe disabilities due to service-related cancers, we have a shared duty to help get their families back on their feet.”

    “Our first responders risk everything for us – from the front lines of wildfires to the unseen lines of duty that keep our communities safe. When they lose their lives to service-related cancers, their families deserve the full measure of support they’ve earned. No one who has lost so much should be left to face hardship alone,” said Schiff.

    The Public Safety Officers’ Benefits (PSOB) program provides benefits to the survivors of fire fighters; law enforcement officers; and other first responders who are killed as the result of injuries sustained in the line of duty. The program also provides disability benefits where first responders become permanently or totally disabled. The Public Safety Officers’ Educational Assistance (PSOEA) program, a component of the PSOB program, provides higher-education assistance to the children and spouses of public safety officers killed or permanently disabled in the line of duty. The PSOB and PSOEA programs are administered by the Department of Justice’s Bureau of Justice Assistance (BJA).

    The Honoring our Fallen Heroes Act would expand access to federal support for the families of firefighters and first responders who pass away from cancer caused by carcinogenic exposure during their service. The bill would also extend disability benefits in cases where these first responders become permanently and totally disabled due to cancer.

    The legislation is endorsed by the International Association of Fire Fighters (IAFF), as well as the Association of State Criminal Investigative Agencies (ASCIA); Congressional Fire Services Institute (CFSI); Federal Law Enforcement Officers Association (FLEOA); Fraternal Order of Police (FOP); International Association of Fire Chiefs (IAFC); Major County Sheriffs of America (MCSA); Metropolitan Fire Chiefs Association (Metro Chiefs); National Association of Police Organizations (NAPO); National Fallen Firefighters Foundation (NFFF); National Fire Protection Association (NFPA); National Narcotics Officers’ Associations’ Coalition (NNOAC); National Volunteer Fire Council (NVFC); and Sergeants Benevolent Association of the NYPD. 

    “I’m grateful to Senators Klobuchar and Cramer for introducing the bipartisan Honoring our Fallen Heroes Act. Every day, our nation’s first responders selflessly serve and protect their communities. Unfortunately, through exposures on the job, many are also fighting occupational cancer. As our family knows firsthand, the lives of the first responder and their family are forever changed upon the cancer diagnosis. Mike loved being a career firefighter and paramedic. Losing him to Leukemia in 2020 was devastating not only for our family, but also for his fire family and our communities. This important legislation will recognize the sacrifices of our fallen, allowing first responders and their families to receive the PSOB benefits they rightly deserve,” said Julie Paidar, widow of St. Paul Fire Captain Michael Paidar.

    “There are thousands of firefighters across the United States that are in the fight for their life battling cancers that they should never get and hundreds more receiving a diagnosis daily.  In 2022, 75% of firefighter Line of Duty Deaths (LODD) were due to occupational cancer. Saint Paul Firefighters IAFF Local 21 will always remember Captain Mike Paidar as a fit, healthy man, a loving father, doting husband and a courageous firefighter, who loved his job and went to work each day with a smile on his face to care for people that needed his help. Sadly, Mike died from his job related exposure to known carcinogens. The Honoring Our Fallen Heroes Act makes it possible for us to preserve Mike’s dignity and care for his family, just as he did for so many others during their time of need. This is what we want to be Mike’s legacy, ” said Kyle Thornberg, President of St. Paul International Association of Fire Fighters Local 21.

    “Cancer is ravaging the fire service and is the leading cause of line of duty deaths. Medical studies and commonsense prove this epidemic comes from our exposures to toxins in smoke, vehicle exhaust, and even our own protective gear. In 2022, the International Agency for Research on Cancer found this evidence so clear that they classified the occupation of firefighting itself as a Group 1 carcinogen – their highest and most dangerous level. However, when fire fighters succumb to job-related cancer, their families are left with nothing and denied critically-needed death benefits. It is unconscionable to abandon fallen fire fighters’ families when they need help most. The IAFF applauds Senators Klobuchar and Cramer for standing with fire fighters’ families and ensuring they don’t fall through the cracks. The Honor Act will rightfully recognize our cancer deaths as line of duty deaths and provide families with sorely needed death benefits. We urge Congress to pass the Honor Act immediately and send a lifeline to families who have already sacrificed a loved one for our nation,” said Edward Kelly, General President of the International Association of Fire Fighters.

    “Firefighters face an increased risk of cancer due to the hazardous nature of their jobs. The Public Safety Officers’ Benefits Program should reflect the scope of the risks faced by our nation’s first responders, including occupational cancer. We look forward to working with Senators Klobuchar and Cramer to ensure that firefighters and their families receive the benefits they need and deserve,” said Bill Webb, Executive Director of the Congressional Fire Services Institute.

    “Modern medicine often struggles to link an officer’s medical condition directly to a specific on-the-job incident; however, federal law enforcement officers face significant carcinogenic exposure in the line of duty, especially as first responders to large-scale chemical, radiological, or biological incidents. Unfortunately, the current Public Safety Officer Benefits (PSOB) system denies many officers earned benefits due to these scientific limitations. We commend Senators Klobuchar and Cramer for introducing legislation to align the PSOB system with the real-world risks faced by law enforcement. This bill is a vital step toward ensuring officers receive the support they deserve,” said Mathew Silverman, National President of the Federal Law Enforcement Officers Association.

    “We are grateful to Senators Klobuchar and Cramer for their leadership on this issue. Our law enforcement officers are in harm’s way each and every day. They are exposed not only to physical threats, but also unseen or unknown threats while operating in potentially hazardous environments. Public safety officers who are exposed to known carcinogens and who contract cancer that ends their lives or disables them should be considered to have sustained a personal injury in the line of duty for the purposes of the Public Safety Officers’ Benefits (PSOB) program. The Klobuchar-Cramer bill, which had 37 cosponsors and cleared the Judiciary Committee unanimously will do just that,” said Patrick Yoes, National President of the Fraternal Order of Police.

    “I thank Senator Klobuchar and the bill’s cosponsors for re-introducing the Honoring Our Fallen Heroes Act. Cancer remains a major cause of death for firefighters across the nation. It is time for the nation to recognize the families that have lost loved ones due to cancer caused by modern-day firefighting. We owe them a debt of gratitude and should take care of them,” said Chief Josh Waldo, President and Board Chair of the International Association of Fire Chiefs.

    “The Major County Sheriffs of America (MCSA) strongly supports the Honoring Our Fallen Heroes Act and applauds Senators Klobuchar and Cramer for their leadership. This bipartisan legislation ensures that families of first responders who lose their lives to service-related cancer receive the benefits they deserve. Our first responders put their lives on the line daily, facing not just immediate dangers but long-term health risks from carcinogen exposure. Supporting their families through these benefits strengthens our public safety community and honors the sacrifices made by those who serve,” said Megan Noland, Executive Director of the Major County Sheriffs of America.

    “Our nation’s public safety officers put their lives at risk every day. Sometimes unnoticed are the officers pulling families from burning cars or saving children from house fires or responding to disasters such as the wildfires in Los Angeles. These acts of heroism often have long-term consequences for the officers, including exposure-related cancers. The Honoring Our Fallen Heroes Act recognizes these as line-of-duty injuries under the Public Safety Officers’ Benefits Program and ensures that officers suffering from these cancers and their families get the benefits they have earned. We stand with Senators Klobuchar and Cramer in support of this bill and thank them for championing this important issue,” said Bill Johnson, Executive Director of the National Association of Police Organizations.

    “The National Fallen Firefighters Foundation expresses our steadfast support of the Honoring Our Fallen Heroes Act. Multiple studies have shown that firefighters have an increased risk of cancer compared to the general public. These men and women put their lives on the line every day to protect their communities, and as a result, are exposed to a variety of carcinogens through the very nature of their work, including exposure to hazardous materials, toxic smoke, and other environmental factors. The federal government must recognize their sacrifice, and the families of public safety officers who die or are permanently disabled as a result of occupational cancer should have access to benefits provided by the Public Safety Officers’ Benefits program. We commend Senators Klobuchar and Cramer for championing this important legislation,” said Victor Stagnaro, Chief Executive Officer of the National Fallen Firefighters Foundation.

    “NFPA urges Congress to approve the HONOR Act which has strong bipartisan support. As a nation, we must honor firefighters lost to occupational cancer and provide support to the families they leave behind,” said Jim Pauley, President and CEO of the National Fire Protection Association.

    “Too often battles with occupational related cancer leave first responders permanently disabled or leave their survivors financially struggling after their passing. I applaud Senators Klobuchar and Cramer for introducing the Honoring Our Fallen Heroes Act of 2025. This important legislation will provide much needed support to first responder and their families as they face the aftermath of occupational cancer by providing coverage for certain exposure-related cancers under the Public Safety Officers Benefit program,”said Steve Hirsch, Chairman of the National Volunteer Fire Council. 

    “For more than twenty years, we have seen firsthand the devasting toll that cancer has taken among the heroes who responded to the 9/11 attacks. The ongoing health crisis among 9/11 responders has also brought to light other serious and long-term health risks that public safety officers across this country face from job-related exposures to known carcinogens. That is why the SBA is proud to join with Sen. Klobuchar and Sen. Cramer again in advocating for swift passage of the ‘Honoring Our Fallen Heroes Act’ to ensure PSOB benefits for the families of those who succumb to job-related cancers,” said Vincent Vallelong, President of the Sergeants Benevolent Association of the NYPD.

    Klobuchar has long led efforts to support firefighters and first responders. Klobuchar co-led bipartisan legislation to create a national cancer registry for firefighters diagnosed with the deadly disease was signed into law in 2018 and reauthorized last year. The Firefighter Cancer Registry Act calls on the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) to monitor and study the relationship between career-long exposure to dangerous fumes and toxins and the incidence of cancer in firefighters.

    Klobuchar also worked to pass the bipartisan Fire Grants and Safety Act which was signed into law in 2023, and continues funding for the Assistance for Firefighters Grant and the Staffing for Adequate Fire and Emergency Response (SAFER) Grant programs. The Assistance for Firefighters Grant program helps firefighters and other first responders obtain critically needed equipment, protective gear, emergency vehicles, training and other resources. The SAFER Grants program provides direct funding to fire departments and volunteer firefighter interest organizations to increase or maintain the number of trained, “front line” firefighters and enhance their capacity to comply with staffing, response, and operational standards.

    Klobuchar also worked to pass the Protecting America’s First Responders Act, which was signed into law in 2021. This legislation improves the PSOB program by allowing benefit amounts to be calculated based on the date of the award and account for cost of living increases.

    Klobuchar also co-led legislation to retrofit older high-rise apartment buildings with sprinkler systems and help prevent future tragedies like the Cedar High Apartments fire, which took place in Minneapolis, Minnesota in 2019.

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: NASA Invites Media to Second Intuitive Machines Launch to Moon

    Source: NASA

    For the second time, Intuitive Machines will launch a lunar lander to deliver NASA technology demonstrations and science investigations to the Moon for the benefit of all. Media accreditation is open for the IM-2 launch, part of NASA’s CLPS (Commercial Lunar Payload Services) initiative and Artemis campaign to establish a long-term presence on the Moon. 
    The Intuitive Machines Nova-C class lunar lander will launch on a SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket and carry NASA science, technology demonstrations, and other commercial payloads to Mons Mouton, a lunar plateau near the Moon’s South Pole region. Liftoff is targeted for a multi-day launch window, which opens no earlier than late February, from Launch Complex 39A at NASA’s Kennedy Space Center in Florida.
    Media prelaunch and launch activities will take place at NASA Kennedy and are open to U.S. citizens and international media. U.S. media must apply by Wednesday, Feb. 12, and international media must apply by Wednesday, Feb. 5.
    Media wishing to take part in person must apply for credentials at:
    https://media.ksc.nasa.gov
    Credentialed media will receive a confirmation email upon approval. NASA’s media accreditation policy is available online. For questions about accreditation or to request special logistical support, such as space for satellite trucks, tents, or electrical connections, please email by Wednesday, Feb. 12, to: ksc-media-accreditat@mail.nasa.gov. For other questions, please contact NASA Kennedy’s newsroom at: 321-867-2468.
    Para obtener información sobre cobertura en español en el Centro Espacial Kennedy o si desea solicitar entrevistas en español, comuníquese con Antonia Jaramillo o Messod Bendayan a: antonia.jaramillobotero@nasa.gov o messod.c.bendayan@nasa.gov.
    Among the items on its lander, the IM-2 mission will deliver one of the first on-site, or in-situ, demonstrations of resource utilization on the Moon, using a drill and mass spectrometer to measure the volatiles content of subsurface materials. Other technology instruments on this delivery will demonstrate a robust surface communications system and deploy a propulsive drone mobility solution.
    Launching as a rideshare alongside the IM-2 delivery NASA’s Lunar Trailblazer spacecraft also will begin its journey to lunar orbit, where it will map the distribution of the different forms of water on the Moon.
    A successful landing will help support the CLPS model for commercial payload deliveries to the lunar surface, as another step toward a sustainable lunar future. As a primary customer of CLPS, NASA is investing in lower-cost methods of Moon deliveries and is one of multiple customers for these flights.
    NASA is working with several U.S. companies to deliver science and technology to the lunar surface through the agency’s CLPS initiative. This pool of companies may bid on task orders to deliver NASA payloads to the Moon. Contract awards cover end-to-end commercial payload delivery services, including payload integration, mission operations, launch from Earth, and landing on the surface of the Moon. These contracts are indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity contracts with a cumulative maximum value of $2.6 billion through 2028.
    For more information about the agency’s Commercial Lunar Payload Services initiative, see:
    https://www.nasa.gov/clps
    -end-
    Alise Fisher / Jasmine HopkinsHeadquarters, Washington202-358-1600alise.m.fisher@nasa.gov / jasmine.s.hopkins@nasa.gov
    Natalia Riusech / Nilufar RamjiJohnson Space Center, Houston281-483-5111natalia.s.riusech@nasa.gov / nilufar.ramji@nasa.gov  
    Antonia JaramilloKennedy Space Center, Florida321-867-2468antonia.jaramillobotero@nasa.gov

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI Economics: Iceland donates an additional CHF 200,000 to WTO Fish Fund

    Source: WTO

    Headline: Iceland donates an additional CHF 200,000 to WTO Fish Fund

    Director-General Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala said: “I warmly welcome Iceland’s second contribution to the WTO Fish Fund, which reflects its strong commitment to sustainable fisheries and multilateral cooperation. Building on its previous donation, this latest contribution will be instrumental in supporting developing and LDC members as they work to implement the historic Agreement on Fisheries Subsidies.”
    Ambassador Einar Gunnarsson of Iceland said: “Iceland is proud to support the WTO Fisheries Funding Mechanism as part of our longstanding commitment to sustainable fisheries and ocean health. By contributing to this fund, we aim to assist developing and least-developed countries in implementing the Agreement on Fisheries Subsidies, ensuring that they have the tools and capacity to join global efforts to protect marine ecosystems. Sustainable Development Goal 14.6 reminds us that collective action is essential, and Iceland remains dedicated to playing its part in fostering sustainable and equitable use of our shared ocean resources.”
    The Agreement on Fisheries Subsidies will enter into force upon its acceptance by two-thirds of WTO members. Eighty-nine WTO members have formally accepted the Agreement. Twenty-two more formal acceptances are needed for the Agreement to come into effect. Because the new Agreement will involve adjustments and enhancements to WTO members’ legislative and administrative frameworks, their transparency and notification obligations, and their fisheries management policies and practices, Article 7 of the Agreement provides for the creation of a voluntary funding mechanism to finance targeted technical assistance and capacity building to help developing and least developed country members with implementation.
    The Fund is operated by the WTO, with the support of the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), the International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD), and the World Bank Group. These core partners bring together relevant expertise to support members seeking assistance to implement the Agreement.
    Iceland contributed CHF 500,000 to the Fish Fund in September 2023; including the most recent donation, Iceland has contributed a total of CHF 700,000 to the Fish Fund. Between 2002 and 2025, Iceland has contributed CHF 1,025,000 to various WTO technical assistance trust funds.
    More information on the fund, which became ready to accept donations on 8 November 2022, is available here.

    MIL OSI Economics –

  • MIL-OSI: Northrim BanCorp Earns $10.9 Million, or $1.95 Per Diluted Share, in Fourth Quarter 2024, and $37.0 Million, or $6.62 Per Diluted Share, for the Year Ended December 31, 2024

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    ANCHORAGE, Alaska, Jan. 24, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Northrim BanCorp, Inc. (NASDAQ:NRIM) (“Northrim” or the “Company”) today reported net income of $10.9 million, or $1.95 per diluted share, in the fourth quarter of 2024, compared to $8.8 million, or $1.57 per diluted share, in the third quarter of 2024, and $6.6 million, or $1.19 per diluted share, in the fourth quarter a year ago. The increase in the fourth quarter of 2024 compared to the third quarter of 2024 is primarily due to an increase in purchased receivable income due to the Company’s acquisition of Sallyport Commercial Finance, LLC (“Sallyport”), which was completed on October 31, 2024. Sallyport and its direct and indirect subsidiaries provide services and products related to factoring and asset-based lending in the United States, Canada, and the United Kingdom. Additionally, in the fourth quarter of 2024 the Company had an increase in mortgage banking income, primarily as a result of an increase in the fair value of a mortgage servicing portfolio that the Company purchased from another financial institution in the fourth quarter. The increase profitability in the fourth quarter of 2024 as compared to the same quarter of the prior year was largely driven by an increase in mortgage banking income and higher net interest income, as well as an increase in purchased receivable income as noted above, which was only partially offset by higher other operating expenses and an increase in the provision for credit losses.

    Net income for the full year of 2024 increased 46% to $37.0 million, or $6.62 per diluted share, compared to $25.4 million, or $4.49 per diluted share, for the full year of 2023. Increased net interest income resulting from loan and deposit growth supported 2024 earnings in the Community Banking segment but were offset by increases in other operating expenses, primarily in salaries and other personnel expense as the Company continued to expand its branch network into new markets in Alaska. An increase in mortgage originations and an increase in the fair value of mortgage servicing rights resulted in net income of $4.4 million in the Home Mortgage Lending segment in 2024 compared to a $2.5 million loss in 2023.

    Dividends per share in the fourth quarter of 2024 remained consistent with the third quarter of 2024 at $0.62 per share and increased from $0.60 per share in the fourth quarter of 2023.

    “Northrim reported record core earnings in 2024 and record earnings per share in the fourth quarter,” said Mike Huston, Northrim’s President and Chief Executive Officer. “We are pleased with our results as we continue to focus on profitable growth. In the last five years Northrim’s deposit market share in Alaska has increased from 11% to 16%, loans and deposits have increased by almost 100%, and net interest income has increased by 60%.”

    “2024 results were also supported by an improvement in mortgage banking income,” continued Mr. Huston. “We believe the acquisition of Sallyport in the fourth quarter will further diversify fee income and provide attractive risk-adjusted returns to Northrim shareholders.”

    Fourth Quarter 2024 Highlights:

    • Net interest income in the fourth quarter of 2024 increased 7% to $30.8 million compared to $28.8 million in the third quarter of 2024 and increased 15% compared to $26.7 million in the fourth quarter of 2023.
    • Net interest margin on a tax equivalent basis (“NIMTE”)* was 4.47% for the fourth quarter of 2024, a 12-basis point increase from the third quarter of 2024 and a 35-basis point increase compared to the fourth quarter of 2023.
    • Return on average assets (“ROAA”) was 1.43% and return on average equity (“ROAE”) was 16.32% for the fourth quarter of 2024.
    • Portfolio loans were $2.13 billion at December 31, 2024, up 6% from the preceding quarter and up 19% from a year ago, primarily due to new customer relationships, expanding market share, and to retaining certain mortgage loans originated by Residential Mortgage, a subsidiary of Northrim Bank (the “Bank”), in the loan portfolio.
    • Total deposits were $2.68 billion at December 31, 2024, up 2% from the preceding quarter, and up 8% from $2.49 billion a year ago. Noninterest bearing demand deposits represented 27% of total deposits at December 31, 2024, down from 29% at September 30, 2024 and 31% at December 31, 2023.
    • Total assets at December 31, 2024 exceeded $3 billion for the first time.
    • The average cost of interest-bearing deposits was 2.15% in the fourth quarter of 2024, down from 2.24% in the third quarter of 2024 and up from 2.00% in the fourth quarter a year ago.
    • Acquired Sallyport for approximately $53.9 million (approximately $47.9 million in cash and $6 million in an earn-out payable over 3 years) on October 31, 2024.
       
    Financial Highlights Three Months Ended
    (Dollars in thousands, except per share data) December 31,
    2024    		 September 30,
    2024    		 June 30, 2024 March 31, 2024 December 31,
    2023
    Total assets $3,041,869   $2,963,392   $2,821,668   $2,759,560   $2,807,497  
    Total portfolio loans $2,129,263   $2,007,565   $1,875,907   $1,811,135   $1,789,497  
    Total deposits $2,680,189   $2,625,567   $2,463,806   $2,434,083   $2,485,055  
    Total shareholders’ equity $267,116   $260,050   $247,200   $239,327   $234,718  
    Net income $10,927   $8,825   $9,020   $8,199   $6,613  
    Diluted earnings per share $1.95   $1.57   $1.62   $1.48   $1.19  
    Return on average assets 1.43 % 1.22 % 1.31 % 1.19 % 0.93 %
    Return on average shareholders’ equity 16.32 % 13.69 % 14.84 % 13.84 % 11.36 %
    NIM 4.41 % 4.29 % 4.24 % 4.16 % 4.06 %
    NIMTE* 4.47 % 4.35 % 4.30 % 4.22 % 4.12 %
    Efficiency ratio 66.96 % 66.11 % 68.78 % 68.93 % 72.21 %
    Total shareholders’ equity/total assets 8.78 % 8.78 % 8.76 % 8.67 % 8.36 %
    Tangible common equity/tangible assets* 7.23 % 8.28 % 8.24 % 8.14 % 7.84 %
    Book value per share $48.41   $47.27   $44.93   $43.52   $42.57  
    Tangible book value per share* $39.17   $44.36   $42.03   $40.61   $39.68  
    Dividends per share $0.62   $0.62   $0.61   $0.61   $0.60  
    Common shares outstanding 5,518,210   5,501,943   5,501,562   5,499,578   5,513,459  
                         

    * References to NIMTE, tangible book value per share, and tangible common equity to tangible common assets, (all of which exclude intangible assets) represent non-GAAP financial measures. Management has presented these non-GAAP measurements in this earnings release, because it believes these measures are useful to investors. Please refer to the end of this release for reconciliations of these non-GAAP financial measures to GAAP financial measures.

    Alaska Economic Update
    (Note: sources for information in this section are listed on page 13.)

    The Alaska Department of Labor (“DOL”) has reported Alaska’s seasonally adjusted unemployment rate in November 2024 was 4.6% compared to the U.S. rate of 4.2%. The total number of payroll jobs in Alaska, not including uniformed military, increased 2.4% or 7,700 jobs between November 2023 and November 2024.

    According to the DOL, Construction had the largest growth in new jobs in Alaska through November compared to the prior year. The Construction sector added 2,100 positions for a year over year growth rate of 12.7% in November 2024. The larger Health Care sector grew by 1,500 jobs for an annual growth rate of 3.7%. The Oil & Gas sector increased by 9.2% or 700 new direct jobs. Transportation, Warehousing and Utilities added 1,000 jobs for a 4.5% growth rate. Professional and Business Services increased 700 jobs year over year through November 2024, up 2.5%.

    The Government sector grew by 1,200 jobs for 1.5% growth, adding 100 Federal jobs, 800 State and 300 Local government positions in Alaska over the same period. Declining sectors between November 2023 and November 2024 were Manufacturing (primarily seafood processing) shrinking 500 jobs (-6.6%), Information, down 100 jobs (-2.2%), and Retail lost 100 jobs (-0.3%).

    Alaska’s Gross State Product (“GSP”) in the third quarter of 2024, exceeded $70 billion for the first time, and is estimated to be $70.1 billion in current dollars, according to the Federal Bureau of Economic Analysis (“BEA”). Alaska’s inflation adjusted “real” GSP increased 6.5% in 2023, placing Alaska fifth best of all 50 states. In the third quarter of 2024 Alaska GSP increased at an annualized rate of 2.2%, compared to the average U.S. growth rate of 3.1%. Alaska’s real GSP improvement in the third quarter of 2024 was primarily caused by growth in the Health Care, Trade, Transportation and Warehousing sectors.

    The BEA also calculated Alaska’s seasonally adjusted personal income at $55.7 billion in the third quarter of 2024. This was an annualized improvement in the third quarter of 3.3% for Alaska, compared to the national average of 3.2%. Alaska enjoyed an annual personal income improvement of 3.8% in 2023. The $445 million increase in personal income in the third quarter in Alaska came from a $310 million increase in net earnings from wages, $145 million growth in government transfer receipts (which grew in all 50 states), and a $10 million decrease in investment income.

    The monthly average price of Alaska North Slope (“ANS”) crude oil was at an annual high of $89.05 in April 2024 and most recently averaged $72.50 in November 2024. The Alaska Department of Revenue (“DOR”) calculated ANS crude oil production was 461 thousand barrels per day (“bpd”) in Alaska’s fiscal year ending June 30, 2024 and is projected to increase to 467 thousand bpd in Alaska’s fiscal year 2025. The DOR expects production to continue to grow rapidly to 657 thousand bpd by fiscal year 2034. This is primarily a result of new production coming on-line in and around the NPR-A region west of Prudhoe Bay. A partnership between Santos and Repsol is constructing the new Pikka field and ConocoPhillips is reportedly developing the large new Willow field. There are also a number of smaller new fields in Alaska’s North Slope that are contributing to the State of Alaska’s production growth estimates.

    According to the Alaska Multiple Listing Services, the average sales price of a single family home in Anchorage rose 6.2% in 2024 to $509,994, following a 5.2% increase in 2023. This was the seventh consecutive year of price increases.

    The average sales price for single family homes in the Matanuska Susitna Borough rose 3.9% in 2024 to $412,907, after increasing 4% in 2023. This continues a trend of average price increases for more than a decade in the region. These two markets represent where the vast majority of the Bank’s residential lending activity occurs.

    The Alaska Multiple Listing Services reported a 3.4% increase in the number of units sold in Anchorage when comparing 2024 to 2023. There was virtually no change in the number of homes sold in the Matanuska Susitna Borough, with only four fewer homes sold in 2024 than in 2023 or 0.2%.

    Northrim Bank sponsors the Alaskanomics blog to provide news, analysis, and commentary on Alaska’s economy. Join the conversation at Alaskanomics.com, or for more information on the Alaska economy, visit: http://www.northrim.com and click on the “Business Banking” link and then click “Learn.” Information from our website is not incorporated into, and does not form, a part of this earnings release.

    Review of Income Statement

    Consolidated Income Statement

    In the fourth quarter of 2024, Northrim generated a ROAA of 1.43% and a ROAE of 16.32%, compared to 1.22% and 13.69%, respectively, in the third quarter of 2024 and 0.93% and 11.36%, respectively, in the fourth quarter a year ago. For the year 2024, Northrim generated a ROAA of 1.29% and a ROAE of 14.70%, compared to 0.94% and 11.17% for 2023.

    Net Interest Income/Net Interest Margin

    Net interest income increased 7% to $30.8 million in the fourth quarter of 2024 compared to $28.8 million in the third quarter of 2024 and increased 15% compared to $26.7 million in the fourth quarter of 2023. Interest expense on deposits increased to $10.6 million in the fourth quarter compared to $10.1 million in the third quarter of 2024 and $8.7 million in the fourth quarter of 2023.

    NIMTE* was 4.47% in the fourth quarter of 2024 compared to 4.35% in the preceding quarter and 4.12% in the fourth quarter a year ago. NIMTE* increased 12 basis points in the fourth quarter of 2024 compared to the prior quarter and 35 basis points compared to the fourth quarter of 2023 primarily due to a favorable change in the mix of earning-assets towards higher loan balances as a percentage of total earning-assets, higher earning-assets, and higher yields on those assets which were only partially offset by an increase in costs on interest-bearing deposits. The weighted average interest rate for new loans booked in the fourth quarter of 2024 was 7.23% compared to 7.24% in the third quarter of 2024 and 7.74% in the fourth quarter a year ago. The yield on the investment portfolio increased to 2.84% from 2.80% in the third quarter of 2024 and increased from 2.48% in the fourth quarter of 2023. “We are beginning to see improvements in our net interest margin as a result of lower deposit costs from the recent Fed interest rate cuts, in addition to the benefit of new loan volume and loan repricing driving our net interest margin to 4.47% for the fourth quarter,” said Jed Ballard, Chief Financial Officer. Northrim’s NIMTE* continues to remain above the peer average of 3.16% posted by the S&P U.S. Small Cap Bank Index with total market capitalization between $250 million and $1 billion as of September 30, 2024.

    Provision for Credit Losses

    Northrim recorded a provision for credit losses of $1.2 million in the fourth quarter of 2024, which includes a $125,000 provision for credit losses on purchased receivables, $107,000 benefit to the provision for credit losses on unfunded commitments, and a provision for credit losses on loans of $1.2 million. This compares to a provision for credit losses of $2.1 million in the third quarter of 2024, and a provision for credit losses of $885,000 in the fourth quarter a year ago. The $1.2 million provision for credit losses in the fourth quarter of 2024 is largely attributable to increases in loan and purchased receivable balances.

    Nonperforming loans, net of government guarantees, increased during the quarter to $7.5 million at December 31, 2024, compared to $5.0 million at both September 30, 2024 and December 31, 2023.

    The allowance for credit losses was 292% of nonperforming loans, net of government guarantees, at the end of the fourth quarter of 2024, compared to 394% three months earlier and 345% a year ago.

    Other Operating Income

    In addition to home mortgage lending, Northrim has interests in other businesses that complement its core community banking activities, including purchased receivables financing and wealth management. Other operating income contributed $13.0 million, or 30% of total fourth quarter 2024 revenues, as compared to $11.6 million, or 29% of revenues in the third quarter of 2024, and $6.5 million, or 20% of revenues in the fourth quarter of 2023. The increase in other operating income in the fourth quarter of 2024 as compared to the preceding quarter and the fourth quarter of 2023 is largely the result of higher purchased receivable income due to the acquisition of Sallyport. Additionally, other operating income in the fourth quarter of 2024 as compared to the fourth quarter a year ago increased due to an increase in mortgage banking income arising from higher volume of mortgage activity and an increase in the value of mortgage servicing rights. The changes in mortgage banking are discussed further in the Home Mortgage Lending section below.

    Other Operating Expenses

    Operating expenses were $29.4 million in the fourth quarter of 2024, compared to $26.7 million in the third quarter of 2024, and $24.0 million in the fourth quarter of 2023. The increase in other operating expenses in the fourth quarter of 2024 compared to the third quarter of 2024 and the fourth quarter a year ago is primarily due to an increase in salaries and other personnel expense, as well as increases in professional fees from one-time deal costs associated with the acquisition of Sallyport and insurance expense due to higher FDIC insurance costs due to the Company’s asset and net income growth.

    Income Tax Provision

    In the fourth quarter of 2024, Northrim recorded $2.4 million in state and federal income tax expense for an effective tax rate of 17.8%, compared to $2.8 million, or 24.2% in the third quarter of 2024 and $1.7 million, or 20.7% in the fourth quarter a year ago. For the year, Northrim recorded $10.0 million in state and federal income tax expense in 2024 for an effective tax rate of 21.3%, compared to $6.2 million, or 19.7% in 2023. The decrease in the tax rate in the fourth quarter of 2024 as compared to the third quarter of 2024 and the fourth quarter a year ago is primarily the result of increased tax benefits related to the Company’s investment in low income housing tax credits and the purchase of renewable energy tax credits.

    Community Banking

    In the most recent deposit market share data from the FDIC, Northrim’s deposit market share in Alaska increased to 15.66% of Alaska’s total deposits as of June 30, 2024 compared to 15.04% of Alaska’s total deposits as of June 30, 2023. This represents 62 basis points of growth in market share percentage for Northrim during that period while, according to the FDIC, the total deposits in Alaska were up 2.3% during the same period. Northrim opened a branch in Kodiak in the first quarter of 2023, a loan production office in Homer in the second quarter of 2023, a permanent branch in Nome in the third quarter of 2023, and a branch in Homer in the first quarter of 2024. See below for further discussion regarding the Company’s deposit movement for the quarter.

    Northrim is committed to meeting the needs of the diverse communities in which it operates. As a testament to that support, the Bank has branches in four regions of Alaska identified by the Federal Reserve as “distressed or underserved non-metropolitan middle-income geographies”.

    Net interest income in the Community Banking segment totaled $27.6 million in the fourth quarter of 2024, compared to $25.9 million in the third quarter of 2024 and $24.2 million in the fourth quarter of 2023. Net interest income increased in the fourth quarter of 2024 as compared to the third quarter of 2024 and the fourth quarter a year ago mostly due to increased interest income on loans that was only partially offset by higher interest expense on deposits.

    The following table provides highlights of the Community Banking segment of Northrim:

       
      Three Months Ended
    (Dollars in thousands, except per share data) December
    31, 2024    		 September 30,
    2024    		 June 30, 2024 March 31,
    2024    		 December
    31, 2023
    Net interest income $27,643   $25,928   $24,318   $24,215   $24,221  
    Provision (benefit) for credit losses 771   1,492   (184 ) 197   885  
    Other operating income 2,535   3,507   2,450   2,468   2,741  
    Other operating expense 19,116   18,723   18,068   17,177   18,158  
    Income before provision for income taxes 10,291   9,220   8,884   9,309   7,919  
    Provision for income taxes 1,474   2,133   1,786   1,966   1,604  
    Net income Community Banking segment $8,817   $7,087   $7,098   $7,343   $6,315  
    Weighted average shares outstanding, diluted 5,597,889   5,583,055   5,558,580   5,554,930   5,578,491  
    Diluted earnings per share $1.58   $1.26   $1.27   $1.32   $1.14  
                         
      Year Ended
    (Dollars in thousands, except per share data) December
    31, 2024    		 December
    31, 2023
    Net interest income $102,104   $95,555  
    Provision for credit losses 2,276   3,842  
    Other operating income 10,960   9,130  
    Other operating expense 73,085   69,253  
    Income before provision for income taxes 37,703   31,590  
    Provision for income taxes 7,359   6,175  
    Net income Community Banking segment $30,344   $25,415  
    Weighted average shares outstanding, diluted 5,583,983   5,661,460  
    Diluted earnings per share $5.43   $4.49  
             

    Home Mortgage Lending

    During the fourth quarter of 2024, mortgage loans funded for sale decreased to $162.5 million, of which 89% was for home purchases, compared to $210.0 million and 94% of loans funded for home purchases in the third quarter of 2024, and increased as compared to $79.7 million, of which 96% was for home purchases in the fourth quarter of 2023.

    During the fourth quarter of 2024, the Bank purchased Residential Mortgage-originated mortgage loans to hold on the Bank’s balance sheet of $23.4 million of which roughly two-thirds were jumbos and one-third were mortgages for second homes, with a weighted average interest rate of 6.30%, down from $38.1 million and 6.59% in the third quarter of 2024, and down from $27.1 million and 7.05% in the fourth quarter of 2023. Mortgage loans funded for investment has increased net interest income in the Home Mortgage Lending segment. Net interest income contributed $3.3 million to total revenue in the fourth quarter of 2024, up from $2.9 million in the prior quarter, and up from $2.3 million in the fourth quarter a year ago.

    The Arizona, Colorado, and the Pacific Northwest mortgage expansion markets were responsible for 19% of Residential Mortgage’s $186 million total production in the fourth quarter of 2024, 20% of the $248 million total production in the third quarter of 2024, and 11% of the $107 million in total production in the fourth quarter of 2023.

    The net change in fair value of mortgage servicing rights increased mortgage banking income by $873,000 during the fourth quarter of 2024 compared to a decrease of $968,000 for the third quarter of 2024 and a decrease of $1.0 million for the fourth quarter of 2023. In the fourth quarter of 2024, the Bank purchased an Alaska Housing Finance Corporation (AHFC) servicing portfolio from another financial institution for $2.3 million. At December 31, 2024, this servicing portfolio was valued at $3.1 million resulting in a $750,000 increase in fair value. Mortgage servicing revenue increased to $2.8 million in the fourth quarter of 2024 from $2.6 million in the prior quarter and increased from $2.2 million in the fourth quarter of 2023 due to an increase in production of AHFC mortgages, which contribute to servicing revenues at origination. In the fourth quarter of 2024, the Company’s mortgage servicing portfolio increased to $294.1 million, which includes the purchase of the AHFC servicing portfolio of $235.6 million, $86.3 million in new mortgage loans, net of amortization and payoffs of $27.8 million as compared to a net increase of $64.8 million in the third quarter of 2024 and $62.4 million in the fourth quarter of 2023.

    As of December 31, 2024, Northrim serviced 6,378 loans in its $1.46 billion home mortgage servicing portfolio, a 25% increase compared to the $1.17 billion serviced as of the end of the third quarter of 2024, and a 40% increase from the $1.04 billion serviced a year ago.

    The following table provides highlights of the Home Mortgage Lending segment of Northrim:

       
      Three Months Ended
    (Dollars in thousands, except per share data) December
    31, 2024    		 September 30,
    2024    		 June 30, 2024 March 31,
    2024    		 December
    31, 2023
    Mortgage loan commitments $32,299   $77,591   $88,006   $56,208   $22,926  
               
    Mortgage loans funded for sale $162,530   $209,960   $152,339   $84,324   $79,742  
    Mortgage loans funded for investment 23,380   38,087   29,175   17,403   27,114  
    Total mortgage loans funded $185,910   $248,047   $181,514   $101,727   $106,856  
    Mortgage loan refinances to total fundings 11 % 6 % 6 % 4 % 4 %
    Mortgage loans serviced for others $1,460,720   $1,166,585   $1,101,800   $1,060,007   $1,044,516  
               
    Net realized gains on mortgage loans sold $3,747   $5,079   $3,188   $1,980   $1,462  
    Change in fair value of mortgage loan commitments, net (665 ) 60   391   386   (296 )
    Total production revenue 3,082   5,139   3,579   2,366   1,166  
    Mortgage servicing revenue 2,847   2,583   2,164   1,561   2,180  
    Change in fair value of mortgage servicing rights:          
    Due to changes in model inputs of assumptions1 1,372   (566 ) 239   289   (707 )
    Other2 (499 ) (402 ) (320 ) (314 ) (301 )
    Total mortgage servicing revenue, net 3,720   1,615   2,083   1,536   1,172  
    Other mortgage banking revenue 238   293   222   129   99  
    Total mortgage banking income $7,040   $7,047   $5,884   $4,031   $2,437  
               
    Net interest income $3,280   $2,941   $2,775   $2,232   $2,276  
    Provision (benefit) for credit losses 305   571   64   (48 ) —  
    Mortgage banking income 7,040   7,047   5,884   4,031   2,437  
    Other operating expense 7,198   7,643   6,697   6,086   5,477  
    Income before provision for income taxes 2,817   1,774   1,898   225   (764 )
    Provision for income taxes 842   497   532   63   (215 )
    Net (loss) income Home Mortgage Lending segment $1,975   $1,277   $1,366   $162   ($549 )
               
    Weighted average shares outstanding, diluted 5,597,889   5,583,055   5,558,580   5,554,930   5,769,415  
    Diluted (loss) earnings per share $0.35   $0.23   $0.25   $0.03   ($0.10 )
    1Principally reflects changes in discount rates and prepayment speed assumptions, which are primarily affected by changes in interest rates.
    2Represents changes due to collection/realization of expected cash flows over time.
                         
       
      Year Ended
    (Dollars in thousands, except per share data) December
    31, 2024    		 December
    31, 2023
    Mortgage loans funded for sale $609,153   $376,154  
    Mortgage loans funded for investment 108,045   146,258  
    Total mortgage loans funded $717,198   $522,412  
    Mortgage loan refinances to total fundings 7 % 4 %
         
    Net realized gains on mortgage loans sold $13,994   $7,828  
    Change in fair value of mortgage loan commitments, net 172   (102 )
    Total production revenue 14,166   7,726  
    Mortgage servicing revenue 9,155   7,368  
    Change in fair value of mortgage servicing rights:    
    Due to changes in model inputs of assumptions1 1,334   (922 )
    Other2 (1,535 ) (1,765 )
    Total mortgage servicing revenue, net 8,954   4,681  
    Other mortgage banking revenue 882   356  
    Total mortgage banking income $24,002   $12,763  
         
    Net interest income $11,228   $7,298  
    Provision for credit losses 892   —  
    Mortgage banking income 24,002   12,763  
    Other operating expense 27,624   23,497  
    Income before provision for income taxes 6,714   (3,436 )
    Provision for income taxes 1,934   (943 )
    Net (loss) income Home Mortgage Lending segment $4,780   ($2,493 )
         
    Weighted average shares outstanding, diluted 5,583,983   5,661,460  
    Diluted (loss) earnings per share $0.86   ($0.44 )
    1Principally reflects changes in discount rates and prepayment speed assumptions, which are primarily affected by changes in interest rates. 
    2Represents changes due to collection/realization of expected cash flows over time.
     

    Specialty Finance

    On October 31, 2024, the Company completed the acquisition of Sallyport Commercial Finance, LLC in an all cash transaction valued at approximately $53.9 million. Sallyport Commercial Finance, LLC is a leading provider of factoring, asset based lending and alternative working capital solutions to small and medium sized enterprises in the United States, Canada, and the United Kingdom. The Company determined that a new Specialty Finance segment was appropriate for the Company upon the completion of the acquisition. The Specialty Finance segment also includes Northrim Funding Services, a division of Northrim Bank that has offered factoring solutions to small businesses since 2004. The composition of revenues for the Specialty Finance segment are primarily purchased receivable income, but also include interest income and other fee income.

    The acquisition of Sallyport included $1.13 million in one-time deal related costs which are reflected in other operating expenses for the fourth quarter and full year of 2024 in the tables below. Total pre-tax income for Sallyport for two months of operations, excluding transaction costs was $945,000.

    The following table provides highlights of the Specialty Finance segment of Northrim:

       
      Three Months Ended
    (Dollars in thousands, except per share data) December
    31, 2024    		 September 30,
    2024    		 June 30, 2024 March 31,
    2024    		 December
    31, 2023
    Purchased receivable income $3,526   $1,033   $1,243   $1,345   $1,307  
    Other operating income (68 ) —   —   —   —  
    Interest income 407   158   170   212   235  
    Total revenue 3,865   1,191   1,413   1,557   1,542  
    Provision for credit losses 125   —   —   —   —  
    Other operating expense 3,063   362   429   374   358  
    Interest expense 489   185   210   212   —  
    Total expense 3,677   547   639   586   358  
    Income before provision for income taxes 188   644   774   971   1,184  
    Provision for income taxes 53   183   218   276   337  
    Net income Specialty Finance segment $135   $461   $556   $695   $847  
    Weighted average shares outstanding, diluted 5,597,889   5,583,055   5,558,580   5,554,930   5,578,491  
    Diluted earnings per share $0.02   $0.08   $0.10   $0.13   $0.15  
                         
      Year Ended
    (Dollars in thousands, except per share data) December
    31, 2024    		 December
    31, 2023
    Purchased receivable income $7,147   $4,482  
    Other operating income (68 ) —  
    Interest income 947   403  
    Total revenue 8,026   4,885  
    Provision for credit losses 125   —  
    Other operating expense 4,228   1,431  
    Interest expense 1,096   —  
    Total expense 5,449   1,431  
    Income before provision for income taxes 2,577   3,454  
    Provision for income taxes 730   982  
    Net income Specialty Finance segment $1,847   $2,472  
    Weighted average shares outstanding, diluted 5,583,983   5,661,460  
    Diluted earnings per share $0.33   $0.44  
             

    Balance Sheet Review

    Northrim’s total assets were $3.04 billion at December 31, 2024, up 3% from the preceding quarter and up 8% from a year ago. Northrim’s loan-to-deposit ratio was 79% at December 31, 2024, up from 76% at September 30, 2024, and 72% at December 31, 2023.

    At December 31, 2024, our liquid assets and investments and loans maturing within one year were $1.01 billion and our funds available for borrowing under our existing lines of credit were $566.8 million. Given these sources of liquidity and our expectations for customer demands for cash and for our operating cash needs, we believe our sources of liquidity to be sufficient for the foreseeable future.

    Average interest-earning assets were $2.79 billion in the fourth quarter of 2024, up 4% from $2.67 billion in the third quarter of 2024 and up 7% from $2.61 billion in the fourth quarter a year ago. The average yield on interest-earning assets was 6.02% in the fourth quarter of 2024, up from 5.92% in the preceding quarter and 5.51% in the fourth quarter a year ago.

    Average investment securities decreased to $565.8 million in the fourth quarter of 2024, compared to $619.0 million in the third quarter of 2024 and $690.7 million in the fourth quarter a year ago. The average net tax equivalent yield on the securities portfolio was 2.84% for the fourth quarter of 2024, up from 2.80% in the preceding quarter and up from 2.48% in the year ago quarter. The average estimated duration of the investment portfolio at December 31, 2024, was approximately 2.4 years down from approximately 2.8 years a year ago. As of December 31, 2024, $79.0 million of available for sale securities are scheduled to mature in the next six months, $55.8 million are scheduled to mature in six months to one year, and $189.3 million are scheduled to mature in the following year, representing a total of $324.0 million or 12% of earning assets that are scheduled to mature in the next 24 months.

    Total unrealized losses, net of tax, on available for sale securities increased by $678,000 in the fourth quarter of 2024 as compared to the prior quarter, and decreased by $9.1 million compared to the fourth quarter of 2023, resulting in a total unrealized loss of $8.3 million at December 31, 2024 compared to $7.6 million at September 30, 2024 and $17.4 million a year ago. The average maturity of the available for sale securities with the majority of the unrealized loss is 1.5 years at the end of 2024. Total unrealized losses on held to maturity securities were $1.0 million at December 31, 2024, compared to $2.1 million at September 30, 2024, and $3.3 million a year ago.

    Average interest bearing deposits in other banks increased to $72.2 million in the fourth quarter from $28.4 million in the third quarter of 2024 due to higher deposit balances and maturing portfolio investments. Average interest bearing deposits in other banks decreased in the fourth quarter of this year compared to $126.2 million in the fourth quarter of 2023 as cash was used to fund the growing loan portfolio.

    Portfolio loans were $2.13 billion at December 31, 2024, up 6% from the preceding quarter and up 19% from a year ago. Portfolio loans, excluding consumer mortgage loans, were $1.86 million at December 31, 2024, up 6% or $99.9 million from $1.76 billion in the preceding quarter and up 14% from a year ago. This increase was diversified throughout the loan portfolio including commercial real estate nonowner-occupied and multi-family loans increasing by $35.1 million, construction loans increasing by $28.7 million, commercial loans increasing $24.9 million, and commercial real estate owner-occupied loans increasing $7.2 million from the preceding quarter. Average portfolio loans in the fourth quarter of 2024 were $2.07 billion, which was up 7% from the preceding quarter and up 18% from a year ago. Yields on average portfolio loans in the fourth quarter of 2024 increased slightly to 6.93% from 6.91% in the third quarter of 2024 and increased from 6.55% in the fourth quarter of 2023. The increase in the yield on portfolio loans in the fourth quarter of 2024 compared to the third quarter of 2024 and the fourth quarter a year ago is primarily due to loan repricing due to the increases in interest rates and new loans booked at higher rates due to changes in the interest rate environment. The yield on new portfolio loans, excluding consumer mortgage loans, was 7.40% in the fourth quarter of 2024 as compared to 7.43% in the third quarter of 2024 and 8.07% in the fourth quarter of 2023.

    Alaskans continue to account for substantially all of Northrim’s deposit base. Total deposits were $2.68 billion at December 31, 2024, up 2% from $2.63 billion at September 30, 2024, and up 8% from $2.49 billion a year ago. “Our bankers are working hard to continue to bring over new relationships to the Bank, which is helping to magnify normal increases in deposit balances from our customers’ business cycles,” said Ballard. At December 31, 2024, 73% of total deposits were held in business accounts and 27% of deposit balances were held in consumer accounts. Northrim had approximately 34,000 deposit customers with an average balance of $61,000 as of December 31, 2024. Northrim had 26 customers with balances over $10 million as of December 31, 2024, which accounted for $612.9 million, or 24%, of total deposits. Demand deposits decreased by 8% from the prior quarter and decreased 6% year-over-year to $706.2 million at December 31, 2024. Demand deposits decreased to 27% of total deposits at December 31, 2024 compared to 29% at September 30, 2024 and 31% of total deposits at December 31, 2023. Average interest-bearing deposits were up 9% to $1.95 billion with an average cost of 2.15% in the fourth quarter of 2024, compared to $1.80 billion and an average cost of 2.24% in the third quarter of 2024, and up 13% compared to $1.72 billion and an average cost of 2.00% in the fourth quarter of 2023. Uninsured deposits totaled $1.08 billion or 40% of total deposits as of December 31, 2024 compared to $1.1 billion or 46% of total deposits as of December 31, 2022. As interest rates continued to increase in 2022, Northrim has taken a proactive, targeted approach to increase deposit rates.

    Shareholders’ equity was $267.1 million, or $48.41 book value per share, at December 31, 2024, compared to $260.1 million, or $47.27 book value per share, at September 30, 2024 and $234.7 million, or $42.57 book value per share, a year ago. Tangible book value per share* was $39.17 at December 31, 2024, compared to $44.36 at September 30, 2024, and $39.68 per share a year ago. The increase in shareholders’ equity in the fourth quarter of 2024 as compared to the third quarter of 2024 was largely the result of earnings of $10.9 million which was partially offset by dividends paid of $3.4 million and a decrease in the fair value of the available for sale securities portfolio, which decreased $678,000, net of tax. The Company did not purchase any shares of common stock in the fourth quarter of 2024 and had 110,000 shares remaining under the current share repurchase program as of December 31, 2024. Tangible common equity to tangible assets* was 7.23% as of December 31, 2024, compared to 8.28% as of September 30, 2024 and 7.84% as of December 31, 2023. The decrease in tangible common equity to tangible assets* was primarily due to $35.0 million of Goodwill booked as part of the acquisition of Sallyport. Northrim continues to maintain capital levels in excess of the requirements to be categorized as “well-capitalized” with Tier 1 Capital to Risk Adjusted Assets of 9.76% at December 31, 2024, compared to 11.53% at September 30, 2024, and 11.43% at December 31, 2023.

    Asset Quality

    Northrim believes it has a consistent lending approach throughout the economic cycles, which emphasizes appropriate loan-to-value ratios, adequate debt coverage ratios, and competent management.

    Nonperforming assets (“NPAs”) net of government guarantees were $11.6 million at December 31, 2024, up from $5.3 million at September 30, 2024 and from $5.8 million a year ago. Of the NPAs at December 31, 2024, $3.0 million, or 26% are nonaccrual loans related to three commercial relationships, $2.8 million, or 24% is related to a Sallyport nonaccrual loan, and $3.3 million, or 28% is related to one purchased receivable relationship.

    Net adversely classified loans were $9.6 million at December 31, 2024, as compared to $6.5 million at September 30, 2024, and $7.1 million a year ago. Adversely classified loans are loans that Northrim has classified as substandard, doubtful, and loss, net of government guarantees. Net loan recoveries were $51,000 in the fourth quarter of 2024, compared to net loan recoveries of $96,000 in the third quarter of 2024, and net loan charge-offs of $96,000 in the fourth quarter of 2023.

    Northrim had $138.0 million, or 6% of total portfolio loans, in the Healthcare sector; $117.0 million, or 5% of portfolio loans, in the Tourism sector; $104.3 million, or 5% in the Accommodations sector; $87.4 million, or 4% in Retail loans; $84.6 million, or 4% of portfolio loans, in the Aviation (non-tourism) sector; $76.5 million, or 4% in the Fishing sector; and $55.1 million, or 3% in the Restaurants and Breweries sector as of December 31, 2024.

    Northrim estimates that $99.7 million, or approximately 5% of portfolio loans, had direct exposure to the oil and gas industry in Alaska, as of December 31, 2024, and $1.6 million of these loans are adversely classified. As of December 31, 2024, Northrim has an additional $45.8 million in unfunded commitments to companies with direct exposure to the oil and gas industry in Alaska, and none of these unfunded commitments are considered to be adversely classified loans. Northrim defines direct exposure to the oil and gas sector as loans to borrowers that provide oilfield services and other companies that have been identified as significantly reliant upon activity in Alaska related to the oil and gas industry, such as lodging, equipment rental, transportation and other logistics services specific to this industry.

    About Northrim BanCorp

    Northrim BanCorp, Inc. is the parent company of Northrim Bank, an Alaska-based community bank with 20 branches throughout the state and differentiates itself with its detailed knowledge of Alaska’s economy and its “Customer First Service” philosophy. The Bank has two wholly-owned subsidiaries, Sallyport Commercial Finance, LLC, a specialty finance company and Residential Mortgage Holding Company, LLC, a regional home mortgage company. Pacific Wealth Advisors, LLC is an affiliated company.

    http://www.northrim.com

    Forward-Looking Statement
    This release may contain “forward-looking statements” as that term is defined for purposes of Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended. These statements are, in effect, management’s attempt to predict future events, and thus are subject to various risks and uncertainties. Readers should not place undue reliance on forward-looking statements, which reflect management’s views only as of the date hereof. All statements, other than statements of historical fact, regarding our financial position, business strategy, management’s plans and objectives for future operations are forward-looking statements. When used in this report, the words “anticipate,” “believe,” “estimate,” “expect,” and “intend” and words or phrases of similar meaning, as they relate to Northrim and its management are intended to help identify forward-looking statements. Although we believe that management’s expectations as reflected in forward-looking statements are reasonable, we cannot assure readers that those expectations will prove to be correct. Forward-looking statements, are subject to various risks and uncertainties that may cause our actual results to differ materially and adversely from our expectations as indicated in the forward-looking statements. These risks and uncertainties include: descriptions of Northrim’s and Sallyport’s financial condition, results of operations, asset based lending volumes, asset and credit quality trends and profitability and statements about the expected financial benefits and other effects of the acquisition of Sallyport by Northrim Bank; expected cost savings, synergies and other financial benefits from the acquisition of Sallyport by Northrim Bank might not be realized within the expected time frames and costs or difficulties relating to integration matters might be greater than expected; the ability of Northrim and Sallyport to execute their respective business plans; potential further increases in interest rates; the value of securities held in our investment portfolio; the impact of the results of government initiatives on the regulatory landscape, natural resource extraction industries, and capital markets; the impact of declines in the value of commercial and residential real estate markets, high unemployment rates, inflationary pressures and slowdowns in economic growth; changes in banking regulation or actions by bank regulators; inflation, supply-chain constraints, and potential geopolitical instability, including the wars in Ukraine and the Middle East; financial stress on borrowers (consumers and businesses) as a result of higher rates or an uncertain economic environment; the general condition of, and changes in, the Alaska economy; our ability to maintain or expand our market share or net interest margin; the sufficiency of our provision for credit losses and the accuracy of the assumptions or estimates used in preparing our financial statements, including those related to current expected credit losses accounting guidance; our ability to maintain asset quality; our ability to implement our marketing and growth strategies; our ability to identify and address cyber-security risks, including security breaches, “denial of service attacks,” “hacking,” and identity theft; disease outbreaks; and our ability to execute our business plan. Further, actual results may be affected by competition on price and other factors with other financial institutions; customer acceptance of new products and services; the regulatory environment in which we operate; and general trends in the local, regional and national banking industry and economy. In addition, there are risks inherent in the banking industry relating to collectability of loans and changes in interest rates. Many of these risks, as well as other risks that may have a material adverse impact on our operations and business, are identified in the “Risk Factors” section of our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2023, and from time to time are disclosed in our other filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission. However, you should be aware that these factors are not an exhaustive list, and you should not assume these are the only factors that may cause our actual results to differ from our expectations. These forward-looking statements are made only as of the date of this release, and Northrim does not undertake any obligation to release revisions to these forward-looking statements to reflect events or conditions after the date of this release.

    References:

    https://www.bea.gov/

    http://almis.labor.state.ak.us/

    http://www.tax.alaska.gov/programs/oil/prevailing/ans.aspx

    http://www.tax.state.ak.us/

    http://www.mba.org

    https://www.alaskarealestate.com/MLSMember/RealEstateStatistics.aspx

    https://www.capitaliq.spglobal.com/web/client?auth=inherit&overridecdc=1&#markets/indexFinancials

                 
    Income Statement            
    (Dollars in thousands, except per share data) Three Months Ended   Year-to-date
    (Unaudited) December 31, September 30, December 31,   December 31, December 31,
      2024 2024 2023   2024 2023
    Interest Income:            
    Interest and fees on loans $37,059   $34,863   $29,508     $134,739   $108,612  
    Interest on investments 3,844   4,164   4,677     16,838   18,695  
    Interest on deposits in banks 883   389   1,743     2,342   4,644  
    Total interest income 41,786   39,416   35,928     153,919   131,951  
    Interest Expense:            
    Interest expense on deposits 10,568   10,123   8,676     39,347   26,511  
    Interest expense on borrowings 377   451   520     1,389   2,184  
    Total interest expense 10,945   10,574   9,196     40,736   28,695  
    Net interest income 30,841   28,842   26,732     113,183   103,256  
                 
    Provision for credit losses 1,201   2,063   885     3,293   3,842  
    Net interest income after provision for            
    loan losses 29,640   26,779   25,847     109,890   99,414  
                 
    Other Operating Income:            
    Mortgage banking income 7,040   7,047   2,437     24,002   12,763  
    Purchased receivable income 3,526   1,033   1,307     7,146   4,482  
    Bankcard fees 1,148   1,196   946     4,366   3,862  
    Service charges on deposit accounts 622   605   532     2,348   2,044  
    Gain on sale of securities 112   —   —     112   —  
    Unrealized gain (loss) on marketable equity securities (364 ) 576   565     465   120  
    Other income 949   1,130   698     3,602   3,104  
    Total other operating income 13,033   11,587   6,485     42,041   26,375  
                 
    Other Operating Expense:            
    Salaries and other personnel expense 18,254   17,549   15,417     67,847   61,741  
    Data processing expense 3,108   2,618   2,500     10,986   9,821  
    Occupancy expense 1,893   1,911   1,783     7,609   7,394  
    Professional and outside services 1,967   903   802     4,351   3,128  
    Marketing expense 965   860   933     3,028   2,929  
    Insurance expense 894   596   675     2,961   2,519  
    OREO expense, net rental income and gains on sale 2   2   (28 )   (385 ) (794 )
    Intangible asset amortization expense —   —   6     —   17  
    Other operating expense 2,294   2,289   1,905     8,540   7,426  
    Total other operating expense 29,377   26,728   23,993     104,937   94,181  
                 
    Income before provision for income taxes 13,296   11,638   8,339     46,994   31,608  
    Provision for income taxes 2,369   2,813   1,726     10,023   6,214  
    Net income $10,927   $8,825   $6,613     $36,971   $25,394  
                 
    Basic EPS $1.99   $1.60   $1.19     $6.72   $4.53  
    Diluted EPS $1.95   $1.57   $1.19     $6.62   $4.49  
    Weighted average common shares outstanding, basic 5,509,078   5,501,943   5,513,041     5,502,797   5,601,471  
    Weighted average shares outstanding, diluted 5,597,889   5,583,055   5,578,491     5,583,983   5,661,460  
                           
    Balance Sheet      
    (Dollars in thousands)      
    (Unaudited) December 31, September 30, December 31,
      2024 2024 2023
           
    Assets:      
    Cash and due from banks $42,101   $42,805   $27,457  
    Interest bearing deposits in other banks 20,635   60,071   91,073  
    Investment securities available for sale, at fair value 478,617   545,210   637,936  
    Investment securities held to maturity 36,750   36,750   36,750  
    Marketable equity securities, at fair value 8,719   12,957   13,153  
    Investment in Federal Home Loan Bank stock 5,331   4,318   2,980  
    Loans held for sale 59,957   97,937   31,974  
    Portfolio loans 2,129,263   2,007,565   1,789,497  
    Allowance for credit losses, loans (22,020 ) (19,528 ) (17,270 )
    Net portfolio loans 2,107,243   1,988,037   1,772,227  
    Purchased receivables, net 74,078   23,564   36,842  
    Mortgage servicing rights, at fair value 26,439   21,570   19,564  
    Premises and equipment, net 37,757   39,625   40,693  
    Operating lease right-of-use assets 7,455   7,616   9,092  
    Goodwill and intangible assets 50,968   15,967   15,967  
    Other assets 85,819   66,965   71,789  
    Total assets $3,041,869   $2,963,392   $2,807,497  
           
    Liabilities:      
    Demand deposits $706,225   $763,595   $749,683  
    Interest-bearing demand 1,108,404   979,238   927,291  
    Savings deposits 250,900   245,043   255,338  
    Money market deposits 196,290   201,821   221,492  
    Time deposits 418,370   435,870   331,251  
    Total deposits 2,680,189   2,625,567   2,485,055  
    Other borrowings 23,045   13,354   13,675  
    Junior subordinated debentures 10,310   10,310   10,310  
    Operating lease liabilities 7,487   7,635   9,092  
    Other liabilities 53,722   46,476   54,647  
    Total liabilities 2,774,753   2,703,342   2,572,779  
           
    Shareholders’ Equity:      
    Total shareholders’ equity 267,116   260,050   234,718  
    Total liabilities and shareholders’ equity $3,041,869   $2,963,392   $2,807,497  
           

    Additional Financial Information
    (Dollars in thousands)
    (Unaudited)

    Composition of Portfolio Loans                        
      December 31,
    2024    		   September 30,
    2024    		   June 30, 2024   March 31, 2024   December 31,
    2023
      Balance % of
    total    		   Balance % of
    total    		   Balance % of
    total    		   Balance % of
    total    		   Balance % of
    total
    Commercial loans $518,148   24 %   $492,414   24 %   $495,781   26 %   $475,220   26 %   $486,057   27 %
    Commercial real estate:                            
    Owner occupied properties 420,060   20 %   412,827   20 %   383,832   20 %   372,507   20 %   368,357   20 %
    Nonowner occupied and multifamily properties 619,431   29 %   584,302   31 %   551,130   30 %   529,904   30 %   519,115   30 %
    Residential real estate:                            
    1-4 family properties secured by first liens 270,535   13 %   248,514   12 %   222,026   12 %   218,552   12 %   203,534   11 %
    1-4 family properties secured by junior liens & revolving secured by first liens 48,857   2 %   45,262   2 %   41,258   2 %   35,460   2 %   33,783   2 %
    1-4 family construction 39,789   2 %   39,794   2 %   29,510   2 %   27,751   2 %   31,239   2 %
    Construction loans 214,068   10 %   185,362   9 %   154,009   8 %   153,537   8 %   149,788   8 %
    Consumer loans 7,562   — %   7,836   — %   6,679   — %   6,444   — %   6,180   — %
    Subtotal 2,138,450       2,016,311       1,884,225       1,819,375       1,798,053    
    Unearned loan fees, net (9,187 )     (8,746 )     (8,318 )     (8,240 )     (8,556 )  
    Total portfolio loans $2,129,263       $2,007,565       $1,875,907       $1,811,135       $1,789,497    
                                 
    Composition of Deposits                        
      December 31, 2024   September 30, 2024   June 30, 2024   March 31, 2024   December 31, 2023
      Balance % of
    total    		   Balance % of
    total    		   Balance % of
    total    		   Balance % of
    total    		   Balance % of
    total
    Demand deposits $706,225   27 %   $763,595   29 %   $704,471   29 %   $714,244   29 %   $749,683   31 %
    Interest-bearing demand 1,108,404   41 %   979,238   37 %   906,010   36 %   889,581   37 %   927,291   37 %
    Savings deposits 250,900   9 %   245,043   9 %   238,156   10 %   246,902   10 %   255,338   10 %
    Money market deposits 196,290   7 %   204,821   8 %   195,159   8 %   209,785   9 %   221,492   9 %
    Time deposits 418,370   16 %   435,870   17 %   420,010   17 %   373,571   15 %   331,251   13 %
    Total deposits $2,680,189       $2,628,567       $2,463,806       $2,434,083       $2,485,055    
                                           

    Additional Financial Information
    (Dollars in thousands)
    (Unaudited)

    Asset Quality
    		 December 31, September 30, December 31,
        2024 2024 2023
      Nonaccrual loans $7,516   $4,944   $6,069  
      Loans 90 days past due and accruing 17   17   —  
      Total nonperforming loans 7,533   4,961   6,069  
      Nonperforming loans guaranteed by government —   —   (1,067 )
      Net nonperforming loans 7,533   4,961   5,002  
      Repossessed assets 297   297   —  
      Nonperforming purchased receivables 3,768   —   808  
      Net nonperforming assets $11,598   $5,258   $5,810  
      Nonperforming loans, net of government guarantees / portfolio loans 0.35 % 0.25 % 0.28 %
      Nonperforming loans, net of government guarantees / portfolio loans, net of government guarantees 0.38 % 0.26 % 0.30 %
      Nonperforming assets, net of government guarantees / total assets 0.38 % 0.18 % 0.21 %
      Nonperforming assets, net of government guarantees / total assets net of government guarantees 0.40 % 0.19 % 0.21 %
                   
      Adversely classified loans, net of government guarantees $9,636   $6,503   $7,057  
      Special mention loans, net of government guarantees $19,769   $9,641   $6,580  
      Loans 30-89 days past due and accruing, net of government guarantees / portfolio loans 0.03 % 0.08 % 0.03 %
      Loans 30-89 days past due and accruing, net of government guarantees / portfolio loans, net of government guarantees 0.03 % 0.09 % 0.03 %
                   
      Allowance for credit losses – loans / portfolio loans 1.03 % 0.97 % 0.97 %
      Allowance for credit losses – loans / portfolio loans, net of government guarantees 1.10 % 1.04 % 1.02 %
      Allowance for credit losses – loans / nonperforming loans, net of government guarantees 292 % 394 % 345 %
                   
      Allowance for credit losses – purchased receivables / purchased receivables 4.69 % — % — %
      Allowance for credit losses – purchased receivables / nonperforming purchased receivables 97 % — % — %
                   
      Gross loan charge-offs for the quarter $149   $15   $281  
      Gross loan recoveries for the quarter ($200 ) ($111 ) ($185 )
      Net loan (recoveries) charge-offs for the quarter ($51 ) ($96 ) $96  
      Net loan (recoveries) charge-offs year-to-date ($215 ) ($164 ) ($38 )
      Net loan (recoveries) charge-offs for the quarter / average loans, for the quarter 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.01 %
      Net loan (recoveries) charge-offs year-to-date / average loans, year-to-date annualized (0.01 )% (0.01 )% 0.00 %
                   

    Additional Financial Information
    (Dollars in thousands)
    (Unaudited)

    Average Balances, Yields, and Rates                            
      Three Months Ended
      December 31, 2024   September 30, 2024   December 31, 2023
        Average     Average     Average
      Average Tax
    Equivalent    		   Average Tax
    Equivalent    		   Average Tax
    Equivalent
      Balance Yield/Rate   Balance Yield/Rate   Balance Yield/Rate
    Assets              
    Interest bearing deposits in other banks $72,212   4.72 %   $28,409   5.28 %   $126,174   5.40 %
    Portfolio investments 565,785   2.84 %   619,012   2.80 %   690,659   2.48 %
    Loans held for sale 83,304   5.97 %   93,689   6.20 %   45,732   6.55 %
    Portfolio loans 2,066,216   6.93 %   1,933,181   6.91 %   1,749,732   6.55 %
    Total interest-earning assets 2,787,517   6.02 %   2,674,291   5.92 %   2,612,297   5.51 %
    Nonearning assets 251,364       196,266       214,934    
    Total assets $3,038,881       $2,870,557       $2,827,231    
                   
    Liabilities and Shareholders’ Equity              
    Interest-bearing deposits $1,954,495   2.15 %   $1,796,107   2.24 %   $1,724,409   2.00 %
    Borrowings 29,251   3.95 %   43,555   4.07 %   47,964   4.25 %
    Total interest-bearing liabilities 1,983,746   2.18 %   1,839,662   2.29 %   1,772,373   2.06 %
                   
    Noninterest-bearing demand deposits 738,911       722,000       760,566    
    Other liabilities 49,815       52,387       63,321    
    Shareholders’ equity 266,409       256,508       230,971    
    Total liabilities and shareholders’ equity $3,038,881       $2,870,557       $2,827,231    
    Net spread   3.84 %   3.63 %     3.45 %
    NIM   4.41 %   4.29 %     4.06 %
    NIMTE*   4.47 %   4.35 %     4.12 %
    Cost of funds   1.59 %   1.64 %     1.44 %
    Average portfolio loans to average interest-earning assets 74.12 %     72.29 %     66.98 %  
    Average portfolio loans to average total deposits 76.71 %     76.77 %     70.41 %  
    Average non-interest deposits to average total deposits 27.43 %     28.67 %     30.61 %  
    Average interest-earning assets to average interest-bearing liabilities 140.52 %     145.37 %     147.39 %  
                           

    Additional Financial Information
    (Dollars in thousands)
    (Unaudited)

    Average Balances, Yields, and Rates          
      Year-to-date
      December 31, 2024   December 31, 2023
        Average     Average
      Average Tax Equivalent   Average Tax Equivalent
      Balance Yield/Rate   Balance Yield/Rate
    Assets          
    Interest bearing deposits in other banks $44,913   5.09 %   $91,161   5.02 %
    Portfolio investments 623,756   2.82 %   715,367   2.43 %
    Loans held for sale 68,790   6.08 %   41,769   6.19 %
    Portfolio loans 1,910,156   6.87 %   1,643,943   6.49 %
    Total interest-earning assets 2,647,615   5.86 %   2,492,240   5.36 %
    Nonearning assets 213,397       198,107    
    Total assets $2,861,012       $2,690,347    
               
    Liabilities and Shareholders’ Equity          
    Interest-bearing deposits $1,802,286   2.18 %   $1,614,386   1.64 %
    Borrowings 33,799   3.81 %   51,038   4.24 %
    Total interest-bearing liabilities 1,836,085   2.21 %   1,665,424   1.72 %
               
    Noninterest-bearing demand deposits 718,163       749,859    
    Other liabilities 55,265       47,820    
    Shareholders’ equity 251,499       227,244    
    Total liabilities and shareholders’ equity $2,861,012       $2,690,347    
    Net spread   3.65 %     3.64 %
    NIM   4.28 %     4.14 %
    NIMTE*   4.33 %     4.21 %
    Cost of funds   1.59 %     1.19 %
    Average portfolio loans to average interest-earning assets 72.15 %     65.96 %  
    Average portfolio loans to average total deposits 75.79 %     69.53 %  
    Average non-interest deposits to average total deposits 28.49 %     31.72 %  
    Average interest-earning assets to average interest-bearing liabilities 144.20 %     149.65 %  
                   

    Additional Financial Information
    (Dollars in thousands, except per share data)
    (Unaudited)

    Capital Data (At quarter end)          
      December 31,
    2024    		   September 30, 2024   December 31,
    2023
    Book value per share $48.41     $47.27     $42.57  
    Tangible book value per share* $39.17     $44.36     $39.68  
    Total shareholders’ equity/Total assets 8.78 %   8.78 %   8.36 %
    Tangible common equity/Tangible assets* 7.23 %   8.28 %   7.84 %
    Tier 1 capital / Risk adjusted assets 9.76 %   11.53 %   11.43 %
    Total capital / Risk adjusted assets 10.94 %   12.50 %   12.35 %
    Tier 1 capital / Average assets 7.68 %   9.08 %   8.72 %
    Common shares outstanding 5,518,210     5,501,943     5,513,459  
    Unrealized gain on AFS debt securities, net of income taxes ($8,295 )   ($7,617 )   ($17,415 )
    Unrealized (loss) on derivatives and hedging activities, net of income taxes $1,272     $863     $978  
                     
    Profitability Ratios                            
      December 31,
    2024    		   September
    30, 2024    		   June 30, 2024   March 31,
    2024    		   December 31,
    2023
    For the quarter:                            
    NIM 4.41 %   4.29 %   4.24 %   4.16 %   4.06 %
    NIMTE* 4.47 %   4.35 %   4.30 %   4.22 %   4.12 %
    Efficiency ratio 66.96 %   66.11 %   68.78 %   68.93 %   72.21 %
    Return on average assets 1.43 %   1.22 %   1.31 %   1.19 %   0.93 %
    Return on average equity 16.32 %   13.69 %   14.84 %   13.84 %   11.36 %
                                 
      December 31,
    2024    		   December 31,
    2023
    Year-to-date:          
    NIM 4.28 %   4.14 %
    NIMTE* 4.33 %   4.21 %
    Efficiency ratio 67.60 %   72.64 %
    Return on average assets 1.29 %   0.94 %
    Return on average equity 14.70 %   11.17 %
               

    *Non-GAAP Financial Measures
    (Dollars and shares in thousands, except per share data)
    (Unaudited)

    Non-GAAP financial measures have inherent limitations, are not required to be uniformly applied, and are not audited. Although we believe these non-GAAP financial measures are frequently used by stakeholders in the evaluation of the Company, they have limitations as analytical tools and should not be considered in isolation or as a substitute for analysis of results as reported under GAAP.

    Net interest margin on a tax equivalent basis

    Net interest margin on a tax equivalent basis (“NIMTE”) is a non-GAAP performance measurement in which interest income on non-taxable investments and loans is presented on a tax equivalent basis using a combined federal and state statutory rate of 28.43% in both 2023 and 2022. The most comparable GAAP measure is net interest margin and the following table sets forth the reconciliation of NIMTE to net interest margin.

       
      Three Months Ended
      December 31,
    2024    		   September 30,
    2024    		   June 30, 2024   March 31,
    2024    		   December 31,
    2023
    Net interest income $30,841     $28,842     $27,053     $26,447     $26,732  
    Divided by average interest-bearing assets 2,787,517     2,674,291     2,568,266     2,558,558     2,612,297  
    Net interest margin (“NIM”)2 4.41 %   4.29 %   4.24 %   4.16 %   4.06 %
                       
    Net interest income $30,841     $28,842     $27,053     $26,447     $26,732  
    Plus: reduction in tax expense related to tax-exempt interest income 379     385     378     379     374  
      $31,220     $29,227     $27,431     $26,826     $27,106  
    Divided by average interest-bearing assets 2,787,517     2,674,291     2,568,266     2,558,558     2,612,297  
    NIMTE2 4.47 %   4.35 %   4.30 %   4.22 %   4.12 %
                                 
      Year-to-date
      December 31,
    2024    		   December 31,
    2023
    Net interest income $113,183     $103,256  
    Divided by average interest-bearing assets 2,647,615     2,492,240  
    Net interest margin (“NIM”)3 4.28 %   4.14 %
           
    Net interest income $113,183     $103,256  
    Plus: reduction in tax expense related to tax-exempt interest income 1,521     1,576  
      $114,704     $104,832  
    Divided by average interest-bearing assets 2,647,615     2,492,240  
    NIMTE3 4.33 %   4.21 %
               
    2Calculated using actual days in the quarter divided by 366 for the quarters ended in 2024 and 365 for the quarters ended in 2023, respectively.
               
    3Calculated using actual days in the year divided by 366 for year-to-date period in 2024 and 365 for year-to-date period in 2023, respectively.
               

    *Non-GAAP Financial Measures

    (Dollars and shares in thousands, except per share data)
    (Unaudited)

    Tangible Book Value

    Tangible book value is a non-GAAP measure defined as shareholders’ equity, less intangible assets, divided by common shares outstanding. The most comparable GAAP measure is book value per share and the following table sets forth the reconciliation of tangible book value per share and book value per share.

                       
      December 31,
    2024    		   September 30,
    2024    		   June 30, 2024   March 31,
    2024    		   December 31,
    2023
                       
    Total shareholders’ equity $267,116     $260,050     $247,200     $239,327     $234,718  
    Divided by common shares outstanding 5,518     5,502     5,502     5,500     5,513  
    Book value per share $48.41     $47.26     $44.93     $43.52     $42.57  
                                 
      December 31,
    2024    		   September 30,
    2024    		   June 30, 2024   March 31,
    2024    		   December 31,
    2023
                       
    Total shareholders’ equity $267,116     $260,050     $247,200     $239,327     $234,718  
    Less: goodwill and intangible assets 50,968     15,967     15,967     15,967     15,967  
      $216,148     $244,083     $231,233     $223,360     $218,751  
    Divided by common shares outstanding 5,518     5,502     5,502     5,500     5,513  
    Tangible book value per share $39.17     $44.36     $43.52     $40.61     $39.68  
                                 

    Tangible Common Equity to Tangible Assets

    Tangible common equity to tangible assets is a non-GAAP ratio that represents total equity less goodwill and intangible assets divided by total assets less goodwill and intangible assets. The most comparable GAAP measure of shareholders’ equity to total assets is calculated by dividing total shareholders’ equity by total assets and the following table sets forth the reconciliation of tangible common equity to tangible assets and shareholders’ equity to total assets.

                       
    Northrim BanCorp, Inc. December 31,
    2024    		   September 30,
    2024    		   June 30,
    2024    		   March 31,
    2024    		   December 31,
    2023
                       
    Total shareholders’ equity $267,116     $260,050     $247,200     $239,327     $234,718  
    Total assets 3,041,869     2,963,392     2,821,668     2,759,560     2,807,497  
    Total shareholders’ equity to total assets 8.78 %   8.78 %   8.76 %   8.67 %   8.36 %
                                 
    Northrim BanCorp, Inc. December 31,
    2024    		   September 30,
    2024    		   June 30, 2024   March 31,
    2024    		   December 31,
    2023
    Total shareholders’ equity $267,116     $260,050     $247,200     $239,327     $234,718  
    Less: goodwill and other intangible assets, net 50,968     15,967     15,967     15,967     15,967  
    Tangible common shareholders’ equity $216,148     $244,083     $231,233     $223,360     $218,751  
                       
    Total assets $3,041,869     $2,963,392     $2,821,668     $2,759,560     $2,807,497  
    Less: goodwill and other intangible assets, net 50,968     15,967     15,967     15,967     15,967  
    Tangible assets $2,990,901     $2,947,425     $2,805,701     $2,743,593     $2,791,530  
    Tangible common equity ratio 7.23 %   8.28 %   8.24 %   8.14 %   7.84 %
                                 

    Note Transmitted on GlobeNewswire on January 24, 2025, at 12:15 pm Alaska Standard Time.

       
    Contact: Mike Huston, President, CEO, and COO
      (907) 261-8750
      Jed Ballard, Chief Financial Officer
      (907) 261-3539
       

    The MIL Network –

  • MIL-OSI Asia-Pac: IWAI sets up new Regional Office at Varanasi

    Source: Government of India (2)

    IWAI sets up new Regional Office at Varanasi

    Aims to streamline IWT activities in Uttar Pradesh

    Posted On: 24 JAN 2025 1:58PM by PIB Delhi

    For effective implementation of Inland Water Transport (IWT) activities in National Waterway-1 (NW-1), River Ganga, the Inland Waterways Authority of India (IWAI) under the Union Ministry of Ports, Shipping and Waterways has upgraded its existing sub-office at Varanasi to a full-fledged Regional Office on January 23, 2025. The decision is aimed at streamlining IWAI projects and related works in the state of Uttar Pradesh.

    IWAI, presently has five regional offices in Guwahati (Assam), Patna (Bihar), Kochi (Kerala), Bhubaneswar (Odisha) and Kolkata (West Bengal). It will now have its sixth regional office in Varanasi, Uttar Pradesh.

    The Varanasi regional office with its sub-office at Prayagraj will oversee works in 487-kilometre stretch from Majhua to Varanasi MMT (Multi-Modal Terminal) and further up to Prayagraj, apart from other NWs in Uttar Pradesh.

    Implementation of the World-Bank supported Jal Marg Vikas Project (JMVP) will be one of its key priorities. JMVP is aimed at the capacity augmentation of River Ganga, i.e., NW-1 through various river conservancy works like bandalling and maintenance dredging in addition to already constructed MMT at Varanasi to promote cruise tourism and smooth cargo movement along the waterway. Three Multi-Modal Terminals – one each at Varanasi, Sahibganj and Haldia along with an Inter-Modal Terminal at Kalughat and a new navigational lock at Farakka in West Bengal have been built under JMVP to facilitate easy navigation along River Ganga. Besides, 60 community jetties are being built along NW-1 in four states of Uttar Pradesh, Bihar, Jharkhand and West Bengal – to facilitate local commuters, small and marginal farmers, artisans and fishermen communities. With its new Regional Office in place, all these activities will be monitored and executed more efficiently.

    There are about 30 rivers in Uttar Pradesh, of which ten have been declared as National Waterways. The Varanasi Regional Office of IWAI shall look after development works not only on River Ganga but its various tributaries and other national waterways in Uttar Pradesh. These include rivers like Betwa, Chambal, Gomti, Tons, Varuna and parts of Gandak, Ghaghra, Karamnasa and Yamuna rivers.

    IWAI’s Varanasi Regional Office will also be coordinating with the State IWT Authority set up for development of waterways in Uttar Pradesh.  

    Under the dynamic leadership of Prime Minister Shri Narendra Modi and the able guidance of Minister of Ports, Shipping and Waterways Shri Sarbananda Sonowal, IWAI has been making several infrastructural interventions to develop waterways as a robust engine of growth. With its concerted efforts, IWAI is expanding its footprint throughout the country – from Arunachal Pradesh in the East to Gujarat in the West and Jammu and Kashmir in the North to Kerala in the South. Other than NW-1, the Authority is presently working towards capacity augmentation of NW-2, NW-3 and NW-16, in the country – by means of developing IWT terminals, fairways through end-to-end dredging contracts, navigational aids like night navigation facility, navigational locks among others.

    *****

    G.D.Hallikeri/Henry

    (Release ID: 2095758) Visitor Counter : 76

    MIL OSI Asia Pacific News –

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Minutes – Thursday, 23 January 2025 – Strasbourg – Final edition

    Source: European Parliament

    PV-10-2025-01-23

    EN

    EN

    iPlPv_Sit

    Minutes
    Thursday, 23 January 2025 – Strasbourg

     Abbreviations and symbols

    + adopted
    – rejected
    ↓ lapsed
    W withdrawn
    RCV roll-call votes
    EV electronic vote
    SEC secret ballot
    split split vote
    sep separate vote
    am amendment
    CA compromise amendment
    CP corresponding part
    D deleting amendment
    = identical amendments
    § paragraph

    IN THE CHAIR: Younous OMARJEE
    Vice-President

    1. Opening of the sitting

    The sitting opened at 09:01.


    2. Combating Desertification: 16th session of the Conference of the Parties (COP16) of the United Nations Convention (debate)

    Commission statement: Combating Desertification: 16th session of the Conference of the Parties (COP16) of the United Nations Convention (2025/3018(RSP))

    Jessika Roswall (Member of the Commission) made the statement.

    The following spoke: Carmen Crespo Díaz, on behalf of the PPE Group, Marta Temido, on behalf of the S&D Group, Julien Leonardelli, on behalf of the PfE Group, Francesco Ventola, on behalf of the ECR Group, Martin Hojsík, on behalf of the Renew Group, Pär Holmgren, on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group, Catarina Martins, on behalf of The Left Group, Zsuzsanna Borvendég, on behalf of the ESN Group, Christine Schneider, Sakis Arnaoutoglou, Mireia Borrás Pabón, Laurence Trochu, Billy Kelleher, Kai Tegethoff, João Oliveira, Daniel Buda, Maria Grapini, Mathilde Androuët, Marie Toussaint, Valentina Palmisano, Salvatore De Meo, Thomas Bajada, France Jamet, Vicent Marzà Ibáñez, who also answered a blue-card question from João Oliveira, Sebastian Everding, who also answered a blue-card question from Sander Smit, Gabriella Gerzsenyi, César Luena, who also answered a blue-card question from Carmen Crespo Díaz, Jutta Paulus, who also answered a blue-card question from Maria Grapini, Nikolas Farantouris, Borja Giménez Larraz, Camilla Laureti, Marco Falcone, who also answered a blue-card question from Kai Tegethoff, Leire Pajín, Manuela Ripa, Jean-Marc Germain, Dan-Ştefan Motreanu, Stefano Bonaccini and Ştefan Muşoiu.

    The following spoke under the catch-the-eye procedure: Grzegorz Braun, Hélder Sousa Silva and Seán Kelly.

    The following spoke: Jessika Roswall.

    The debate closed.

    (The sitting was suspended for a few moments.)


    IN THE CHAIR: Christel SCHALDEMOSE
    Vice-President

    3. Resumption of the sitting

    The sitting resumed at 10:29.


    4. Cryptocurrencies – need for global standards (debate)

    Commission statement: Cryptocurrencies – need for global standards (2025/2514(RSP))

    Magnus Brunner (Member of the Commission) made the statement.

    The following spoke: Markus Ferber, on behalf of the PPE Group, Jonás Fernández, on behalf of the S&D Group, Pierre Pimpie, on behalf of the PfE Group, Marlena Maląg, on behalf of the ECR Group, Stéphanie Yon-Courtin, on behalf of the Renew Group, Rasmus Andresen, on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group (the President reminded the speaker of the rules on conduct), Pasquale Tridico, on behalf of The Left Group, René Aust, on behalf of the ESN Group, Regina Doherty, Eero Heinäluoma, Aleksandar Nikolic, Guillaume Peltier, Gilles Boyer, Damian Boeselager, Catarina Martins, Stanislav Stoyanov, Kateřina Konečná, Kinga Kollár, Aurore Lalucq, Mathilde Androuët, Adrian-George Axinia, Cynthia Ní Mhurchú, Giuseppe Antoci, Marcin Sypniewski, Luis-Vicențiu Lazarus, Lídia Pereira (the President provided some clarifications on the blue-card procedure), Nikos Papandreou, who also answered a blue-card question from Diana Iovanovici Şoşoacă, Angéline Furet, Ondřej Krutílek, Michalis Hadjipantela, Adnan Dibrani, Diego Solier, Andrey Kovatchev, Waldemar Buda, Caterina Chinnici and Seán Kelly.

    The following spoke under the catch-the-eye procedure: Niels Geuking, Maria Grapini, Alexander Jungbluth, Grzegorz Braun, Vytenis Povilas Andriukaitis and Diana Iovanovici Şoşoacă.

    The following spoke: Magnus Brunner.

    The debate closed.

    (The sitting was suspended at 11:48.)


    IN THE CHAIR: Sabine VERHEYEN
    Vice-President

    5. Resumption of the sitting

    The sitting resumed at 11:59.


    6. Composition of new committees

    Following the creation of the standing committees on security and defence and on public health, and the creation of the special committees on the European Democracy Shield and on the housing crisis in the European Union, the President had received nominations for membership of these new standing and special committees from the political groups and the non-attached Members, in accordance with Rules 212 and 213.

    The decisions took effect as of that day.

    The lists of Members nominated to form these committees are annexed to these minutes (minutes of 23.1.2025 Annex 1).


    7. Composition of committees and delegations

    The Renew Group and non-attached Members had notified the President of the following decisions changing the composition of committees:

    – ITRE Committee: Oihane Agirregoitia Martínez to replace Barry Andrews, Elena Yoncheva

    – REGI Committee: Elsi Katainen

    – LIBE Committee: Raquel García Hermida-Van Der Walle

    – PETI Committee: Cynthia Ní Mhurchú and Eugen Tomac were no longer members, Taner Kabilov

    The decisions took effect as of that day.

    ⁂

    The following spoke: Jordan Bardella, Carlo Fidanza and Patryk Jaki on points of order (the President cut off the speakers as their remarks did not constitute points of order).


    8. Voting time

    For detailed results of the votes, see also ‘Results of votes’ and ‘Results of roll-call votes’.




    8.2. Systematic repression of human rights in Iran, notably the cases of Pakhshan Azizi and Wrisha Moradi, and the taking of EU citizens as hostages (vote)

    Motions for resolutions RC-B10-0066/2025 (minutes of 23.1.2025, item I), B10-0063/2025, B10-0066/2025, B10-0067/2025, B10-0073/2025, B10-0082/2025, B10-0085/2025 and B10-0086/2025 (minutes of 22.1.2025, item 1) (2025/2511(RSP))

    The debate had taken place on 22 January 2025 (minutes of 22.1.2025, item 16.2).

    (Majority of the votes cast)

    JOINT MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION

    Adopted (P10_TA(2025)0004)

    (Motions for resolutions B10-0063/2025 and B10-0067/2025 fell.)

    Detailed voting results








    9. Resumption of the sitting

    The sitting resumed at 15:00.


    10. Approval of the minutes of the previous sitting

    The minutes of the previous sitting were approved.


    11. Major interpellations (debate)

    Major interpellation for written answer with debate (G-001002/2024) submitted by Charlie Weimers, Sebastian Tynkkynen, Kristoffer Storm, Jaak Madison, Carlo Fidanza, Adam Bielan, Alexandr Vondra, Patryk Jaki, Johan Van Overtveldt, Roberts Zīle, Emmanouil Fragkos, Georgiana Teodorescu, Geadis Geadi, Marion Maréchal, Ivaylo Valchev, Kosma Złotowski, Mariusz Kamiński, Maciej Wąsik, Dick Erixon, Joachim Stanisław Brudziński, Beatrice Timgren, Nicolas Bay, Jadwiga Wiśniewska, Ondřej Krutílek, Guillaume Peltier, Michał Dworczyk, Laurence Trochu, Şerban-Dimitrie Sturdza, Tobiasz Bocheński, Gheorghe Piperea, on behalf of the ECR Group, to the Commission: EU funding of physical border protection structures such as walls, fences or other barriers at the external border (B10-0001/2025)

    Jaak Madison moved the major interpellation.

    Magnus Brunner (Member of the Commission) answered the major interpellation.

    The following spoke: Lena Düpont, on behalf of the PPE Group, Ana Catarina Mendes, on behalf of the S&D Group, András László, on behalf of the PfE Group, Joachim Stanisław Brudziński, on behalf of the ECR Group, Fabienne Keller, on behalf of the Renew Group, Mélissa Camara, on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group, Christine Anderson, on behalf of the ESN Group, Fredis Beleris, Murielle Laurent, France Jamet and Riho Terras.

    The following spoke under the catch-the-eye procedure: Kinga Kollár, Bogdan Rzońca and Siegbert Frank Droese.

    The following spoke: Magnus Brunner.

    The debate closed.


    12. Explanations of vote

    Written explanations of vote

    Explanations of vote submitted in writing under Rule 201 appear on the Members’ pages on Parliament’s website.


    13. Approval of the minutes of the sitting and forwarding of texts adopted

    In accordance with Rule 208(3), the minutes of the sitting would be put to the House for approval at the beginning of the afternoon of the sitting on Monday, 10 February 2025.

    With Parliament’s agreement, the texts adopted during the part-session would be forwarded to their respective addressees without delay.


    14. Dates of forthcoming sittings

    The next sitting would be held on 29 January 2025.


    15. Closure of the sitting

    The sitting closed at 15:41.


    16. Adjournment of the session

    The session of the European Parliament was adjourned.

    Alessandro Chiocchetti

    Roberta Metsola

    Secretary-General

    President


    LIST OF DOCUMENTS SERVING AS A BASIS FOR THE DEBATES AND DECISIONS OF PARLIAMENT


    I. Motions for resolutions tabled

    Case of Jean-Jacques Wondo in the Democratic Republic of the Congo

    Joint motion for a resolution tabled under Rule 150(5) and Rule 136(4):

    on the case of Jean-Jacques Wondo in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (2025/2510(RSP)) (RC-B10-0069/2025)
    (replacing motions for resolutions B10-0069/2025, B10-0072/2025, B10-0078/2025, B10-0081/2025 and B10-0084/2025)
    Sebastião Bugalho, Wouter Beke, Isabel Wiseler-Lima, Michael Gahler, Luděk Niedermayer, Christophe Gomart, Antonio López-Istúriz White, Danuše Nerudová, Davor Ivo Stier, Michał Wawrykiewicz, Jessica Polfjärd, Tomáš Zdechovský, Andrey Kovatchev, Inese Vaidere
    on behalf of the PPE Group
    Yannis Maniatis, Francisco Assis, Elio Di Rupo
    on behalf of the S&D Group
    Waldemar Tomaszewski, Joachim Stanisław Brudziński, Sebastian Tynkkynen
    on behalf of the ECR Group
    Bernard Guetta, Petras Auštrevičius, Oihane Agirregoitia Martínez, Malik Azmani, Dan Barna, Benoit Cassart, Olivier Chastel, Svenja Hahn, Karin Karlsbro, Ľubica Karvašová, Ilhan Kyuchyuk, Jan-Christoph Oetjen, Urmas Paet, Marie-Agnes Strack-Zimmermann, Hilde Vautmans, Lucia Yar
    on behalf of the Renew Group
    Catarina Vieira
    on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

    Systematic repression of human rights in Iran, notably the cases of Pakhshan Azizi and Wrisha Moradi, and the taking of EU citizens as hostages

    Joint motion for a resolution tabled under Rule 150(5) and Rule 136(4):

    on the systematic repression of human rights in Iran, notably the cases of Pakhshan Azizi and Wrisha Moradi, and the taking of EU citizens as hostages (2025/2511(RSP)) (RC-B10-0066/2025)
    (replacing motions for resolutions B10-0066/2025, B10-0073/2025, B10-0082/2025, B10-0085/2025 and B10-0086/2025)
    Sebastião Bugalho, Tomáš Zdechovský, Loucas Fourlas, Isabel Wiseler-Lima, David McAllister, Michael Gahler, Željana Zovko, Christophe Gomart, Isabel Benjumea Benjumea, Javier Zarzalejos, Luděk Niedermayer, Wouter Beke, Davor Ivo Stier, Michał Wawrykiewicz, Jessica Polfjärd, Danuše Nerudová, Andrey Kovatchev, Inese Vaidere
    on behalf of the PPE Group
    Yannis Maniatis, Francisco Assis, Evin Incir, Chloé Ridel, Daniel Attard, Alessandra Moretti
    on behalf of the S&D Group
    Rihards Kols, Mariusz Kamiński, Sebastian Tynkkynen, Carlo Fidanza, Reinis Pozņaks, Aurelijus Veryga, Ondřej Krutílek, Veronika Vrecionová, Alberico Gambino, Joachim Stanisław Brudziński, Dick Erixon, Beatrice Timgren, Waldemar Tomaszewski, Alexandr Vondra, Marion Maréchal, Małgorzata Gosiewska, Carlo Ciccioli, Charlie Weimers
    on behalf of the ECR Group
    Petras Auštrevičius, Oihane Agirregoitia Martínez, Malik Azmani, Dan Barna, Benoit Cassart, Olivier Chastel, Veronika Cifrová Ostrihoňová, Bart Groothuis, Bernard Guetta, Svenja Hahn, Karin Karlsbro, Ľubica Karvašová, Ilhan Kyuchyuk, Nathalie Loiseau, Jan-Christoph Oetjen, Urmas Paet, Marie-Agnes Strack-Zimmermann, Hilde Vautmans, Sophie Wilmès, Lucia Yar
    on behalf of the Renew Group
    Hannah Neumann
    on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group
    Per Clausen, Hanna Gedin, Jonas Sjöstedt

    Case of Boualem Sansal in Algeria

    Joint motion for a resolution tabled under Rule 150(5) and Rule 136(4):

    on the case of Boualem Sansal in Algeria (2025/2512(RSP)) (RC-B10-0087/2025)
    (replacing motions for resolutions B10-0087/2025, B10-0089/2025, B10-0091/2025, B10-0092/2025 and B10-0093/2025)
    Sebastião Bugalho, Christophe Gomart, Isabel Wiseler-Lima, Michael Gahler, Luděk Niedermayer, Wouter Beke, Davor Ivo Stier, Michał Wawrykiewicz, Jessica Polfjärd, Tomáš Zdechovský, Andrey Kovatchev, Inese Vaidere
    on behalf of the PPE Group
    Yannis Maniatis, Francisco Assis, Marta Temido
    on behalf of the S&D Group
    Adam Bielan, Ondřej Krutílek, Veronika Vrecionová, Joachim Stanisław Brudziński, Waldemar Tomaszewski, Alexandr Vondra, Marion Maréchal, Sebastian Tynkkynen, Małgorzata Gosiewska
    on behalf of the ECR Group
    Helmut Brandstätter, Petras Auštrevičius, Malik Azmani, Dan Barna, Benoit Cassart, Olivier Chastel, Bernard Guetta, Ilhan Kyuchyuk, Nathalie Loiseau, Urmas Paet, Lucia Yar
    on behalf of the Renew Group
    Leoluca Orlando
    on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

    Russia’s disinformation and historical falsification to justify its war of aggression against Ukraine

    Motions for resolutions tabled under Rule 136(2) to wind up the debate:

    on Russia’s disinformation and historical falsification to justify its war of aggression against Ukraine (2024/2988(RSP)) (B10-0074/2025)
    Yannis Maniatis, Nacho Sánchez Amor, Thijs Reuten, Raphaël Glucksmann
    on behalf of the S&D Group

    on Russia’s disinformation and historical falsification to justify its war of aggression against Ukraine (2024/2988(RSP)) (B10-0075/2025)
    Rasa Juknevičienė, Michael Gahler, Andrzej Halicki, Sebastião Bugalho, David McAllister, Siegfried Mureşan, Željana Zovko, Isabel Wiseler-Lima, Nicolás Pascual de la Parte, Mika Aaltola, Krzysztof Brejza, Daniel Caspary, Sandra Kalniete, Seán Kelly, Ondřej Kolář, Łukasz Kohut, Andrey Kovatchev, Miriam Lexmann, Antonio López-Istúriz White, Danuše Nerudová, Mirosława Nykiel, Ana Miguel Pedro, Paulius Saudargas, Davor Ivo Stier, Michał Szczerba, Alice Teodorescu Måwe, Ingeborg Ter Laak, Matej Tonin, Pekka Toveri, Inese Vaidere, Milan Zver
    on behalf of the PPE Group

    on Russia’s disinformation and historical falsification to justify its war of aggression against Ukraine (2024/2988(RSP)) (B10-0076/2025)
    Sergey Lagodinsky, Hannah Neumann, Markéta Gregorová, Mārtiņš Staķis, Maria Ohisalo, Virginijus Sinkevičius, Villy Søvndal, Nicolae Ştefănuță, Reinier Van Lanschot
    on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

    on Russia’s disinformation and historical falsification to justify its war of aggression against Ukraine (2024/2988(RSP)) (B10-0077/2025)
    Bernard Guetta, Petras Auštrevičius, Malik Azmani, Dan Barna, Olivier Chastel, Karin Karlsbro, Ľubica Karvašová, Ilhan Kyuchyuk, Michał Kobosko, Jan-Christoph Oetjen, Urmas Paet, Marie-Agnes Strack-Zimmermann, Eugen Tomac, Hilde Vautmans, Sophie Wilmès, Lucia Yar, Dainius Žalimas
    on behalf of the Renew Group

    on Russia’s disinformation and historical falsification to justify its war of aggression against Ukraine (2024/2988(RSP)) (B10-0079/2025)
    Adam Bielan, Mariusz Kamiński, Małgorzata Gosiewska, Joachim Stanisław Brudziński, Rihards Kols, Ondřej Krutílek, Jaak Madison, Ivaylo Valchev, Sebastian Tynkkynen, Veronika Vrecionová, Roberts Zīle, Aurelijus Veryga, Maciej Wąsik, Michał Dworczyk, Cristian Terheş, Reinis Pozņaks, Alexandr Vondra
    on behalf of the ECR Group

    Joint motion for a resolution tabled under Rule 136(2) and (4):

    on Russia’s disinformation and historical falsification to justify its war of aggression against Ukraine (2024/2988(RSP)) (RC-B10-0074/2025)
    (replacing motions for resolutions B10-0074/2025, B10-0075/2025, B10-0076/2025, B10-0077/2025 and B10-0079/2025)
    Rasa Juknevičienė, Michael Gahler, Andrzej Halicki, Sebastião Bugalho, David McAllister, Siegfried Mureşan, Željana Zovko, Isabel Wiseler-Lima, Nicolás Pascual de la Parte, Mika Aaltola, Krzysztof Brejza, Daniel Caspary, Sandra Kalniete, Seán Kelly, Ondřej Kolář, Łukasz Kohut, Andrey Kovatchev, Miriam Lexmann, Antonio López-Istúriz White, Danuše Nerudová, Mirosława Nykiel, Ana Miguel Pedro, Paulius Saudargas, Davor Ivo Stier, Michał Szczerba, Alice Teodorescu Måwe, Ingeborg Ter Laak, Matej Tonin, Pekka Toveri, Inese Vaidere, Milan Zver
    on behalf of the PPE Group
    Yannis Maniatis, Nacho Sánchez Amor, Thijs Reuten, Raphaël Glucksmann
    on behalf of the S&D Group
    Adam Bielan, Rihards Kols, Reinis Pozņaks, Jadwiga Wiśniewska, Roberts Zīle, Ondřej Krutílek, Veronika Vrecionová, Jaak Madison, Małgorzata Gosiewska, Cristian Terheş, Maciej Wąsik, Ivaylo Valchev, Aurelijus Veryga, Joachim Stanisław Brudziński
    on behalf of the ECR Group
    Bernard Guetta, Petras Auštrevičius, Malik Azmani, Dan Barna, Benoit Cassart, Olivier Chastel, Karin Karlsbro, Veronika Cifrová Ostrihoňová, Ľubica Karvašová, Ilhan Kyuchyuk, Michał Kobosko, Nathalie Loiseau, Jan-Christoph Oetjen, Urmas Paet, Marie-Agnes Strack-Zimmermann, Eugen Tomac, Hilde Vautmans, Sophie Wilmès, Lucia Yar, Dainius Žalimas
    on behalf of the Renew Group
    Sergey Lagodinsky
    on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

    Situation in Venezuela following the usurpation of the presidency on 10 January 2025

    Motions for resolutions tabled under Rule 136(2) to wind up the debate:

    on the situation in Venezuela following the usurpation of the presidency on 10 January 2025 (2025/2519(RSP)) (B10-0064/2025)
    Gabriel Mato, Sebastião Bugalho, Davor Ivo Stier
    on behalf of the PPE Group

    on the situation in Venezuela following the usurpation of the presidency on 10 January 2025 (2025/2519(RSP)) (B10-0068/2025)
    Jorge Buxadé Villalba, Hermann Tertsch, Jorge Martín Frías, Silvia Sardone, Nikola Bartůšek, Susanna Ceccardi, Roberto Vannacci, António Tânger Corrêa, Enikő Győri
    on behalf of the PfE Group

    on the situation in Venezuela following the usurpation of the presidency on 10 January 2025 (2025/2519(RSP)) (B10-0071/2025)
    Leire Pajín
    on behalf of the S&D Group
    Catarina Vieira, Ville Niinistö, Nicolae Ştefănuță
    on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

    on the situation in Venezuela following the usurpation of the presidency on 10 January 2025 (2025/2519(RSP)) (B10-0080/2025)
    Oihane Agirregoitia Martínez, Petras Auštrevičius, Malik Azmani, Dan Barna, Helmut Brandstätter, Benoit Cassart, Olivier Chastel, João Cotrim De Figueiredo, Valérie Devaux, Karin Karlsbro, Ľubica Karvašová, Ilhan Kyuchyuk, Urmas Paet, Marie-Agnes Strack-Zimmermann, Ana Vasconcelos, Hilde Vautmans, Lucia Yar
    on behalf of the Renew Group

    on the situation in Venezuela following the usurpation of the presidency on 10 January 2025 (2025/2519(RSP)) (B10-0083/2025)
    Carlo Fidanza, Adam Bielan, Mariusz Kamiński, Alberico Gambino, Waldemar Tomaszewski, Joachim Stanisław Brudziński, Diego Solier, Rihards Kols, Ondřej Krutílek, Jaak Madison, Nora Junco García, Şerban-Dimitrie Sturdza, Sebastian Tynkkynen, Veronika Vrecionová, Małgorzata Gosiewska, Jadwiga Wiśniewska, Alexandr Vondra
    on behalf of the ECR Group

    Joint motion for a resolution tabled under Rule 150(5) and Rule 136(4):

    on the situation in Venezuela following the usurpation of the presidency on 10 January 2025 (2025/2519(RSP)) (RC-B10-0064/2025)
    (replacing motions for resolutions B10-0064/2025, B10-0080/2025 and B10-0083/2025)
    Gabriel Mato, Sebastião Bugalho, Davor Ivo Stier, Francisco José Millán Mon
    on behalf of the PPE Group
    Carlo Fidanza, Adam Bielan, Mariusz Kamiński, Ivaylo Valchev, Sebastian Tynkkynen, Ondřej Krutílek, Veronika Vrecionová, Rihards Kols, Alexandr Vondra, Małgorzata Gosiewska, Alberico Gambino, Joachim Stanisław Brudziński
    on behalf of the ECR Group
    Oihane Agirregoitia Martínez, Petras Auštrevičius, Dan Barna, Helmut Brandstätter, Benoit Cassart, Olivier Chastel, Veronika Cifrová Ostrihoňová, João Cotrim De Figueiredo, Karin Karlsbro, Ľubica Karvašová, Ilhan Kyuchyuk, Urmas Paet, Marie-Agnes Strack-Zimmermann, Ana Vasconcelos, Hilde Vautmans, Lucia Yar
    on behalf of the Renew Group


    II. Decisions to draw up own-initiative reports

    Decisions to draw up own-initiative reports (Rule 55)

    (Following the Conference of Presidents’ decision of 15 January 2025)

    AFCO Committee

    – Reform of the European Electoral Act – hurdles to ratification and implementation in the Member States (2025/2028(INI))

    – Institutional aspects of the Report on the future of European Competitiveness (Draghi Report) (2025/2013(INI))

    – Stock-taking of the European elections 2024 (2025/2012(INI))

    AFET Committee

    – 2023 and 2024 Commission reports on Ukraine (2025/2026(INI))

    – 2023 and 2024 Commission reports on Moldova (2025/2025(INI))

    – 2023 and 2024 Commission reports on Georgia (2025/2024(INI))

    – 2023 and 2024 Commission reports on Türkiye (2025/2023(INI))

    – 2023 and 2024 Commission reports on Serbia (2025/2022(INI))

    – 2023 and 2024 Commission reports on North Macedonia (2025/2021(INI))

    – 2023 and 2024 Commission reports on Montenegro (2025/2020(INI))

    – 2023 and 2024 Commission reports on Kosovo (2025/2019(INI))

    – 2023 and 2024 Commission reports on Bosnia and Herzegovina (2025/2018(INI))

    – 2023 and 2024 Commission reports on Albania (2025/2017(INI))

    DEVE Committee

    – Financing for development – ahead of the Fourth International Conference on Financing for Development in Seville (2025/2004(INI))

    – Implementation and delivery of the Sustainable Development Goals in view of the 2025 High-Level Political Forum (2025/2014(INI))
    (opinion: FEMM)

    IMCO Committee

    – Implementation and streamlining of EU internal market rules to strengthen the single market (2025/2009(INI))

    ITRE Committee

    – Future of the EU biotechnology and biomanufacturing sector: leveraging research, boosting innovation and enhancing competitiveness (2025/2008(INI))

    – European technological sovereignty and digital infrastructure (2025/2007(INI))

    – Electricity grids: the backbone of the EU energy system (2025/2006(INI))

    JURI Committee

    – Monitoring the application of European Union law in 2023 and 2024 (2025/2016(INI))
    (opinion: PETI)

    – European Union regulatory fitness and subsidiarity and proportionality – report on Better Law-Making covering 2023 and 2024 (2025/2015(INI))

    PECH Committee

    – Fisheries management approaches for safeguarding sensitive species, tackling invasive species and benefiting local economies (2025/2011(INI))

    – The role of social, economic and environmental standards in safeguarding fair competition for all aquatic food products and improving food security (2025/2010(INI))

    PETI Committee

    – Deliberations of the Committee on Petitions in 2023 (2025/2027(INI))

    (Following the Conference of Presidents’ decision of 19 December 2024)

    – The multiannual plan for the Baltic Sea and ways forward (2024/2127(INI))

    – The impact of the implementation of the Maritime Spatial Planning Directive 2014/89/EU on fisheries in selected fishing areas and sea basins (2024/2126(INI))

    – Decarbonisation and modernisation of EU fisheries, and the development and deployment of fishing gear (2024/2123(INI))

    AGRI Committee

    – The position of farmers in the agri-food value chain (2024/2122(INI))

    ECON Committee

    – The role of simple tax rules and tax fragmentation in European competitiveness (2024/2118(INI))

    – A coherent tax framework for the EU’s financial sector (2024/2117(INI))

    – Facilitating the financing of investments and reforms to boost European competitiveness and creating a Capital Markets Union (Draghi Report) (2024/2116(INI))
    (opinion: BUDG)

    FEMM Committee

    – Gender Equality Strategy 2025 (2024/2125(INI))
    (opinion: LIBE)

    – Women’s entrepreneurship in rural and island areas and outermost regions (2024/2124(INI))
    (opinion: AGRI)

    IMCO Committee

    – A new legislative framework for products that is fit for the digital and sustainable transition (2024/2119(INI))

    REGI Committee

    – The role of cohesion policy in supporting the just transition (2024/2121(INI))
    (opinion: EMPL)

    – The role of cohesion policy investment in resolving the current housing crisis (2024/2120(INI))
    (opinion: EMPL)


    III. Consent procedure

    Reports with a motion for a non-legislative resolution (consent procedure) (Rule 107(5))

    (Following notification by the Conference of Committee Chairs on 15 January 2025)

    AFET Committee

    – Interim report in view of the consent procedure on the Agreement establishing an association between the EU and the Principality of Andorra and the Republic of San Marino (2024/0101R(NLE) – 2024/0101(NLE))
    (opinion: ECON, IMCO)


    IV. Petitions

    Petitions Nos 1427-24 to 1518-24 had been entered in the register on 17 January 2025 and had been forwarded to the committee responsible, in accordance with Rule 232(9) and (10).

    The President had, on 17 January 2025, forwarded to the committee responsible, in accordance with Rule 232(15), petitions addressed to the European Parliament by natural or legal persons who were not citizens of the European Union and who did not reside, or have their registered office, in a Member State.


    V. Documents received

    The following documents had been received from Members:

    – Mathilde Androuët, Gerolf Annemans, Jordan Bardella, Nikola Bartůšek, Rachel Blom, Barbara Bonte, Paolo Borchia, Mireia Borrás Pabón, Irmhild Boßdorf, Jaroslav Bžoch, Klara Dostalova, Marieke Ehlers, Dick Erixon, Tomasz Froelich, Petras Gražulis, Branko Grims, Catherine Griset, Enikő Győri, Roman Haider, Fernand Kartheiser, Ondřej Knotek, Vilis Krištopans, Julien Leonardelli, Jorge Martín Frías, Milan Mazurek, Tiago Moreira de Sá, Jana Nagyová, Hans Neuhoff, Julie Rechagneux, Dominik Tarczyński, Hermann Tertsch, Isabella Tovaglieri, António Tânger Corrêa, Milan Uhrík, Tom Vandendriessche, Harald Vilimsky, Ewa Zajączkowska-Hernik and Auke Zijlstra. Motion for a resolution on Dismantling Overregulation and Government Encroachment: reclaiming competitiveness and innovation in the European Union (B10-0214/2024)
    referred to committee responsible: JURI
    opinion: ITRE

    – Pekka Toveri and Sebastian Tynkkynen. Motion for a resolution on restricting the ability of passenger and cargo traffic to enter European Union airspace from Russia (B10-0220/2024)
    referred to committee responsible: TRAN
    opinion: AFET

    – Matthieu Valet. Motion for a resolution on EU policy on Syrian refugees following the overthrow of the Bashar al-Assad regime (B10-0237/2024)
    referred to committee responsible: LIBE

    – Christine Anderson, Anja Arndt, René Aust, Arno Bausemer, Zsuzsanna Borvendég, Markus Buchheit, Petr Bystron, Elisabeth Dieringer, Siegbert Frank Droese, Marc Jongen, Mary Khan, Sarah Knafo, Maximilian Krah and Jaroslava Pokorná Jermanová. Motion for a resolution on financial and organisational support for Member States to repatriate Syrian nationals (B10-0238/2024)
    referred to committee responsible: LIBE


    ATTENDANCE REGISTER

    Present:

    Aaltola Mika, Abadía Jover Maravillas, Adamowicz Magdalena, Aftias Georgios, Agirregoitia Martínez Oihane, Agius Peter, Agius Saliba Alex, Allione Grégory, Al-Sahlani Abir, Anadiotis Nikolaos, Anderson Christine, Andersson Li, Andresen Rasmus, Andrews Barry, Andriukaitis Vytenis Povilas, Androuët Mathilde, Angel Marc, Annemans Gerolf, Antoci Giuseppe, Arias Echeverría Pablo, Arimont Pascal, Arłukowicz Bartosz, Arnaoutoglou Sakis, Arndt Anja, Arvanitis Konstantinos, Asens Llodrà Jaume, Assis Francisco, Attard Daniel, Aubry Manon, Auštrevičius Petras, Axinia Adrian-George, Azmani Malik, Bajada Thomas, Baljeu Jeannette, Ballarín Cereza Laura, Bardella Jordan, Barley Katarina, Barna Dan, Barrena Arza Pernando, Bartulica Stephen Nikola, Bartůšek Nikola, Bausemer Arno, Bay Nicolas, Bay Christophe, Beke Wouter, Beleris Fredis, Bellamy François-Xavier, Benea Adrian-Dragoş, Benifei Brando, Benjumea Benjumea Isabel, Beňová Monika, Berendsen Tom, Berger Stefan, Berg Sibylle, Berlato Sergio, Bernhuber Alexander, Biedroń Robert, Bielan Adam, Bischoff Gabriele, Blaha Ľuboš, Blinkevičiūtė Vilija, Blom Rachel, Bloss Michael, Bocheński Tobiasz, Boeselager Damian, Bogdan Ioan-Rareş, Bonaccini Stefano, Bonte Barbara, Borchia Paolo, Borrás Pabón Mireia, Borvendég Zsuzsanna, Borzan Biljana, Bosanac Gordan, Bosse Stine, Botenga Marc, Boyer Gilles, Boylan Lynn, Brandstätter Helmut, Brasier-Clain Marie-Luce, Braun Grzegorz, Brejza Krzysztof, Bricmont Saskia, Brnjac Nikolina, Brudziński Joachim Stanisław, Bryłka Anna, Buczek Tomasz, Buda Daniel, Buda Waldemar, Budka Borys, Bugalho Sebastião, Buła Andrzej, Burkhardt Delara, Buxadé Villalba Jorge, Bžoch Jaroslav, Camara Mélissa, Canfin Pascal, Carberry Nina, Casa David, Caspary Daniel, Cassart Benoit, Castillo Laurent, del Castillo Vera Pilar, Cavazzini Anna, Cavedagna Stefano, Ceccardi Susanna, Cepeda José, Ceulemans Estelle, Chahim Mohammed, Chaibi Leila, Chastel Olivier, Chinnici Caterina, Christensen Asger, Ciccioli Carlo, Cifrová Ostrihoňová Veronika, Ciriani Alessandro, Cisint Anna Maria, Clausen Per, Clergeau Christophe, Cormand David, Corrado Annalisa, Costanzo Vivien, Cotrim De Figueiredo João, Cowen Barry, Cremer Tobias, Crespo Díaz Carmen, Cristea Andi, Cunha Paulo, Danielsson Johan, Dauchy Marie, Dávid Dóra, David Ivan, Decaro Antonio, de la Hoz Quintano Raúl, Della Valle Danilo, Deloge Valérie, De Masi Fabio, De Meo Salvatore, Demirel Özlem, Deutsch Tamás, Devaux Valérie, Dibrani Adnan, Diepeveen Ton, Dieringer Elisabeth, Dîncu Vasile, Di Rupo Elio, Doherty Regina, Doleschal Christian, Dömötör Csaba, Do Nascimento Cabral Paulo, Donazzan Elena, Dorfmann Herbert, Dostál Ondřej, Droese Siegbert Frank, Düpont Lena, Ecke Matthias, Ehler Christian, Ehlers Marieke, Eriksson Sofie, Erixon Dick, Eroglu Engin, Everding Sebastian, Ezcurra Almansa Alma, Falcone Marco, Farantouris Nikolas, Farreng Laurence, Farský Jan, Ferber Markus, Fernández Jonás, Fidanza Carlo, Fiocchi Pietro, Firmenich Ruth, Fita Claire, Fourlas Loucas, Fourreau Emma, Fragkos Emmanouil, Freund Daniel, Frigout Anne-Sophie, Fritzon Heléne, Froelich Tomasz, Fuglsang Niels, Furet Angéline, Furore Mario, Gahler Michael, Galán Estrella, Gálvez Lina, Gambino Alberico, García Hermida-Van Der Walle Raquel, Garraud Jean-Paul, Gasiuk-Pihowicz Kamila, Geadi Geadis, Gedin Hanna, Geese Alexandra, Geier Jens, Geisel Thomas, Gemma Chiara, Georgiou Giorgos, Gerbrandy Gerben-Jan, Germain Jean-Marc, Gerzsenyi Gabriella, Geuking Niels, Gieseke Jens, Giménez Larraz Borja, Girauta Vidal Juan Carlos, Glavak Sunčana, Glück Andreas, Glucksmann Raphaël, Goerens Charles, Gomart Christophe, Gomes Isilda, Gómez López Sandra, Gonçalves Bruno, Gonçalves Sérgio, González Pons Esteban, Gori Giorgio, Gosiewska Małgorzata, Gotink Dirk, Gozi Sandro, Grapini Maria, Gražulis Petras, Grims Branko, Griset Catherine, Gronkiewicz-Waltz Hanna, Groothuis Bart, Grossmann Elisabeth, Grudler Christophe, Gualmini Elisabetta, Guarda Cristina, Guetta Bernard, Guzenina Maria, Hadjipantela Michalis, Hahn Svenja, Haider Roman, Halicki Andrzej, Hassan Rima, Häusling Martin, Hava Mircea-Gheorghe, Hazekamp Anja, Heide Hannes, Heinäluoma Eero, Henriksson Anna-Maja, Herbst Niclas, Herranz García Esther, Hetman Krzysztof, Hohlmeier Monika, Hojsík Martin, Holmgren Pär, Hölvényi György, Homs Ginel Alicia, Humberto Sérgio, Ijabs Ivars, Imart Céline, Incir Evin, Inselvini Paolo, Iovanovici Şoşoacă Diana, Jalloul Muro Hana, Jamet France, Jerković Romana, Jongen Marc, Joński Dariusz, Joron Virginie, Jouvet Pierre, Joveva Irena, Juknevičienė Rasa, Junco García Nora, Jungbluth Alexander, Kabilov Taner, Kalfon François, Kaljurand Marina, Kalniete Sandra, Kamiński Mariusz, Kanev Radan, Karlsbro Karin, Kartheiser Fernand, Karvašová Ľubica, Katainen Elsi, Kefalogiannis Emmanouil, Kelleher Billy, Keller Fabienne, Kelly Seán, Kemp Martine, Kennes Rudi, Khan Mary, Kobosko Michał, Köhler Stefan, Kohut Łukasz, Kokalari Arba, Kolář Ondřej, Kollár Kinga, Kols Rihards, Konečná Kateřina, Kopacz Ewa, Körner Moritz, Kountoura Elena, Kovatchev Andrey, Krah Maximilian, Krištopans Vilis, Kruis Sebastian, Krutílek Ondřej, Kubín Tomáš, Kuhnke Alice, Kulja András Tivadar, Kulmuni Katri, Kyllönen Merja, Kyuchyuk Ilhan, Lagodinsky Sergey, Lakos Eszter, Lalucq Aurore, Lange Bernd, Langensiepen Katrin, Laššáková Judita, László András, Laurent Murielle, Laureti Camilla, Laykova Rada, Lazarov Ilia, Lazarus Luis-Vicențiu, Le Callennec Isabelle, Leggeri Fabrice, Lenaers Jeroen, Leonardelli Julien, Lewandowski Janusz, Lexmann Miriam, Liese Peter, Lins Norbert, Loiseau Nathalie, Løkkegaard Morten, Lopatka Reinhold, López Javi, López Aguilar Juan Fernando, López-Istúriz White Antonio, Lövin Isabella, Luena César, Łukacijewska Elżbieta Katarzyna, Lupo Giuseppe, McAllister David, Madison Jaak, Magoni Lara, Maij Marit, Maląg Marlena, Manda Claudiu, Mandl Lukas, Maniatis Yannis, Mantovani Mario, Maran Pierfrancesco, Marczułajtis-Walczak Jagna, Mariani Thierry, Marino Ignazio Roberto, Martín Frías Jorge, Martins Catarina, Martusciello Fulvio, Marzà Ibáñez Vicent, Matthieu Sara, Mavrides Costas, Mayer Georg, Mazurek Milan, Mažylis Liudas, McNamara Michael, Mebarek Nora, Mehnert Alexandra, Meleti Eleonora, Mendes Ana Catarina, Mendia Idoia, Mertens Verena, Mesure Marina, Metsola Roberta, Metz Tilly, Mikser Sven, Millán Mon Francisco José, Miranda Paz Ana, Molnár Csaba, Montero Irene, Montserrat Dolors, Morace Carolina, Moreira de Sá Tiago, Moreno Sánchez Javier, Moretti Alessandra, Motreanu Dan-Ştefan, Mularczyk Arkadiusz, Müller Piotr, Mullooly Ciaran, Mureşan Siegfried, Muşoiu Ştefan, Nagyová Jana, Navarrete Rojas Fernando, Negrescu Victor, Nemec Matjaž, Nerudová Danuše, Nesci Denis, Neuhoff Hans, Neumann Hannah, Nevado del Campo Elena, Niebler Angelika, Niedermayer Luděk, Niinistö Ville, Nikolic Aleksandar, Ní Mhurchú Cynthia, Noichl Maria, Nordqvist Rasmus, Novakov Andrey, Nykiel Mirosława, Obajtek Daniel, Ódor Ľudovít, Oetjen Jan-Christoph, Ohisalo Maria, Oliveira João, Olivier Philippe, Omarjee Younous, Ondruš Branislav, Ó Ríordáin Aodhán, Ozdoba Jacek, Paet Urmas, Pajín Leire, Palmisano Valentina, Papadakis Kostas, Papandreou Nikos, Pappas Nikos, Pascual de la Parte Nicolás, Pedro Ana Miguel, Pedulla’ Gaetano, Pellerin-Carlin Thomas, Peltier Guillaume, Penkova Tsvetelina, Pennelle Gilles, Pereira Lídia, Peter-Hansen Kira Marie, Petrov Hristo, Picaro Michele, Picula Tonino, Piera Pascale, Pimpie Pierre, Piperea Gheorghe, de la Pisa Carrión Margarita, Pokorná Jermanová Jaroslava, Polato Daniele, Polfjärd Jessica, Popescu Virgil-Daniel, Pozņaks Reinis, Princi Giusi, Protas Jacek, Pürner Friedrich, Rackete Carola, Radev Emil, Radtke Dennis, Rafowicz Emma, Ratas Jüri, Rechagneux Julie, Regner Evelyn, Repasi René, Repp Sabrina, Ressler Karlo, Reuten Thijs, Riba i Giner Diana, Ricci Matteo, Riehl Nela, Ripa Manuela, Rodrigues André, Ros Sempere Marcos, Roth Neveďalová Katarína, Rougé André, Ruissen Bert-Jan, Ruotolo Sandro, Rzońca Bogdan, Saeidi Arash, Salini Massimiliano, Salis Ilaria, Salla Aura, Sánchez Amor Nacho, Sanchez Julien, Sancho Murillo Elena, Saramo Jussi, Sardone Silvia, Šarec Marjan, Sargiacomo Eric, Satouri Mounir, Saudargas Paulius, Sbai Majdouline, Sberna Antonella, Schaldemose Christel, Schaller-Baross Ernő, Schenk Oliver, Scheuring-Wielgus Joanna, Schieder Andreas, Schilling Lena, Schneider Christine, Schwab Andreas, Scuderi Benedetta, Seekatz Ralf, Sell Alexander, Serrano Sierra Rosa, Serra Sánchez Isabel, Sienkiewicz Bartłomiej, Simon Sven, Singer Christine, Sinkevičius Virginijus, Sippel Birgit, Sjöstedt Jonas, Śmiszek Krzysztof, Smith Anthony, Smit Sander, Sokol Tomislav, Solier Diego, Sommen Liesbet, Sonneborn Martin, Sorel Malika, Sousa Silva Hélder, Søvndal Villy, Squarta Marco, Staķis Mārtiņš, Stancanelli Raffaele, Stier Davor Ivo, Stöteler Sebastiaan, Stoyanov Stanislav, Strack-Zimmermann Marie-Agnes, Strada Cecilia, Streit Joachim, Strik Tineke, Strolenberg Anna, Stürgkh Anna, Sypniewski Marcin, Szczerba Michał, Szekeres Pál, Szydło Beata, Tamburrano Dario, Tânger Corrêa António, Tarquinio Marco, Târziu Claudiu-Richard, Tavares Carla, Tegethoff Kai, Temido Marta, Teodorescu Georgiana, Teodorescu Måwe Alice, Ter Laak Ingeborg, Terras Riho, Thionnet Pierre-Romain, Timgren Beatrice, Tinagli Irene, Tobback Bruno, Tobé Tomas, Tolassy Rody, Tomašič Zala, Tomc Romana, Tonin Matej, Toom Jana, Topo Raffaele, Torselli Francesco, Tosi Flavio, Toussaint Marie, Toveri Pekka, Tridico Pasquale, Trochu Laurence, Tsiodras Dimitris, Tudose Mihai, Tynkkynen Sebastian, Uhrík Milan, Ušakovs Nils, Vaidere Inese, Valchev Ivaylo, Vălean Adina, Valet Matthieu, Van Brempt Kathleen, Van Brug Anouk, van den Berg Brigitte, Vandendriessche Tom, Van Dijck Kris, Van Lanschot Reinier, Van Leeuwen Jessika, Vannacci Roberto, Van Overtveldt Johan, Van Sparrentak Kim, Varaut Alexandre, Vasconcelos Ana, Vasile-Voiculescu Vlad, Vautmans Hilde, Vedrenne Marie-Pierre, Ventola Francesco, Verheyen Sabine, Verougstraete Yvan, Veryga Aurelijus, Vieira Catarina, Vigenin Kristian, Vilimsky Harald, Vincze Loránt, Vind Marianne, Vistisen Anders, Vivaldini Mariateresa, Volgin Petar, von der Schulenburg Michael, Vondra Alexandr, Voss Axel, Vozemberg-Vrionidi Elissavet, Vrecionová Veronika, Vázquez Lázara Adrián, Waitz Thomas, Walsmann Marion, Warborn Jörgen, Warnke Jan-Peter, Wąsik Maciej, Wawrykiewicz Michał, Wcisło Marta, Wechsler Andrea, Werbrouck Séverine, Wiesner Emma, Wiezik Michal, Wilmès Sophie, Winkler Iuliu, Winzig Angelika, Wiseler-Lima Isabel, Wiśniewska Jadwiga, Wölken Tiemo, Wolters Lara, Yar Lucia, Yon-Courtin Stéphanie, Zacharia Maria, Zajączkowska-Hernik Ewa, Zalewska Anna, Žalimas Dainius, Zan Alessandro, Zarzalejos Javier, Zdechovský Tomáš, Zdrojewski Bogdan Andrzej, Zijlstra Auke, Zīle Roberts, Zingaretti Nicola, Złotowski Kosma, Zoido Álvarez Juan Ignacio, Zovko Željana, Zver Milan

    Excused:

    Sidl Günther


    ANNEX 1 – Composition of new committees

    C01A SEDE

    [ 20/01/2025 – ]

    Комисия по сигурност и отбрана

    Comisión de Seguridad y Defensa

    Výbor pro bezpečnost a obranu

    Udvalget om Sikkerhed og Forsvar

    Ausschuss für Sicherheit und Verteidigung

    Julgeoleku- ja kaitsekomisjon

    Επιτροπή Ασφάλειας και Άμυνας

    Committee on Security and Defence

    Commission de la sécurité et de la défense

    An Coiste um Shlándáil agus Cosaint

    Odbor za sigurnost i obranu

    Commissione per la sicurezza e la difesa

    Drošības un aizsardzības komiteja

    Saugumo ir gynybos komitetas

    ssBiztonság- és Védelempolitikai Bizottság

    Kumitat għas-Sigurtà u d-Difiża

    Commissie veiligheid en defensie

    Komisja Bezpieczeństwa i Obrony

    Comissão da Segurança e da Defesa

    Comisia pentru securitate și apărare

    Výbor pre bezpečnosť a obranu

    Odbor za varnost in obrambo

    Turvallisuus- ja puolustuspolitiikan valiokunta

    Utskottet för säkerhet och försvar

    (43 members)

    PPE (11)

    BEKE Wouter

    DE MEO Salvatore

    GOMART Christophe

    HERBST Niclas

    MEIMARAKIS Vangelis

    NOVAKOV Andrey

    PASCUAL DE LA PARTE Nicolás

    SZCZERBA Michał

    TEODORESCU MÅWE Alice

    TERRAS Riho

    TOVERI Pekka

    S&D (8)

    CREMER Tobias

    DI RUPO Elio

    GLUCKSMANN Raphaël

    LÓPEZ Javi

    MAVRIDES Costas

    MENDES Ana Catarina

    MIKSER Sven

    TUDOSE Mihai

    PfE (5)

    HÖLVÉNYI György

    POKORNÁ JERMANOVÁ Jaroslava

    STÖTELER Sebastiaan

    THIONNET Pierre-Romain

    VANNACCI Roberto

    ECR (5)

    DONAZZAN Elena

    DWORCZYK Michał

    GAMBINO Alberico

    POZŅAKS Reinis

    VONDRA Alexandr

    Renew (5)

    AUŠTREVIČIUS Petras

    LOISEAU Nathalie

    ŠAREC Marjan

    STRACK-ZIMMERMANN Marie-Agnes

    YAR Lucia

    Verts/ALE (3)

    NEUMANN Hannah

    STAĶIS Mārtiņš

    VAN LANSCHOT Reinier

    The Left (3)

    BOTENGA Marc

    DEMIREL Özlem

    KYLLÖNEN Merja

    ESN (1)

    NEUHOFF Hans

    NI (2)

    PAPADAKIS Kostas

    VON DER SCHULENBURG Michael

    C08A SANT

    [ 20/01/2025 – ]

    Комисия по обществено здраве

    Comisión de Salud Pública

    Výbor pro veřejné zdraví

    Udvalget om Folkesundhed

    Ausschuss für öffentliche Gesundheit

    Rahvatervishoiu komisjon

    Επιτροπή Δημόσιας Υγείας

    Committee on Public Health

    Commission de la santé publique

    An Coiste um Shláinte Phoiblí

    Odbor za javno zdravlje

    Commissione per la sanità pubblica

    Sabiedrības veselības komiteja

    Visuomenės sveikatos komitetas

    Közegészségügyi Bizottság

    Kumitat għas-Saħħa Pubblika

    Commissie volksgezondheid

    Komisja Zdrowia Publicznego

    Comissão da Saúde Pública

    Comisia pentru sănătate publică

    Výbor pre verejné zdravie

    Odbor za javno zdravje

    Kansanterveyden valiokunta

    Utskottet för folkhälsa

    (43 members)

    PPE (11)

    ARŁUKOWICZ Bartosz

    CASTILLO Laurent

    HADJIPANTELA Michalis

    JARUBAS Adam

    KULJA András Tivadar

    LIESE Peter

    MORATTI Letizia

    NEVADO DEL CAMPO Elena

    POLFJÄRD Jessica

    SCHENK Oliver

    SOKOL Tomislav

    S&D (8)

    ANDRIUKAITIS Vytenis Povilas

    CLERGEAU Christophe

    GONZÁLEZ CASARES Nicolás

    JERKOVIĆ Romana

    MORETTI Alessandra

    NEGRESCU Victor

    PAPANDREOU Nikos

    WÖLKEN Tiemo

    PfE (5)

    BRASIER-CLAIN Marie-Luce

    DE LA PISA CARRIÓN Margarita

    FERENC Viktória

    HAUSER Gerald

    KNOTEK Ondřej

    ECR (5)

    BUDA Waldemar

    FRAGKOS Emmanouil

    PICARO Michele

    RAZZA Ruggero

    TROCHU Laurence

    Renew (5)

    BOSSE Stine

    CANFIN Pascal

    CHASTEL Olivier

    CIFROVÁ OSTRIHOŇOVÁ Veronika

    VASILE-VOICULESCU Vlad

    Verts/ALE (3)

    HÄUSLING Martin

    MARINO Ignazio Roberto

    METZ Tilly

    The Left (3)

    MARTINS Catarina

    PALMISANO Valentina

    TAMBURRANO Dario

    ESN (1)

    ANDERSON Christine

    NI (2)

    BEŇOVÁ Monika

    DOSTÁL Ondřej

    CS01 EUDS

    [ 20/01/2025 – ]

    Специална комисия относно европейския щит за демокрацията

    Comisión Especial sobre el Escudo Europeo de la Democracia

    Zvláštní výbor pro Evropský štít pro demokracii

    Det Særlige Udvalg om Det Europæiske Demokratiskjold

    Sonderausschuss für den Europäischen Schutzschild für die Demokratie

    Euroopa demokraatia kaitse erikomisjon

    Ειδική Επιτροπή για την Ευρωπαϊκή Ασπίδα Δημοκρατίας

    Special committee on the European Democracy Shield

    Commission spéciale sur le bouclier européen de la démocratie

    An Coiste Speisialta um an Sciath Eorpach don Daonlathas

    Posebni odbor za europski štit za zaštitu demokracije

    Commissione speciale sullo scudo europeo per la democrazia

    Īpašā komiteja attiecībā uz Eiropas demokrātijas vairogu

    Specialusis komitetas Europos demokratijos skydo klausimais

    Az európai demokráciapajzzsal foglalkozó különbizottság

    Kumitat Speċjali dwar it-Tarka Ewropea għad-Demokrazija

    Bijzondere Commissie inzake een schild voor de Europese democratie

    Komisja Specjalna ds. Europejskiej Tarczy Demokracji

    Comissão Especial sobre o Escudo Europeu da Democracia

    Comisia specială pentru Scutul democrației europene

    Osobitný výbor pre európsky štít na obranu demokracie

    Posebni odbor za evropski ščit za demokracijo

    Eurooppalaista demokratian kilpeä käsittelevä erityisvaliokunta

    Särskilda utskottet för det europeiska demokratiförsvaret

    (33 members)

    PPE (9)

    AALTOLA Mika

    BOGDAN Ioan-Rareş

    DÜPONT Lena

    KALNIETE Sandra

    MARTUSCIELLO Fulvio

    SIENKIEWICZ Bartłomiej

    TOBÉ Tomas

    ZDECHOVSKÝ Tomáš

    ZOIDO ÁLVAREZ Juan Ignacio

    S&D (6)

    DÎNCU Vasile

    MENDES Ana Catarina

    MOLNÁR Csaba

    PICIERNO Pina

    SCHALDEMOSE Christel

    VAN BREMPT Kathleen

    PfE (4)

    BŽOCH Jaroslav

    LEGGERI Fabrice

    SCHALLER-BAROSS Ernő

    TÂNGER CORRÊA António

    ECR (4)

    CAVEDAGNA Stefano

    KANKO Assita

    SZYDŁO Beata

    TERHEŞ Cristian

    Renew (4)

    BRANDSTÄTTER Helmut

    GROOTHUIS Bart

    LOISEAU Nathalie

    WILMÈS Sophie

    Verts/ALE (2)

    GEESE Alexandra

    VAN SPARRENTAK Kim

    The Left (2)

    ARVANITIS Konstantinos

    DELLA VALLE Danilo

    ESN (1)

    ANDERSON Christine

    NI (1)

    PANAYIOTOU Fidias

    CS02 HOUS

    [ 20/01/2025 – ]

    Специална комисия относно жилищната криза в Европейския съюз

    Comisión Especial sobre la Crisis de la Vivienda en la Unión Europea

    Zvláštní výbor pro krizi v oblasti bydlení v Evropské unii

    Det Særlige Udvalg om Boligkrisen i Den Europæiske Union

    Sonderausschuss zur Wohnraumkrise in der Europäischen Union

    Euroopa Liidu eluasemekriisi erikomisjon

    Ειδική Επιτροπή για τη στεγαστική κρίση στην Ευρωπαϊκή Ένωση

    Special committee on the Housing Crisis in the European Union

    Commission spéciale sur la crise du logement dans l’Union européenne

    An Coiste Speisialta um an nGéarchéim Tithíochta san Aontas Eorpach

    Posebni odbor za stambenu krizu u Europskoj uniji

    Commissione speciale sulla crisi degli alloggi nell’Unione europea

    Īpašā komiteja mājokļu krīzes risināšanai Eiropas Savienībā

    Specialusis komitetas būsto krizės Europos Sąjungoje klausimais

    Az Európai Unióban tapasztalható lakhatási válsággal foglalkozó különbizottság

    Kumitat Speċjali dwar il-Kriżi tal-Akkomodazzjoni fl-Unjoni Ewropea

    Bijzondere Commissie inzake de huisvestingscrisis in de Europese Unie

    Komisja Specjalna ds. Kryzysu Mieszkaniowego w Unii Europejskiej

    Comissão Especial sobre a Crise de Habitação na União Europeia

    Comisia specială pentru criza locuințelor în Uniunea Europeană

    Osobitný výbor pre krízu bývania v Európskej únii

    Posebni odbor za stanovanjsko krizo v Evropski uniji

    Asuntokriisiä Euroopan unionissa käsittelevä erityisvaliokunta

    Särskilda utskottet för bostadskrisen i Europeiska unionen

    (33 members)

    PPE (9)

    BUGALHO Sebastião

    CASA David

    DOHERTY Regina

    EZCURRA ALMANSA Alma

    FALCONE Marco

    FERBER Markus

    GOTINK Dirk

    LE CALLENNEC Isabelle

    MARCZUŁAJTIS-WALCZAK Jagna

    S&D (6)

    BISCHOFF Gabriele

    GOMES Isilda

    HOMS GINEL Alicia

    MEBAREK Nora

    SCHIEDER Andreas

    TINAGLI Irene

    PfE (4)

    BLOM Rachel

    DOSTALOVA Klara

    HÖLVÉNYI György

    RECHAGNEUX Julie

    ECR (4)

    JUNCO GARCÍA Nora

    MAGONI Lara

    SBERNA Antonella

    TEODORESCU Georgiana

    Renew (4)

    HOJSÍK Martin

    MULLOOLY Ciaran

    TOOM Jana

    VAN DEN BERG Brigitte

    Verts/ALE (2)

    MARZÀ IBÁÑEZ Vicent

    OHISALO Maria

    The Left (2)

    CHAIBI Leila

    MONTERO Irene

    ESN (1)

    BOSSDORF Irmhild

    NI (1)

    ZACHARIA Maria

    MIL OSI Europe News –