Category: Fisheries

MIL-OSI: Alaris Equity Partners Income Trust Releases 2025 First Quarter Financial Results

Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION IN THE UNITED STATES.

FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH THIS RESTRICTION MAY CONSTITUTE A VIOLATION OF UNITED STATES SECURITIES LAW.

CALGARY, Alberta, May 08, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Alaris Equity Partners Income Trust (TSX-AD.UN) (together, as applicable, with its subsidiaries, “Alaris” or the “Trust“) is pleased to announce its results for the three months ended March 31, 2025. The results are prepared in accordance with IFRS Accounting Standards as issued by the International Accounting Standards Board. All amounts below are in Canadian dollars unless otherwise noted.

Highlights:

For the period ended March 31, 2025, Alaris generated $0.12 per unit of additional Net book value ⁽¹⁾, improving this metric to $24.34. Driving this increase is current quarter earnings of $0.50 per unit, offset by $0.34 of distributions to unitholders;
During the quarter, the Trust, through its normal course issuer bid (“NCIB”), purchased and cancelled 218,900 units, which reflects a $0.02 per unit of additional Net book value ⁽¹⁾;
The Trust, together with its Acquisition Entities, earned $43.0 million of Partner distribution revenue in Q1 2025, an increase of $3.7 million or 9% for the three-month period as compared to Q1 2024. The period over period increase is primarily the result of new and follow-on investments made subsequent to Q1 2024, higher common distributions received and for preferred distributions that were subject to a reset, an increase of distributions of approximately 4% based on unaudited result from each of its Partners;
Alaris’ net distributable cash flow ⁽²⁾ for the three months ended March 31, 2025, of $30.4 million increased by 19% as compared to the three months ended March 31, 2024.
- The Actual Payout Ratio ⁽³⁾ for the Trust, based on the Alaris net distributable cash ⁽²⁾ flow for the three months ended March 31, 2025 was 59%, which is inclusive of the cash disbursements related to the quarters NCIB purchases;
Following March 31, 2025, Federal Management Partners, LLC (“FMP”) experienced suspension of certain key contracts, primarily driven by changes in U.S. federal procurement policies, resulting in a material reduction in revenue. These developments are expected to have a significant adverse impact on FMP’s financial performance and outlook in the near term. Given the evolving circumstances and associated uncertainty, Alaris anticipates that FMP’s ability to sustain distribution payments for the remainder of the year will be negatively affected. Furthermore, these factors are expected to lead to a material downward reassessment of the fair value of FMP. FMP management is actively evaluating mitigation strategies and Alaris is continuing to assess the potential impact to FMP’s long-term outlook;
The weighted average combined Earnings Coverage Ratio ⁽⁴⁾ for Alaris’ Partners is approximately 1.5x with ten of twenty Partners greater than 1.5x. In addition, twelve of our partners have either no debt or less than 1.0x Senior Debt to EBITDA on a trailing twelve-month basis;
Subsequent to quarter end, Alaris completed an amendment to its senior credit facility, which included converting the credit facility from CDN$500 million to US$450 million, in addition to converting the accordion feature from CDN$50 million to US$50 million. As of the date of this release, total drawn of the facility is approximately US$289 million and US$161 million remaining available.

“Our first quarter saw solid performance from the portfolio despite a very uncertain environment. The combination of predominantly required service, low leverage businesses continues to shield us from extreme volatility. The US government cuts have ultimately hit one of our partners, FMP, in a negative way. Despite it appearing that the company had dodged anything significant through the end of April, a surprise cut to some of their large contracts has resulted in a substantial loss of revenue and a need to pivot. This is still a profitable company with no net debt and an extremely talented, aligned management team. FMP is already focusing on targeting new opportunities to replace lost contracts but this will take time to execute on. We are confident in this management team’s ability to build the revenue stream back up. We’re very fortunate that as a portfolio, the impact of the government cuts and tariffs has been quite small in the context of our total portfolio. On a positive note, the current environment is presenting our company with a large number of opportunities to invest in very good, long-term assets. We expect an active second half of deployment.” said Steve King President and CEO.

Results of Operations

Three months ended March 31,		2025		2024	% Change
Change in Net book value per unit	$	0.12	$	0.54	-77.8	%
Alaris net distributable cash flow per unit	$	0.67	$	0.56	+19.6	%
Earnings from operations per unit	$	0.62	$	0.52	+19.2	%
Earnings and comprehensive income per unit	$	0.50	$	1.62	-69.1	%
Weighted average basic units (000’s)		45,534		45,498

Net book value ⁽¹⁾ per unit at March 31, 2025 increased by $0.12 during the quarter to $24.34 per unit, which is a 77.8% decrease from Q1 2024 change in Net book value ⁽¹⁾ of $0.54 per unit . The $0.12 per unit increase in Net book value ⁽¹⁾ is primarily driven by $0.50 earnings per unit recorded by the Trust during Q1 2025, less the quarterly dividend of $0.34 per unit. In Q1 2024, $0.46 of the $0.54 per unit change in Net book value ⁽¹⁾ was related to a foreign exchange gain of $20.1 million as compared to a foreign exchange loss of $4.9 million in the current quarter. These foreign exchange gains and losses are primarily related to the revaluation of U.S dollar denominated assets due to changes in foreign exchange rates from period to period.

Alaris net distributable cash flow ⁽²⁾ per unit increased by 19.6%, primarily due to higher preferred and common Partner distributions received in Q1 2025 in addition to higher cash taxes recovered by the Acquisition Entities during the quarter. Partner distributions increased quarter over quarter, reflecting higher common Distributions received in Q1 2025 and higher preferred distributions, primarily due to Alaris’ new investment in Cresa, LLC (“Cresa”) and follow-on investment in The Shipyard, LLC (”Shipyard”) that were made partway through the prior year. New investments in The Berg Demo Holdings, LLC (“Berg”) and Professional Electric Contractors of Connecticut, Inc. (“PEC”) completed in Q1 2025, also contributed to the increase. These were partially offset by lower distributions following the redemption of Brown & Settle Investments, LLC and a subsidiary thereof (collectively, “Brown & Settle”) and as part of Ohana Growth Partners, LLC (“Ohana”) asset under management transaction in Q4 2024, which had lower yields on the new convertible preferred units received.

Earnings and comprehensive income decreased by 69.1% per unit due to a non-recurring gain of $30.3 million recognized in Q1 2024 on the derecognition of previously consolidated entities, as well as a foreign exchange loss of $4.9 million recognized during Q1 2025 as compared to a foreign exchange gain of $20.8 million in Q1 2024. Partially offsetting period over period decrease to earnings and comprehensive income is a 19.2% increase to earnings from operations in Q1 2025 as compared to Q1 2024, which is primarily due to higher revenue and operating income driven by higher Distributions from Partners and increases to the fair value of Partner investments. The Trust recorded a net increase of $10.1 million to the fair value of its investment in Partners during Q1 2025, largely driven by gains to the fair value of Alaris’ investment in Shipyard and Ohana, and partially offset by a fair value decrease in Sono Bello, LLC (“Sono Bello“).

Outlook

In Q1 2025, the Trust together with its Acquisition Entities earned $43.7 million of revenue from Partners, which included $43.0 million of Partner Distributions and $0.7 million of third party transaction and management fee revenue, collectively which was ahead of previous guidance of $42.5 million due to higher than expected common Distributions received, as well as a higher realized foreign exchange rate on US denominated distributions. Alaris expects total revenue from its Partners in Q2 2025 of approximately $41.4 million.

During the three months ended March 31, 2025, the Trust, through its Acquisition Entities invested in two new Partners, Berg and PEC, for a total investment of approximately $118 million. Subsequent to March 31, 2025, FMP was impacted by the loss of certain key contracts which Alaris anticipates will require FMP to defer distributions. These investments and the deferral of FMP’s distributions are reflected in Alaris’ Run Rate Revenue ⁽⁵⁾ for the next twelve months, of approximately $178 million, which includes an estimated $19.1 million of common dividends.

The Run Rate Cash Flow ⁽⁶⁾ table below outlines the Trust and it’s Acquisition Entities’ combined expectation for Partners Distribution revenue, transaction fee revenue, general and administrative expenses, third party interest expense, tax expense and distributions to unitholders for the next twelve months. The Run Rate Cash Flow ⁽⁶⁾ is a forward looking supplementary financial measure and outlines the net cash from operating activities, less the distributions paid, that Alaris is expecting to generate over the next twelve months. The Trust’s method of calculating this measure may differ from the methods used by other issuers. Therefore, it may not be comparable to similar measures presented by other issuers.

Run rate general and administrative expenses are currently estimated at $18.5 million and include all public company costs incurred by the Trust and its Acquisition Entities. The Trust’s Run Rate Payout Ratio ⁽⁷⁾ is expected to be within a range of 60% and 65% when including Run Rate Revenue ⁽⁵⁾, overhead expenses and our existing capital structure. The table below sets out our estimated Run Rate Cash Flow ⁽⁶⁾ as well as the after-tax impact of positive net investment, the impact of every 1% increase in Secure Overnight Financing Rate (“SOFR”) based on current outstanding USD debt and the impact of every $0.01 change in the USD to CAD exchange rate.

Run Rate Cash Flow ($ thousands except per unit)		Amount ($)			$ / Unit
Run Rate Revenue, Partner Distribution revenue		$	178,000		$	3.91
General and administrative expenses			(18,500	)		(0.41	)
Third party Interest and taxes			(60,600	)		(1.33	)
Net cash from operating activities		$	98,900		$	2.17
Distributions paid			(61,900	)		(1.36	)
Run Rate Cash Flow		$	37,000		$	0.81

Other considerations (after taxes and interest):
New investments	Every $50 million deployed @ 14%		+2,550			+0.06
Interest rates	Every 1.0% increase in SOFR		-3,200			-0.07
USD to CAD	Every $0.01 change of USD to CAD	+/- 900			+/- 0.02

Alaris’ financial statements and MD&A are available on SEDAR+ at www.sedarplus.ca and on our website at www.alarisequitypartners.com.

Earnings Release Date and Conference Call Details

Alaris management will host a conference call at 9am MT (11am ET), Friday, May 9, 2025 to discuss the financial results and outlook for the Trust.

Participants must register for the call using this link: Q1 2025 Conference Call. Pre-register to receive the dial-in numbers and unique PIN to access the call seamlessly. It is recommended that you join 10 minutes prior to the event start (although you may register and dial in at any time during the call). Participants can access the webcast here: Q1 Webcast. A replay of the webcast will be available two hours after the call and archived on the same web page for six months. Participants can also find the link on our website, stored under the “Investors” section – “Presentations and Events”, at www.alarisequitypartners.com.

An updated corporate presentation will be posted to the Trust’s website within 24 hours at www.alarisequitypartners.com.

About the Trust:

Alaris’ investment and investing activity refers to providing, through the Acquisition Entities, structured equity to private companies (“Partners”) to meet their business and capital objectives, which includes management buyouts, dividend recapitalization, growth and acquisitions. Alaris achieves this by investing its unitholder capital, as well as debt, through the Acquisition Entities, in exchange for distributions, dividends or interest (collectively, “Distributions”) as well as capital appreciation on both preferred and common equity. The principal objective is to generate predictable cash flows for distribution payments to its unitholders while growing net book value through returns from capital appreciation. Distributions, other than common equity Distributions, from the Partners are adjusted annually based on the percentage change of a “top-line” financial performance measure such as gross margin or same store sales and rank in priority to common equity position.

Non-GAAP and Other Financial Measures

The terms Net book value, Alaris net distributable cashflow, Earnings Coverage Ratio, Run Rate Payout Ratio, Actual Payout Ratio, Run Rate Revenue, Run Rate Cash Flow, and Per Unit amounts (collectively, the “Non-GAAP and Other Financial Measures”) are financial measures used in this MD&A that are not standard measures under International Financial Reporting Standards (“IFRS”) . The Trust’s method of calculating the Non-GAAP and Other Financial Measures may differ from the methods used by other issuers. Therefore, the Trust’s Non-GAAP and Other Financial Measures may not be comparable to similar measures presented by other issuers.

(1) “Net book value” and “net book value per unit” are Non-GAAP financial measures and represents the equity value of the company or total assets less total liabilities and the same amount divided by weighted average basic units outstanding. Net book value and net book value per unit are used by management to determine the growth in assets over the period net of amounts paid out to unitholders as distributions. Management believes net book value and net book value per unit are useful supplemental measures from which to compare the Trust’s growth period over period. The Trust’s method of calculating these Non-GAAP financial measures may differ from the methods used by other issuers. Therefore, they may not be comparable to similar measures presented by other issuers.

	31-Mar		31-Dec		31-Mar
*$ thousands except per unit amounts*		2025		2024		2024
Total Assets	$	1,201,210	$	1,199,683	$	1,073,401
Total Liabilities	$	92,749	$	97,721	$	87,985
Net book value	$	1,108,461	$	1,101,962	$	985,416
Weighted average basic units (000’s)		45,534		45,503		45,498
Net book value per unit	$	24.34	$	24.22	$	21.66

(2) “Alaris net distributable cashflow” is a non-GAAP measure that refers to all sources of external revenue in both the Trust and the Acquisition Entities less all general and administrative expenses, third party interest expense and cash tax paid (received). Alaris net distributable cashflow is a useful metric for management and investors as it provides a summary of the total cash from operating activities that can be used to pay the Trust distribution, repay senior debt and/or be used for additional investment purposes. The Trust’s method of calculating this Non-GAAP measure may differ from the methods used by other issuers. Therefore, it may not be comparable to similar measures presented by other issuers.

	Three months ended March 31
*$ thousands except per unit amounts*		2025			2024		% Change
Partner Distribution revenue – Preferred	$	40,579		$	38,193
Partner Distribution revenue – Common	$	2,393		$	601
Third party management and advisory fees	$	706		$	510

Expenditures of the Trust:
General and administrative	$	(4,185	)	$	(4,110	)
Third party cash interest paid by the Trust	$	(2,028	)	$	(2,032	)
Cash taxes (paid) / received by the Trust	$	(7	)	$	–

Expenditures incurred by Acquisition Entities:
Operating costs and other	$	(866	)	$	(903	)
Transactions costs	$	(1,869	)	$	(1,362	)
Cash interest paid, senior credit facility and convertible debentures	$	(6,290	)	$	(5,428	)
Cash taxes received by the Acquisition Entities	$	1,988		$	63
Alaris net distributable cash flow	$	30,421		$	25,532			+19.1	%
Alaris net distributable cash flow per unit	$	0.67		$	0.56			+19.6	%

(3) “Actual Payout Ratio” is a supplementary financial measure and refers to Alaris’ total distributions paid during the period (annually or quarterly) divided by Alaris net distributable cashflow generated for the period. It represents the net cash from operating activities after distributions paid to unitholders available for either repayments of senior debt and/or to be used in investing activities.

(4) “Earnings Coverage Ratio (“ECR”)” is a supplementary financial measure and refers to the EBITDA of a Partner divided by such Partner’s sum of debt servicing (interest and principal), unfunded capital expenditures and distributions to Alaris. Management believes the earnings coverage ratio is a useful metric in assessing our partners continued ability to make their contracted distributions.

(5) “Run Rate Revenue” is a supplementary financial measure and refers to Alaris’ total revenue expected to be generated over the next twelve months based on contracted distributions from current Partners, excluding any potential Partner redemptions, it also includes an estimate for common dividends or distributions based on past practices, where applicable. Run Rate Revenue is a useful metric as it provides an expectation for the amount of revenue Alaris can expect to generate in the next twelve months based on information known.

(6) “Run Rate Cash Flow” is a Non-GAAP financial measure and outlines the net cash from operating activities, net of distributions paid, that Alaris is expecting to have after the next twelve months. This measure is comparable to net cash from operating activities less distributions paid, as outlined in Alaris’ consolidated statements of cash flows.

(7) “Run Rate Payout Ratio” is a Non-GAAP financial ratio that refers to Alaris’ distributions per unit expected to be paid over the next twelve months divided by the net cash from operating activities per unit calculated in the Run Rate Cash Flow table. Run Rate Payout Ratio is a useful metric for Alaris to track and to outline as it provides a summary of the percentage of the net cash from operating activities that can be used to either repay senior debt during the next twelve months and/or be used for additional investment purposes. Run Rate Payout Ratio is comparable to Actual Payout Ratio as defined above.

(8) “Per Unit” values, other than earnings per unit, refer to the related financial statement caption as defined under IFRS or related term as defined herein, divided by the weighted average basic units outstanding for the period.

The terms Net Book Value, Components of Corporate investments, EBITDA, Adjusted EBITDA, Alaris net distributable cashflow, Earnings Coverage Ratio, Run Rate Payout Ratio, Actual Payout Ratio, Run Rate Revenue, Run Rate Cash Flow, and Per Unit amounts should only be used in conjunction with the Trust’s unaudited interim condensed consolidated financial statements, complete versions of which available on SEDAR+ at www.sedarplus.ca.

Forward-Looking Statements

This news release contains forward-looking information and forward-looking statements (collectively, “forward-looking statements”) under applicable securities laws, including any applicable “safe harbor” provisions. Statements other than statements of historical fact contained in this news release are forward-looking statements, including, without limitation, management’s expectations, intentions and beliefs concerning the growth, results of operations, performance of the Trust and the Partners, the future financial position or results of the Trust, business strategy and plans and objectives of or involving the Trust or the Partners. Many of these statements can be identified by looking for words such as “believe”, “expects”, “will”, “intends”, “projects”, “anticipates”, “estimates”, “continues” or similar words or the negative thereof. In particular, this news release contains forward-looking statements regarding: the anticipated financial and operating performance of the Partners; the attractiveness of Alaris’ capital offering; the Trust’s Run Rate Payout Ratio, Run Rate Cash Flow, Run Rate Revenue and total revenue; the impact of recent new investments and follow-on investments; expectations regarding receipt (and amount of) any common equity Distributions or dividends from Partners in which Alaris holds common equity, including the impact on the Trust’s net cash from operating activities, Run Rate Revenue, Run Rate Cash Flow and Run Rate Payout Ratio; the impact of future deployment; the Trust’s ability to deploy capital; expected gains on common equity and future exits; payout of Alaris’ AUM strategy including, without limitation, the impact of management fees and profit participation; the yield on the Trust’s investments and expected resets on Distributions; changes in interest rates, including SOFR and exchange rates; the impact of deferred Distributions and the timing of repayment there of; the Trust’s return on its investments; and Alaris’ expenses for the next twelve months. To the extent any forward-looking statements herein constitute a financial outlook or future oriented financial information (collectively, “FOFI”), including estimates regarding revenues, Distributions from Partners (restarting full or partial Distributions and common equity distributions), Run Rate Payout Ratio, Run Rate Cash Flow, net cash from operating activities, expenses and impact of capital deployment, they were approved by management as of the date hereof and have been included to provide an understanding with respect to Alaris’ financial performance and are subject to the same risks and assumptions disclosed herein. There can be no assurance that the plans, intentions or expectations upon which these forward-looking statements are based will occur.

By their nature, forward-looking statements require Alaris to make assumptions and are subject to inherent risks and uncertainties. Assumptions about the performance of the Canadian and U.S. economies over the next 24 months and how that will affect Alaris’ business and that of its Partners (including, without limitation, the impact of any global health crisis, like COVID-19, and global economic and political factors) are material factors considered by Alaris management when setting the outlook for Alaris. Key assumptions include, but are not limited to, assumptions that: the Russia/Ukraine conflict, conflicts in the Middle East, and other global economic pressures over the next twelve months will not materially impact Alaris, its Partners or the global economy; interest rates will not rise in a matter materially different from the prevailing market expectation over the next 12 months; global heath crises, like COVID-19 or variants thereof, will not impact the economy or our Partners operations in a material way in the next 12 months; the businesses of the majority of our Partners will continue to grow; more private companies will require access to alternative sources of capital; the businesses of new Partners and those of existing Partners will perform in line with Alaris’ expectations and diligence; and that Alaris will have the ability to raise required equity and/or debt financing on acceptable terms. Management of Alaris has also assumed that the Canadian and U.S. dollar trading pair will remain in a range of approximately plus or minus 15% of the current rate over the next 6 months. In determining expectations for economic growth, management of Alaris primarily considers historical economic data provided by the Canadian and U.S. governments and their agencies as well as prevailing economic conditions at the time of such determinations.

There can be no assurance that the assumptions, plans, intentions or expectations upon which these forward-looking statements are based will occur. Forward-looking statements are subject to risks, uncertainties and assumptions and should not be read as guarantees or assurances of future performance. The actual results of the Trust and the Partners could materially differ from those anticipated in the forward-looking statements contained herein as a result of certain risk factors, including, but not limited to, the following: impact of widespread health crises is, like COVID-19 (or its variants), other global economic factors (including, without limitation, the Russia/Ukraine conflict, conflicts in the Middle East, inflationary measures and global supply chain disruptions on the global economy, tariffs and internal trade disputes on the Trust and the Partners (including how many Partners will experience a slowdown of their business and the length of time of such slowdown)); the dependence of Alaris on the Partners, including any new investment structures; leverage and restrictive covenants under credit facilities; reliance on key personnel; failure to complete or realize the anticipated benefit of Alaris’ financing arrangements with the Partners; a failure to obtain required regulatory approvals on a timely basis or at all; changes in legislation and regulations and the interpretations thereof; risks relating to the Partners and their businesses, including, without limitation, a material change in the operations of a Partner or the industries they operate in; inability to close additional Partner contributions or collect proceeds from any redemptions in a timely fashion on anticipated terms, or at all; a failure to settle outstanding litigation on expected terms, or at all; a change in the ability of the Partners to continue to pay Alaris at expected Distribution levels or restart distributions (in full or in part); a failure to collect material deferred Distributions; a change in the unaudited information provided to the Trust; a negative impact on the Trust or Partners with risk to cybersecurity and or implementation of artificial intelligence; and a failure to realize the benefits of any concessions or relief measures provided by Alaris to any Partner or to successfully execute an exit strategy for a Partner where desired. Additional risks that may cause actual results to vary from those indicated are discussed under the heading “Risk Factors” and “Forward Looking Statements” in Alaris’ Management Discussion and Analysis and Annual Information Form for the year ended December 31, 2024, which is or will be (in the case of the AIF) filed under Alaris’ profile at www.sedarplus.ca and on its website at www.alarisequitypartners.com.

Readers are cautioned that the assumptions used in the preparation of forward-looking statements, including FOFI, although considered reasonable at the time of preparation, based on information in Alaris’ possession as of the date hereof, may prove to be imprecise. In addition, there are a number of factors that could cause Alaris’ actual results, performance or achievement to differ materially from those expressed in, or implied by, forward looking statements and FOFI, or if any of them do so occur, what benefits the Trust will derive therefrom. As such, undue reliance should not be placed on any forward-looking statements, including FOFI.

The Trust has included the forward-looking statements and FOFI in order to provide readers with a more complete perspective on Alaris’ future operations and such information may not be appropriate for other purposes. The forward-looking statements, including FOFI, contained herein are expressly qualified in their entirety by this cautionary statement. Alaris disclaims any intention or obligation to update or revise any forward-looking statements, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise, except as required by law.

For more information please contact:
Investor Relations
Alaris Equity Partners Income Trust
403-260-1457
ir@alarisequity.com

The MIL Network –

May 9, 2025

MIL-OSI USA: Magaziner Defends NOAA, Rhode Island Fishermen During House Natural Resources Committee Markup Debate

Source: US Representative Seth Magaziner (RI-02)

WASHINGTON, DC – Yesterday, U.S. Rep. Seth Magaziner (RI-02) led in Democrats’ defense of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) during the Natural Resources Committee markup of the House Republicans’ sweeping reconciliation tax bill, which proposes deep cuts to programs that Rhode Island’s fishermen and coastal communities depend on, in order to pay for tax cuts for the rich.

The proposal includes deep cuts to NOAA, which plays a critical role in protecting national security by supplying data for military decision making, collects information on fish stocks that the livelihoods of Rhode Island fishermen depend on, and provides weather data used by meteorologists, farmers, and countless other Americans.

House Republicans are attempting to pass a package of tax cuts expected to predominantly benefit the wealthy and big corporations, through a process called reconciliation that requires offsetting cuts to federal programs. Democratic members of the Natural Resources Committee submitted amendments to the legislation, with Magaziner proposing amendments to reverse all proposed cuts to NOAA in the bill, and to ensure that all NOAA services and operations that support military readiness are preserved – both of which were blocked by the Republican majority.

“The House Natural Resources Committee should work together on a bipartisan basis to create good-paying clean energy jobs, support Rhode Island’s fishermen and growing coastal economy, and invest in national parks – a source of pride for our nation,” said Magaziner. “Instead, Republicans in the majority are pushing a partisan bill that guts critical programs like NOAA—not to help working people, but to hand out more tax breaks to billionaires and provide giveaways to Big Oil. The people of Rhode Island deserve better.”

Magaziner also spoke out against proposed Republican funding cuts targeting national parks and environmental protection, as well as the proposed return of noncompetitive leasing in federal oil and gas lease sales.

You can view or download Rep. Magaziner’s opening remarks from this week’s committee markup here.

BACKGROUND

In Rhode Island, NOAA supports a fishing and aquaculture industry that supports thousands of jobs, provides lifesaving weather forecasting, and funds research that strengthens the state’s coastal economy and conservation of ocean resources.

Despite its critical mission, NOAA has become a primary target of the Trump administration and Elon Musk’s DOGE. Since January, NOAA has faced an unprecedented wave of political interference: censorship of climate research, purging of expert staff, the shutdown of oversight committees, and forced layoffs. Just last week, the Trump Administration sent an agency-wide email announcing that it has eliminated 1,000 NOAA employees with over 27,000 years of collective experience.

Last month, Magaziner led House Natural Resources Committee Democrats in a congressional forum on the devastating impact of cuts to NOAA, highlighting how mass layoffs and facility closures at the agency hurt Rhode Island’s coastal economy and national security interests.

The forum brought together voices from the fishing industry, environmental advocacy, and public service at the nation’s capital—including Sarah Schumann, a Rhode Island commercial fisher and Director of the Fishery Friendly Climate Action Campaign—to testify on the impact of Trump Administration cuts to NOAA.

Previously, Magaziner hosted a roundtable in Providence to hear from Rhode Island fishing, aquaculture, environmental, and conservation leaders about their concerns surrounding a weakened NOAA.

MIL OSI USA News –

May 9, 2025
MIL-OSI USA: New Bipartisan Build America Caucus Launches to Support Pro-Growth Policies
Source: US Representative Seth Magaziner (RI-02)

Watershed moment for the pro-growth, abundance movement as Congress readies federal action
WASHINGTON – Today, more than a dozen bipartisan members launched the bipartisan Build America Caucus, a first-of-its-kind effort in Congress to advance pro-growth policies. While momentum for the abundance agenda has grown in cities and states, this caucus marks the first coordinated push to bring that vision to Capitol Hill. The caucus includes nearly 30 members from across the ideological spectrum, many of whom hold key committee assignments, putting the group in a strong position to pass meaningful legislation. Rep. Josh Harder will serve as Chair.

The Build America Caucus will prioritize:
- Unleashing American energy through permitting and transmission reform
- Making housing affordable by incentivizing states and cities to build more homes
- Speeding up American infrastructure projects by streamlining requirements and cutting red tape
“This caucus isn’t about making government bigger or smaller. It’s about making government work better, so we can bring down the cost of housing, build schools for the next generation, and make sure clean energy projects are a reality – not just an idea,” said Rep. Seth Magaziner. “With my experience cutting through red tape as General Treasurer and getting projects over the finish line, I’m excited to be a part of a bipartisan coalition working to bring a results-oriented mentality to Washington.”

“Voters have lost faith in government because they don’t see results – they see gridlock, red tape, and delay,” said Chair Josh Harder. “It’s time to get back to building. Housing costs are out of control, our energy grid is strained, and foreign adversaries are racing ahead in critical manufacturing. The Build America Caucus is bringing Republicans and Democrats together to deliver real, pro-growth solutions. Our mission is simple: pass effective legislation that unleashes America’s full potential.”

“It’s time to rebuild America with purpose and urgency,” said Rep. Gus Bilirakis. “I am proud to be a part of the Build America Caucus which will bring together bipartisan voices committed to modernizing our infrastructure, removing needless bureaucratic red tape, reducing costs and ensuring taxpayer dollars go further. Our country needs smart investment, faster timelines, and real results that strengthen our economy and improve lives across the country.”

“One of the cruelest ironies in America is that we have more laws restricting the supply of affordable housing than expanding it,” said Rep. Ritchie Torres. “That’s neither progressive nor pro–working class. It’s time for every elected official to embrace an agenda of abundance—an abundance of opportunity for all Americans. The Build America Caucus is fighting to make America work for working people. It’s time to put building over bureaucracy—and progress over process.”

“Too many families in the Central Valley are struggling due to slow-moving infrastructure projects and the growing unaffordability of housing costs and energy,” said Rep. David Valadao. “To revitalize the American Dream, we need to focus on growth by streamlining rules and regulations, prioritizing innovation, and incentivizing competition. I’m proud to join my colleagues on the bipartisan Build America Caucus to deliver real results for our hardworking families.”

“Our communities need affordable housing, reliable infrastructure, and clean energy — and they need them now, not years from now,” said Rep. Sharice Davids. “I’m joining the bipartisan Build America Caucus to help cut unnecessary red tape and make sure we’re building a stronger, more affordable future for Kansas and the country.”

“I am proud to join my colleagues on the Build America Caucus as we work to strengthen our economy and streamline pro-growth policies in Congress,” said Rep. Dan Newhouse. “By cutting bureaucratic red tape and onerous regulations we will identify real solutions to unleash American energy, mitigate the housing affordability crisis, and create good-paying jobs here at home.”

“I came to Congress to solve problems, and I’m ready to work with colleagues on both sides of the aisle to get s**t done,” said Rep. George Whitesides. “We need to move from a focus on process to a focus on outcomes – how much housing are we building, how many roads are we fixing, how much clean energy infrastructure are we creating, how many rural homes are we connecting to broadband, how many acres of forest are we treating for wildfire risk? It is the outcomes that will dictate whether we are really creating positive impacts for our constituents, and I’m ready to make some progress!”

“To meet America’s growing demand for energy, housing, and infrastructure, Congress needs to make sure that policies and regulations are supporting, not hindering, the ability to build what America needs,” said Rep. Chuck Edwards. “Unnecessary red tape slows down growth and stifles innovation. As a member of the Build America Caucus, I look forward to fixing how Washington works by making processes more efficient and reasonable so that energy production and the building of our nation’s houses and infrastructure are not stuck in bureaucracy.”

“Building more affordable housing, developing clean energy, and improving our infrastructure are all key to American growth in the 21st century,” said Rep. Joe Neguse. “That’s why I’m proud to join with a bipartisan group of my colleagues in forming the Build America Caucus, to move America forward by investing in innovation and implementing practical solutions that address the consequential challenges of our time.”

“America’s strength lies in our workers, our businesses, and our abundant natural resources, but outdated laws and regulations too often hold our country back,” said Rep. Michael McCaul. “I’m proud to join the bipartisan Build America Caucus to drive growth, restore U.S. energy leadership, and unleash our nation’s full potential.”

“America was built by doers who put bold ideas into action. But for too long, American innovation and production has been tied up in overburdensome regulation and bureaucratic red tape,” said Rep. Adam Gray. “The status quo doesn’t work anymore. It’s time to enact pro-growth policies that will harness American energy resources, increase our housing supply and encourage economic development. I’m proud to represent the Central Valley as a member of the bipartisan Build America Caucus to finally deliver on America’s promise of opportunity for all.”

“Building more housing, mass transit, and clean energy is essential to making life more affordable and connected. But outdated processes are driving up costs and delaying the projects communities desperately need,” said Rep. Laura Friedman. I’m proud to join the Build America Caucus to help break through the gridlock and give local governments the tools to build more homes, better infrastructure, and clean power — so we can actually meet this moment.”

“Housing is unaffordable, federally funded projects are delayed, and we’re not thinking clearly about long-term solutions,” said Rep. Janelle Bynum. “We’ve got to cut the red tape, build smarter, and deliver real solutions for the Americans. That’s why I’m proud to join the bipartisan Build America Caucus to help tackle the structural challenges holding back our growth.”

“To lower costs and compete with China, we need to build more — more housing, stronger roads and bridges, and better energy infrastructure,” said Rep. Kristen McDonald Rivet. “Having worked in local government and led a local non-profit, I have seen firsthand how the best of ideas can be derailed by red tape. I look forward to working with Republicans and Democrats with the Build America Caucus to turbocharge American innovation, lower costs, and create good-paying jobs in mid-Michigan.”

“America prides itself on accomplishing big things, whether it be winning world wars, sending man to the moon, or discovering the next medical breakthrough,” said Rep. Scott Peters. “Unfortunately, we have gotten in our own way with excessive red tape and process that delays progress. The Build America Caucus will be laser-focused on taking on our country’s most fundamental challenges, like the housing shortage, the need for a more reliable grid and cheaper energy, and ensuring America continues to be at the forefront of scientific discovery. I am excited to work with my colleagues from both parties to update our laws to meet the challenges of today and encourage America to build again.”

“America needs to build 5 million homes and 5 Hoover Dams’ worth of nuclear power this decade,” said Rep. Jake Auchincloss. “The status quo won’t deliver that speed and scale, so Congress needs to take action and relieve bottlenecks in housing and energy that lower prices for the middle class.”

“In my past life, I built things in Northeastern Pennsylvania, and I’m committed to building a bright future for our constituents,” said Rep. Rob Bresnahan. “I am ready to bring my real-world experience to the policy-making sphere, and I look forward to working with my fellow members of the Build America Caucus to find bipartisan ways to streamline permitting for transportation and energy projects, and ensure we have the workforce to deliver on these projects.”

The members of the Build America Caucus are: Reps. Jake Auchincloss, Gus Bilirakis, Rob Bresnahan, Nikki Budzinski, Janelle Bynum, Sharice Davids, Chuck Edwards, Laura Friedman, Adam Gray, Josh Harder, Jim Himes, Jeff Hurd, Jen Kiggans, Seth Magaziner, Nicole Malliotakis, Celeste Maloy, Mike McCaul, Kristen McDonald Rivet, Joe Neguse, Dan Newhouse, Jay Obernolte, Scott Peters, Brittany Pettersen, Pat Ryan, Andrea Salinas, Haley Stevens, Ritchie Torres, David Valadao, and George Whitesides.
MIL OSI USA News –
May 9, 2025
MIL-OSI USA: Disaster Alert: Reed Warns Trump’s Efforts to Dismantle NOAA Threatens Economy, People, & Environment

US Senate News:

Source: United States Senator for Rhode Island Jack Reed

WASHINGTON, DC – As hurricane season approaches, U.S. Senator Jack Reed (D-RI) is leading Senate colleagues in sounding the alarm about President Trump’s attacks on the National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) and the National Weather Service (NWS) and urging bipartisan action to protect the critical agency from privatization.

Every day, NOAA employees collect, analyze, and freely disseminate vast amounts of data through its National Weather Service – vital information all Americans count on. American commerce – particularly the transportation sector – relies heavily on federal weather forecasts, flooding predictions, hurricane and storm alerts, air temperature readings, nautical charts, and other scientific data. The research, services, and forecasts provided by these federal agencies is essential for everything from accurately predicting the next severe weather front to supporting farmers and fishermen to scientifically assessing the long-term costs of extreme weather events linked to climate change.

In a letter to Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick, Senator Reed led U.S. Senators Richard Blumenthal (D-CT), Chris Coons (D-DE), Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI), and Ed Markey (D-MA) in pointing to a new public letter released this week by five former Weather Service directors. The Senators say it offers an early warning on how the Trump Administration’s cuts to staff and programs could lead to “needless loss of life.”

“On May 2, five former NWS Directors – who served under both Republican and Democratic administrations – wrote a letter expressing alarm that the NWS is operating at a dangerous staffing deficit, with more than 10% of its workforce lost in recent months due to the Trump Administration’s reckless buyouts and mass firings,” the Senators wrote. “These massive staffing cuts, combined with the Trump Administration’s proposal to slash funding for the NWS’s parent agency – the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration – by 25%, led these Directors to conclude that their “worst nightmare is that weather forecast offices will be so understaffed that there will be needless loss of life.””

In his preliminary budget request, President Trump called for a $1.5 billion cut to NOAA programs, including a $209 million cut for NOAA’s weather satellites which help to ensure accurate weather forecasting is available to Americans.

In their letter, the five Senators called on Secretary Lutnick to “reverse course on the Trump Administration’s staffing and funding cuts, which will prevent the National Weather Service (NWS) from being fully prepared and operational.”

According to NWS, its employees collect over six billion weather observations every day, monitor local conditions through a host of field offices across the nation, issue daily forecasts, and circulate warnings before dangerous weather events. NWS provides the public with forecasts and alerts free of charge. Private companies like AccuWeather, Google, and Apple also rely on NOAA’s observational data and satellites, buoys, and weather sensors to power their own weather products.

The Senators say that President Trump’s proposed cuts, paired with the administration’s efforts to significantly downsize NOAA and NWS, is already upending the agency’s ability to promptly alert and prepare Americans for imminent and dangerous severe weather events.

“Forecasters at Colorado State University have predicted an “above-average” 2025 hurricane season, with an estimated nine hurricanes, four of which are expected to reach Category 3 status or stronger,” the Senators continued. “Understaffed forecast offices mean longer wait times for critical alerts, slower radar maintenance, and a reduction in the high level of accuracy the public has come to rely upon. Any degradation in service risks loss of life, economic disruption, and long-term damage to public trust in our nation’s ability to prepare for and respond to extreme weather.”

Earlier this year, the so-called Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) either fired or pushed out more than 10 percent of NOAA’s workforce, including top meteorologists and researchers who are charged with providing the public with accurate, life-saving weather reports and data. The Administration is reportedly working on further diminishing NOAA’s workforce by another 10 percent.

According to data obtained by the Associated Press, nearly half of all NWS forecast offices are now critically understaffed. Due to these shortages, NWS meteorologists are reportedly being forced to forego important surveys of storm damage that help inform and improve future forecasts and warnings.

While researchers, scientists, and experts point to a connection between climate change and worsening extreme storms, the Trump Administration is reportedly planning to propose eliminating NOAA’s research office and cutting NOAA research funding by 74 percent. It is anticipated that cuts to NOAA climate programs and activities will also have impacts on the collection of key weather data.

In March, Senator Reed called attention to the Trump Administration’s staffing cuts at NOAA and NWS and warned about negative impacts for Rhode Islanders. And last fall, Senator Reed sounded the alarm about Project 2025’s extremist plan to dismantle NOAA, which it labelled “one of the main drivers of the climate change alarm industry.” Reed warned plans to gut the National Weather Service and emergency management would be a major disaster.

Full text of the letter follows:

May 8, 2025

The Honorable Howard Lutnick, Secretary

U.S. Department of Commerce

1401 Constitution Ave NW

Washington, D.C. 20230

Dear Secretary Lutnick:

As we approach the 2025 Atlantic hurricane season, which begins on June 1, we write to demand you reverse course on the Trump Administration’s staffing and funding cuts, which will prevent the National Weather Service (NWS) from being fully prepared and operational.

The NWS and its employees play a critical role in protecting lives, property, and our national economy. From issuing tornado and hurricane warnings to providing essential weather information for aviation, shipping, agriculture, and emergency response, the NWS is integral to Americans’ daily lives. Its employees include highly trained meteorologists, technicians, and support staff who work hard to deliver life-saving data all across the United States.

On May 2, five former NWS Directors – who served under both Republican and Democratic administrations – wrote a letter expressing alarm that the NWS is operating at a dangerous staffing deficit, with more than 10% of its workforce lost in recent months due to the Trump Administration’s reckless buyouts and mass firings. These massive staffing cuts, combined with the Trump Administration’s proposal to slash funding for the NWS’s parent agency – the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration – by 25%, led these Directors to conclude that their “worst nightmare is that weather forecast offices will be so understaffed that there will be needless loss of life.”

Forecasters at Colorado State University have predicted an “above-average” 2025 hurricane season, with an estimated nine hurricanes, four of which are expected to reach Category 3 status or stronger. Understaffed forecast offices mean longer wait times for critical alerts, slower radar maintenance, and a reduction in the high level of accuracy the public has come to rely upon. Any degradation in service risks loss of life, economic disruption, and long-term damage to public trust in our nation’s ability to prepare for and respond to extreme weather.

We urge you to provide a detailed plan on how you will ensure that this critical agency has the staffing and resources it needs to ensure Americans are safe heading into this hurricane season. We look forward to your prompt response to this important matter.

Sincerely,

MIL OSI USA News –

May 9, 2025
MIL-OSI USA: Dingell, Cline Introduce Bipartisan Bill to Support Bird Conservation in Urban Areas
Source: United States House of Representatives – Congresswoman Debbie Dingell (12th District of Michigan)

Representatives Debbie Dingell (D-MI) and Ben Cline (R-VA) today reintroduced the bipartisan Local Communities & Bird Habitat Stewardship Act to establish a federal grant program to support conservation of birds and habitats in urban areas.

“Birds play an important role in our ecosystems and our everyday lives, and we all have an opportunity and a responsibility to make our communities safer places for birds and people to live together,” Dingell said. “Unfortunately, we have lost nearly 3 billion birds in the last 50 years, and we need to take serious action to address this crisis. The Local Communities & Bird Habitat Stewardship Act will provide federal funding to cities, community organizations, and other groups doing important work to restore bird habitat, and most importantly, educate communities about the small steps we can all take to protect bird populations for generations to come.”

“Birds play an important role in our environment, and responsible conservation efforts can help preserve migratory patterns and reduce the risk of avian illnesses,” Cline said. “These efforts should be led locally by individuals and municipalities who understand the needs of their communities. As we codify existing partnerships through the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, we must ensure that any federal support remains targeted, transparent, and accountable to the taxpayer.”

In North America, one in four breeding birds has been lost since 1970. The widespread loss and degradation of habitat is the biggest driver of bird population decline. Restoring bird habitat in urban areas can make a significant difference in conserving bird populations.

The Local Communities & Bird Habitat Stewardship Act would make $1,000,000 available annually through a competitive grant program to eligible entities, including Tribal, State, or municipal agencies, nongovernmental organizations, community groups, and academic institutions, to promote urban bird conservation. Specifically, the grant program aims to:
- protect, restore, or enhance urban habitats for birds, including through the control of invasive species and the restoration of native plant species;
- reduce urban hazards to birds; and
- educate and engage communities in scientific activities involving the monitoring of birds and the habitats of such birds in urban areas
The bill is endorsed by the National Audubon Society, the National Wildlife Federation, the American Bird Conservancy, and Ducks Unlimited.

“Every spring, billions of birds migrate across the United States, sometimes as many as 500 million in a single night. For them to safely complete their journeys, our communities must not only offer safe passage but also provide critical places to rest, nest, and feed along the way,” said Felice Stadler, vice president of government affairs at the National Audubon Society. “With bird populations down 30 percent since 1970, it’s essential that legislation like the Local Communities & Bird Habitat Stewardship Act becomes law and give communities the tools we need to create healthy bird habitat in our neighborhoods. Thank you to Reps. Dingell and Cline for your leadership and commitment to protecting our nation’s birds. We look forward to seeing this important bill move forward in Congress.”

“As wildlife habitats shrink across the country, it is increasingly important to protect and expand existing habitat and ensure safe passage for birds,” said Abby Tinsley, vice president for conservation policy at the National Wildlife Federation. “For migrating birds, rural and urban parks and greenways offer places to feed and rest on their journeys, and many species rely on them year-round. This bill will empower communities to conserve and restore these essential habitats, benefitting the birds and people who share these spaces. We are grateful to Representatives Dingell and Cline for their leadership.”

“Thriving communities include birds,” said Steve Holmer, vice president of policy at American Bird Conservancy. “Thanks to Representatives Debbie Dingell and Ben Cline for introducing the Local Communities & Bird Habitat Stewardship Act, which will improve bird habitat, reduced hazards to birds, and engage communities in bird conservation. As birds face unprecedented declines and bird watching participation grows, conserving birds is more important now than ever before.”

“Waterfowl and other birds are important to ecosystems in both rural and urban areas,” said Kellis Moss, Ducks Unlimited Managing Director of Federal Affairs. “The Local Communities & Bird Habitat Stewardship Act will help cities and local organizations invest in habitats that benefit the long-term conservation of bird populations. We thank Rep. Dingell and Rep. Cline for their leadership on this issue.”

MIL OSI USA News –
May 9, 2025
MIL-OSI USA: Brownley and House Natural Resources Democrats Reject Republicans’ Plan to Sacrifice our Public Lands, Waters and Wildlife for Billionaire Tax Cuts
Source: United States House of Representatives – Julia Brownley (D-CA)
Washington, DC – On Tuesday, Congresswoman Julia Brownley (CA-26) and House Natural Resources Committee Democrats rejected House Republicans’ plan to sell off our lands, waters, and wildlife to fund tax cuts for billionaires in the Committee’s portion of the Republican reconciliation package. Democrats were united in the bipartisan opposition to a Republican amendment offered in the dead of night to sell off thousands of acres of public lands. While House Republicans remained silent, Democrats presented a unified front to protect communities, the American taxpayers, and our most cherished places.

“Republicans have launched one of the most egregious attacks on our public lands, our waters, and our health that we have ever witnessed. It hands over our national parks, forests, and precious natural resources to oil and gas corporations, putting their profits over the safety and well-being of the American people,” said Congresswoman Brownley. “In exchange for giveaways to the wealthiest polluters, American families will face higher energy costs, dirtier air and water, and more frequent environmental disasters. This is the same ‘polluters over people’ agenda that has defined the Trump Administration, where corporate greed comes first and the American people pay the price. This Republican proposal will add billions to the deficit while selling off our environment, our economy, and our future to the highest bidder. This bill is shameful, and the American people deserve better.”

“Republicans just rammed the most extreme, anti-environment legislation in American history through the Natural Resources Committee. It’s a billionaires-first, Americans-last giveaway to benefit Big Oil and polluters,” said Ranking Member Jared Huffman (CA-02). “It guts clean air and water protections, slashes funding for our national parks, and sells off, auctions off, and even allows for giving away our public lands to special interests. For the first time, Americans who simply want their voices heard on Big Oil projects on federal land will be slapped with fees for daring to protest. House Republicans not only voted in lock-step for this cartoonishly extreme bill, they refused to participate in any public debate or discussion about it. I’m sure they had plenty of discussion with their corporate polluter puppet masters, but in the only public hearing before this bill goes to the House Floor they refused to even discuss it. The American people deserve better policy and process than what they’re getting from this GOP Congress. I’m proud that Democrats showed up and fully engaged in debating and challenging this terrible bill. We fought back. And we’ll keep fighting for Americans’ basic freedoms, which include clean air, safe water, healthy communities, and a livable planet for future generations.”

“The only thing these budget gimmicks will do is drive up Big Oil profits, CEO pay, and shareholder dividends at the expense of our public lands and the American taxpayer,” said Congresswoman Yassamin Ansari (AZ-03). “We should be caring about the everyday Americans who are going to be suffering from the consequences of these decisions for years. Our constituents, who are already facing a climate crisis with heat wave after heat wave, who are getting sick from the pollution released by coal fired power plants and petrochemical facilities next door, all compounded by threats of serious cuts to Medicaid healthcare coverage.”

“House Republicans are once again putting polluters over people. But as a mother, I refuse to let my children’s future be auctioned off to Big Oil. I offered common-sense amendments that range from blocking funds to agencies that refuse to comply with the courts to stopping oil and gas drilling near schools and hospitals,” said Congresswoman Maxine Dexter (OR-03). “This bill is a giveaway to Big Oil and billionaires. My amendments demand House Republicans choose: people or polluters?”

“Instead of advancing a budget that helps address the challenges Americans are confronting, House Republicans are combining the most extreme attack on our nation’s natural resources with enormous cuts to Medicaid, Social Security, and other critical programs working families depend on every single day,” said Congresswoman Debbie Dingell (MI-06). “We should be focusing on expanding public access to federal lands, not auctioning them off. And we should be investing in our National Parks System and National Wildlife Refuges, not making it harder for Americans to visit these special places. This bill doesn’t put Americans first—it gives massive handouts to pad polluters’ pockets with no regard for the environment.”

“This is a fire sale on our federal land and waters,” said Congresswoman Sarah Elfreth (MD-03). “This bill reduces corporate fees and eliminates environmental and judicial safeguards that our constituents deserve. And, all for what? There is no guarantee that any of those resources will benefit Americans or lower the cost of energy for our taxpayers. We’ll still be exporting this oil just like before. We’ll still be importing oil to our refineries. We’re putting at real risk the natural resources and national security assets that I’ll address with my amendments. Taxpayers will once again be footing the bill for large corporations from all over the world who score a lease to pillage our land with no recourse. I believe that our taxpayers simply deserve better.”

“This bill is a giveaway to big oil and gas companies at the expense of our environment, workers, and communities,” said Congresswoman Val Hoyle (OR-04). “Instead of investing in bipartisan priorities like wildfire prevention or strengthening our coastal communities, it prioritizes polluters and weakens the very protections Americans rely on. I stand firmly against this reckless and misguided approach.”

“This bill is nothing more than a billion-dollar giveaway to corporations,” said Congresswoman Teresa Leger Fernández (NM-03). “House Republicans are selling off our lands, slashing corporate royalty rates, and raising fees on clean energy—all to pay for tax breaks for billionaires. They’re making our families pay the price in higher energy bills, polluted water, and more extreme climate disasters. I offered amendments to protect Tribal sovereignty, keep revenues in oil and gas producing states like New Mexico, and block foreign adversaries from exploiting our resources. These are common sense protections—but Republicans chose to protect polluters over working families.”

“The devastating effects of climate change will cost us trillions of dollars and lead to catastrophic threats to our civilization,” said Congressman Dave Min (CA-47). “We have both a moral and economic imperative to fight back and give our children the opportunity to grow up in a world where they can breathe clean air, drink clean water, and have the freedom to chase the American dream. That’s why I led four amendments to stand up for our environment and fight back against the Trump administration.”

“The GOP is trying to pass a massive tax break to billionaires, and it will cost the American people $7 trillion on the backs of the American people and the expense of the environment,” said Congresswoman Melanie Stansbury (NM-01). “I was truly shocked when I read this reconciliation package before the Natural Resources Committee. It has mandatory oil and gas leasing, mining, and logging requirements. It gives away public lands and resources, not to the highest bidder, but to the lowest bidder. And, it takes away the rights of the American people to participate in planning, permitting, and holding bad actors accountable. That means impacts on public lands and waters without accountability. Furthermore, it is based on a completely false premise that will undermine the protection of our economy, our communities, and the environment. That’s why I am prepared to sit here as long as it takes to fight this bill.”

Background

House Republicans are squandering Americans’ money, health, and safety to pad polluters’ pockets. The House Natural Resources Committee’s portion of the Republican reconciliation package, which was pushed through without support from Committee Democrats, does the following:
- Instantly boosts big oil and gas company profits by letting them drill and frack at bargain-basement prices while robbing taxpayers blind.
- Puts polluters before people by letting the wealthy companies pay for legal immunity for inadequate environmental reviews and slapping Americans with exorbitant fees to protest oil and gas pollution.
- Slashes funding for critical and popular public services like NOAA’s coastal restoration and resilience efforts and the National Parks workforce, making it harder for Americans to protect their communities from natural hazards and visit our nation’s most scenic and inspiring places.
- Locks up 4 million acres for unprofitable coal mining – more land than the entire state of Connecticut – taking our energy policy back to the 19th century.
- Mandates dirty mining and drilling deals that will create toxic disasters in our nation’s most pristine lands and waters, permanently polluting places like the Boundary Waters and the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge.
- Crushes clean energy development by jacking up fees for wind and solar while slashing fees for oil and coal.
- Wipes out protections for endangered species, including dooming the planet’s most endangered whale to extinction by waiving all sensible safeguards for offshore oil and gas operations.
- Sells off public lands to pay for handouts to big oil and tax cuts for billionaires – a surprise, late-night amendment paves the way for a fire sale of public lands.
Republicans had the opportunity to support common-sense safeguards and improve the bill. However, they rejected numerous Democratic amendments, including those to do the following:

Bolster essential and lifesaving public services:
- Congresswoman Brownley’s amendment (#65) redirecting funding to NOAA climate monitoring, weather forecasts, and disaster preparedness.
- Congressman Magaziner’s amendment (#213) striking recissions of IRA funds for National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration investments in coastal communities and climate resilience and facilities.
- Congresswoman Leger Fernandez (#69) and Representative Hoyle’s (#70) amendments to fund wildland firefighting and fuels reduction.
- Congresswoman Randall’s amendment (#18) to fund the Bureau of Indian Education, and Congresswoman Ledger Fernandez’s amendment (#38) to fund the Indian Health Service.
Hold oil, gas, and mining companies accountable and ensure a fair return for taxpayers:
- Congresswoman Brownley’s amendment (#61) to require DOI to assess a fee on oil and gas operators to pay for the decommissioning of offshore pipelines in the event of bankruptcy.
- Congressman Min’s amendment (#44) to require DOI to increase financial assurances from oil and gas companies before reduced royalties can take effect.
- Congresswoman Ansari’s amendment to (#19) to deny new leases for oil and gas companies if they have been found liable for collusion.
- Congresswoman Stansbury’s amendment (#9) to prevent bad actor mining companies from operating on federal land if they are owned by foreign adversaries, have a history of using slave labor, or otherwise break the law.
Prevent dangerous pollution:
- Congresswoman Elfreth’s amendment (#129) to prohibit offshore drilling where the Defense Department has determined it is incompatible with military readiness, including off the coast of Virginia, other Atlantic Coast states, and the Eastern Gulf.
- Ranking Member Huffman’s amendments (#20 and #35) to protect the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge and the Boundary Waters.
- Congresswoman Rivas’s amendment (#210) striking the rescission of funding for the Council on Environmental Quality’s environmental justice screening tool.
Stop corruption and illegal actions:
- Congresswoman Rivas’s amendment (#183) prohibiting funding for new contracts with Elon Musk’s companies until Inspectors General determine there are no conflicts of interest.
- Congresswoman Ansari’s amendment (#301) striking the text of the bill and inserting the STOCK Act 2.0, to prevent government officials from being able to trade individual stocks.
- Congresswoman Stansbury’s amendment (#150) directing funds to applicable Inspectors General to report to Congress on the impacts of the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) actions on staffing, program services, funding, and data security.
Ensure healthy and accessible public lands and waters:
- Congressman Neguse’s amendment (#139) striking the language that rescinds funding National Park Service staffing.
- Congressman Soto’s amendment (#13) to redirect funding to coral reef conservation.
- Congresswoman Randall’s amendment (#144) restoring funding for the Fish and Wildlife Service fish passage restoration program.
- Congresswoman Dingell’s amendment (#82) to prohibit any recissions of funds for Great Lakes fisheries, harmful algal blooms, and resilience.
Protect Americans’ rights to provide public input:
- Congresswoman Dexter’s amendment (#15) striking protest filing fees.
- Ranking Member Huffman’s amendment (#247) striking the section creating a “pay-to-play” process for NEPA.
Advance clean and affordable energy:
- Resident Commissioner Hernández’s amendment (#201) to ensure utility-scale solar financing is implemented on schedule.
- Congressman Min’s amendment (#45) preventing lease sales until the Trump Administration’s national energy policy includes wind and solar energy.
- Congresswoman Hoyle’s amendment (#186) to ensure the recent firings at the Power Marketing Administrations will not result in a loss of power for ratepayers.
A full list of amendments offered by Committee Democrats and blocked by Republicans can be found here.

###

Issues: 119th Congress, Climate Crisis, Disaster Relief, Energy and Environment

MIL OSI USA News –
May 9, 2025
MIL-OSI USA: Grothman Reintroduces Bipartisan Student Loan Marriage Penalty Elimination Act

Source: United States House of Representatives – Congressman Glenn Grothman (R-Glenbeulah 6th District Wisconsin)

Representative Glenn Grothman (R-WI) is joined by Representative Suzan DelBene (D-WA), Mary Miller (R-IL), and Danny K. Davis (D-IL) to reintroduce the Student Loan Marriage Penalty Elimination Act. This legislation will eliminate a government-imposed punishment for marriage and ease the burden of student loan debt by amending the tax code to ensure that student loan interest is tax-deductible for each spouse independently. This bill has received endorsements from the National Taxpayers Union (NTU), the Family Research Council, and Third Way.

Grothman, DelBene, Miller, and Davis are joined by six bipartisan cosponsors, including Representatives Andrew Clyde (R-GA), John Larson (D-CT), Rich McCormick (R-GA), Kevin Mullin (D-CA), David Rouzer (R-NC), and Michael Rulli (R-OH).

“The federal government has a troubling record of polices that discourage marriage, and the student loan interest deduction is no exception,” said Grothman. “This is why I’m reintroducing the Student Loan Marriage Penalty Elimination Act to end the unnecessary marriage penalty on student loans that punish marriage and undermine the nuclear family. This is an initial dent on the war the federal government has waged on marriage.

“If two unmarried individuals each have student loans, they can each receive up to a $2,500 tax deduction, for a total of $5,000. However, their collective deduction is capped at $2,500 when married and filing jointly. My bill will rectify this anti-marriage provision by allowing each spouse to claim their full $2,500 deduction.

“Separately applying the $2,500 deductible for each spouse in a marriage is a common-sense approach that reduces financial stress for young couples and removes yet another government-imposed barrier to marriage. Our policies should support, not penalize, American families. While this is only an initial dent in the federal government’s war on marriage, it’s a meaningful step toward protecting the institution of marriage from unfair discrimination.”

“Higher education is a critical path to economic security,” said Davis. “Unfortunately, Americans collectively struggle under $1.77 trillion in crushing student loan debt, with an average $38,375 in federal student loans. I am proud to join my colleagues in leading this bill that would double the student loan interest deduction for married couples filing jointly. Congress must take every opportunity to ease the heavy financial burden on student loan borrowers.”

“Young couples already face numerous financial challenges, and the federal government should not add to that burden simply because they choose to build a life together,” said Miller. “Rep. Grothman’s Student Loan Marriage Penalty Elimination Act brings much-needed fairness to the current tax system and supports both fiscal responsibility and strong families.”

“Student loan debt should not prevent couples from getting married. Yet, for many Americans, the cost of the marriage penalty outweighs the benefit of marriage,” said DelBene. “While making college more affordable remains a top priority, the Student Loan Marriage Penalty Elimination Act is a practical solution that would ease financial pressure on couples by ending the marriage penalty for student loan borrowers and remove an unnecessary barrier to building a future together.”

“National Taxpayers Union is proud to once again endorse the Student Loan Marriage Penalty Elimination Act,” said Thomas Aiello, Senior Director of Government Affairs at NTU. “Under current law, the tax code wrongly imposes burdens on certain taxpayers depending on if they choose to marry. Thankfully, this legislation ends that penalty and corrects the unequal tax burden that exists. We applaud Rep. Grothman for his leadership on this issue and look forward to helping this legislation become law.”

“FRC is grateful to Congressman Grothman for introducing the Student Loan Marriage Penalty Elimination Act,” said the Family Research Council. “Family is the foundation of society and family starts with a husband and wife joining in marriage. Marriage should be supported in federal legislation, not penalized.”

Background Information

Currently, interest on student loan debt, both public and private, is tax deductible up to $2,500. However, current law penalizes married couples by only allowing them to take one deduction– even if both spouses would separately qualify.

The Student Loan Marriage Penalty Elimination Act will end this unfair tax treatment of student loan interest against married couples by allowing married couples filing a joint tax return to apply the $2,500 limitation on the tax deduction for student loan interest separately to each spouse, ensuring they can receive a maximum of $5,000 in deductions and eliminating the penalty they are currently paying upon getting married.

Passing this bill will end an unfair marriage penalty in the tax code and ease the burden couples face when paying off student loan debt.

-30-

U.S. Rep. Glenn Grothman (R-Glenbeulah) serves the people of Wisconsin’s 6th Congressional District in the U.S. House of Representatives.

MIL OSI USA News –

May 9, 2025
MIL-OSI USA: Senate passes Kennedy resolution to undo cumbersome Biden-era bank merger rule
US Senate News:
Source: United States Senator John Kennedy (Louisiana)

Watch Kennedy’s comments here.

WASHINGTON – The Senate passed Sen. John Kennedy’s (R-La.) joint resolution of disapproval under Congressional Review Act (CRA) procedures to block an Office of Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) rule that delays the bank merger approval process by adding more red tape that could lead to consumer uncertainty.

The Biden administration’srule, which went into effect on Jan. 1, 2025, amended the Bank Merger Act of 1960 to make it harder for the OCC to approve healthy bank mergers quickly. Kennedy’s resolution would reverse the Biden administration’s misguided rule so that banks can stay in business and serve hardworking Americans.

Kennedy spoke on the Senate floor ahead of the resolution’s passage. Key excerpts of the speech are below:

“Well, President Biden’s people at the OCC decided that [the rule] wasn’t broken; so they were going to fix it. Again, I don’t hate anybody, but you have got to call it like you see it.

“I think the folks at President Biden’s OCC got up one day and thought there was an award for being stupid. They took this very simple and effective rule and procedure, and they turned it on its head. What they did was tier-one level moronic.”

. . .

“I am going to ask the Senate to reject President Biden’s cumbersome rule. . . . That doesn’t mean that the OCC can’t revisit it at some point, but let me just be blunt: What President Biden’s OCC people did was put together a plan—a new rule—that looks like it was put together by a heroin addict with a socket wrench. I mean, it is the most convoluted thing you have ever seen.

“If we vote yes today—and I hope we do—then we will reject this rule and go back to doing it the old way.”

Background:
- Historically, the OCC assumed that a potential merger passed muster if the agency took no action on a merger application within 15 days. The burden of showing that a merger would harm business and consumers fell on the OCC and bank regulators.
- The Biden administration’s rule shifted the burden of proof to individual banks, making it harder for banks—particularly community banks—to fulfill their obligations by making smart, strategic mergers.
Sens. Bill Hagerty (R-Tenn.), Thom Tillis (R-N.C.), Tim Scott (R-S.C.), Steve Daines (R-Mont.) and Bernie Moreno (R-Ohio) cosponsored the resolution.

“The Biden OCC rule restricting bank mergers would lead to less competition in the industry and reduce access to credit and important services for Americans. I’m proud to join Senator Kennedy’s effort to overturn this rule and allow the free market to decide how financial institutions can best serve their customers,” said Scott, chairman of the Senate Banking Committee.

“The Biden bank merger rule was a solution in search of a problem and embodies the overzealous rulemaking that defined the last Administration. Lacking any basis in sound banking policy, this regulation added more red tape and disproportionally burdened and harmed the competitiveness of small and mid-size banks by deterring beneficial business combinations,” said Daines.

The resolution will now move to the House of Representatives for consideration. Rep. Andy Barr (R-Ky.), chairman of the Financial Institutions Subcommittee on the House Financial Services Committee, has introduced the companion resolution.

“With President Trump restoring regulatory sanity in Washington, I’m proud to partner with Senator Kennedy on this effort to overturn the Joe Biden’s OCC’s flawed bank merger rule. This resolution upholds the integrity of our financial system by ensuring that merger applications are evaluated based on clear, consistent standards—not arbitrary political agendas. Community and regional banks deserve a regulatory framework that supports growth, innovation, and expanded access to credit,” said Barr.

The American Bankers Association (ABA) supports Kennedy’s resolution.

“ABA has long believed that bank mergers should be subject to clear and transparent standards, and that regulators should act in a timely and fair manner when considering applications. Unfortunately, the final rule the OCC approved last September created unhelpful and biased new standards—including arbitrary asset thresholds—without providing the clarity and predictability that banks and their customers need. We applaud today’s Senate passage of the Congressional Review Act resolution nullifying the OCC’s merger rule and thank Sen. Kennedy for his leadership on this important issue. We now urge the House to quickly pass the companion resolution introduced by Rep. Andy Barr so regulators can correct this flawed rule and establish a new framework that reflects today’s financial services landscape and promotes competition that strengthens our financial system,” said Rob Nichols, President and CEO of the ABA.

Text of the resolution is available here.
MIL OSI USA News –
May 9, 2025
MIL-OSI Global: A beginner’s guide to vegan fashion (and how to spot ‘greenwashing’)

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Dr Songyi Yan, Senior Lecturer in Sustainable Fashion Management, Manchester Metropolitan University

Ksw Photographer/Shutterstock

“Vegan” and “plant-based” are not just food labels anymore; they are fashion’s latest buzzwords. Imagine walking into a high-street fashion store, drawn to a stylish bomber jacket labelled “100% vegan”. You flip the tag, looking for material details, only to find none. Nearby, a luxury handbag proudly announces it’s made from vegan leather. A closer look reveals it’s 56% recycled polyester and 44% polyurethane – basically plastic.

It’s easy to assume vegan clothes are more ethically and sustainably produced. While it’s evident that vegan leathers avoid animal-derived materials and can support higher animal welfare, labels can be misleading. Many vegan leathers are primarily plastic-based, with environmental consequences that aren’t always communicated clearly.

Even when made from recycled polyester, these materials still contribute to pollution. They will shed plastic microfibres that persist in landfills and oceans for centuries, and require energy intensive recycling. In some cases, plastic-based vegan leather can be more environmentally damaging than natural alternatives such as vegetable-tanned leather, which is a by-product of the meat industry that biodegrades more easily.

Fashion’s veganism doesn’t stop with plastics. Material innovations such as cactus leather, mushroom-based mycelium and algae-derived threads promise exciting alternatives to plastic-based and animal-derived fabrics. Brands often use terms such as “plant-based”, “bio-material”, and “100% biodegradable” to attract consumers. Unfortunately, these labels are often vague, inconsistently defined, and can hide potential issues, including synthetic coatings, unclear biodegradability or short product lifespans.

I’m a researcher in sustainable fashion, focusing on consumer behaviour and sustainability communication. Together with colleagues, I have analysed the websites of 21 innovative materials companies and found that sustainability messaging is often carefully curated and lacking transparency. Vegan alternatives can help brands build an eco image and cut production costs, without necessarily reducing environmental harm.

Few companies disclose important details such as product durability, recyclability or the conditions needed to biodegrade. Meanwhile, terms like “100% biodegradable” can give the impression that their algae-derived T-shirt will simply decompose in the garden – when, in reality, it requires specific industrial conditions such as sustained high heat, controlled humidity and specialised microbial environments to break down properly. Such miscommunication contributes to “greenwashing”, where marketing sounds greener than the reality.

Often vegan products are made from plastic polymers.
TaraPatta/Shutterstock

To help consumers make informed choices, brand messaging about sustainability needs to be clear and consistent. Terms such as “vegan”, “plastic-free” and “biodegradable” currently lack standardised definitions and aren’t regulated rigorously in markets such as the UK and EU, making them nearly meaningless without verifiable proof. Even upcoming legislation aimed at regulating green claims faces major challenges, as legally binding definitions remain vague.

This lack of transparency isn’t limited to fashion. I’ve seen a vegan sofa marketed without details about its materials, leaving consumers unaware of plastics and synthetic chemicals involved.

Similarly, a computer bag is marketed as made from Banbū, a plant-based material derived from bamboo. While the exact composition isn’t disclosed, similar materials often combine natural fibres with synthetic elements for durability. Without full transparency, it’s difficult for consumers to know whether such items are entirely plastic-free or not.

How to shop smarter

So, what can we do as consumers? With so much greenwashing and fuzzy language, it’s easy to feel powerless. Here are some practical ways to help you question vague eco-claims:

Read beyond the label: Don’t stop at buzzwords such as “vegan” or “plant-based”, check what the product is actually made of. Is it 100% natural or blended with plastics like polyurethane? If material details aren’t listed, that’s a red flag.

Check for trusted certifications: Claims are stronger when backed by certifications. Look out for certifications such as the Global Recycled Standard (GRS), Global Organic Textile Standard (GOTS), or Cradle-to-Cradle Certified™ help verify claims around recycled content, chemical safety and sustainability across products’ lifecycle.

Think long-term: A durable product you can use for years is more sustainable than one that’s vegan but only lasts a season. Ask yourself: Will this item stand the test of time? Can it be repaired, reused, or easily recycled once it reaches the end of its wearable life?

Prioritise transparency: Choose brands that don’t just tell feel-good stories but openly share facts. One good example is Veja – the footwear brand openly discusses its practices with vegetable-tanned leather, admitting it wasn’t durable enough for wide use. While they don’t claim perfection, Veja is relatively honest about their materials, production practices, and sustainability challenges and limitations – that transparency is still quite rare.

Don’t have time to read about climate change as much as you’d like?

Get a weekly roundup in your inbox instead. Every Wednesday, The Conversation’s environment editor writes Imagine, a short email that goes a little deeper into just one climate issue. Join the 45,000+ readers who’ve subscribed so far.

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

– ref. A beginner’s guide to vegan fashion (and how to spot ‘greenwashing’) – https://theconversation.com/a-beginners-guide-to-vegan-fashion-and-how-to-spot-greenwashing-253770

MIL OSI – Global Reports –

May 9, 2025
MIL-OSI USA: Dingell Joins Bipartisan Public Lands Caucus as Vice-Chair

Source: United States House of Representatives – Congresswoman Debbie Dingell (12th District of Michigan)

Congresswoman Debbie Dingell (D-MI-06) joined a bipartisan group of her House colleagues in launching the Public Lands Caucus, a Congressional coalition focused on conserving America’s public lands and expanding access for all Americans. Rep. Dingell will serve as Vice-Chair of the Caucus, along with Co-Chairs Reps. Gabe Vasquez (D-NM-02), Ryan Zinke (R-MT-01), and Vice-Chair Rep. Mike Simpson (R-ID-02).

The Public Lands Caucus is founded on the belief that public lands are “for the benefit and enjoyment of the people.” It will bring lawmakers from both sides of the aisle to advance practical, consensus-driven public lands policy that conserves natural resources while supporting recreation, local economies, and public access. Caucus members are committed to bridging ideological divides and advancing pragmatic solutions to protect and manage public lands.

“We should be focusing on expanding public access to federal lands, not auctioning them off. And we should be investing in our National Parks System and National Wildlife Refuges, not making it harder for Americans to visit these special places,” said Vice-Chair Rep. Debbie Dingell. “I’m proud to be Vice-Chair of the Public Lands Caucus because conservation has historically been, and should continue to be, a bipartisan priority. I look forward to working with my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to protect our precious natural resources, federal lands, and beloved species.”

“Public lands are where I learned to fish, hunt, and connect with my family and culture—and those experiences shaped who I am,” said Co-Chair Rep. Gabe Vasquez (D-NM-02). “These lands don’t belong to one party or one group of people; they belong to all of us. The Public Lands Caucus is about protecting that birthright—bringing Democrats and Republicans together to preserve access, defend conservation, and invest in the outdoor economy that powers rural communities like mine in southern New Mexico. This is personal for me, and I’m proud to lead this bipartisan effort to keep our public lands in public hands.”

“I follow the Theodore Roosevelt motto that public lands are ‘for the benefit and enjoyment of the people,’ and that means making sure we both conserve and manage those lands to ensure public access for the next generation,” said Co-Chair Ryan Zinke (R-MT-02). “Public lands aren’t red or blue issues, it’s red, white and blue. The bipartisan Public Lands Caucus brings together lawmakers who don’t agree on much, but we agree on and are ready to work together to promote policies that advance conservation and public access. I look forward to working with Co-Chair Vasquez, the vice chairs, and all the members of this caucus so future generations can enjoy the same opportunities to hunt, hike, fish, make a living and enjoy our uniquely American heritage.”

“Idahoans live in Idaho because we love our public lands,” said Vice-Chair Rep. Mike Simpson (R-ID-02). “This trend is common across the West, where public lands are a part of our daily lives. As a lifelong Idahoan and Chairman of the House Interior and Environment Appropriations Subcommittee, I remain committed to preserving access to our public lands and defending our way of life. Being named Vice Chair of the Public Lands Caucus is an honor, and I look forward to working with my colleagues to ensure future generations can enjoy the same benefits that we do today. I’m thankful to Rep. Zinke for his leadership here.”

“As someone born and raised in the Coachella Valley, I know how sacred our public lands are. Places like Joshua Tree and the new Chuckwalla National Monument are more than landscapes—they’re part of our identity, history, and culture,” said Rep. Raul Ruiz (D-CA-25) “Conserving public lands means protecting cultural heritage, preserving critical ecosystems, and expanding access to nature’s healing power, especially for underserved communities. I’ll continue fighting to ensure every family—no matter where they live—can experience the beauty, health, and enjoyment that public lands offer.”

“Public land access is integral to Montana,” said Rep. Troy Downing (R-MT-02). “Montanans rely on the Treasure State’s more than 30 million acres of public lands to hunt, fish, recreate, graze their livestock, and so much more. I applaud Co-Chairs Zinke and Vasquez for their efforts and look forward to working with my colleagues to find common sense solutions that preserve my constituents’ access to this fundamentally American resource.”

“As a representative of Coastal Virginia, I know how vital our public lands and waters are to our economy, our culture, and our quality of life – from supporting tourism and outdoor recreation to sustaining jobs and protecting natural habitats,” said Rep. Jen Kiggans (R-VA-02). “I’m proud to join the bipartisan Public Lands Caucus to bring a balanced, commonsense approach to protecting these resources. From our shorelines to our forests, we must ensure that future generations can enjoy and benefit from healthy and accessible public lands across the country for years to come.”

View photos from the press conference here.

MIL OSI USA News –

May 9, 2025
MIL-OSI Global: Girls’ voices are needed to tackle misogyny and the manosphere – but they are being ignored

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Chiara Fehr, PhD Candidate in Gender and Sexuality Studies, UCL

yunulia/Shutterstock

The Netflix series Adolescence has sparked important conversations about the role of social media in spreading harmful content. It has widened the public’s understanding of the rampant uptake of digitally disseminated misogyny, the legacies of Andrew Tate and those like him, and the violence perpetuated by the manosphere. Prime Minister Keir Starmer has even supported a plan to show the series to young people in schools.

But when the term “misogyny” is brought up in reference to the manosphere, girls and women often become abstract representations of victimhood. Their voices are missing. Conversation around Adolescence, as well as wider coverage on the online misogyny, tends to prioritise the opinions, behaviour and experiences of boys and how they can be supported.

Very little so far has been said about how those victimised feel towards the cultural uptake of misogyny. We need to know how this is playing out in real time in and around schools for girls, and what structures of support are necessary for them.

The crux of online misogyny lies in the systemic dehumanisation of women and girls. We need this to be a part of the discussion and to find solutions.

In 2021, in the wake of COVID-19, an Ofsted review explored sexual abuse in schools and colleges. Girls were asked about the types of sexual behaviour they experienced among their peer group. 92% of girls mentioned sexist name calling, and 88% said that they or their peers had received unsolicited explicit pictures or videos.

Similarly, one of us (Jessica) has carried out research with colleagues on over 600 young people on their experiences of sexual violence online and at school. The research found that 78% of all participants had experienced harms that included misogynistic, sexually harassing or homophobic comments, and image-based sexual abuse.

For almost all the young people in the study – 98.5% – these experiences had increased during COVID-19.

The other of us (Chiara), is conducting doctoral research into teenage girls’ online experiences. So far this research has found that most participants had been negatively affected by rhetoric of online misogyny influencers, both online and offline. For most, these negative experiences involved behaviour from their male peers at school.

Misogyny is normalised as ‘lad banter’.
Tsuguliev/Shutterstock

The girls recounted seeing a lot of manosphere content online and hearing discussions at school, which they found “unsettling” and “scary” as they promoted harmful body image and toxic sexual scripts. Much of this related to the standards boys in their schools would set for girls’ appearance.

The girls also discussed how boys at their school did not understand the seriousness of their misogynist behaviour. “They do it to wind us up, to get a reaction from us … to them it’s all a joke,” one girl said.

This aligns with previous research by Jessica and her colleagues on manosphere messages and the sharing of nude images in school. Misogyny is legitimised as part of lad banter. “It’s normalised with boys to like to behave that way, I think,” a year-nine girl (aged 13-14) in one study said.

An everyday reality

Young people are already very familiar with, and regularly deal with, the mundane reality of misogyny in their everyday lives. They do not need to be shown a television show, like Adolescence, which sensationalises and dramatises misogyny through the murder of a young girl. This show was not intended for educational purposes and would do little to change misogynist attitude of boys while potentially terrify girls.

When addressing the radicalisation of boys online, the experiences of those who have been victimised need to be included. Young people should be taught to recognise patriarchal power structures and to be critical of online media, so they can better identify manosphere type messaging that legitimises misogyny.

Unfortunately, although relationships and sex education is now a compulsory subject in UK schools, it is often poorly resourced and low priority. It does not necessarily cover issues such as sexual violence and misogyny, nor does it typically connect the dots to how sexual violence is normalised in digital and non-digital environments. Jessica and colleagues have co-produced relationships and sex education lessons that cover the complexity of online and offline sexual harassment, abuse and misogyny.

Politicians across the UK need to make a systematic and concerted effort to support and regulate high-quality relationships and sex education. Training for teachers is necessary to address issues of sexual violence in a wider and more comprehensive way.

Relying on a TV show that sensationalises misogyny and the manosphere, re-centres masculinity and erases the experiences of those victimised including girls and gender diverse youth, will not solve any of the pressing contemporary issues around the influx of digitally exacerbated misogyny.

Jessica Ringrose receives funding from Arts and Humanities Research Council

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

– ref. Girls’ voices are needed to tackle misogyny and the manosphere – but they are being ignored – https://theconversation.com/girls-voices-are-needed-to-tackle-misogyny-and-the-manosphere-but-they-are-being-ignored-254626

MIL OSI – Global Reports –

May 9, 2025
MIL-OSI USA: Warner & Kaine Introduce Bills to Protect Wilderness in Rockingham, Augusta, Highland, and Bath Counties

US Senate News:

Source: United States Senator for Commonwealth of Virginia Mark R Warner
WASHINGTON – Today, U.S. Sens. Mark R. Warner and Tim Kaine (both D-VA) introduced two bills to protect wilderness in Rockingham, Augusta, Highland, and Bath counties.
“We are lucky to have such beautiful natural resources in Virginia, and we need to do more to ensure that these lands are protected for future generations,” said the senators. “We’re proud to introduce this legislation to preserve wilderness in Rockingham, Augusta, Highland, and Bath counties, protect wildlife, and support local economies that depend on tourism and outdoor recreation.”
These additions were recommended by the U.S. Forest Service in 2014 and endorsed by members of the George Washington National Forest Stakeholder Collaborative, a group of forest users that started work together over a decade ago to agree on acceptable locations in the George Washington National Forest for wilderness, timber harvest, trails, and other uses.
In 2023, the tourism economy directly employed 7,562 people and generated $842.5 million in expenditures in Augusta, Rockingham, Bath, and Highland counties, as well as Harrisonburg, Staunton, and Waynesboro.
Shenandoah Mountain Act
The Shenandoah Mountain Act would establish a 92,562-acre Shenandoah Mountain National Scenic Area (SMNSA) in Rockingham, Augusta, and Highland counties. National Scenic Areas protect the scenic, historic, recreational, and natural resources in specific areas and allow compatible uses such as outdoor recreation activities.
The SMNSA encompasses four wilderness areas—Skidmore Fork, Little River, Ramsey’s Draft, and Lynn Hollow—and establishes a wilderness area at Beech Lick Knob. It also includes headwaters for the Potomac and James Rivers and watersheds that provide municipal drinking water sources for Harrisonburg, Staunton, and other communities. The NSA designation would protect these rivers and streams from industrial development and safeguard populations of at-risk species, such as the Cow Knob and Shenandoah Mountain Salamander.
James Madison University scientists estimate that lands within the SMNSA proposal already generate $13.7 million per year in other local benefits, including the value of the water supply and energy savings, and that the designation of the SMNSA would further grow this value.
“Friends of Shenandoah Mountain is so pleased with the reintroduction of the Shenandoah Mountain Act. For decades, we’ve worked with folks who hunt, hike, paddle, fish, and ride mountain bikes in this landscape, and everyone agrees that a National Scenic Area designation strikes the right balance between recreation and preservation,” said Lynn Cameron, Co-Chair of Friends of Shenandoah Mountain.
Full text of the Shenandoah Mountain Act is available here.
Virginia Wilderness Additions Act
The Virginia Wilderness Additions Act would add 5,600 acres to the existing Rough Mountain and Rich Hole wilderness areas within the George Washington National Forest in Bath County.
“Expanding the Rough Mountain and Rich Hole Wilderness Areas honors decades of work by dozens of stakeholders, and results in a number of ecological, economic, and recreational benefits. The Virginia Wilderness Committee is grateful to Senators Kaine and Warner for this reintroduction,” said Ellen Stuart-Haentjens, Executive Director of the Virginia Wilderness Committee.
Full text of the Virginia Wilderness Additions Act is available here.

MIL OSI USA News –

May 9, 2025
MIL-OSI USA: Baldwin, Ernst Lead Bipartisan Bill to Ensure Coverage for Children Born with Congenital Anomalies or Birth Defects
US Senate News:
Source: United States Senator for Wisconsin Tammy Baldwin

WASHINGTON, D.C. – Today, U.S. Senators Tammy Baldwin (D-WI) and Joni Ernst (R-IA) led a bipartisan group of their colleagues in re-introducing legislation to ensure health insurance covers needed treatment and procedures for individuals born with congenital anomalies or birth defects. The Ensuring Lasting Smiles Act would close a coverage gap to ensure that health insurance plans cover medically necessary services related to a birth defect, including any serious dental and oral-related procedures that are necessary for the child’s health and overall function.

Senator Baldwin first introduced this legislation in 2018 after hearing the story of Aidan Abbott of Slinger, Wisconsin, who was born with Ectodermal Dysplasia (ED), a rare congenital disease. Aidan has needed intense dental and oral care and will need reconstructive surgeries throughout his life, among other services related to ED. Despite having comprehensive health insurance, the Abbotts were denied coverage for Aidan’s dental work and forced to pay out of pocket for his treatments. Although most health plans cover care for congenital anomalies, claims are routinely denied or delayed for any oral-related procedures due to an individuals’ disorder.

“There is no reason that big insurance companies should be able to deny families like Aidan’s the care they need. For millions of Americans, medically necessary care for birth defects can cost thousands of dollars out of pocket, or for others, it is entirely out of reach because of the cost – despite having health insurance,” said Senator Baldwin. “I’m proud to work with Democrats and Republicans to put this care in reach so more Americans can lead healthy lives and more families can focus on caring for their loved ones, not figuring out how they will afford medically necessary care.”

“It’s an honor to advocate alongside passionate patient and provider advocates who are united in a common goal to ensure individuals and children born with congenital anomalies receive the medically necessary treatments they deserve,” said Becky M. Abbott, MPH, from Slinger, Wisconsin and Co-Chair of the National Foundation for Ectodermal Dysplasias Family Advocacy Committee. “We are fortunate that this advocacy initiative is being led by extraordinary bill leads who not only understand the importance of passing the Ensuring Lasting Smiles Act (ELSA), but have and continue to make it a priority to move ELSA forward. We are grateful for every advocate and member of Congress who stand beside us and support the efforts to move this life-changing legislation across the finish line in the 119th Congress.”

“To support young Iowans like Alli Steele, who was born with Ectodermal Dysplasia, this bipartisan legislation will help Iowa families by ensuring that health plans cover medically necessary services related to patients’ congenital anomalies of the eyes, ears, teeth, mouth, or jaw,” said Senator Ernst.

About four percent of children in the U.S. are born with congenital anomalies that affect the way they look, develop, or function. Many born with congenital anomalies suffer from severe oral defects (such as cleft lip or palate, hypodontia, or enamel hypoplasia), vision defects (such as congenital cataracts or aphakia), hearing defects (such as microtia), or other loss of bodily functions. Patients who do not receive timely, continuous care for their congenital anomalies face long-term physical and psychological injuries. Individuals who suffer from ED and other craniofacial anomalies can expect to incur significant out of pocket costs on reconstructive oral and dental procedures related to their disorder during their lifetime.

Most group and individual health plans include coverage for congenital anomalies, and many states require insurers to provide coverage for treatments of congenital anomalies. Despite this, health plans systematically and routinely deny or delay claims and appeals for treatment of congenital anomalies by wrongfully categorizing certain treatments or body parts as cosmetic or not medically necessary. This is a common practice that leaves families with the burden of paying the full cost of their child’s medically necessary treatments, despite having private health insurance.

The Ensuring Lasting Smiles Act would address these coverage denials and delays and ensure that children suffering from congenital anomalies or birth defects get the treatment they need and deserve.

Specifically, the legislation would:
- Ensure that all group and individual health plans cover outpatient and inpatient items and services related to the diagnosis and treatment of a congenital anomaly or birth defect that primarily impacts the appearance or function of the eyes, ears, teeth, mouth, or jaw;
- Stipulate that such coverage include services and procedures that improve, repair, or restore function due to a congenital anomaly or birth defect, including treatment to any missing or abnormal body part that the treating physician determines is medically necessary. The bill makes clear that this includes adjunctive dental, orthodontic, or prosthodontic support; and
- Exclude cosmetic procedures or surgery.
The Ensuring Lasting Smiles Act is supported by a broad coalition of national health care professional and patient advocacy organizations including the National Foundation for Ectodermal Dysplasias (NFED), American Academy of Pediatric Dentistry, American Dental Association, American Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons, Pathways for Rare and Orphan Solutions (PROS Foundation), Rare and Undiagnosed Network (RUN), American Institute of Dental Public Health, FACES: The National Craniofacial Association, Children’s Wisconsin, Crane Dental Laboratory, Inc., American Cleft Palate Craniofacial Association, M-CM Network, American Academy of Ophthalmology, Ear Community, American College of Surgeons, Academy of General Dentistry, TMJ Association, American Association of Orthodontists, American Society of Plastic Surgeons, American Academy of Pediatrics, American Association for Pediatric Ophthalmology & Strabismus, and American Association for Dental, Oral, and Craniofacial Research.

In addition to Senators Baldwin and Ernst, the Ensuring Lasting Smiles Act is co-sponsored by Senators Amy Klobuchar (D-MN), Lisa Murkowski (R-AK), Ben Ray Lujan (D-NM), Thom Tillis (R-NC), Angus King (I-ME), Roger Marshall (R-KS), Jack Reed (D-RI), Chuck Grassley (R-IA), Richard Blumenthal (D-CT), Cory Booker (D-NJ), and Jeff Merkley (D-OR).

Companion legislation was introduced in the U.S. House by Representatives Kim Schrier, M.D. (D-WA-08) and Neal P. Dunn, M.D. (R-FL-02).

“Many families with children who are born with congenital anomalies face significant financial barriers to accessing the treatment their child needs. This treatment is not just cosmetic. These conditions can have long-term health consequences that can severely impact everyday life,” said Congressman Dunn. “This bipartisan and bicameral legislation will help alleviate the financial hardship that many families endure to get their children the vital care they need. I’m proud to lead this important initiative and would like to thank my colleagues for helping us put a smile on every child’s face.”

“For far too long, countless patients, including children, have been unable to access treatment for congenital anomalies such as ectodermal dysplasias and cleft lip and palate because their health insurance refused to cover care, leaving them either without treatment or burdened with thousands of dollars in medical expenses,” said Congresswoman Schrier. “This bill would tackle this issue head on by requiring private health insurance plans to cover medically necessary services for treating congenital anomalies and birth defects, thus allowing patients with these conditions to secure and afford the treatment they need.”

A one-pager on this legislation is available here. Full text of this legislation is available here.
MIL OSI USA News –
May 9, 2025
MIL-OSI Russia: China’s Defense Ministry warns Philippines against any encroachment on China’s core interests

Translation. Region: Russian Federal

Source: People’s Republic of China in Russian – People’s Republic of China in Russian –

Source: People’s Republic of China – State Council News

BEIJING, May 8 (Xinhua) — Chinese Defense Ministry spokesman Zhang Xiaogang on Thursday issued a stern warning to the Philippines against infringing on China’s core interests in any form.

Zhang Xiaogang made the remarks at a press conference, commenting on the recent appearance of the Chinese aircraft carrier Shandong in waters north of the Philippines during joint Philippine-US military exercises, as well as the words of a Philippine navy spokesman about possible joint maneuvers with Taiwanese troops.

According to the official representative of the PRC Ministry of Defense, the group of ships led by the aircraft carrier Shandong carried out annual training missions in the relevant waters in order to test and improve the comprehensive combat potential of the aircraft carrier group.

“This is in line with international law and generally accepted international practice and is not directed against any specific country or target,” Zhang Xiaogang stressed.

He noted that some Filipino figures are colluding with external forces such as the United States, “muddying the waters” for selfish purposes, undermining peace and stability in the South China Sea, and even trying to “play with fire” on the Taiwan issue.

“We strongly warn the Philippine side to stop violations and provocations, and stop encroaching on China’s core interests in any form,” Zhang Xiaogang said, adding that the Chinese side will continue to take resolute and effective measures to protect China’s territorial sovereignty, maritime rights and interests. -0-

MIL OSI Russia News –

May 9, 2025
MIL-OSI Global: David Attenborough’s Ocean reveals how bottom trawling is hurting sealife in horrifying detail

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Callum Roberts, Professor of Marine Conservation, University of Exeter

A bottom trawl net hanging to dry in the harbour of Harlingen in the Netherlands, showing the rockhopper rollers on the footrope that contacts the seabed. 365 Focus Photography/Shutterstock

In one of the most powerful scenes of Sir David Attenborough’s new film Ocean, the audience sees industrial fishing from a fish’s perspective.

Confronting a bottom trawl net as it thunders across the seabed, terrified fish scatter in desperate but futile attempts to escape the vast net swallowing them. The heavy chain that holds the trawl down sweeps away sponges, corals, seagrass and other seabed life, leaving behind utter devastation.

Attenborough’s latest nature documentary is a visually magnificent and highly personal meditation on the relationship humans have with the sea. It is the most important part of our world, he says. But we have taken it for granted.

A century of intensifying and destructive fishing has culminated in bottom trawl nets, some as big as cathedrals and weighing many tonnes, being towed along the seabed to catch fish. To allow them to fish more effectively in areas of rough seabed, which is where most marine life is found, fishers in the 1920s invented “rock-hopper” gear: rollers placed along the foot rope that touches the bottom, allowing the net to bounce over obstacles.

This innovation followed the trajectory of many fishing methods, which was to become more destructive over time to sustain the size of catches in the face of declining fish stocks.

Trawler nets are designed to gobble up marine life indiscriminately.
Anney_Lier/Shutterstock

Shellfish dredging, another fishing method that destroys as it catches, is shown in a second horrifying scene. To catch scallops, steel dredges armed with spikes (imagine the harrows farmers use to break up soil on ploughed fields) drag along the seabed, smashing and pummelling everything. In minutes, seabed life of astonishing diversity and beauty is erased.

Together, Attenborough explains, bottom trawling and dredging wreak their havoc across an area of seabed larger than the Amazon rainforest every year.

Attenborough invites viewers to wonder how on Earth these fishing methods are still allowed when the damage is so obvious. Viewers may be even more surprised, and very probably angry, to learn that most marine protected areas in Europe, and indeed worldwide, permit bottom trawling and dredging within their boundaries.

To understand why this is the case, we have to go back in time.

A medieval practice

We know from the parliamentary records of Edward III in 1376 that fishers in southern England were practising bottom trawling as far back as the 1300s. Long-held traditions are hard to change, even when there is irrefutable evidence that they cause harm.

It is telling, however, that this early description of trawling is a petition urging the king to ban the method for its reckless destruction of habitat and waste of fish.

Nevertheless, these fisheries expanded because trawling was an efficient means of landing huge quantities of fish. Trawling’s success came at the expense of what we call marine animal forests, habitats built by animals like oysters, horse mussels and sponges – all swept away to leave behind vacant shifting sands, mud and gravel that predominate over vast swaths of seafloor today.

A recent estimate has suggested that oyster reefs once covered at least 17,000 square kilometres of European seas – an area the size of Northern Ireland. All of this was gone by the beginning of the 20th century. This ecosystem cannot recover until it is offered protection from trawling and dredging. So, why haven’t we protected it?

Degraded habitats, profoundly altered by trawling, were what scientists and then conservationists found when they first ventured below water after the invention of scuba diving in the mid-20th century. These early submarine explorers mistook them for natural and wild, failing to see the role industrial fishing had played in their creation.

Being now occupied almost exclusively by creatures used to the passage of trawls – animals that live fast and die young like worms, prawns and whelks – these habitats were labelled as resilient, and not in need of protection.

This warped perspective fooled us into thinking that marine protected areas left open to bottom trawling would be fine. In the few cases where protected areas exclude trawling, like around the Isle of Arran in western Scotland, the swift resurgence of seabed life has revealed how wrong this assumption was.

In only five years, sea-moss, sea-nettles, scallops and brittle stars have reoccupied the seafloor, a transformation that is nevertheless just the beginning of a recovery that will carry on for decades.

Seabeds protected from trawls and dredges can rebound, like this one off the Isle of Arran. It offers a glimpse of what existed before industrial fisheries.
Henley Spiers/Blue Marine Foundation

Giving up the trawl and dredge does not mean an end to fishing, as the film explains. In fact, recovering fish populations in protected areas replenish those in fishing grounds nearby, leading to better and more sustainable catches.

Calling time on destructive fishing

Perhaps now, at last, the writing is on the wall for bottom trawling and dredging, because they do a more insidious form of damage we have only recently become fully aware of. The ocean floor is one of the planet’s largest carbon stores. A snowfall of sinking organic matter and sediment accumulates on the seabed, where the carbon it contains is buried for thousands of years.

Left undisturbed, this carbon is out of harm’s way. But when churned up by the passage of trawls and dredges, some is turned back into CO₂, some of which will end up back in the atmosphere.

The magnitude of these seabed carbon emissions, and their role in climate change, is hotly debated. Getting more reliable estimates is the mission of a five-year project I lead, the Convex Seascape Survey. One thing is already clear from our research, however: there are places underwater – like peat bogs or permafrost on land – that we should not disturb because they harbour immense quantities of carbon.

Ironically, these muddy basins have in the past few decades become some of the most intensively fished places in the sea because they are home to valuable prawns, which are among the few species still able to support viable fisheries.

Any country serious about meeting net zero in time to prevent dangerous climate change must act swiftly to protect its seabed carbon stores. And any country serious about ocean conservation knows that marine protected areas are useless if they don’t exclude trawling and dredging.

David Attenborough, Silverback Films and the Open Planet Studios team have brought these truths to a mass audience, leaving no space for further evasion and denial. What we need now is action.

Don’t have time to read about climate change as much as you’d like?

Get a weekly roundup in your inbox instead. Every Wednesday, The Conversation’s environment editor writes Imagine, a short email that goes a little deeper into just one climate issue. Join the 45,000+ readers who’ve subscribed so far.

Callum Roberts receives funding from Convex, the Natural Environment Research Council and the European Research Council. He is on the board of Nekton and Maldives Coral Institute and sits on the Minderoo Natural Ecosystems advisory panel, the Bertarelli Ocean Legacy Science advisory board and the CORDAP science advisory panel.

– ref. David Attenborough’s Ocean reveals how bottom trawling is hurting sealife in horrifying detail – https://theconversation.com/david-attenboroughs-ocean-reveals-how-bottom-trawling-is-hurting-sealife-in-horrifying-detail-255991

MIL OSI – Global Reports –

May 9, 2025
MIL-OSI Canada: B.C. ranchers, farmers urged to protect livestock as wildfire risk increases
With wildfire season fast approaching, B.C. ranchers and farmers are encouraged to register the location of their livestock to protect their animals during emergencies.

“Ranchers and farmers are deeply committed to the well-being of their animals, especially in times of crisis,” said Lana Popham, Minister of Agriculture and Food. “By registering with Premises ID, they ensure emergency responders have access to fast and accurate information — providing critical support and peace of mind when every second counts.”

Premises ID is mandatory in British Columbia. Registration is free and confidential. The program helps link livestock and poultry to the geographic areas where they are kept. This information helps emergency responders reach animals faster so they can quickly prioritize assistance during evacuations or animal disease outbreaks.

“As we approach another wildfire season, it is important that we use what we have learned from the previous years of fire events,” said Kevin Boon, general manager, BC Cattlemen’s Association. “Premises ID has become a cornerstone of our communications and co-ordination for livestock welfare and movement. Making sure your operation is registered is one more way to help us help you with things like the Ranch Liaison and Range Rider programs.”

Premises ID is a key component of B.C.’s animal traceability system, which contributes to ensuring stable, local meat supply chains and market access for livestock producers throughout the province.

“Registering for a Premises ID through this provincial program makes it easier for local governments to support residents with large animals during emergencies when evacuation is required,” said Jamie Vieira, general manager of operations, Thompson-Nicola Regional District. “In recent years, our emergency operations centre has been able to support residents more quickly when they have a Premises ID. Whether residents have a hobby farm or a large agricultural production, we encourage all residents to make sure they have a Premises ID set up.”

Quick Facts:
- The main priority of the mandatory Premises ID program is to help producers and communities prepare for emergencies and be better equipped to respond to them.
- There are more than 10,000 ranchers and farmers registered with Premises ID with 100% supply-managed (i.e., dairy cattle and poultry) participation and over 80% of cattle producers.
- Premises ID is one of three pillars of an effective livestock traceability system, along with animal identification and animal movement reporting.
- Premises ID registration is currently mandatory in British Columbia, Alberta, Saskatchewan, Manitoba, Quebec and Prince Edward Island.
Learn More:

Premises ID registration: https://apps.nrs.gov.bc.ca/ext/pid-ext/

Additional information on who needs to register for premises ID and what types of animals, is available here: https://www2.gov.bc.ca/gov/content/industry/agriculture-seafood/programs/premises-id

MIL OSI Canada News –
May 9, 2025
MIL-OSI Global: Fraudulent crowdfunding after the Lapu Lapu tragedy highlights the need for vigilance and oversight

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Jeremy Snyder, Professor, Health Sciences, Simon Fraser University

Around 100,000 members of Vancouver’s Filipino community and other residents recently gathered to take part in the Lapu Lapu street festival to celebrate Filipino culture. This vibrant community celebration ended in tragedy when a vehicle was driven at high speed through the festival.

Eleven people were killed in the April 26 attack, and dozens injured in what acting police chief Steve Rai called the “darkest day in the city’s history.”

There has been an outpouring of community support for the victims, their friends and families, and the Filipino community in Vancouver. This support has taken the form of flowers and messages left at the attack site, vigils and gatherings and religious events.

And, as is now common following high-profile tragedies, the Lapu Lapu festival attack has been accompanied by a number of crowdfunding campaigns by and for its victims.

A memorial for the victims of the Lapu Lapu tragedy.
(J. Snyder), CC BY

Helping after disaster

Many of these crowdfunding campaigns are hosted by GoFundMe, which has set up a dedicated hub for these fundraisers. A week after the attack, the 16 campaigns on this hub had raised more than $2.3 million.

Dozens of other fundraisers on GoFundMe have raised additional money for various causes and groups associated with the tragedy and Vancouver’s Filipino community. Other crowdfunding platforms have also hosted related crowdfunding campaigns.

Crowdfunding is a way for the public to help those in need in concrete ways while also expressing their shock and sadness over tragic events. People from across the world have taken advantage of crowdfunding’s accessibility to learn about victims and join the outpouring of support.

This support can be large and consequential. A campaign for Andy Le, a teenager who lost his family at the festival attack, has received more than $500,000 in donations. As a result of this support, Le has in turn pledged to donate half that money to other victims.

This viral, international support has meant these campaigns are likely able to raise vastly more money than would be possible through traditional, purely local and offline activities.

Teenager Andy Le, who lost his family in the Lapu Lapu attack, redistributes the funds raised in an online campaign.

Fraud and fundraising

But while the online nature of crowdfunding allows for a global response to high-profile tragedies, the relatively impersonal nature of crowdfunding has its downsides. Our research has demonstrated that crowdfunding sometimes attracts fraudulent campaigns.

High-profile events that spur numerous campaigns and massive financial support are particularly attractive to fraudsters. Unfortunately, this has been the case with the Lapu Lapu festival tragedy. In one case, a GoFundMe campaign fraudulently raised more than $57,000, ostensibly to return the body of “Reyna Dela Peñato” to the Philippines after her death at the festival and to support her sons.

Separately, the Philippine Consulate General of Vancouver warned of fraudulent campaigns on its behalf that used images from its website.

Vetting authenticity

Communities can provide mutual support by detecting these fraudulent campaigns, especially in tight-knit communities like Filipinos in Vancouver. In the case of the fraudulent campaign for “Reyna Dela Peñato,” it was flagged by Raquel Narraway, a Vancouver resident who had been compiling information on fundraisers. Narraway was able to marshal her connections to the local Filipino community to show that the campaign was not genuine.

GoFundMe does its own vetting as well, identifying some campaigns as “verified” after contacting organizers.

However, responding to actual and potential fraud creates new burdens on victims to prove their legitimacy to the public and crowdfunding platforms. Local community members are in turn taken away from grieving to investigate these campaigns. These policing activities inject a level of distrust into fundraising that is less present when giving takes place between people with pre-existing connections.

Growing challenges

While the problem of fraud in crowdfunding isn’t new, changes to the practice of crowdfunding may make it harder to detect. The advent of large language models or artificial intelligence (AI) tools like ChatGPT have made it easier for crowdfunding campaigners to edit their campaign narratives to appeal to a wider pool of potential donors.

Crowdfunding platforms like GoFundMe are also pushing AI features directly into their platforms to “enhance” these campaigns and help campaigners “connect with more donors.” These features may be especially appealing to people whose first language is not English, as may be the case with some victims of the Lapu Lapu festival attack.

While the AI-ification of crowdfunding creates a more level playing field for campaigners, it may also make fraud easier to commit and harder to detect. This will be true if generating fake campaigns is easier using chatbots and if legitimate campaigns use AI and take on a less authentic voice.

Online crowdfunding isn’t going anywhere, and for many victims of the Lapu Lapu festival attack, it has enabled them to ease some of the burden from that terrible day. However, we should be aware that crowdfunding isn’t a purely beneficial tool for people in need. Without proper oversight, it may develop in ways that are even more problematic.

Jeremy Snyder receives funding from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada.

Valorie A. Crooks receives funding from the Canadian Institutes of Health Research, Social Science and Humanities Research Council of Canada, BC Women’s Health Research Institute and MITACS..

– ref. Fraudulent crowdfunding after the Lapu Lapu tragedy highlights the need for vigilance and oversight – https://theconversation.com/fraudulent-crowdfunding-after-the-lapu-lapu-tragedy-highlights-the-need-for-vigilance-and-oversight-255934

MIL OSI – Global Reports –

May 9, 2025
MIL-OSI Security: Man convicted of Gordon Ogunmuyiwa’s manslaughter

Source: United Kingdom London Metropolitan Police

A man has been found guilty of the manslaughter of Gordon Ogunmuyiwa after an investigation by specialist Met detectives.

Paul Campbell, 43 (03.04.79) of Dunheved Road West, Thornton Heath, was convicted on Thursday, 8 May following a three-week trial at Woolwich Crown Court.

He is due to be sentenced on Tuesday, 10 June.

Campbell had beaten Gordon, a 62-year-old former doctor from Dalston, Hackney to death on Christmas Eve, following more than a year of financial and physical abuse.

Detective Chief Inspector Samantha Townsend, who led the Met’s investigation said: “Gordon was a gentle man with no history of violence.

“Ill health however had seen him become increasingly vulnerable – something Campbell took advantage of. A selfish and self-serving man, Campbell’s greed coloured his actions and an innocent man was taken from his family.

“I hope today’s verdict goes some way in providing a sense of justice to Gordon’s family.”

The court heard that on Saturday, 24 December 2023, police were called by the London Ambulance Service at 11:00hrs to a report a man had died in a bed and breakfast in Thornton Heath.

Gordon was found in a room registered in Campbell’s name. However, when paramedics arrived Campbell was not present.

Detectives attempted to contact him but were unsuccessful.

This led officers to make enquiries into Campbell, which resulted in a murder investigation being launched.

Police interviewed fellow residents at the bed and breakfast and quickly established a pattern of behaviour that saw Gordon suffer brutal beatings by Campbell.

A financial search uncovered that Campbell had been using Gordon’s credit cards. He also bought an iPhone from a second hand shop, using said bank cards, a week after Gordon had died.

On Wednesday, 11 January Campbell was arrested on suspicion of murder and charged the next day.

A post mortem was conducted and it was clear that Gordon had multiple injuries borne over time.

However, the assault, heard by neighbours on Saturday, 23 December, was declared to have been particularly vicious and ultimately led to Gordon’s death.

Gordon’s Sister Merion Wood said: “Gordon was much loved and his death has completely destroyed our family. We thank the police for their efforts at bringing his murderer to justice and pray no other family has to suffer as we have.”

MIL Security OSI –

May 9, 2025
MIL-OSI USA: Wyden, Duckworth, Murray and Booker Lead Colleagues in Demanding Answers About Firings of Congressionally-Mandated CDC IVF Team

US Senate News:

Source: United States Senator Ron Wyden (D-Ore)
May 08, 2025
“The Trump administration is now moving beyond broken promises to purposely dismantling the very system that provides hopeful families with accountability and transparency regarding fertility clinic success rates.”
Washington, D.C. — U.S. Senators Ron Wyden, D-Ore., Tammy Duckworth, D-Ill., Patty Murray, D-Wash., and Cory Booker, D-N.J., today led colleagues in demanding answers from Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. for eliminating the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) team responsible for making sure people who are trying to become pregnant have the information they need to thoughtfully and safely grow their families – despite Donald Trump’s broken promise to support families seeking IVF treatments.
“Because IVF is a complicated and expensive process, the American people deserve access to the best information possible to inform their family building journey. Unfortunately, hollowing out National Assisted Reproductive Technology (ART) Surveillance System capabilities and capacity is consistent with Donald Trump’s deceitful and disingenuous rhetoric on IVF,” the senators wrote in a letter to HHS Secretary Kennedy. “Your actions threaten hopeful parents and families’ ability to access high-quality, safe, and effective fertility care. The American people deserve assurances that their rights under the [Fertility Clinic Success Rate and Certification Act of 1992] will continue to be guaranteed, as Congress intended.”
The Assisted Reproductive Technology Surveillance and Research team (ARTS) was established following a 1992 Wyden law passed by Congress aimed at guaranteeing consumer protections for people seeking to grow their family through IVF and other assisted reproductive technology. The fired team of six deeply qualified scientists and public health practitioners were responsible for carrying out the CDC’s mandated responsibilities under the Wyden law, including conducting IVF clinic data analysis related to success rates and important clinic oversight through yearly audits and site visits and the monitoring of lab certification status.
ARTS served as a critical source of unbiased information for patients seeking fertility treatment, collecting and maintaining data on approximately 98 percent of all IVF and assisted reproductive technology cycles performed in the United States.
In addition to Wyden, Duckworth, Murray, and Booker, the letter was signed by Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn., Kirsten Gillibrand, D-N.Y., John Hickenlooper, D-Colo., Mazie Hirono, D-Hawai’i, Amy Klobuchar, D-Minn., Jon Ossoff, D-Ga., Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., Raphael Warnock, D-Ga., and Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass.
The senators demanded the immediate rehiring of every civil servant formerly on the ARTS team and answers to the following questions by Friday, May 16:

When will you reinstate the entirety of the ARTS team?

How many employees on the ARTS team, and any supporting contracts, have been fired since January 20, 2025? Please provide a complete breakdown by position, provide information on GS level and veteran status, and clearly state the justification for termination. This accounting should include any employees who have since been reinstated or placed on administrative leave, noting that change in status.

Which officials at HHS were involved in these staffing reduction decisions and what planning, if any, was undertaken prior to these reductions? Please describe the events that unfolded and name each office that was involved in the decision. Further, please name the official(s) who approved the staffing reductions as well as specifically indicate if any of the below individuals, or direct reports to these individuals, were involved in the decision-making. Name any such direct reports.

Elon Musk, Special Government Employee, DOGE.

Amy Gleason, Acting Administrator, DOGE.

Susan Monarez, Acting Director, First Assistant to the Director, Principal Deputy Director, CDC.

Without an ARTS team, how will the CDC continue to carry-out its statutorily-required responsibilities under FCSRCA? Please provide a detailed plan, including noting who has the expertise, skills, capacity, and resources to carry-out the responsibilities formerly carried-out by the ARTS team.

Have, or will, any of the CDC’s responsibilities previously carried-out by the ARTS team been contracted out?

If so, what assurance will you give the American people that the data and analysis produced will be comprehensive, transparent, publicly-accessible and cover all IVF cycles annually, as the ARTS team did?

If so, please describe the cost of contracting out these services.

In some instances, the HHS’s Reduction In Force (RIF) efforts have been characterized as final. Those same people have stated that, as per the nature of the layoffs, the roles and responsibilities previously carried out by fired staff cannot be refilled. Is this characterization of the RIF efforts correct?

If so, how can the CDC continue to carry-out its statutorily required responsibilities under FCSRCA?

What communication, if any, has been given to IVF clinics in connection with the ARTS layoffs and how to report data going forward? If any such communication was distributed, please produce it.

Does the CDC continue to collect data from IVF clinics across the country? If so, who is responsible for collecting that data and where is the data presently being stored?

People considering and undergoing IVF and other assisted reproductive technologies rely on up-to-date information to make informed medical decisions. Each year, CDC collects data from IVF clinics across the country and standardizes this information into a public-facing website and report.

As of the ARTS team’s firings, the 2023 data had been fully collected. What is the anticipated release date for the 2023 IVF report? Has this timeline been impacted by the ARTS layoffs?

Have any of the information categories published in previous years been removed or altered? If so, please describe the changes that have been made to information categories and provide a rationale for any changes.

The ARTS team was operational for over 30 years and the historical information it held related to ARTS is uniquely instructive to public health efforts and contains sensitive PII about hopeful parents undergoing IVF and their children. How will the CDC maintain patient confidentiality, protect PII, and sustain this critical database moving forward? Please provide a detailed plan.

Further, who is presently in charge of the historical information previously held by the ARTS Team and where is this information held?

Was the decision to dismiss the ARTS team made in consultation with any non-governmental entities, including nonprofits, think tanks, advocacy organizations, research or educational institutions, or public policy research organizations.

If so, please provide any written documents or correspondence that informed this decision and name all non-governmental entities involved in the decision to terminate the ARTS team.

The full letter text is here.

MIL OSI USA News –

May 9, 2025
MIL-OSI USA: Rep. Pfluger’s “DHS Restrictions on Confucius Institutes” Act Passes the House

Source: United States House of Representatives – Congressman August Pfluger (TX-11)

WASHINGTON, DC — Today, Congressman August Pfluger (TX-11), Chairman of the House Committee on Homeland Security’s Subcommittee on Counterterrorism and Intelligence, had legislation pass through the U.S. House of Representatives. Chairman Pfluger’s “DHS Restrictions on Confucius Institutes Act“ will defend American students from the Chinese Communist Party by prohibiting any Department of Homeland Security (DHS) funding from flowing to universities that host a Confucius Institute or maintain a relationship with a Chinese entity of concern.

Following the legislation’s passage, Rep. Pfluger released the following statement:

“The Chinese Communist Party has proven to be an untrustworthy, adversarial actor by continually undermining American interests at every turn – in no world should they have a front-row seat in our classrooms funded by our own taxpayer dollars,” said Rep. Pfluger. “The bipartisan passage of my legislation today sends a clear message: America’s universities and research labs will no longer be used to steal critical research, recruit talent for Military-Civil fusion enterprises, conduct espionage, commit transnational repression, and influence academic institutions to the benefit of the CCP. This is a victory for our national security and future generations of Americans.”

Several leaders in the U.S. House of Representatives also praised the passage of Rep. Pfluger’s legislation:

Speaker of the House Mike Johnson said, “House Republicans will not tolerate adversarial regimes, like the Chinese Communist Party, using propaganda to manipulate students, undermine academic institutions, and compromise national security. Higher education in America must remain free from foreign malign influence. I commend Rep. Pfluger for his leadership in protecting students and ensuring taxpayer dollars are not used to fund institutions that host Confucius Institutes or maintain ties to Chinese entities supporting CCP interests.”

House Committee on Homeland Security Chairman Mark Green said, “Beijing’s malign influence should never have been allowed to reach American campuses. Chairman Pfluger’s legislation will protect our universities from the CCP’s efforts to steal American research and innovation, which Xi uses to undermine our nation’s sovereignty,” Chairman Green said. “After years of hard work by Chairman Pfluger, I look forward to getting this bill to the Senate and signed into law by President Trump. We must prevent American taxpayer dollars from funding our greatest geopolitical adversary’s sinister ambitions.”

Majority Leader Steve Scalise said, “For years, the Chinese Communist Party targeted the United States and our institutes of higher education in attempts to influence and exploit American classrooms and research. Specifically, Confucius Institutes were extensions of the CCP’s influence network meant to conduct espionage in the U.S., impact academic institutions’ decisions, push propaganda, and steal intellectual property and trade secrets. We cannot allow foreign adversaries to infiltrate U.S. education, participate in shaping the minds of America’s future leaders, or allow them access to steal intellectual property. That is why we must ensure American institutions of higher education fully cut ties with these hostile entities or face consequences. I’m grateful to Rep. Pfluger for his leadership on this issue and for bringing legislation to protect our best and brightest.”

House GOP Conference Chairwoman Lisa McClain said, “There’s no place for Chinese propaganda in America. House Republicans are ending CCP influence on college campuses and ensuring taxpayer dollars are not funding foreign agendas. My colleague Rep. Pfluger has done a great job getting this bill to the finish line, and I’m proud to have voted YES to pass this bill and defend our students from harmful CCP influence.”

Majority Whip Tom Emmer said, “We cannot allow the Chinese Communist Party to infiltrate and influence American schools without consequence—especially schools that are funded by taxpayer dollars. I thank Rep. Pfluger for leading a bill that rightly restricts federal funding to any institution of higher education that chooses to align with the CCP’s anti-American agenda.”

Background:

Confucius Institutes have historically been presented as centers for promoting Chinese language and culture, but unfortunately, they have proven to be far from that. Confucius Institutes have been used to steal critical research, recruit talent for Military-Civil fusion enterprises, conduct espionage, commit transnational repression, and influence academic institutions to the benefit of the CCP.

At their peak, the United States hosted approximately 118 Confucius Institutes, primarily at colleges and universities. There are fewer than 14 active Confucius Institutes today, but the danger remains. Many of these programs have rebranded themselves within universities with the same mission as before: to subvert national security and expand CCP influence operations.

Prior to its passage, Chairman Pfluger delivered remarks on the House floor highlighting these dangers and more to outline the critical need for this legislation.

Chairman Pfluger has led this legislation since the 117th Congress, reintroduced the “DHS Restrictions on Confucius Institutes Act, and held a CTI Subcommittee hearing to combat threats posed by the Chinese Communist Party to U.S. National Security. During the hearing, Chairman Pfluger had experts agree with the need for his legislation, stating that federal funding should be restricted from universities with Confucius institutes.

Following the hearing, Chairman Pfluger’s legislation passed through the House Committee on Homeland Security’s legislative markup with bipartisan support.

MIL OSI USA News –

May 9, 2025
MIL-OSI Global: Decentralized finance is booming − and so are the security risks. My team surveyed nearly 500 crypto investors and uncovered the most common mistakes

Source: The Conversation – USA – By Mingyi Liu, Ph.D. student in Computer Science, Georgia Institute of Technology

When the first cryptocurrency, Bitcoin, was proposed in 2008, the goal was simple: to create a digital currency free from banks and governments. Over time, that idea evolved into something much bigger: “decentralized finance,” or “DeFi.”

With decentralized finance, people trade, borrow and earn interest on crypto assets without relying on traditional intermediaries. DeFi services run on blockchains, which are essentially digital ledgers, and use “smart contracts” − self-executing code that automates financial transactions. Tens of billions of dollars have poured into the DeFi market.

But with innovation comes risks. The lack of centralized oversight has made crypto, including decentralized finance, a prime target for hackers and scammers. In 2024 alone, people lost nearly US$1.5 billion due to security exploits and fraud. And unlike traditional finance, there’s usually no way to recover stolen crypto.

As a computer scientist, I wanted to better understand how people perceive and respond to these risks. So my colleagues and I first conducted in-depth interviews with 14 crypto investors, then surveyed nearly 500 others to validate our findings.

Our study found that people often made the same mistakes, driven by recurring misconceptions and gaps in security awareness. Here are some of the most important.

Mistake 1: Thinking the blockchain guarantees security

Many people told us they thought decentralized finance was secure – but their reasoning wasn’t very convincing. Some seemed to confuse decentralized finance with blockchain technology itself, which is designed to ensure transactions are tamper-resistant through so-called “consensus mechanisms.” One told us that DeFi is secure “because a hacker would have to override an entire blockchain” to steal funds.

But services on the blockchain are still vulnerable to implementation and design flaws. These include smart contract breaches, in which bad guys exploit bugs in a service’s code, and front-end attacks, where a user interface is altered to redirect funds into a hacker’s wallet. A front-end attack was reportedly to blame for a recent $1.5 billion crypto heist.

CNBC reports on the record-breaking $1.5 billion crypto theft.

Mistake 2: Thinking safe keys mean safe funds

Another common misconception is that DeFi is secure if private keys are well stored. A private key is a secret code that allows someone to access their crypto assets. It’s true that in DeFi – unlike in centralized crypto finance where an exchange holds private keys – users have full control over their own private keys.

But even with perfect private key management, users can still lose funds by interacting with compromised DeFi platforms. That’s because safeguarding private keys can prevent only direct attacks targeting private key access, such as phishing attempts.

The people we spoke with also failed to follow best practices for securing their private keys. Using a hardware wallet – a physical device that stores private keys offline – is one of the most secure options for protecting keys from online threats. However, our study found that only a handful of participants actually used hardware wallets.

Mistake 3: Thinking 2-factor authentication is a silver bullet

Two-factor authentication, or 2FA, is a standard security mechanism in which two forms of verification are required to access an account. Think being texted a one-time code before you can log into your bank account.

To prevent account breaches, centralized crypto exchanges such as Binance and Coinbase use two-factor authentication for logins, account recovery and withdrawal confirmations. But while 2FA is crucial to security in the traditional and centralized crypto finance system, it plays a much smaller role in decentralized finance.

DeFi wallets give users access based on private key ownership rather than identity verification, which means traditional 2FA can’t be used. Instead, only 2FA-like mechanisms are available in DeFi. For instance, multisignature wallets require approval from multiple private key holders. However, if your private key is compromised, attackers can perform wallet operations on your behalf without any additional verification. In addition, even users who adopt 2FA-like measures can’t prevent the security breaches on the DeFi services’ end.

Unfortunately, our participants were overly confident regarding the effectiveness of 2FA, with one saying, “Two-factor authentication has been one of the best solutions for keeping wallets safe.” In our survey, 57.1% of users relied on 2FA as their only technical countermeasure against rug pulls – scams where project creators suddenly withdraw funds – and 49.3% did so for smart contract exploits. This misplaced trust could lead them to ignore more effective security strategies.

Mistake 4: Not managing token approvals

One such effective strategy is revoking token approvals. In DeFi, tokens are digital assets on a blockchain that represent value or rights, and users often need to approve smart contracts to access or spend them. But if you leave these approvals open, a malicious contract – or one that’s been hacked – can drain your wallet. So it’s crucial to routinely check all token approvals you’ve granted to prevent losses caused by fraudulent or hacked DeFi services. Specifically, you should limit spending allowances instead of using the default “unlimited” option, and revoke approvals for apps you no longer use or trust.

Worryingly, we found that only 10.8% and 16.3% of participants regularly checked and revoked token approvals to protect against rug pulls and smart contract exploits, respectively. In light of this, we recommend that wallet providers introduce a reminder feature to prompt users to review their token approvals periodically.

Mistake 5: Not learning from past incidents

Even after they’re hacked or scammed, people often don’t do anything to improve their security practices, we found. Just 17.6% of those who reported being victims of a DeFi scam regularly checked token approvals afterward. Worse, 26% took no action at all after a scam, and 16.4% doubled down by investing even more in other DeFi services.

Surprisingly, more than half of the victims said their belief in DeFi either stayed the same or grew stronger after the incident. One user who lost $4,700 due to a rug-pull incident said, “My belief in cryptocurrency has grown stronger after that because I made good money from it.” That person added, “An opportunity to make money is something I believe in.” This suggests that DeFi users’ financial motivations can sometimes outweigh their security concerns – and, perhaps, their better judgment.

There’s no one-size-fits-all solution to DeFi security. But awareness is the first step. To stay safe, crypto investors should use hardware wallets, revoke unused token approvals and continually learn new techniques to protect themselves from evolving threats. Most importantly, they should stay rational and not let the allure of profits cloud their security practices.

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

– ref. Decentralized finance is booming − and so are the security risks. My team surveyed nearly 500 crypto investors and uncovered the most common mistakes – https://theconversation.com/decentralized-finance-is-booming-and-so-are-the-security-risks-my-team-surveyed-nearly-500-crypto-investors-and-uncovered-the-most-common-mistakes-251305

MIL OSI – Global Reports –

May 9, 2025
MIL-OSI USA: Opening Remarks at the SEC Town Hall

Source: Securities and Exchange Commission

Thank you very much for coming to our first “town hall” meeting together. To those of you here with me at our headquarters in Washington, it is so great to see you. And, let me add an especial welcome to you who are joining from our regional offices around the country.

I am pleased that we can meet today to discuss the SEC; our important mission on behalf of our fellow citizens, investors, and taxpayers; as well as some of my priorities as your new Chairman.

First and foremost, I take great pride in saying that it is a new day here at the SEC. We are returning to our core mission that Congress set for us. All of us can recite the familiar three-part mission enunciated by Congress in the Exchange Act: protecting investors; furthering capital formation; and safeguarding fair, orderly, and efficient markets. We see these phrases on our website, on the walls of this building, in our public pronouncements. They are at the core of what brings us to work every day.

Investor protection is the cornerstone of our mission—to hold accountable those who lie, cheat, and steal. Capital formation is at the root of what we do. Otherwise, why have the financial markets? Capital formation—building a direct, economical route for investors’ capital to find its way to entrepreneurs and industry that put capital to work to create products and services that people value and willingly pay for, because these products and services make their lives some combination of better, healthier, safer, longer, more fun. This engine of growth employs people, helping them to work and save to achieve their dreams. It is responsible for lifting them out of the poverty that unfortunately has been the traditional state of humanity for millennia.

We should not overlook the part about fair, orderly, and efficient markets. Congress calls on us to ensure that our regulations balance costs and benefits, that they do not become too burdensome that they add needless friction to the marketplace, undermining the capital formation that yields so much benefit.

But, what if the SEC’s leadership has directed the agency, which oversees and is responsible for the markets, to lose its own fairness, orderliness, and efficiency? Does that undermine the markets’ own approach if their policeman comports itself with inconsistent values? Predictability, due process, rule of law, integrity are all part of what create respect and project a sense that one can get a fair shake without vindictiveness or ulterior motives.

Unfortunately, in the last four years until January, the SEC’s long-held reputation has suffered in that vein.

Two weeks ago today, I was sworn in by Secretary of the Treasury Scott Bessent in the Oval Office with President Trump; my family was by my side. It was an optimistic moment in the Oval.

I am honored by the trust and confidence that the President and the Senate placed in me to lead the SEC.

There are so many people to whom I am thankful for helping make my appointment by President Trump even possible.

As you know by now, I was a Commissioner from 2002 to 2008, after serving on the staff of two chairmen – Richard Breeden and Arthur Levitt. My time in public service and the private sector, both earlier in my career and more recently, have allowed me to see firsthand how regulations affect markets and investors. They can stoke innovation, facilitate investment goals, and create opportunities—or burdens—on businesses’ ability to compete and serve their customers.

So, how we implement regulations at the SEC is crucial; it is one thing to write a regulation, quite another for it to achieve its intended goal. Regulation ideally should be smart, effective, and appropriately tailored within the confines of our statutory authority.

It takes market experience and focused application to ensure that customers and investors of financial services firms benefit from efficient, effective, and well-designed regulation. Our goal at the SEC should be to facilitate those efforts, analyze their effectiveness, and use our enforcement power to cure and rectify wayward actions.

In short, clear rules of the road benefit all market participants.

Returning to this agency has been a pleasure. I have very much enjoyed seeing all the friendly faces, meeting with staff, and reconnecting with many colleagues I remember from years ago.

I know from my own experience that the SEC’s longstanding reputation for its dedicated and highly skilled professionals is justly deserved. Your knowledge and expertise continue to impress me. I want you to know that I value and appreciate you.

It is a high calling to work every day to protect investors, facilitate capital formation, and maintain, fair, orderly, and efficient markets. Thank you for your commitment to our mission.

I am grateful to Commissioner Uyeda—who once upon a time was my counsel—for his stewardship of the agency from January to April, a very productive three months. Thank you, Commissioner Uyeda.

As we look ahead, I am confident in the direction of our work. My experience over the decades will naturally inform my approach as Chairman. I told the press—who were peppering me with questions during the last crypto roundtable—that I have a list of priorities as long as my arm that I would like to achieve.

It should be no surprise that high on that list is a sensible approach toward crypto. From 2017 until my nomination, I worked to help develop best practices for the digital assets industry and saw firsthand how ambiguous or nonexistent regulations in this space created uncertainty and inhibited innovation. That lack of regulatory framework also invites fraud.

A top priority for me will be to tackle regulatory treatment of digital assets and distributed ledger technologies, providing a firm regulatory foundation through a rational, coherent, principled approach.

I thank Commissioner Peirce, our own “Crypto Mom,” who is working hard on this issue. I am proud to say that she also was once upon a time my counsel when I was Commissioner. She is known for her principled and tireless advocacy for common-sense policy. I am confident that she is the right person to lead this effort to come up with a rational regulatory framework for crypto asset markets.

I am pleased with the efforts of the Crypto Task Force and the three roundtables it has held so far on defining security status, tailoring regulation for crypto trading, and custody considerations. I look forward to the input from industry and additional public feedback we will get during the next two roundtables on the topics of tokenization and decentralized finance.

This is important work. Entrepreneurs across the United States and around the world are harnessing blockchain technology to modernize aspects of our financial system. I expect huge benefits from this market innovation for efficiency, cost reduction, transparency, and risk mitigation.

This is a pivotal moment for our economy. Entrepreneurs, businesses, and individuals here at home and across the globe are eager to invest in America.

We will work together to protect investors from fraud, keep politics out of how our securities laws and regulations are applied, and advance clear rules of the road that encourage investment in our economy to the benefit of all Americans.

We will work together to ensure that regulations promote capital formation rather than stifle it. We will work together to ensure American investors get disclosures that actually help them understand the true risks of an investment.

Together, we will make every effort to ensure that the U.S. is the best and most secure place in the world to invest and do business. Americans should always feel utmost confidence when investing their hard-earned dollars to save and provide for their future and the future of their families.

I cannot say that the current times are not without uncertainty. Many of you have expressed your uncertainty to me. What will the course of the agency be? Will there be further cuts in headcount? Will we maintain regional offices?

I am in my third week at the SEC—my 10th working day is today. I thank Commissioner Uyeda for his work during the transition time to straighten out some urgent policy issues that we faced in the courts and some organizational issues as the new Administration came into office.

As we look forward, I am counting on Commissioner Peirce’s continued leadership of the Crypto Task Force. I would like Commissioner Uyeda to be an ambassador to IOSCO since I have enough to focus on at home. I also am happy to say that Commissioner Crenshaw has agreed to take on the SEC’s administrative law framework and procedure in light of the two Supreme Court rulings that in effect oblige us to rethink and reform this area. It is high time that we take that task to heart.

We have had departures—many of our former colleagues accepted retirement or separation offers. I count many of them as old friends, and I salute their service over many years. The Offices and Divisions have decreased headcount by 15% since the beginning of the current fiscal year. These departures leave vacancies that in many cases need to be filled. When I left the agency in 2008, we had approximately 3,600 employees. At our height a year ago, we had approximately 5,000 employees plus 2,000 contractors. Today we are at approximately 4,200 employees and 1,700 contractors.

Tomorrow we will begin a process to review our technology infrastructure and our contractual obligations. This review is long overdue—call it a spring cleaning and reassessment of contracts, especially regarding information technology. We need to see what we have, where our vulnerabilities are, and how we can shore up and improve our systems.

We will work on optimizing our efficiency. There will be targeted, common-sense reorganization to come. We also have leasing issues to be resolved—notably in Los Angeles and Philadelphia. I am working on those issues and share your concerns. Unfortunately, about 11 years ago, the agency precipitously surrendered to the General Services Administration its control over leasing, which Congress specifically granted the SEC in the Exchange Act. That action puts me in a weaker position today.

Let me say unequivocally that I firmly believe in our regional office concept. We cannot and should not have everyone in Washington and New York. Risk management, human resource development, and practicality for our examination teams (to focus on one example) provide ample reinforcement for that position.

I also want to salute our regional teams for their expertise and collaboration across offices to find the best resources to assign to matters. At least one direct experience that I had in the past year in which my firm was an independent compliance consultant indicates that the SEC has advanced quite a bit in this coordination over the past couple of decades. Two of our SEC colleagues from the Miami office with necessary, specific expertise played a key role in uncovering problematic activity of a Philadelphia asset manager by meticulously analyzing trades—going back to the trade blotters—to build a case.

As I said at the outset of my remarks today, it is a new and brighter day for the SEC.

I am here to work, with each of you, on behalf of American markets and investors. We will work with our colleagues in the Administration, especially other financial services regulators, notably the CFTC and banking regulators, and, of course, with Congress to bolster the economy and build on U.S. leadership of the global markets.

Thank you for all that you do each and every day to advance our mission.

If you are joining us remotely today, thank you for participating. I look forward to interacting with you in person in the near future. For those of you here at headquarters, please join me for some refreshments right outside.

Thank you.

MIL OSI USA News –

May 9, 2025
MIL-OSI USA: After 170 Years, Thoreau’s River Observations Inform Our Changing Climate

Source: US State of Connecticut

Like an expertly choreographed dance, the sequence and timing of natural events through a season, called phenology, give us clues about how the climate is changing.

For example, a warmer spring may lead to plants leafing and flowering early, potentially disrupting life cycles of the birds and insects who may miss this crucial window if it happens before they migrate. Climate change is throwing such timing out of balance, and unless it directly impacts humans, we may not notice.

To study New England’s regional phenology through a historical lens, UConn Department of Earth Sciences Professor Robert Thorson is looking into 10 years’ worth of Henry David Thoreau’s meticulous, systematic records of river behavior from the 1850s to glean insights into climate change. His findings are published in The Concord Saunterer.

A season is much more than a block of a few months on the calendar; it is a category of phenomena that varies depending on who you ask, says Thorson. For instance, a season differs if you ask a skier, a fisherman, or a student. To understand something as complex as climate change on a personal level requires helping them see that their seasons are being changed and time-shifted, no matter how they define them. This requires a well-established baseline with a clear definition for each season. Thoreau’s “Journal” provides exactly this.

Replica of Thoreau’s boat, Musketaquid, on the bank of the Sudbury River, Lincoln, MA. (Photo courtesy of Juliet Wheeler)

“I don’t pick Thoreau for his philosophy, he’s just a damn good observer,” says Thorson. “He is meticulous, he is daily, he is yearly, and he is systematically rigorous about roaming around 50 square miles and recording it day after day after day after day.”

Thoreau created an impressive data set from 1850 through 1860, including the 6,000 entries Thorson has cataloged so far by reading line-by-line, indexing, and creating a spreadsheet. Thoreau recorded examples of phenology along the river – for instance, when the first ice occurred, when the river was completely frozen, when the first snow fell, and when the breakup of ice occurred.

“From these observations, we can establish the timings of discrete phenomena from the mid-19th century using simple statistics,” says Thorson. “The next step is to compare those timings with the modern era using publicly available data; for example, minimum stream discharges from the U.S. Geological Survey.”

Rather than seeing the year on a calendar, Thorson categorized how Thoreau saw not four, but ten discrete seasons whose exact dates were fluid and based on the physical conditions he observed rather than celestial happenings or arbitrary dates. These seasons included breakup, inland sea, aquatic spring, riparian spring, summer, drought, aquatic autumn, riparian autumn, freeze up, and winter white. Thorson details the timings and characteristics of Thoreau’s river seasons using hundreds of direct, dated, and descriptive quotes. Thorson notes that all of Thoreau’s seasons still exist today, though they have shifted in timing and intensity due to climate change.

Thorson’s idea is to create a then-and-now comparison and to incorporate statistical analysis between Thoreau’s and modern data sets to understand patterns and trends in the complicated phenomena.

“Even just answering the question of how much earlier ice breakup is occurring would take nothing more than a than simple statistical analysis. This is eminently translatable to the public because many residents of Thoreau country have experienced river breakup in the past,” says Thorson. “They may have had their dock ripped out by river ice, they may have gone swimming on a certain day, but not others. People could relate to this stuff, and that’s essentially what I’m trying to do.”

Though Thoreau is remembered primarily for his writings while living on Walden Pond, Thorson points out that he actually spent most of his time on three local rivers, whether walking trails, boating, swimming, or skating.

“This is a guy who skated 60 miles in one day — upriver to the falls at Framingham on the Sudbury River and then he turned around and skated past Concord all the way down to just north of Lowell in Billerica. Then he turned around and skated back home again. On another winter, he measured ice floes two feet thick. Imagine those conditions today. Now the river hardly freezes at all.”

Researching this project, Thorson was delighted by the sensory detail of Thoreau’s descriptions. For example, on one August day, he felt the baking “dog-day” heat of the air, the silence of laminar streamflow, the “unctuous” iridescent sheen on sluggish water, and the fetid smell of riverbank muck draped by dead lily pads, says Thorson.

“But within a day, he can feel fall coming, and all of a sudden, the first rains or the cooling air start to bring change. You get a completely different river from the preceding one of drought, or the one with icebergs stampeding down the river, tearing out bridges. All of this is phenology. All can be timed to a specific day.”

With these phenological details, Thorson has laid the groundwork for creating a record of climate change. Thorson was initially inspired by Thoreau’s phenology when writing his book “The Boatman,” in which he was only able to sketch Thoreau’s river seasons briefly. With this new article, Thorson pulls it all together to identify the specific seasonal thresholds and present the information in Thoreau’s words to show readers how he saw the year. Thorson hopes the paper inspires collaboration with statisticians to help in the next step of analysis.

“Probably the first thing I’ll do is explore where the modern records are. I also wanted to pull the historic record together and tighten portions into a robust hypothesis. Thoreau’s work is New England’s best record of broad environmental conditions for the mid-19th century. It’s astonishing. It’s two million words,” says Thorson.

Noting the contrasts between the river phenology Thoreau so thoughtfully detailed and what we can observe today, Thorson says he hopes this work resonates with readers.

“Breakup is the most instantaneous and dramatic point in the entire year. We don’t think much about it right now, because we don’t have a lot of river ice, but it used to be two feet thick on the river, and that says something sad about how dramatic the climate change has been. You can read dry numerical facts about how New England’s nighttime average temperatures have risen in the 100 years. But when you make climate change dramatic, as with a bridge being torn apart by a spring freshet, that’s a phenomenon associated with emotion. People pay more attention. The personal narrative of a river system year after year after year — that’s what Thoreau gave us.”

MIL OSI USA News –

May 9, 2025
MIL-OSI USA: Neag School Class of 2025 Student Profile: Nathan Kim

Source: US State of Connecticut

Editor’s Note: As Commencement approaches, we are featuring some of our Neag School Class of 2025 graduating students over the coming days.

Major: BS, Sport Management
Hometown: North Wales, Pennsylvania

Q: Why did you choose UConn?

A: Even though UConn is out-of-state for me, I felt drawn to it because of the strength of the program and the unique opportunities it offered. After touring the campus, I just couldn’t say no. It had that true college-town feel, which was exactly what I wanted. Unlike city schools, where you’re walking alongside people from all walks of life, UConn felt like a tight-knit community. Everywhere I went, I’d run into students just like me, and that sense of connection was enough for me.

Q: What’s your major or field of study, and what drew you to it?

A: I’m a sport management major, and I’ve known I have wanted to be in this field since high school. UConn, having one of the top programs in the country, made the decision easy. To me, sports are more than just games; they’re a powerful, universal language. They give people a way to express themselves without saying a word. My goal has always been to help others and combining that with my love and passion for sports gave me the perfect path forward: using sports as a tool to make a positive impact in the world.

Q: Did you have a favorite professor or class?

A: Man… choosing just one professor feels impossible. I’ve been lucky to have some amazing mentors. But if I had to shout someone out, it’s Dr. Chen. He is my professor and my advisor, and he went above and beyond by agreeing to supervise a club I started at UConn. He’s been consistently supportive, both academically and personally. We’ve had countless run-ins on campus, whether it’s at the gym or just walking around, and every time, it led to a funny or motivational chat I’ll always remember.

Q: What activities were you involved in as a student?

A: I was the president of KSA (Korean Student Association) and founded and served as president of GIFT (Guys in Fitness Training). On the job side, I worked briefly as a tour guide and was also part of the athletic operations team for UConn’s sports programs. Getting involved in all these different spaces gave me the chance to meet incredible people and build lasting relationships. Get involved everywhere as much as you can.

Q: What’s one thing that surprised you about UConn?

A: I was never bored. Not once. People love to say college towns don’t have much going on, but UConn proved them all wrong. If anything, there was too much to do. Even after four years, I feel like I barely scratched the surface of everything this place has to offer.

Q: What are your plans after graduation/receiving your degree?

A: I plan to continue working in the sports industry. I’ve been fortunate enough to intern with a few teams, and I’m excited to explore roles in sponsorships and partnerships. Long-term, I want to build something of my own. Something rooted in sports and driven by a bigger purpose. My dream is to make a difference while doing what I love.

Q: How has UConn prepared you for the next chapter in life?

A: UConn taught me how to be independent and thrive on my own. Sure, it’s fun to be surrounded by friends, go to games together, and eat at the dining halls. But there were also those moments when I had to stand on my own. Those moments helped me figure out who I am, what I value, and the kind of people I want around me. Thanks to the support of my professors, advisors, and friends, I’ve learned a lot about life and about myself.

UConn taught me how to be independent and thrive on my own. &#8212 Nathan Kim

Q: Any advice for incoming students?

A: Come in knowing your “why” and be proud of it. Don’t feel like you need to fit into a mold. UConn has so many clubs, organizations, and communities that you will find your people. Your journey is your own, and that’s what makes it special. Be confident in your path, even if it looks different from everyone else’s.

Q: What’s one thing everyone should do during their time at UConn?

A: Okay, I know the default answer is “go to a sporting game,” yes, you should definitely do that, but I want to give you a different take: use the Rec Center. Whether it’s group fitness classes, pickup sports, or just hanging out, the Rec Center is a hub of energy and good vibes. Even if you’re not super into fitness, it’s a great way to meet people and stay active. Honestly, it’s one of the gems of campus life, and I definitely took this for granted. It’s honestly one of the things I will miss the most.

Q: What will always make you think of UConn?

A: A husky. No doubt. Every time I see one, I instantly think of UConn. It’s more than just a mascot here. It’s part of who we are. Honestly, I might even get a husky one day.

MIL OSI USA News –

May 9, 2025
MIL-OSI Europe: AFRICA – Archbishop Nwachukwu: “Africa is no longer a little child”

Source: Agenzia Fides – MIL OSI

Luca Mainoldi

Rome (Agenzia Fides) – “Africa is often seen as a little child in a cradle, whose voice is perceived as a disturbing cry and who needs to be calmed by giving her some ‘milk’ in the form of development aid,” said Archbishop Fortunatus Nwachukwu, Secretary of the Dicastery for Evangelization (Section for First Evangelization and the New Particular Churches), in his speech at the Colloquium “The Church in Africa: general perspectives in view of the Conclave and the future of the Church,” held on Tuesday, May 6, at the Pontifical University of the Holy Cross in Rome.Archbishop Nwachukwu emphasized that at the international political level, there are those “who see Africa only as a baby in a cradle: They say, ‘Please go and calm the child so she does not disturb the adults who are talking.’ And then they give the baby a little milk in the form of a subsidy so she will be quiet and the adults can talk. That is why Africa is often viewed as a child who has no voice to be taken into consideration.” “Unfortunately, in the political world, Africa is still only either a mine from which minerals are extracted for one’s own production or a deposit for one’s own waste,” said the Secretary of the Missionary Dicastery. “And when Africans try to raise their heads to change this situation, there are those who set fires to prevent any change.”That is why,” Archbishop Nwachukwu continued, “Africa is internationally viewed either as a baby in a cradle, as a mine, or as a landfill.” “We therefore need a new way of thinking, including in the Church,” he emphasized. “Africa finds itself in a situation it did not want, but it is working to respond and rise again,” he emphasizes. “And the Lord is with Africa, the continent that Jesus sought to bind to himself since he was a child and sought refuge there when he was in danger.”Archbishop Nwachukwu reminds us that there is also a kind of new Herod in Africa, such as “the modern ideology that wants to destroy the Church.” It is above all the ideology of easy money that captivates the young African generation, says Archbishop Nwachukwu. “That is the real challenge: how to convey to young people where true happiness can be found, the true meaning of life,” he says. “In search of quick money, so many fall victim to scams or join criminal gangs or sects. What worries me about these phenomena is that efforts are being made to destroy the Church’s image. The Church, which came to save, is portrayed as having come to exploit people and destroy what was there before. When a young person grows up with these ideas, they reject the Church, forgetting that they only received an education because a missionary sacrificed himself to build the school where he went to study.” According to the Secretary of the Dicastery for Evangelization, it is necessary to “strengthen the memory of our missionaries.” “And thanks be to God that in Africa we have received the faith from Westerners whom I call heroes of the faith, those missionaries who left for other continents when leaving meant death, also because today’s means were not available,” he emphasizes. “These missionaries were the best export product of the West, and it is time to reap the fruits of what they sowed,” concludes Archbishop Nwachukwu. (L.M.) (Agenzia Fides, 7/5/2025)
Share:

MIL OSI Europe News –

May 8, 2025

MIL-OSI Europe: Minutes – Wednesday, 7 May 2025 – Strasbourg – Final edition

Source: European Parliament

PV-10-2025-05-07

iPlPv_Sit

Minutes

Wednesday, 7 May 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: Martin HOJSÍK
Vice-President

1. Opening of the sitting

The sitting opened at 09:00.

2. Negotiations ahead of Parliament’s first reading (Rule 72) (action taken)

The decisions of the LIBE and PECH committees and (jointly) the SEDE and ITRE committees to enter into interinstitutional negotiations had been announced on 5 May 2025 (minutes of 5.5.2025, item 12).

Since no requests for vote had been made pursuant to Rule 72(2), the committees responsible had been able to begin negotiations after the expiry of the deadline set.

3. EU support for a just, sustainable and comprehensive peace in Ukraine (debate)

Council and Commission statements: EU support for a just, sustainable and comprehensive peace in Ukraine (2025/2685(RSP))

Adam Szłapka (President-in-Office of the Council) and Ursula von der Leyen (President of the Commission) made the statements.

The following spoke: Michael Gahler, on behalf of the PPE Group, Yannis Maniatis, on behalf of the S&D Group, Kinga Gál, on behalf of the PfE Group, Adam Bielan, on behalf of the ECR Group, Petras Auštrevičius, on behalf of the Renew Group, Terry Reintke, on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group, Özlem Demirel, on behalf of The Left Group, Hans Neuhoff, on behalf of the ESN Group, Sandra Kalniete, Thijs Reuten, Harald Vilimsky, who also declined to take a blue-card question from Moritz Körner, Alberico Gambino, Marie-Agnes Strack-Zimmermann, Virginijus Sinkevičius, Marc Botenga, who also answered a blue-card question from Sebastian Tynkkynen, Petar Volgin, Fidias Panayiotou, who also answered a blue-card question from Moritz Körner, Rasa Juknevičienė, Brando Benifei, Tom Vandendriessche, Mirosława Nykiel and Heléne Fritzon.

IN THE CHAIR: Christel SCHALDEMOSE
Vice-President

The following spoke: Beata Szydło, Nathalie Loiseau, Mika Aaltola, Francisco Assis, Hannah Neumann, Paulius Saudargas, Marcos Ros Sempere, Roberto Vannacci, Victor Negrescu, Aurelijus Veryga, Hilde Vautmans, Matej Tonin, Danilo Della Valle, Francisco José Millán Mon, Tonino Picula, Pierre-Romain Thionnet, Salvatore De Meo, Raphaël Glucksmann, Merja Kyllönen, Ingeborg Ter Laak, Elena Yoncheva, Seán Kelly, who also answered a blue-card question from Petras Gražulis, Joanna Scheuring-Wielgus, Tamás Deutsch, Rihards Kols, Helmut Brandstätter, Adrián Vázquez Lázara, Vilija Blinkevičiūtė, Krzysztof Hetman, Jonas Sjöstedt, Danuše Nerudová, Tobias Cremer, Tomasz Buczek, Małgorzata Gosiewska, Dan Barna, Wouter Beke, Ignazio Roberto Marino, Irene Montero and Ana Miguel Pedro.

The following spoke under the catch-the-eye procedure: Michał Szczerba, Juan Fernando López Aguilar, Viktória Ferenc, Arkadiusz Mularczyk, Dainius Žalimas, Jaume Asens Llodrà, Siegbert Frank Droese, Lukas Sieper, Maria Grapini, Damian Boeselager and Petras Gražulis.

The following spoke: Valdis Dombrovskis (Member of the Commission) and Adam Szłapka.

The debate closed.

(The sitting was suspended at 11:19.)

IN THE CHAIR: Roberta METSOLA
President

4. Resumption of the sitting

The sitting resumed at 11:35.

5. Commemoration of the 80th anniversary of the end of World War II in Europe

The President made a statement to mark the 80th anniversary of the end of World War II in Europe.

António Costa (President of the European Council), Robert Chot (Member of the Belgian Royal National Federation of War Volunteers), Janusz Komorowski (President of the Polish Association of Home Army Soldiers) and Janusz Maksymowicz (Vice-President of the Warsaw Uprising Insurgents Association), addressed the House.

The House stood for the European anthem performed by soprano Francesca Sorteni, accompanied by Thomas Gautier and Claire Rigaux on violin, Marie Viard on cello and Emma Errara on viola.

(The sitting was suspended for a few moments.)

6. Resumption of the sitting

The sitting resumed at 12:19.

⁂

The following spoke: Valérie Hayer (the President noted her remarks. She pointed out that serving Europe in the House of democracy was an honourable commitment and called for everyone to respect what this represented).

7. Welcome

On behalf of Parliament, the President welcomed Dr Denis Mukwege, winner of the 2014 Sakharov Prize and 2018 Nobel Peace Prize, who had taken his seat in the distinguished visitors’ gallery.

8. Voting time

For detailed results of the votes, see also ‘Results of votes’ and ‘Results of roll-call votes’.

8.1. Amending ERDF, Cohesion Fund and Just Transition Fund as regards specific measures to address strategic challenges in the context of the mid-term review ***I (vote)

Amending ERDF, Cohesion Fund and Just Transition Fund as regards specific measures to address strategic challenges in the context of the mid-term review – (COM(2025)0123 – C10-0063/2025 – 2025/0084(COD))

REQUEST FOR AN URGENT DECISION by the REGI Committee (Rule 170(5))

Approved

Vote: at a later part-session.

Detailed voting results

8.2. European Social Fund (ESF+): specific measures to address strategic challenges ***I (vote)

European Social Fund (ESF+): specific measures to address strategic challenges – (COM(2025)0164 – C10-0064/2025 – 2025/0085(COD))

REQUEST FOR AN URGENT DECISION by the EMPL Committee (Rule 170(5))

Approved

Vote: at a later part-session.

Detailed voting results

8.3. Discharge 2023: EU general budget – Commission, executive agencies and European Development Funds (vote)

Report on discharge in respect of the implementation of the general budget of the European Union for the financial year 2023, Section III – Commission, executive agencies and the ninth, tenth and eleventh European Development Funds [COM(2024)0272 – C10-0067/2024 – 2024/2019(DEC)] – Committee on Budgetary Control. Rapporteur: Niclas Herbst (A10-0074/2025)

(Majority of the votes cast)

PROPOSALS FOR DECISIONS – Commission and executive agencies

Adopted (P10_TA(2025)0077)

Discharge was granted and closure of the accounts approved (see Annex V, Article 5(1) to the Rules of Procedure).

PROPOSALS FOR DECISIONS – European Development Funds – EDF (9th, 10th and 11th)

Adopted (P10_TA(2025)0077)

Discharge was granted and closure of the accounts approved (see Annex V, Article 5(1) to the Rules of Procedure).

MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION

Adopted (P10_TA(2025)0077)

Detailed voting results

8.4. Discharge 2023: EU general budget – European Parliament (vote)

Report on discharge in respect of the implementation of the general budget of the European Union for the financial year 2023, Section I – European Parliament [COM(2024)0272 – C10-0068/2024 – 2024/2020(DEC)] – Committee on Budgetary Control. Rapporteur: Monika Hohlmeier (A10-0062/2025)

(Majority of the votes cast)

PROPOSAL FOR A DECISION

Adopted (P10_TA(2025)0078)

Detailed voting results

8.5. Discharge 2023: EU general budget – European Council and Council (vote)

Report on discharge in respect of the implementation of the general budget of the European Union for the financial year 2023, Section II – European Council and Council [COM(2024)0272 – C10-0069/2024 – 2024/2021(DEC)] – Committee on Budgetary Control. Rapporteur: Joachim Stanisław Brudziński (A10-0052/2025)

PROPOSAL FOR A DECISION

Approved (P10_TA(2025)0079)

Discharge postponed (see Annex V, Article 5(1)(b) to the Rules of Procedure)

MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION

Adopted (P10_TA(2025)0079)

Detailed voting results

8.6. Discharge 2023: EU general budget – Court of Justice of the European Union (vote)

Report on discharge in respect of the implementation of the general budget of the European Union for the financial year 2023, Section IV – Court of Justice [COM(2024)0272 – C10-0070/2024 – 2024/2022(DEC)] – Committee on Budgetary Control. Rapporteur: Cristian Terheş (A10-0050/2025)

(Majority of the votes cast)

PROPOSAL FOR A DECISION

Adopted (P10_TA(2025)0080)

MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION

Adopted (P10_TA(2025)0080)

Detailed voting results

8.7. Discharge 2023: EU general budget – Court of Auditors (vote)

Report on discharge in respect of the implementation of the general budget of the European Union for the financial year 2023, Section V – Court of Auditors [COM(2024)0272 – C10-0071/2024 – 2024/2023(DEC)] – Committee on Budgetary Control. Rapporteur: Dick Erixon (A10-0047/2025)

(Majority of the votes cast)

PROPOSAL FOR A DECISION

Adopted (P10_TA(2025)0081)

MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION

Adopted (P10_TA(2025)0081)

Detailed voting results

8.8. Discharge 2023: EU general budget – European Economic and Social Committee (vote)

Report on discharge in respect of the implementation of the general budget of the European Union for the financial year 2023, Section VI – European Economic and Social Committee [COM(2024)0272 – C10-0073/2024 – 2024/2025(DEC)] – Committee on Budgetary Control. Rapporteur: Joachim Stanisław Brudziński (A10-0054/2025)

(Majority of the votes cast)

PROPOSAL FOR A DECISION

Adopted (P10_TA(2025)0082)

MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION

Adopted (P10_TA(2025)0082)

Detailed voting results

8.9. Discharge 2023: EU general budget – Committee of the Regions (vote)

Report on discharge in respect of the implementation of the general budget of the European Union for the financial year 2023, Section VII – Committee of the Regions [COM(2024)0272 – C10-0074/2024 – 2024/2026(DEC)] – Committee on Budgetary Control. Rapporteur: Joachim Stanisław Brudziński (A10-0046/2025)

(Majority of the votes cast)

PROPOSAL FOR A DECISION

Adopted (P10_TA(2025)0083)

MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION

Adopted (P10_TA(2025)0083)

Detailed voting results

8.10. Discharge 2023: EU general budget – European Ombudsman (vote)

Report on discharge in respect of the implementation of the general budget of the European Union for the financial year 2023, Section VIII – European Ombudsman [COM(2024)0272 – C10-0075/2024 – 2024/2027(DEC)] – Committee on Budgetary Control. Rapporteur: Joachim Stanisław Brudziński (A10-0055/2025)

(Majority of the votes cast)

PROPOSAL FOR A DECISION

Adopted (P10_TA(2025)0084)

MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION

Adopted (P10_TA(2025)0084)

Detailed voting results

8.11. Discharge 2023: EU general budget – European Data Protection Supervisor (vote)

Report on discharge in respect of the implementation of the general budget of the European Union for the financial year 2023, Section IX – European Data Protection Supervisor [COM(2024)0272 – C10-0076/2024 – 2024/2028(DEC)] – Committee on Budgetary Control. Rapporteur: Joachim Stanisław Brudziński (A10-0053/2025)

(Majority of the votes cast)

PROPOSAL FOR A DECISION

Adopted (P10_TA(2025)0085)

MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION

Adopted (P10_TA(2025)0085)

Detailed voting results

8.12. Discharge 2023: EU general budget – European External Action Service (vote)

Report on discharge in respect of the implementation of the general budget of the European Union for the financial year 2023, Section X – European External Action Service [COM(2024)0272 – C10-0072/2024 – 2024/2024(DEC)] – Committee on Budgetary Control. Rapporteur: Joachim Stanisław Brudziński (A10-0069/2025)

(Majority of the votes cast)

PROPOSAL FOR A DECISION

Adopted (P10_TA(2025)0086)

MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION

Adopted (P10_TA(2025)0086)

Detailed voting results

8.13. Discharge 2023: European Public Prosecutor’s Office (vote)

Report on discharge in respect of the implementation of the budget of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office for the financial year 2023 [COM(2024)0272 – C10-0077/2024 – 2024/2029(DEC)] – Committee on Budgetary Control. Rapporteur: Tomáš Zdechovský (A10-0051/2025)

(Majority of the votes cast)

PROPOSALS FOR DECISIONS

Adopted (P10_TA(2025)0087)

Discharge was granted and closure of the accounts approved (see Annex V, Article 5(1) to the Rules of Procedure).

MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION

Adopted (P10_TA(2025)0087)

Detailed voting results

8.14. Discharge 2023: Agencies (vote)

Report on discharge in respect of the implementation of the budget of the European Union Agencies for the financial year 2023 [COM(2024)0272 – C10-0078/2024 – 2024/2030(DEC)] – Committee on Budgetary Control. Rapporteur: Erik Marquardt (A10-0065/2025)

(Majority of the votes cast)

European Union Agency for the Cooperation of Energy Regulators (ACER)

PROPOSALS FOR DECISIONS

Adopted (P10_TA(2025)0088)

Discharge was granted and closure of the accounts approved (see Annex V, Article 5(1) to the Rules of Procedure).

Agency for Support for BEREC

PROPOSALS FOR DECISIONS

Adopted (P10_TA(2025)0088)

Discharge was granted and closure of the accounts approved (see Annex V, Article 5(1) to the Rules of Procedure).

Translation Centre for the Bodies of the European Union (CdT)

PROPOSALS FOR DECISIONS

Adopted (P10_TA(2025)0088)

Discharge was granted and closure of the accounts approved (see Annex V, Article 5(1) to the Rules of Procedure).

European Centre for the Development of Vocational Training (Cedefop)

PROPOSALS FOR DECISIONS

Adopted (P10_TA(2025)0088)

Discharge was granted and closure of the accounts approved (see Annex V, Article 5(1) to the Rules of Procedure).

European Union Agency for Law Enforcement Training (CEPOL)

PROPOSALS FOR DECISIONS

Adopted (P10_TA(2025)0088)

Discharge was granted and closure of the accounts approved (see Annex V, Article 5(1) to the Rules of Procedure).

European Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA)

PROPOSALS FOR DECISIONS

Adopted (P10_TA(2025)0088)

Discharge was granted and closure of the accounts approved (see Annex V, Article 5(1) to the Rules of Procedure).

European Banking Authority (EBA)

PROPOSALS FOR DECISIONS

Adopted (P10_TA(2025)0088)

Discharge was granted and closure of the accounts approved (see Annex V, Article 5(1) to the Rules of Procedure).

European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (ECDC)

PROPOSALS FOR DECISIONS

Adopted (P10_TA(2025)0088)

Discharge was granted and closure of the accounts approved (see Annex V, Article 5(1) to the Rules of Procedure).

European Chemicals Agency (ECHA)

PROPOSALS FOR DECISIONS

Adopted (P10_TA(2025)0088)

Discharge was granted and closure of the accounts approved (see Annex V, Article 5(1) to the Rules of Procedure).

European Environment Agency (EEA)

PROPOSALS FOR DECISIONS

Adopted (P10_TA(2025)0088)

Discharge was granted and closure of the accounts approved (see Annex V, Article 5(1) to the Rules of Procedure).

European Fisheries Control Agency (EFCA)

PROPOSALS FOR DECISIONS

Adopted (P10_TA(2025)0088)

Discharge was granted and closure of the accounts approved (see Annex V, Article 5(1) to the Rules of Procedure).

European Food Safety Authority (EFSA)

PROPOSALS FOR DECISIONS

Adopted (P10_TA(2025)0088)

Discharge was granted and closure of the accounts approved (see Annex V, Article 5(1) to the Rules of Procedure).

European Institute for Gender Equality (EIGE)

PROPOSALS FOR DECISIONS

Adopted (P10_TA(2025)0088)

Discharge was granted and closure of the accounts approved (see Annex V, Article 5(1) to the Rules of Procedure).

European Insurance and Occupational Pensions Authority (EIOPA)

PROPOSALS FOR DECISIONS

Adopted (P10_TA(2025)0088)

Discharge was granted and closure of the accounts approved (see Annex V, Article 5(1) to the Rules of Procedure).

European Institute of Innovation and Technology (EIT)

PROPOSALS FOR DECISIONS

Adopted (P10_TA(2025)0088)

Discharge was granted and closure of the accounts approved (see Annex V, Article 5(1) to the Rules of Procedure).

European Labour Authority (ELA)

PROPOSALS FOR DECISIONS

Adopted (P10_TA(2025)0088)

Discharge was granted and closure of the accounts approved (see Annex V, Article 5(1) to the Rules of Procedure).

European Medicines Agency (EMA)

PROPOSALS FOR DECISIONS

Adopted (P10_TA(2025)0088)

Discharge was granted and closure of the accounts approved (see Annex V, Article 5(1) to the Rules of Procedure).

European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction (now European Union Drugs Agency)

PROPOSALS FOR DECISIONS

Adopted (P10_TA(2025)0088)

Discharge was granted and closure of the accounts approved (see Annex V, Article 5(1) to the Rules of Procedure).

European Maritime Safety Agency (EMSA)

PROPOSALS FOR DECISIONS

Adopted (P10_TA(2025)0088)

Discharge was granted and closure of the accounts approved (see Annex V, Article 5(1) to the Rules of Procedure).

European Union Agency for Cybersecurity (ENISA)

PROPOSALS FOR DECISIONS

Adopted (P10_TA(2025)0088)

Discharge was granted and closure of the accounts approved (see Annex V, Article 5(1) to the Rules of Procedure).

European Union Agency for Railways (ERA)

PROPOSALS FOR DECISIONS

Adopted (P10_TA(2025)0088)

Discharge was granted and closure of the accounts approved (see Annex V, Article 5(1) to the Rules of Procedure).

Euratom Supply Agency (ESA)

PROPOSALS FOR DECISIONS

Adopted (P10_TA(2025)0088)

Discharge was granted and closure of the accounts approved (see Annex V, Article 5(1) to the Rules of Procedure).

European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA)

PROPOSALS FOR DECISIONS

Adopted (P10_TA(2025)0088)

Discharge was granted and closure of the accounts approved (see Annex V, Article 5(1) to the Rules of Procedure).

European Training Foundation (ETF)

PROPOSALS FOR DECISIONS

Adopted (P10_TA(2025)0088)

Discharge was granted and closure of the accounts approved (see Annex V, Article 5(1) to the Rules of Procedure).

European Union Agency for Asylum (EUAA)

PROPOSALS FOR DECISIONS

Adopted (P10_TA(2025)0088)

Discharge and closure of the accounts was postponed (see Annex V, Article 5(1) to the Rules of Procedure).

European Union Agency for the Operational Management of Large-Scale IT Systems in the Area of Freedom, Security and Justice (eu-LISA)

PROPOSALS FOR DECISIONS

Adopted (P10_TA(2025)0088)

Discharge was granted and closure of the accounts approved (see Annex V, Article 5(1) to the Rules of Procedure).

European Agency for Safety and Health at Work (EU-OSHA)

PROPOSALS FOR DECISIONS

Adopted (P10_TA(2025)0088)

Discharge was granted and closure of the accounts approved (see Annex V, Article 5(1) to the Rules of Procedure).

European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions (Eurofound)

PROPOSALS FOR DECISIONS

Adopted (P10_TA(2025)0088)

Discharge was granted and closure of the accounts approved (see Annex V, Article 5(1) to the Rules of Procedure).

European Union Agency for Criminal Justice Cooperation (Eurojust)

PROPOSALS FOR DECISIONS

Adopted (P10_TA(2025)0088)

Discharge was granted and closure of the accounts approved (see Annex V, Article 5(1) to the Rules of Procedure).

European Union Agency for Law Enforcement Cooperation (Europol)

PROPOSALS FOR DECISIONS

Adopted (P10_TA(2025)0088)

Discharge was granted and closure of the accounts approved (see Annex V, Article 5(1) to the Rules of Procedure).

European Union Agency for the Space Programme (EUSPA)

PROPOSALS FOR DECISIONS

Adopted (P10_TA(2025)0088)

Discharge was granted and closure of the accounts approved (see Annex V, Article 5(1) to the Rules of Procedure).

European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights (FRA)

PROPOSALS FOR DECISIONS

Adopted (P10_TA(2025)0088)

Discharge was granted and closure of the accounts approved (see Annex V, Article 5(1) to the Rules of Procedure).

European Border and Coast Guard Agency (Frontex)

PROPOSALS FOR DECISIONS

Adopted (P10_TA(2025)0088)

Discharge was granted and closure of the accounts approved (see Annex V, Article 5(1) to the Rules of Procedure).

MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION

Adopted (P10_TA(2025)0088)

Detailed voting results

8.15. Discharge 2023: Joint Undertakings (vote)

Report on discharge in respect of the implementation of the budget of the EU joint undertakings for the financial year 2023 [COM(2024)0272 – C10-0079/2024 – 2024/2031(DEC)] – Committee on Budgetary Control. Rapporteur: Michal Wiezik (A10-0056/2025)

(Majority of the votes cast)

Clean Aviation Joint Undertaking

PROPOSALS FOR DECISIONS

Adopted (P10_TA(2025)0089)

Discharge was granted and closure of the accounts approved (see Annex V, Article 5(1) to the Rules of Procedure).

Circular Bio-based Europe Joint Undertaking

PROPOSALS FOR DECISIONS

Adopted (P10_TA(2025)0089)

Discharge was granted and closure of the accounts approved (see Annex V, Article 5(1) to the Rules of Procedure).

Clean Hydrogen Joint Undertaking

PROPOSALS FOR DECISIONS

Adopted (P10_TA(2025)0089)

Discharge was granted and closure of the accounts approved (see Annex V, Article 5(1) to the Rules of Procedure).

Europe’s Rail Joint Undertaking

PROPOSALS FOR DECISIONS

Adopted (P10_TA(2025)0089)

Discharge was granted and closure of the accounts approved (see Annex V, Article 5(1) to the Rules of Procedure).

European High Performance Computing Joint Undertaking

PROPOSALS FOR DECISIONS

Adopted (P10_TA(2025)0089)

Discharge was granted and closure of the accounts approved (see Annex V, Article 5(1) to the Rules of Procedure).

European Joint Undertaking for ITER and the Development of Fusion Energy

PROPOSALS FOR DECISIONS

Adopted (P10_TA(2025)0089)

Discharge was granted and closure of the accounts approved (see Annex V, Article 5(1) to the Rules of Procedure).

Global Health EDCTP3 Joint Undertaking

PROPOSALS FOR DECISIONS

Adopted (P10_TA(2025)0089)

Discharge was granted and closure of the accounts approved (see Annex V, Article 5(1) to the Rules of Procedure).

Innovative Health Initiative Joint Undertaking

PROPOSALS FOR DECISIONS

Adopted (P10_TA(2025)0089)

Discharge was granted and closure of the accounts approved (see Annex V, Article 5(1) to the Rules of Procedure).

Chips Joint Undertaking (before 21.9.2023: Key Digital Technologies Joint Undertaking)

PROPOSALS FOR DECISIONS

Adopted (P10_TA(2025)0089)

Discharge was granted and closure of the accounts approved (see Annex V, Article 5(1) to the Rules of Procedure).

Single European Sky ATM Research 3 Joint Undertaking

PROPOSALS FOR DECISIONS

Adopted (P10_TA(2025)0089)

Discharge was granted and closure of the accounts approved (see Annex V, Article 5(1) to the Rules of Procedure).

Smart Networks and Services Joint Undertaking

PROPOSALS FOR DECISIONS

Adopted (P10_TA(2025)0089)

Discharge was granted and closure of the accounts approved (see Annex V, Article 5(1) to the Rules of Procedure).

MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION

Adopted (P10_TA(2025)0089)

Detailed voting results

8.16. A revamped long-term budget for the Union in a changing world (vote)

Report on a revamped long-term budget for the Union in a changing world [2024/2051(INI)] – Committee on Budgets. Rapporteurs: Siegfried Mureşan and Carla Tavares (A10-0076/2025)

The debate had taken place on 6 May 2025 (minutes of 6.5.2025, item 9).

(Majority of the votes cast)

MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION

Adopted (P10_TA(2025)0090)

Detailed voting results

8.17. The European Water Resilience Strategy (vote)

Report on the European Water Resilience Strategy [2024/2104(INI)] – Committee on the Environment, Climate and Food Safety. Rapporteur: Thomas Bajada (A10-0073/2025)

The debate had taken place on 6 May 2025 (minutes of 6.5.2025, item 13).

(Majority of the votes cast)

MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION

Adopted (P10_TA(2025)0091)

Detailed voting results

8.18. 2023 and 2024 reports on Türkiye (vote)

2023 and 2024 Commission reports on Türkiye [2025/2023(INI)] – Committee on Foreign Affairs. Rapporteur: Nacho Sánchez Amor (A10-0067/2025)

The debate had taken place on 6 May 2025 (minutes of 6.5.2025, item 14).

(Majority of the votes cast)

MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION

Adopted (P10_TA(2025)0092)

The following had spoken:

Nacho Sánchez Amor (rapporteur), to move an oral amendment to add a new paragraph after paragraph 31. Parliament had agreed to put the oral amendment to the vote.

Jordan Bardella, to move an oral amendment to add a new paragraph after paragraph 36. Parliament had not agreed to put the oral amendment to the vote as more than 39 Members had opposed it.

Detailed voting results

8.19. 2023 and 2024 reports on Serbia (vote)

Report on the 2023 and 2024 Commission reports on Serbia [2025/2022(INI)] – Committee on Foreign Affairs. Rapporteur: Tonino Picula (A10-0072/2025)

The debate had taken place on 6 May 2025 (minutes of 6.5.2025, item 16).

(Majority of the votes cast)

MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION

Adopted (P10_TA(2025)0093)

The following had spoken:

Tonino Picula (rapporteur), to move an oral amendment to paragraph 23. Parliament had agreed to put the oral amendment to the vote.

Detailed voting results

8.20. 2023 and 2024 reports on Kosovo (vote)

Report on the 2023 and 2024 Commission Reports on Kosovo [2025/2019(INI)] – Committee on Foreign Affairs. Rapporteur: Riho Terras (A10-0075/2025)

The debate had taken place on 6 May 2025 (minutes of 6.5.2025, item 17).

(Majority of the votes cast)

MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION

Adopted (P10_TA(2025)0094)

Detailed voting results

(The sitting was suspended at 13:39.)

IN THE CHAIR: Javi LÓPEZ
Vice-President

9. Resumption of the sitting

The sitting resumed at 13:44.

10. Approval of the minutes of the previous sitting

The minutes of the previous sitting were approved.

11. Winning the global tech race: boosting innovation and closing funding gaps (topical debate)

The following spoke: Eva Maydell to open the debate proposed by the PPE Group.

The following spoke: Adam Szłapka (President-in-Office of the Council) and Costas Kadis (Member of the Commission).

The following spoke: Pablo Arias Echeverría, on behalf of the PPE Group, Alex Agius Saliba, on behalf of the S&D Group, Julie Rechagneux, on behalf of the PfE Group, Elena Donazzan, on behalf of the ECR Group, Christophe Grudler, on behalf of the Renew Group, Kim Van Sparrentak, on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group, Leila Chaibi, on behalf of The Left Group, Marcin Sypniewski, on behalf of the ESN Group, Tomislav Sokol, Christel Schaldemose, Kosma Złotowski, Svenja Hahn, David Cormand, Milan Mazurek, Massimiliano Salini, Giorgio Gori, Philippe Olivier, Charlie Weimers, Morten Løkkegaard, Eszter Lakos, Laura Ballarín Cereza, Diego Solier, Fernando Navarrete Rojas, Matthias Ecke, Mario Mantovani and Elena Sancho Murillo.

The following spoke: Costas Kadis and Adam Szłapka.

The debate closed.

12. Competition policy – annual report 2024 (debate)

Report on competition policy – annual report 2024 [2024/2079(INI)] – Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs. Rapporteur: Lara Wolters (A10-0071/2025)

Lara Wolters introduced the report.

The following spoke: Teresa Ribera (Executive Vice-President of the Commission).

The following spoke: Andreas Schwab, on behalf of the PPE Group, and Thomas Bajada, on behalf of the S&D Group.

IN THE CHAIR: Antonella SBERNA
Vice-President

The following spoke: Pierre Pimpie, on behalf of the PfE Group, Francesco Ventola, on behalf of the ECR Group, Stéphanie Yon-Courtin, on behalf of the Renew Group, Kira Marie Peter-Hansen, on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group, Martin Schirdewan, on behalf of The Left Group, Rada Laykova, on behalf of the ESN Group, Markus Ferber, René Repasi, Enikő Győri, Marlena Maląg, Marie Toussaint, Marcin Sypniewski, Branislav Ondruš, who also answered a blue-card question from João Oliveira, Georgios Aftias, Nikos Papandreou, Dirk Gotink, Adnan Dibrani, Marco Falcone and Jonás Fernández.

The following spoke under the catch-the-eye procedure: Ralf Seekatz, Sebastian Tynkkynen, Petras Gražulis, João Oliveira and Alexander Jungbluth.

The following spoke: Teresa Ribera and Lara Wolters.

The debate closed.

Vote: 8 May 2025.

13. Resilience and the need to improve the interconnection of energy grid infrastructure in the EU: the first lessons from the blackout in the Iberian Peninsula (debate)

Council and Commission statements: Resilience and the need to improve the interconnection of energy grid infrastructure in the EU: the first lessons from the blackout in the Iberian Peninsula (2025/2686(RSP))

Adam Szłapka (President-in-Office of the Council) and Dan Jørgensen (Member of the Commission) made the statements.

The following spoke: Dolors Montserrat, on behalf of the PPE Group, Nicolás González Casares, on behalf of the S&D Group, Jorge Buxadé Villalba, on behalf of the PfE Group, Diego Solier, on behalf of the ECR Group, Anna Stürgkh, on behalf of the Renew Group, Diana Riba i Giner, on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group, Estrella Galán, on behalf of The Left Group, Petr Bystron, on behalf of the ESN Group, Paulo Cunha, who also answered a blue-card question from Petras Gražulis, Francisco Assis, António Tânger Corrêa, who also answered a blue-card question from Bruno Gonçalves, Patryk Jaki, Oihane Agirregoitia Martínez, Jaume Asens Llodrà, Irene Montero, Marc Jongen, Lefteris Nikolaou-Alavanos, François-Xavier Bellamy, who also answered a blue-card question from Nicolás González Casares, Sofie Eriksson, Paolo Borchia, Nora Junco García, Christophe Grudler, Pernando Barrena Arza, Pilar del Castillo Vera, who also declined to take a blue-card question from Nicolás González Casares, and Elena Sancho Murillo.

IN THE CHAIR: Christel SCHALDEMOSE
Vice-President

The following spoke: András Gyürk, Nicolas Bay, Michał Kobosko, João Oliveira, Ana Miguel Pedro, Bruno Gonçalves, Pascale Piera, Daniel Obajtek, Seán Kelly, Bruno Tobback, Georg Mayer, Aleksandar Nikolic and Juan Carlos Girauta Vidal.

The following spoke under the catch-the-eye procedure: Davor Ivo Stier, Susana Solís Pérez, Sebastian Tynkkynen, Maria Zacharia and Lukas Sieper.

The following spoke: Dan Jørgensen and Adam Szłapka.

The debate closed.

14. High levels of retail food prices and their consequences for European consumers (debate)

Council and Commission statements: High levels of retail food prices and their consequences for European consumers (2025/2687(RSP))

Adam Szłapka (President-in-Office of the Council) and Costas Kadis (Member of the Commission) made the statements.

The following spoke: Tomislav Sokol, on behalf of the PPE Group, Camilla Laureti, on behalf of the S&D Group, Gilles Pennelle, on behalf of the PfE Group, Stefano Cavedagna, on behalf of the ECR Group, Asger Christensen, on behalf of the Renew Group, David Cormand, on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group, Hanna Gedin, on behalf of The Left Group, Milan Mazurek, on behalf of the ESN Group, Carmen Crespo Díaz, Adnan Dibrani, Tomasz Buczek, Veronika Vrecionová, Christine Singer, Ana Miranda Paz, who also answered a blue-card question from João Oliveira, Konstantinos Arvanitis, who also answered a blue-card question from Rody Tolassy, Kateřina Konečná, Péter Magyar, Biljana Borzan, Marieke Ehlers, Sergio Berlato, Ciaran Mullooly, Marc Botenga, Nikolaos Anadiotis, Krzysztof Hetman, Pierfrancesco Maran, Barbara Bonte, Jessika Van Leeuwen, Laura Ballarín Cereza, Margarita de la Pisa Carrión and France Jamet.

IN THE CHAIR: Esteban GONZÁLEZ PONS
Vice-President

The following spoke under the catch-the-eye procedure: Cristina Maestre, Mireia Borrás Pabón, Csaba Dömötör, Sebastian Tynkkynen, Rasmus Andresen, Elena Kountoura, João Oliveira, Lukas Sieper and Maria Zacharia.

The following spoke: Costas Kadis and Adam Szłapka.

The debate closed.

15. Malta’s Golden Passport scheme circumventing EU sanctions against Russia (debate)

Council and Commission statements: Malta’s Golden Passport scheme circumventing EU sanctions against Russia (2025/2688(RSP))

Adam Szłapka (President-in-Office of the Council) and Michael McGrath (Member of the Commission) made the statements.

The following spoke: David Casa, on behalf of the PPE Group, Alex Agius Saliba, on behalf of the S&D Group, Jadwiga Wiśniewska, on behalf of the ECR Group, Raquel García Hermida-Van Der Walle, on behalf of the Renew Group, Saskia Bricmont, on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group, Giuseppe Antoci, on behalf of The Left Group, Luděk Niedermayer, Birgit Sippel, Georgiana Teodorescu, who also declined to take a blue-card question from Raquel García Hermida-Van Der Walle, Irena Joveva, Daniel Freund, Peter Agius, Thomas Bajada, who also answered a blue-card question from Raquel García Hermida-Van Der Walle and did not accept a blue-card question from Daniel Freund, Alice Teodorescu Måwe, Daniel Attard, who also answered a blue-card question from Daniel Freund, and Evelyn Regner.

The following spoke under the catch-the-eye procedure: Juan Fernando López Aguilar and Sebastian Tynkkynen.

The following spoke: Alex Agius Saliba (the President cut off the speaker as his remarks did not constitute a point of order).

The following spoke under the catch-the-eye procedure: Maria Zacharia.

The following spoke: Michael McGrath and Adam Szłapka.

The debate closed.

16. The role of gas storage for securing gas supplies ahead of the winter season (debate)

Report on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Regulation (EU) 2017/1938 as regards the role of gas storage for securing gas supplies ahead of the winter season [COM(2025)0099 – C10-0041/2025 – 2025/0051(COD)] – Committee on Industry, Research and Energy. Rapporteur: Borys Budka (A10-0079/2025)

Borys Budka introduced the report.

The following spoke: Dan Jørgensen (Member of the Commission).

The following spoke: Andrea Wechsler, on behalf of the PPE Group, Jens Geier, on behalf of the S&D Group, András Gyürk, on behalf of the PfE Group, Ondřej Krutílek, on behalf of the ECR Group, Yvan Verougstraete, on behalf of the Renew Group, Marie Toussaint, on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group, Dario Tamburrano, on behalf of The Left Group, Alexander Sell, on behalf of the ESN Group, Jüri Ratas, Nicolás González Casares, Julie Rechagneux, Michael Bloss, Thomas Geisel and Mirosława Nykiel.

IN THE CHAIR: Ewa KOPACZ
Vice-President

The following spoke: Michalis Hadjipantela and Virgil-Daniel Popescu.

The following spoke under the catch-the-eye procedure: Liudas Mažylis, Sebastian Tynkkynen, Marta Wcisło and Billy Kelleher.

The following spoke: Dan Jørgensen and Borys Budka.

The debate closed.

Vote: 8 May 2025.

17. Banking Union – annual report 2024 (debate)

Report on Banking Union – annual report 2024 [2024/2055(INI)] – Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs. Rapporteur: Ralf Seekatz (A10-0044/2025)

Ralf Seekatz introduced the report.

The following spoke: Michael McGrath (Member of the Commission).

The following spoke: Marco Falcone, on behalf of the PPE Group, Jonás Fernández, on behalf of the S&D Group, Marlena Maląg, on behalf of the ECR Group, Billy Kelleher, on behalf of the Renew Group, Jussi Saramo, on behalf of The Left Group, Costas Mavrides and Giovanni Crosetto.

The following spoke under the catch-the-eye procedure: Marta Wcisło, Sebastian Tynkkynen and Lukas Sieper.

The following spoke: Michael McGrath and Ralf Seekatz.

The debate closed.

Vote: 8 May 2025.

18. The fine against TikTok and the need to strengthen the protection of citizens’ rights on social media platforms (debate)

Commission statement: The fine against TikTok and the need to strengthen the protection of citizens’ rights on social media platforms (2025/2704(RSP))

Michael McGrath (Member of the Commission) made the statement.

The following spoke: François-Xavier Bellamy, on behalf of the PPE Group, Alex Agius Saliba, on behalf of the S&D Group, Virginie Joron, on behalf of the PfE Group, Gheorghe Piperea, on behalf of the ECR Group, Veronika Cifrová Ostrihoňová, on behalf of the Renew Group, Alexandra Geese, on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group, Konstantinos Arvanitis, on behalf of The Left Group, Mary Khan, Pablo Arias Echeverría, Elisabeth Dieringer, Sandro Gozi, Fidias Panayiotou, Sunčana Glavak, Cynthia Ní Mhurchú and Moritz Körner.

The following spoke under the catch-the-eye procedure: Juan Fernando López Aguilar, Billy Kelleher and Lukas Sieper.

The following spoke: Michael McGrath.

The debate closed.

19. Debate on cases of breaches of human rights, democracy and the rule of law (debate)

(For the titles and authors of the motions for resolutions, see minutes of 7.5.2025, item I.)

19.1. Arrest and risk of execution of Tundu Lissu, Chair of Chadema, the main opposition party in Tanzania

Motions for resolutions B10-0260/2025, B10-0261/2025, B10-0262/2025, B10-0263/2025, B10-0264/2025 and B10-0265/2025 (2025/2690(RSP))

Reinhold Lopatka, Marit Maij, Jan-Christoph Oetjen, Catarina Vieira and Tomasz Froelich introduced their groups’ motions for resolutions.

The following spoke under the catch-the-eye procedure: Lukas Sieper.

The following spoke: Michael McGrath (Member of the Commission).

The debate closed.

Vote: 8 May 2025.

19.2. Return of Ukrainian children forcibly transferred and deported by Russia

Motions for resolutions B10-0247/2025, B10-0249/2025, B10-0250/2025, B10-0252/2025, B10-0255/2025 and B10-0258/2025 (2025/2691(RSP))

Jessika Van Leeuwen, Thijs Reuten, Petras Auštrevičius, Villy Søvndal and Małgorzata Gosiewska introduced their groups’ motions for resolutions.

The following spoke: Michał Szczerba, on behalf of the PPE Group, and Pina Picierno, on behalf of the S&D Group.

IN THE CHAIR: Antonella SBERNA
Vice-President

The following spoke: Karin Karlsbro, on behalf of the Renew Group, Ingeborg Ter Laak, Sandra Gómez López, Charles Goerens, Lukas Mandl, Pierfrancesco Maran, Isabel Wiseler-Lima, Davor Ivo Stier and Alice Teodorescu Måwe.

The following spoke under the catch-the-eye procedure: Liudas Mažylis, Nikos Papandreou, Lukas Sieper and Marta Wcisło.

The following spoke: Michael McGrath (Member of the Commission).

The debate closed.

Vote: 8 May 2025.

19.3. Violations of religious freedom in Tibet

Motions for resolutions B10-0248/2025, B10-0251/2025, B10-0253/2025, B10-0254/2025, B10-0256/2025 and B10-0259/2025 (2025/2692(RSP))

Danuše Nerudová, Hannes Heide, Mariusz Kamiński, Engin Eroglu and Ville Niinistö introduced their groups’ motions for resolutions.

The following spoke: Michael McNamara, on behalf of the Renew Group.

The following spoke under the catch-the-eye procedure: Vytenis Povilas Andriukaitis and Lukas Sieper.

The following spoke: Michael McNamara, on the previous speaker’s comments, and Lukas Sieper on Michael McNamara’s contribution.

The following spoke: Michael McGrath (Member of the Commission).

The debate closed.

Vote: 8 May 2025.

20. Democratic legitimacy and the Commission’s continued authorisation of genetically modified organisms despite Parliament’s objections (debate)

Commission statement: Democratic legitimacy and the Commission’s continued authorisation of genetically modified organisms despite Parliament’s objections (2025/2645(RSP))

Olivér Várhelyi (Member of the Commission) made the statement.

The following spoke: Esther Herranz García, on behalf of the PPE Group, Biljana Borzan, on behalf of the S&D Group, Paolo Inselvini, on behalf of the ECR Group, Martin Häusling, on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group, Nikolas Farantouris, on behalf of The Left Group, Daniel Buda, Maria Noichl, Georgiana Teodorescu and Günther Sidl.

The following spoke under the catch-the-eye procedure: Kristian Vigenin, Diana Iovanovici Şoşoacă, Vytenis Povilas Andriukaitis and Lukas Sieper.

The following spoke: Olivér Várhelyi.

The debate closed.

21. The illegal visit of President Erdoğan to the occupied areas of Cyprus (debate)

Council and Commission statements: The illegal visit of President Erdoğan to the occupied areas of Cyprus (2025/2705(RSP))

Michael McGrath (Member of the Commission) made the statement on behalf of the Commission.

The following spoke: Loucas Fourlas, on behalf of the PPE Group, Costas Mavrides, on behalf of the S&D Group, Afroditi Latinopoulou, on behalf of the PfE Group, Geadis Geadi, on behalf of the ECR Group (the President reminded the speaker of the rules on conduct), Kai Tegethoff, on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group, and Irene Montero, on behalf of The Left Group.

The following spoke: Michael McGrath.

The debate closed.

22. Explanations of vote

22.1. Discharge 2023: EU general budget – European External Action Service (A10-0069/2025 – Joachim Stanisław Brudziński) (oral explanations of vote)

Lynn Boylan

22.2. Written explanations of vote

Explanations of vote submitted in writing under Rule 201 appear on the Members’ pages on Parliament’s website.

23. Agenda of the next sitting

The next sitting would be held the following day, 8 May 2025, starting at 09:00. The agenda was available on Parliament’s website.

24. Approval of the minutes of the sitting

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 next sitting.

25. Closure of the sitting

The sitting closed at 22:21.

LIST OF DOCUMENTS SERVING AS A BASIS FOR THE DEBATES AND DECISIONS OF PARLIAMENT

I. Motions for resolutions tabled

Arrest and risk of execution of Tundu Lissu, Chair of Chadema, the main opposition party in Tanzania

The following Members or political groups had requested that a debate be held, in accordance with Rule 150, on the following motions for resolutions:

on the arrest and risk of execution of Tundu Lissu, Chair of Chadema, the main opposition party in Tanzania (2025/2690(RSP)) (B10-0260/2025)
Catarina Vieira, Nicolae Ştefănuță, Mounir Satouri, Maria Ohisalo, Mélissa Camara, Ville Niinistö
on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

on the arrest and risk of execution of Tundu Lissu, Chair of Chadema, the main opposition party in Tanzania (2025/2690(RSP)) (B10-0261/2025)
Yannis Maniatis, Francisco Assis, Marit Maij
on behalf of the S&D Group

on the arrest and risk of execution of Tundu Lissu, Chair of Chadema, the main opposition party in Tanzania (2025/2690(RSP)) (B10-0262/2025)
Tomasz Froelich
on behalf of the ESN Group

on the arrest and risk of execution of Tundu Lissu, Chair of Chadema, the main opposition party in Tanzania (2025/2690(RSP)) (B10-0263/2025)
Jan-Christoph Oetjen, Oihane Agirregoitia Martínez, Petras Auštrevičius, Malik Azmani, Dan Barna, Benoit Cassart, Olivier Chastel, Engin Eroglu, Svenja Hahn, Ilhan Kyuchyuk, Karin Karlsbro, Moritz Körner, Urmas Paet, Marie-Agnes Strack-Zimmermann, Hilde Vautmans, Michal Wiezik, Lucia Yar
on behalf of the Renew Group

on the arrest and risk of execution of Tundu Lissu, Chair of Chadema, the main opposition party in Tanzania (2025/2690(RSP)) (B10-0264/2025)
Sebastião Bugalho, Reinhold Lopatka, Michael Gahler, David McAllister, Antonio López-Istúriz White, Ana Miguel Pedro, Davor Ivo Stier, Tomas Tobé, Liudas Mažylis, Ingeborg Ter Laak, Isabel Wiseler-Lima, Mirosława Nykiel, Wouter Beke, Luděk Niedermayer, Vangelis Meimarakis, Milan Zver, Tomáš Zdechovský, Danuše Nerudová, Miriam Lexmann, Jan Farský, Loránt Vincze, Jessica Polfjärd, Andrey Kovatchev, Inese Vaidere
on behalf of the PPE Group

on the arrest and risk of execution of Tundu Lissu, Chair of Chadema, the main opposition party in Tanzania (2025/2690(RSP)) (B10-0265/2025)
Adam Bielan, Sebastian Tynkkynen, Waldemar Tomaszewski, Ondřej Krutílek, Veronika Vrecionová, Alexandr Vondra, Joachim Stanisław Brudziński, Ivaylo Valchev, Jadwiga Wiśniewska, Assita Kanko, Alberico Gambino, Carlo Fidanza
on behalf of the ECR Group

Return of Ukrainian children forcibly transferred and deported by Russia

The following Members or political groups had requested that a debate be held, in accordance with Rule 150, on the following motions for resolutions:

on the return of Ukrainian children forcibly transferred and deported by Russia (2025/2691(RSP)) (B10-0247/2025)
Merja Kyllönen
on behalf of The Left Group

on the return of Ukrainian children forcibly transferred and deported by Russia (2025/2691(RSP)) (B10-0249/2025)
Villy Søvndal, Sergey Lagodinsky, Nicolae Ştefănuță, Mounir Satouri, Maria Ohisalo, Catarina Vieira, Ville Niinistö
on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

on the return of Ukrainian children forcibly transferred and deported by Russia (2025/2691(RSP)) (B10-0250/2025)
Yannis Maniatis, Francisco Assis, Thijs Reuten, Evin Incir, Pina Picierno
on behalf of the S&D Group

on the return of Ukrainian children forcibly transferred and deported by Russia (2025/2691(RSP)) (B10-0252/2025)
Petras Auštrevičius, Oihane Agirregoitia Martínez, Abir Al-Sahlani, Malik Azmani, Dan Barna, Helmut Brandstätter, Benoit Cassart, Olivier Chastel, Veronika Cifrová Ostrihoňová, Engin Eroglu, Svenja Hahn, Karin Karlsbro, Ľubica Karvašová, Moritz Körner, Ilhan Kyuchyuk, Nathalie Loiseau, Jan-Christoph Oetjen, Urmas Paet, Marie-Agnes Strack-Zimmermann, Eugen Tomac, Hilde Vautmans, Lucia Yar, Michał Kobosko
on behalf of the Renew Group

on the return of Ukrainian children forcibly transferred and deported by Russia (2025/2691(RSP)) (B10-0255/2025)
Sebastião Bugalho, Jessika Van Leeuwen, Michael Gahler, David McAllister, Sandra Kalniete, Andrzej Halicki, Antonio López-Istúriz White, Ana Miguel Pedro, Dariusz Joński, Davor Ivo Stier, Tomas Tobé, Reinhold Lopatka, Liudas Mažylis, Ingeborg Ter Laak, Isabel Wiseler-Lima, Mirosława Nykiel, Wouter Beke, Luděk Niedermayer, Vangelis Meimarakis, Milan Zver, Tomáš Zdechovský, Danuše Nerudová, Miriam Lexmann, Ondřej Kolář, Jan Farský, Loránt Vincze, Jessica Polfjärd, Andrey Kovatchev, Ewa Kopacz, Matej Tonin, Inese Vaidere
on behalf of the PPE Group

on the return of Ukrainian children forcibly transferred and deported by Russia (2025/2691(RSP)) (B10-0258/2025)
Adam Bielan, Mariusz Kamiński, Małgorzata Gosiewska, Sebastian Tynkkynen, Michał Dworczyk, Veronika Vrecionová, Ondřej Krutílek, Jaak Madison, Alexandr Vondra, Arkadiusz Mularczyk, Bogdan Rzońca, Roberts Zīle, Ivaylo Valchev, Joachim Stanisław Brudziński, Assita Kanko, Aurelijus Veryga, Jadwiga Wiśniewska, Rihards Kols, Maciej Wąsik, Marlena Maląg, Charlie Weimers, Cristian Terheş
on behalf of the ECR Group

Violations of religious freedom in Tibet

The following Members or political groups had requested that a debate be held, in accordance with Rule 150, on the following motions for resolutions:

on the violations of religious freedom in Tibet (2025/2692(RSP)) (B10-0248/2025)
Ville Niinistö, Catarina Vieira, Maria Ohisalo, Erik Marquardt, Nicolae Ştefănuță, Mounir Satouri, Leoluca Orlando
on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

on the violations of religious freedom in Tibet (2025/2692(RSP)) (B10-0251/2025)
Yannis Maniatis, Francisco Assis, Hannes Heide
on behalf of the S&D Group

on the violations of religious freedom in Tibet (2025/2692(RSP)) (B10-0253/2025)
Hermann Tertsch, Jorge Martín Frías, Jaroslav Bžoch, Susanna Ceccardi
on behalf of the PfE Group

on the violations of religious freedom in Tibet (2025/2692(RSP)) (B10-0254/2025)
Engin Eroglu, Oihane Agirregoitia Martínez, Petras Auštrevičius, Malik Azmani, Dan Barna, Helmut Brandstätter, Benoit Cassart, Olivier Chastel, Bernard Guetta, Svenja Hahn, Ľubica Karvašová, Moritz Körner, Ilhan Kyuchyuk, Nathalie Loiseau, Karin Karlsbro, Jan-Christoph Oetjen, Marie-Agnes Strack-Zimmermann, Lucia Yar, Dainius Žalimas
on behalf of the Renew Group

on the violations of religious freedom in Tibet (2025/2692(RSP)) (B10-0256/2025)
Sebastião Bugalho, Danuše Nerudová, Michael Gahler, Antonio López-Istúriz White, Ana Miguel Pedro, Davor Ivo Stier, Tomas Tobé, Reinhold Lopatka, Liudas Mažylis, Ingeborg Ter Laak, Isabel Wiseler-Lima, Mirosława Nykiel, Wouter Beke, Luděk Niedermayer, Vangelis Meimarakis, Milan Zver, Tomáš Zdechovský, Miriam Lexmann, Ondřej Kolář, Jan Farský, Loránt Vincze, Jessica Polfjärd, Andrey Kovatchev, Inese Vaidere
on behalf of the PPE Group

on the violations of religious freedom in Tibet (2025/2692(RSP)) (B10-0259/2025)
Adam Bielan, Mariusz Kamiński, Waldemar Tomaszewski, Alberico Gambino, Sebastian Tynkkynen, Carlo Fidanza, Małgorzata Gosiewska, Ondřej Krutílek, Veronika Vrecionová, Assita Kanko, Michał Dworczyk, Arkadiusz Mularczyk, Bogdan Rzońca, Alexandr Vondra, Joachim Stanisław Brudziński, Jadwiga Wiśniewska, Maciej Wąsik, Marlena Maląg
on behalf of the ECR Group

II. Delegated acts (Rule 114(2))

Draft delegated acts forwarded to Parliament

– Commission Delegated Regulation supplementing Regulation (EU) 2023/2631 of the European Parliament and of the Council by establishing the content, methodologies, and presentation of the information to be voluntarily disclosed by issuers of bonds marketed as environmentally sustainable or of sustainability-linked bonds in the templates for periodic post-issuance disclosures (C(2025)00005 – 2025/2674(DEA))

Deadline for raising objections: 3 months from the date of receipt of 16 April 2025

referred to committee responsible: ECON

– Commission Delegated Regulation supplementing Regulation (EU) 2023/2631of the European Parliament and of the Council by specifying rules of procedure for the exercise of the power to impose fines or periodic penalty payments by the European Securities and Markets Authority on external reviewers (C(2025)00006 – 2025/2676(DEA))

Deadline for raising objections: 3 months from the date of receipt of 16 April 2025

referred to committee responsible: ECON

– Commission Delegated Regulation supplementing Regulation (EU) 2023/2631 of the European Parliament and of the Council by specifying the type of fees to be charged by ESMA to external reviewers of European Green Bonds, the matters in respect of which fees are due, the amount of the fees, and the manner in which those fees are to be paid (C(2025)00007 – 2025/2677(DEA))

Deadline for raising objections: 3 months from the date of receipt of 16 April 2025

referred to committee responsible: ECON

– Commission Delegated Regulation supplementing Directive 2013/36/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council with regard to regulatory technical standards specifying the general conditions for the functioning of supervisory colleges, and repealing Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2016/98 (C(2025)00701 – 2025/2678(DEA))

Deadline for raising objections: 3 months from the date of receipt of 23 April 2025

referred to committee responsible: ECON

– Commission Delegated Regulation amending Regulation (EU) 2023/1804 of the European Parliament and of the Council as regards additional data types on alternative fuels infrastructure (C(2025)01912 – 2025/2661(DEA))

Deadline for raising objections: 2 months from the date of receipt of 2 April 2025

referred to committee responsible: TRAN

– Commission Delegated Regulation supplementing Regulation (EU) 2023/1804 of the European Parliament and of the Council as regards common technical requirements for a common application programme interface (C(2025)01913 – 2025/2659(DEA))

Deadline for raising objections: 2 months from the date of receipt of 2 April 2025

referred to committee responsible: TRAN

– Commission Delegated Regulation amending Regulation (EC) No 1272/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council as regards the harmonised classification and labelling of certain substances (C(2025)01916 – 2025/2660(DEA))

Deadline for raising objections: 2 months from the date of receipt of 2 April 2025

referred to committee responsible: ENVI
opinion: IMCO

– Commission Delegated Regulation amending Regulation (EU) 2023/1804 of the European Parliament and of the Council as regards standards for wireless recharging, electric road system, vehicle-to-grid communication and hydrogen supply for road transport vehicles (C(2025)01918 – 2025/2662(DEA))

Deadline for raising objections: 2 months from the date of receipt of 2 April 2025

referred to committee responsible: TRAN

– Commission Delegated Regulation amending Delegated Regulation (EU) 2015/68 and Delegated Regulation (EU) 2015/208 with regard to vehicle braking requirements and to vehicle functional safety requirements for agricultural and forestry vehicles (C(2025)01944 – 2025/2663(DEA))

Deadline for raising objections: 2 months from the date of receipt of 3 April 2025

referred to committee responsible: IMCO

– Commission Delegated Regulation amending Delegated Regulation (EU) 2023/205 as regards the European Maritime Single Window environment data set (C(2025)02021 – 2025/2667(DEA))

Deadline for raising objections: 2 months from the date of receipt of 7 April 2025

referred to committee responsible: TRAN

– Commission Delegated Regulation supplementing Regulation (EU) No 305/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council by establishing threshold levels and classes of performance for permanent anchor devices and safety hooks (C(2025)02119 – 2025/2670(DEA))

Deadline for raising objections: 3 months from the date of receipt of 9 April 2025

referred to committee responsible: IMCO

– Commission Delegated Directive amending Directive 2005/36/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council as regards the minimum training requirements for the profession of veterinary surgeon (C(2025)02128 – 2025/2671(DEA))

Deadline for raising objections: 2 months from the date of receipt of 10 April 2025

referred to committee responsible: IMCO

– Commission Delegated Regulation amending Regulation (EU) 2019/1021 of the European Parliament and of the Council as regards perfluorooctane sulfonic acid and its derivatives (C(2025)02189 – 2025/2672(DEA))

Deadline for raising objections: 2 months from the date of receipt of 14 April 2025

referred to committee responsible: ENVI

– Commission delegated decision on the unilateral inclusion of sectors by Finland in the emissions trading system within the Union for buildings, road transport and additional sectors pursuant to Article 30j of Directive 2003/87/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council (C(2025)02232 – 2025/2673(DEA))

Deadline for raising objections: 2 months from the date of receipt of 15 April 2025

referred to committee responsible: ENVI
opinion: ITRE

– Commission Delegated Regulation amending Delegated Regulation (EU) 2023/2197 as regards the date of application (C(2025)02258 – 2025/2675(DEA))

Deadline for raising objections: 3 months from the date of receipt of 16 April 2025

referred to committee responsible: SANT

– Commission Delegated Regulation supplementing Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council with regard to regulatory technical standards specifying the conditions and indicators that the EBA is to use to determine whether extraordinary circumstances in the sense of Article 325az(5) and Article 325bf(6) of that Regulation have occurred (C(2025)02287 – 2025/2679(DEA))

Deadline for raising objections: 3 months from the date of receipt of 23 April 2025

referred to committee responsible: ECON

– Commission Delegated Regulation supplementing Regulation (EU) 2023/1114 of the European Parliament and of the Council with regard to regulatory technical standards specifying the arrangements, systems and procedures to prevent, detect and report market abuse, the templates to be used for reporting suspected market abuse, and the coordination procedures between the competent authorities for the detection and sanctioning of market abuse in cross-border market abuse situations (C(2025)02480 – 2025/2684(DEA))

Deadline for raising objections: 3 months from the date of receipt of 29 April 2025

referred to committee responsible: ECON

– Commission Delegated Regulation amending Annex I to Regulation (EU) 2019/1021 of the European Parliament and of the Council as regards perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA), its salts and PFOA-related compounds (C(2025)02566 – 2025/2701(DEA))

Deadline for raising objections: 2 months from the date of receipt of 5 May 2025

referred to committee responsible: ENVI

– Commission Delegated Regulation (EU)…/ … amending Annex I to Regulation (EU) 2019/1021 of the European Parliament and of the Council as regards UV-328 (C(2025)02567 – 2025/2703(DEA))

Deadline for raising objections: 2 months from the date of receipt of 5 May 2025

referred to committee responsible: ENVI

– Commission Delegated Regulation amending Delegated Regulation (EU) 2024/2910 on the implementation of the Union’s international obligations, as referred to in Article 15(2) of Regulation (EU) No 1380/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council, under the General Fisheries Commission for the Mediterranean (C(2025)02570 – 2025/2702(DEA))

Deadline for raising objections: 2 months from the date of receipt of 5 May 2025

referred to committee responsible: PECH

III. Implementing measures (Rule 115)

Draft implementing measures falling under the regulatory procedure with scrutiny forwarded to Parliament

– Commission Regulation correcting certain language versions of Regulation (EU) No 142/2011 implementing Regulation (EC) No 1069/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council laying down health rules as regards animal by-products and derived products not intended for human consumption and implementing Council Directive 97/78/EC as regards certain samples and items exempt from veterinary checks at the border under that Directive (D010438/05 – 2025/2693(RPS) – deadline: 22 July 2025)
referred to committee responsible: ENVI
opinion: AGRI

– Commission Regulation amending Annex II to Regulation (EC) No 396/2005 of the European Parliament and of the Council as regards maximum residue levels for acetamiprid in or on certain products (D102375/03 – 2025/2664(RPS) – deadline: 4 June 2025)
referred to committee responsible: ENVI

– Commission Regulation amending Annex III to Regulation (EC) No 1333/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council as regards the use of polyvinylpolypyrrolidone (E 1202) as a carrier in colour tablets for the decorative colouring of poultry eggshells (D106245/02 – 2025/2680(RPS) – deadline: 29 June 2025)
referred to committee responsible: ENVI

– Commission Regulation amending Regulation (EU) 2023/915 as regards maximum levels of inorganic arsenic in fish and other seafood (D106246/02 – 2025/2681(RPS) – deadline: 29 July 2025)
referred to committee responsible: ENVI

IV. Documents received

The following documents had been received from other institutions:

– Proposal for transfer of appropriations DEC 05/2025 – Section III – Commission (N10-0013/2025 – C10-0065/2025 – 2025/2078(GBD))
referred to committee responsible: BUDG

– Proposal for transfer of appropriations INF 1/2025 – Section VI – Economic and Social Committee (N10-0014/2025 – C10-0078/2025 – 2025/2091(GBD))
referred to committee responsible: BUDG

– Proposal for transfer of appropriations No. 2/2025 – Section IX – European Data Protection Supervisor (N10-0015/2025 – C10-0079/2025 – 2025/2092(GBD))
referred to committee responsible: BUDG

V. Transfers of appropriations and budgetary decisions

In accordance with Article 31(1) of the Financial Regulation, the Committee on Budgets had decided to approve the European Commission’s transfers of appropriations DEC 03/2025 and DEC 04/2025 – Section III – Commission.

In accordance with Article 31(6) of the Financial Regulation, the Council of the European Union had decided to approve the European Commission’s transfers of appropriations DEC 03/2025 and DEC 04/2025 – Section III – Commission.

ATTENDANCE REGISTER

Present:

Aaltola Mika, Abadía Jover Maravillas, Adamowicz Magdalena, Aftias Georgios, Agirregoitia Martínez Oihane, Agius Peter, Agius Saliba Alex, Alexandraki Galato, Allione Grégory, Al-Sahlani Abir, Anadiotis Nikolaos, Anderson Christine, Andersson Li, Andresen Rasmus, Andrews Barry, Andriukaitis Vytenis Povilas, Androuët Mathilde, Angel Marc, Annemans Gerolf, Annunziata Lucia, 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, Barna Dan, Barrena Arza Pernando, Bartulica Stephen Nikola, Bartůšek Nikola, Bay Nicolas, Bay Christophe, Beke Wouter, Beleris Fredis, Bellamy François-Xavier, Benea Dragoş, Benifei Brando, Benjumea Benjumea Isabel, Beňová Monika, Berendsen Tom, Berger Stefan, 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, Boßdorf Irmhild, Bosse Stine, Botenga Marc, Boyer Gilles, Boylan Lynn, Brandstätter Helmut, Brasier-Clain Marie-Luce, Bricmont Saskia, Brnjac Nikolina, Brudziński Joachim Stanisław, Bryłka Anna, Buchheit Markus, Buczek Tomasz, Buda Daniel, Buda Waldemar, Budka Borys, Bugalho Sebastião, Buła Andrzej, Bullmann Udo, Burkhardt Delara, Buxadé Villalba Jorge, Bystron Petr, Bžoch Jaroslav, Camara Mélissa, Canfin Pascal, Carberry Nina, Cârciu Gheorghe, Carême Damien, Casa David, Caspary Daniel, Cassart Benoit, Castillo Laurent, del Castillo Vera Pilar, Cavazzini Anna, Cavedagna Stefano, 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, Crosetto Giovanni, Cunha Paulo, Dahl Henrik, 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, Disdier Mélanie, Dobrev Klára, Doherty Regina, Doleschal Christian, Dömötör Csaba, Do Nascimento Cabral Paulo, Donazzan Elena, Dorfmann Herbert, Dostalova Klara, Dostál Ondřej, Droese Siegbert Frank, Dworczyk Michał, Ecke Matthias, Ehler Christian, Ehlers Marieke, Eriksson Sofie, Erixon Dick, Eroglu Engin, Estaràs Ferragut Rosa, Everding Sebastian, Falcă Gheorghe, Falcone Marco, Farantouris Nikolas, Farreng Laurence, Farský Jan, Ferber Markus, Ferenc Viktória, Fernández Jonás, Fidanza Carlo, Fiocchi Pietro, Firea Gabriela, Firmenich Ruth, Fita Claire, Fourlas Loucas, Fourreau Emma, Fragkos Emmanouil, Freund Daniel, Frigout Anne-Sophie, Fritzon Heléne, Froelich Tomasz, Fuglsang Niels, Funchion Kathleen, Furet Angéline, Furore Mario, Gahler Michael, Gál Kinga, 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 Casares Nicolás, 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, Győri Enikő, Gyürk András, Hadjipantela Michalis, Hahn Svenja, Haider Roman, Halicki Andrzej, Hansen Niels Flemming, Hauser Gerald, Häusling Martin, Hava Mircea-Gheorghe, 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, Imart Céline, Incir Evin, Inselvini Paolo, Iovanovici Şoşoacă Diana, Jamet France, Jarubas Adam, Jerković Romana, Jongen Marc, Joński Dariusz, Joron Virginie, Jouvet Pierre, Joveva Irena, Juknevičienė Rasa, Junco García Nora, Jungbluth Alexander, Kabilov Taner, Kalfon François, Kaliňák Erik, Kaljurand Marina, Kalniete Sandra, Kamiński Mariusz, Karlsbro Karin, Kartheiser Fernand, Karvašová Ľubica, Katainen Elsi, Kefalogiannis Emmanouil, Kelleher Billy, Keller Fabienne, Kelly Seán, Kennes Rudi, Khan Mary, Kircher Sophia, Knafo Sarah, Knotek Ondřej, Kobosko Michał, Köhler Stefan, Kohut Łukasz, Kokalari Arba, Kolář Ondřej, Kols Rihards, Konečná Kateřina, Kopacz Ewa, Körner Moritz, Kountoura Elena, Kovařík Ondřej, Kovatchev Andrey, Krištopans Vilis, Kruis Sebastian, Krutílek Ondřej, Kubín Tomáš, Kuhnke Alice, Kulja András Tivadar, Kulmuni Katri, Kyllönen Merja, Kyuchyuk Ilhan, Lakos Eszter, Lalucq Aurore, Lange Bernd, Langensiepen Katrin, Laššáková Judita, László András, Latinopoulou Afroditi, Laurent Murielle, Laureti Camilla, Laykova Rada, Lazarov Ilia, Le Callennec Isabelle, Leggeri Fabrice, Lenaers Jeroen, Leonardelli Julien, Lewandowski Janusz, Lexmann Miriam, Liese Peter, Loiseau Nathalie, Løkkegaard Morten, Lopatka Reinhold, López Javi, López Aguilar Juan Fernando, López-Istúriz White Antonio, Lövin Isabella, Lucano Mimmo, Luena César, Łukacijewska Elżbieta Katarzyna, Lupo Giuseppe, McAllister David, Madison Jaak, Maestre Cristina, Magoni Lara, Magyar Péter, Maij Marit, Maląg Marlena, Manda Claudiu, Mandl Lukas, Maniatis Yannis, Mantovani Mario, Maran Pierfrancesco, Marczułajtis-Walczak Jagna, Maréchal Marion, Mariani Thierry, Marino Ignazio Roberto, Marquardt Erik, Martín Frías Jorge, Martusciello Fulvio, Marzà Ibáñez Vicent, Mato Gabriel, Mavrides Costas, Maydell Eva, Mayer Georg, Mazurek Milan, Mažylis Liudas, McNamara Michael, Mebarek Nora, Meimarakis Vangelis, Meleti Eleonora, Mendes Ana Catarina, Mendia Idoia, Mertens Verena, Mesure Marina, Metsola Roberta, Metz Tilly, Mikser Sven, Milazzo Giuseppe, Millán Mon Francisco José, Minchev Nikola, Miranda Paz Ana, Molnár Csaba, Montero Irene, Montserrat Dolors, Morace Carolina, Morano Nadine, Moratti Letizia, 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, Nica Dan, Niebler Angelika, Niedermayer Luděk, Niinistö Ville, Nikolaou-Alavanos Lefteris, Nikolic Aleksandar, Ní Mhurchú Cynthia, Noichl Maria, Nordqvist Rasmus, Novakov Andrey, Nykiel Mirosława, Obajtek Daniel, Ódor Ľudovít, Oetjen Jan-Christoph, Ohisalo Maria, Olivier Philippe, Omarjee Younous, Ondruš Branislav, Ó Ríordáin Aodhán, Orlando Leoluca, Ozdoba Jacek, Paet Urmas, Pajín Leire, Palmisano Valentina, Panayiotou Fidias, Papadakis Kostas, Papandreou Nikos, Pappas Nikos, Pascual de la Parte Nicolás, Patriciello Aldo, Paulus Jutta, Pedro Ana Miguel, Pedulla’ Gaetano, Pellerin-Carlin Thomas, Peltier Guillaume, Penkova Tsvetelina, Pennelle Gilles, Pereira Lídia, Peter-Hansen Kira Marie, Petrov Hristo, Picaro Michele, Picierno Pina, Picula Tonino, Piera Pascale, Pietikäinen Sirpa, Pimpie Pierre, Piperea Gheorghe, de la Pisa Carrión Margarita, Pokorná Jermanová Jaroslava, Polato Daniele, Polfjärd Jessica, Popescu Virgil-Daniel, Pozņaks Reinis, Prebilič Vladimir, Princi Giusi, Protas Jacek, Pürner Friedrich, Rackete Carola, Radev Emil, Radtke Dennis, Rafowicz Emma, Ratas Jüri, Razza Ruggero, Rechagneux Julie, Regner Evelyn, Repasi René, Repp Sabrina, Ressler Karlo, Reuten Thijs, Riba i Giner Diana, Ricci Matteo, Ridel Chloé, 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, 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, Schnurrbusch Volker, Schwab Andreas, Scuderi Benedetta, Seekatz Ralf, Sell Alexander, Serrano Sierra Rosa, Sidl Günther, Sienkiewicz Bartłomiej, Sieper Lukas, Simon Sven, Singer Christine, Sinkevičius Virginijus, Sippel Birgit, Sjöstedt Jonas, Śmiszek Krzysztof, Smith Anthony, Smit Sander, Sokol Tomislav, Solier Diego, Solís Pérez Susana, Sommen Liesbet, Sonneborn Martin, Sorel Malika, Sousa Silva Hélder, Søvndal Villy, Squarta Marco, Staķis Mārtiņš, Stancanelli Raffaele, Ştefănuță Nicolae, Steger Petra, Stier Davor Ivo, Storm Kristoffer, Stöteler Sebastiaan, Stoyanov Stanislav, Strack-Zimmermann Marie-Agnes, Strada Cecilia, Streit Joachim, Strik Tineke, Strolenberg Anna, Sturdza Şerban Dimitrie, Stürgkh Anna, Sypniewski Marcin, Szczerba Michał, Szekeres Pál, Szydło Beata, Tamburrano Dario, Tânger Corrêa António, Tarczyński Dominik, Tarquinio Marco, Tarr Zoltán, Târziu Claudiu-Richard, Tavares Carla, Tegethoff Kai, Teodorescu Georgiana, Teodorescu Måwe Alice, Terheş Cristian, Ter Laak Ingeborg, Terras Riho, Tertsch Hermann, Thionnet Pierre-Romain, Timgren Beatrice, Tinagli Irene, Tobback Bruno, Tobé Tomas, Tolassy Rody, Tomac Eugen, Tomašič Zala, Tomaszewski Waldemar, Tomc Romana, Tonin Matej, Toom Jana, Torselli Francesco, Tosi Flavio, Toussaint Marie, Tovaglieri Isabella, Tridico Pasquale, Trochu Laurence, Tsiodras Dimitris, Tudose Mihai, Turek Filip, Tynkkynen Sebastian, 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 Sparrentak Kim, Varaut Alexandre, Vasconcelos Ana, Vasile-Voiculescu Vlad, Vautmans Hilde, Vedrenne Marie-Pierre, Ventola Francesco, Verougstraete Yvan, Veryga Aurelijus, Vicsek Annamária, 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, Walsh Maria, Walsmann Marion, Warborn Jörgen, Warnke Jan-Peter, Wąsik Maciej, Wawrykiewicz Michał, Wcisło Marta, Wechsler Andrea, Weimers Charlie, Werbrouck Séverine, Wiesner Emma, Wiezik Michal, Winkler Iuliu, Winzig Angelika, Wiseler-Lima Isabel, Wiśniewska Jadwiga, Wölken Tiemo, Wolters Lara, Yar Lucia, Yon-Courtin Stéphanie, Yoncheva Elena, Zacharia Maria, Zalewska Anna, Žalimas Dainius, Zan Alessandro, Zarzalejos Javier, Zdechovský Tomáš, Zdrojewski Bogdan Andrzej, Zijlstra Auke, Zīle Roberts, Zingaretti Nicola, Złotowski Kosma, Zver Milan

Excused:

Verheyen Sabine

MIL OSI Europe News –

May 8, 2025

MIL-OSI Europe: Written question – The EU marine action plan and the missing national roadmaps – E-001732/2025
Source: European Parliament
Question for written answer E-001732/2025
to the Commission
Rule 144
Sirpa Pietikäinen (PPE)

In accordance with the EU marine action plan[1], the Member States had to submit roadmaps by March 2024 to present the national measures and joint fisheries recommendations needed to meet the action plan’s objectives and support the EU 2030 biodiversity strategy. According to a recent analysis[2], only nine countries have submitted their roadmaps, and while some Member States have taken steps in some marine protected areas (MPAs), none have plans to phase out destructive fishing practices in MPAs by 2030. A recent study found that 80 % of EU MPAs barely regulate harmful human activities[3], suggesting possible breaches of EU law.

In view of the above:

1.Has the Commission evaluated the roadmaps submitted by the Member States against the objectives of the plan, and can it specify when it will present an implementation assessment?

2.What action is the Commission taking with regard to those Member States who have not yet sent a roadmap, and how is the Commission ensuring that the Member States will submit their roadmaps as soon as possible?

3.At this stage, does the Commission consider that additional measures or proposals might be necessary to ensure the achievement of its objectives?

Submitted: 30.4.2025

[1] https://oceans-and-fisheries.ec.europa.eu/policy/common-fisheries-policy-cfp/action-plan-protecting-and-restoring-marine-ecosystems-sustainable-and-resilient-fisheries_en.

[2] https://europe.oceana.org/press-releases/multiple-eu-countries-are-failing-to-stop-destructive-fishing-in-protected-areas-analysis-finds-as-several-face-legal-action/.

[3] Aminian-Biquet, J. et al., ‘Over 80% of the European Union’s marine protected area only marginally regulates human activities’, One Earth, Vol 7, Issue 9, 2024, pp. 1614-1629, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oneear.2024.07.010.
Last updated: 8 May 2025
MIL OSI Europe News –
May 8, 2025
MIL-OSI United Kingdom: Latest data on listeriosis
Source: United Kingdom – Executive Government & Departments

News story

Latest data on listeriosis

The infection can cause severe illnesses in the elderly, immunocompromised or those with underlying chronic conditions.
There were 179 cases of listeriosis reported in England and Wales in 2024, according to new data published today by the UK Health Security Agency (UKHSA).

Listeriosis is caused by Listeria bacteria and is usually contracted by eating contaminated raw, chilled, or ready-to-eat foods. Most people with listeriosis won’t have any symptoms or will have mild gastroenteritis. However, the infection can cause severe illnesses in the elderly, immunocompromised or those with underlying chronic conditions. Infection during pregnancy can lead to miscarriage or stillbirth, or severe infections in newborn babies.

The 179 cases reported in 2024 are comparable to the previous year’s figures (177 cases in 2023), and to levels seen in the years preceding the COVID-19 pandemic. The latest data show that while listeriosis can affect people of all ages, it poses a significantly greater risk to vulnerable groups, with the highest numbers seen in people aged 80 and over. Of the 28 deaths reported among 142 non-pregnancy cases, 12 were aged 80 years and over. Among pregnancy-associated infections, which accounted for approximately one-fifth of all cases, 43.7% resulted in stillbirth or miscarriage where outcomes were known.

In England, London had the highest levels of listeriosis (0.39 cases per 100,000 population), whilst the East of England had the lowest (0.23 cases per 100,000 population).

Vanessa Wong, UKHSA Consultant in gastrointestinal infections, said:

Listeriosis is a rare infection and most people only experience mild symptoms of gastroenteritis that usually pass within a few days without the need for treatment. However, severe listeriosis is more likely to affect the elderly, very young babies, pregnant women and those with a weakened immune system. The best way to prevent listeriosis is to practise good food hygiene and avoid high-risk foods if you are in a vulnerable group. Foods that carry a greater risk of Listeria include: soft cheeses, pâté, smoked fish, chilled sliced meats and other chilled ready-to-eat products.

Those at higher risk from severe Listeria infection include:

elderly people (risk increases with age)

those with malignancies or undergoing immunosuppressive or cytotoxic treatments

pregnant women and their unborn or newborn infants

organ transplant recipients

people with chronic kidney and liver diseases

those with uncontrolled diabetes, HIV, alcohol dependency or iron overload

In most people, listeriosis has no symptoms or only causes mild symptoms for a few days, such as:

high temperature

aches and pains

chills

feeling or being sick

diarrhoea

If you’re pregnant, you may also have a stomach ache or notice your baby moving less than usual.

For advice on avoiding listeriosis during pregnancy or if you are in a high-risk group, please visit the NHS website at Listeriosis – NHS

In 2024, UKHSA investigated 7 listeriosis outbreaks across England and Wales, linked to various food products including smoked fish, chocolate and strawberry mousse, garlic sausage and pre-packed sandwiches.

Share this page

The following links open in a new tab

Share on Facebook (opens in new tab)

Share on Twitter (opens in new tab)

Updates to this page

Published 8 May 2025
MIL OSI United Kingdom –
May 8, 2025
MIL-OSI: Leiðrétting: Lánasjóður sveitarfélaga – Útboð LSS 39 0303 og LSS151155

Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

Lánasjóður sveitarfélaga hefur ákveðið að efna til útboðs á skuldabréfaflokkunum LSS 39 0303 og LSS151155 mánudaginn 12. maí 2025. Lánasjóðurinn stefnir að því að taka tilboðum að fjárhæð 500 til 1.500 milljónir króna að nafnvirði í skuldabréfaflokknum LSS151155 og að fjárhæð 500 til 1.500 milljónir króna að nafnvirði í skuldabréfaflokknum LSS 39 0303. Lánasjóðurinn áskilur sér rétt til að hækka og lækka útboðsfjárhæð útboðsins, taka hvaða tilboði sem er eða hafna þeim öllum. Lánasjóðurinn hefur boðið aðalmiðlurum sjóðsins Arion banka, Íslandsbanka, Kviku banka, Landsbankanum og Fossum fjárfestingabanka að taka þátt í útboðinu.

Óskað er eftir tilboðum í samræmi við eftirfarandi lýsingu:

Fyrirkomulag: “Hollensk” uppboðsaðferð þar sem allir tilboðsgjafar fá sömu ávöxtunarkröfu og hæst er tekið. Heimilt er að afturkalla eða breyta tilboði með sama hætti og tilboðum er skilað inn, sé það gert fyrir lok útboðsfrests.

Tilboð: Í tilboði skal taka fram ávöxtunarkröfu án þóknunar og tilboðsfjárhæð.

Að öðru leyti er vísað til skilmála skuldabréfanna á heimasíðu Lánasjóðs sveitarfélaga

Tilboð skulu berast fyrir kl. 16:00, mánudaginn 12. maí 2025 til Lánasjóðs sveitarfélaga á netfangið utbod@lanasjodur.is

Öllum tilboðum verður svarað fyrir kl. 17:00 á útboðsdegi. Uppgjör sölu fer fram fimmtudaginn 15. maí 2025.

Nánari upplýsingar veitir Óttar Guðjónsson, framkvæmdastjóri, ottar@lanasjodur.is / s. 515 4949

The MIL Network –

May 8, 2025
MIL-OSI China: Philippines should stop offending China’s core interests in any form: Defense Spokesperson 2025-05-08 17:58:59 “We sternly warn the Philippine side to cease its infringements and provocations, and stop offending China’s core interests in any form,” said Chinese defense spokesperson Zhang Xiaogang at a press brief on Thursday.
Source: People’s Republic of China – Ministry of National Defense
loading…

MIL OSI China News –
May 8, 2025

Category: Fisheries

Watershed moment for the pro-growth, abundance movement as Congress readies federal action

Watch Kennedy’s comments here.

How to shop smarter

An everyday reality

A medieval practice

Calling time on destructive fishing

Helping after disaster

Fraud and fundraising

Vetting authenticity

Growing challenges

Mistake 1: Thinking the blockchain guarantees security

Mistake 2: Thinking safe keys mean safe funds

Mistake 3: Thinking 2-factor authentication is a silver bullet

Mistake 4: Not managing token approvals

Mistake 5: Not learning from past incidents

Latest data on listeriosis

Share this page

Updates to this page