Category: Germany

  • MIL-OSI United Kingdom: Leeds marks German relationship at Dortmund Square

    Source: City of Leeds

    German dignitaries attending UKREiiF have visited Dortmund Square to see how Leeds City Council plans to continue celebrating its twinning relationship with the North Rhine-Westphalia city. 

    The German Honorary Consul, Regina Rosenthal, and Christian Klose, Investor Support Manager – Economic Development Agency Dortmund, were shown around the city centre landmark by Deputy Leader and executive member for economy, transport and sustainable development, Councillor Jonathan Pryor.

    Councillor Pryor showed the visitors the recently installed place name signage and discussed the council’s plan for new wayfinding boards in the square, which celebrates Leeds’s twin city relationship with Dortmund.

    Above: Dortmund Square.

    Leeds has been officially twinned with Dortmund since 1969. However, the relationship dates to 1949, when the two cities started cooperating to nurture international peace, friendship, and understanding, following years of conflict between the UK and Germany.

    Above: New placename signage in Dortmund Square.

    Dortmund Square, which has a counterpart in its namesake city called Platz von Leeds, is set in the heart of the city centre. The square was officially renamed in 1980 to celebrate the success of the partnership between Leeds and Dortmund and hosts the famous caricature sculpture, Dortmund Drayman, known locally as “barrel man”.  The bronze sculpture was a gift from the Mayor of Dortmund to the people of Leeds.

    Above (L-R):  Christian Klose, Investor Support Manager – Economic Development Agency Dortmund, German Honorary Consul, Regina Rosenthal, and Deputy Leader and executive member for economy, transport and sustainable development, Councillor Jonathan Pryor

    The German visitors will be joined at UKREiiF later this week by Benedikt Scholz, Director of Internationalisation & Commercial Partnerships at BVB Borussia Dortmund Football Club, who will join a panel to discuss the societal benefits from investment into stadiums, leisure facilities and global events and how these can act as a catalyst for wider investment and regeneration.

     The delegation will also be meeting representatives from Leeds United Football Club to hear firsthand the plans to develop Elland Road stadium and to participate in an interactive Leeds City Council-led event showcasing regeneration projects. 

    Deputy Leader and executive member for economy, transport and sustainable development, Councillor Jonathan Pryor, said: “It was my great privilege to show Regina and Christian around Dortmund Square and to explain the council’s plans to further celebrate our two cities friendship.

    “I also look forward to welcoming Benedikt Scholz from Borussia Dortmund Football Club and to gaining his insight into how the regeneration and expansion of sporting venues and leisure facilities can attract wider investment and regeneration to Leeds.

    “It is always exciting to showcase how incredible Leeds is to visitors and to discuss the wide-ranging redevelopment plans that will build on Leeds’s reputation as a global city of note.”

    The German Honorary Consul, Regina Rosenthal, said: “As a German living in Leeds and representing my country here, it makes me very proud to see how Leeds celebrates its Dortmund partnership, which has brought so many benefits to both cities over the years.”

    Ends

    MIL OSI United Kingdom

  • MIL-OSI United Kingdom: G7 Export Credit Agency Leaders Meet in London for Two-Day Summit

    Source: United Kingdom – Government Statements

    Press release

    G7 Export Credit Agency Leaders Meet in London for Two-Day Summit

    UK Export Finance is hosting the annual meeting of leaders of export credit agencies from G7 countries.

    Leaders of G7 export credit agencies (from left to right): Paola Valerio (SACE, Italy), Atsuo Kuroda (NEXI, Japan), Bastian Kern (Export Credit Guarantees Germany), Tim Reid (UK Export Finance), James C. Cruse (US EXIM), Alison Nankivell (EDC, Canada), Armel Castets (Export Finance and Trade Promotion Division, France)

    Leaders of export credit agencies (ECAs) from the G7 nations are gathering in London today (19 May) for a two-day summit focused on “Global Challenges, Shared Solutions”. 

    The Chiefs and senior representatives from the ECAs of Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, and the United States will be hosted by UK Export Finance (UKEF), the UK government’s export credit agency, to address critical issues in international trade finance as part of their annual meeting. 

    The summit will tackle key topics including strengthening supply chain resilience, securing access to critical minerals, and navigating the evolving landscape of export finance amid the growth of domestic industrial programmes and the advancement of artificial intelligence. 

    Tim Reid, Chief Executive of UK Export Finance, said:

    “In today’s world, collaboration between export credit agencies is more vital than ever to unlock critical financing for the largest and most pioneering opportunities aligned to our shared social and economic targets.

    “This annual summit, hosted this year by UKEF, offers a unique opportunity for our G7 ECAs to share insights, align strategies and develop joint approaches to deliver impact for our domestic exporters and in countries around the world. By working together, we can better support businesses navigating international trade challenges while driving sustainable economic growth across our nations.”

    Contact

    Media enquiries:

    Updates to this page

    Published 20 May 2025

    MIL OSI United Kingdom

  • MIL-OSI Canada: Readout: Canada and Germany’s Housing Ministers meet in Ottawa to discuss common goals

    Source: Government of Canada News (2)

    The Honourable Sean Fraser and the Honorable Klara Geywitz met in Ottawa to discuss mutual priorities and opportunities for collaboration between Canada and Germany on the topics of housing and infrastructure. As members of the Group of Seven (G7), they also discussed the ongoing work around sustainable urban policies that help promote the growth of livable cities.

    MIL OSI Canada News

  • MIL-Evening Report: Victorian budget has cash to splash on health, transport but new levies, job cuts, rising debt signal pain ahead

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By David Hayward, Emeritus Professor of Public Policy, RMIT University

    There was not a lot of cheer in the media reporting ahead of the 2025/6 Victorian budget released on Wednesday. Debt and deficits dominated the coverage.

    All eyes turned to new treasurer, Jaclyn Symes, to see if in her first budget the Labor government was finally delivering some financial discipline.

    That theme flowed into the press conference during the budget lockup, when journalists got to grill the treasurer about the budget papers. Symes copped a pasting. Journalists were clearly unhappy with what they had read and more unhappy about what they heard.

    Yes, the operating side of the budget is projected to be back to a wafer thin A$600 million surplus. But that is almost $1 billion less than was promised when Symes delivered a budget update last December.

    And all that infrastructure is to paid for by more borrowings, taking net debt to $167 billion, $10 billion more than it was last year.

    And that was despite the government benefiting from a whopping $3.5 billion in GST grants from the Commonwealth, over $1 billion more than the previous year.

    And it was despite a new fire and emergency services levy that is set to deliver an extra $600 million.

    And it was also despite a 22% increase in fees and fines, and a $1.3 billion rise in unspecified government charges. And it is also based on banking $500 million of savings from an efficiency review led by former head of Premier and Cabinet Helen Silver, which won’t be finished until July at the earliest.

    So where did that extra money go? Well, it paid for more than $6 billion of new services ($3 billion net of savings), and an extra $1.6 billion for new infrastructure, across all portfolios. This includes free public transport for seniors on weekends and free public transport for kids.

    The big ticket item was health, which got an extra $2.5 billion. That came as a surprise given health copped a $1.5 billion cut in last year’s budget, after the government claimed the hospitals were still spending at pandemic levels and needed to rediscover efficiency.

    That cut did not last long. Health services workers staged a short but effective campaign that forced the then new premier, Jacinta Allan, to buckle. The money was returned in December’s budget update.

    The budget papers show the Victorian economy has been performing strongly post pandemic, with Victoria leading the nation in employment growth. The budget papers tip that strong performance will continue, despite the continued warnings that all that government debt will eventually force the economy to buckle.

    The government argues rather than be criticised it should be applauded for a job well done.

    It spent up big on infrastructure during the pandemic, which has delivered to the state remarkably strong economic performance. It also spent up big to protect Victorians from COVID.

    It has a budget recovery plan and everything is on schedule. First employment had to grow, then we needed a cash surplus and now we have an operating surplus to add to it. Net debt in real terms will start to fall next year as the last step in a long-term plan.

    It also points to the state’s balance sheet to highlight it has something to show for all that debt in the form of $437 billion in assets.

    Victoria is not alone in running budget operating deficits during the pandemic. NSW and Queensland make happy bedfellows, but they are not as eye-catching because their levels of debt are much lower.

    Victoria is also not alone as a state or provincial government that has a lot of debt. The Canadian provinces are also in that situation, with Quebec and Ontario leading the pack.

    Then there are the German state governments. Their problem is not too much debt, but far too little, leaving them to grapple with not enough as well as crumbling infrastructure caused by a constitutional debt brake that is responsible for the mess, and which has recently been lifted.

    Treasurer Symes delivered a budget that has disappointed those who wanted to see debt fall and for the government to at long last show some fiscal discipline. With the economy still doing quite nicely, and so many new announcements to glow in, Treasurer Symes will be quite happy to disappoint.

    The political calculation here is simple: Victorians want services and aren’t worried if it is paid for by debt.

    Whether that remains the case at next year’s state election due in November is another question. For this will have been Syme’s last real chance to have been more prudent, and just at that moment when the economy could have afforded it.

    The Conversation

    David Hayward chairs the Strategic Advisory Committee for Fire Rescue Victoria.

    ref. Victorian budget has cash to splash on health, transport but new levies, job cuts, rising debt signal pain ahead – https://theconversation.com/victorian-budget-has-cash-to-splash-on-health-transport-but-new-levies-job-cuts-rising-debt-signal-pain-ahead-257013

    MIL OSI AnalysisEveningReport.nz

  • MIL-OSI: Nokia trials 5G technology during Joint Viking military exercise in Norway

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    Press Release
    Nokia trials 5G technology during Joint Viking military exercise in Norway

    • Worked alongside industry partners to deploy Nokia 5G AirScale radios and 5G Standalone Core, enhancing tactical communication during multinational Arctic defense exercise.
    • Nokia’s 5G technology supported advanced defense applications and provided real-time information to field personnel.

    20 May 2025
    Espoo, Finland – Nokia, in collaboration with industry partners, tested 5G technology in a defense scenario during Joint Viking 2025, a Norwegian military exercise. Throughout the trial, Nokia’s 5G technology enabled field personnel from multiple nations with advanced defense applications, enhancing situational awareness and facilitating seamless cooperation across military units.

    Nokia’s solutions included 5G AirScale radio products and 5G Standalone Core technology tuned for defense applications, to enhance tactical communication and information systems among participating nations. Nokia’s 5G communications platform gave military personnel access to real-time battlefield intelligence, facilitating faster decision-making. The Joint Viking command and control leadership leveraged this data to improve situational awareness, streamline operations, and enhance both safety and efficiency throughout the exercise.

    Joint Viking 2025 took place in Bardufoss, located in northern Norway, above the Arctic Circle. It included more than 10,000 soldiers from Belgium, Canada, Finland, France, Germany, US, UK, The Netherlands, and Norway. Occurring every two years, the exercise aims to enhance military cooperation, support protection of NATO’s northern flank and test Norway’s ability to receive allied reinforcements.

    The Norwegian Material Defense Agency (NDMA), an agency directly subordinate to the Norwegian Ministry of Defense, collaborates with Norway’s mobile operators as key service partners. Recently, the Norwegian energy and telecom group Lyse and Nokia have entered into a strategic agreement to enhance tactical communication solutions for Norway, leveraging their expertise and strengths in critical communications.

    “We collaborate with the industry to develop innovative defense solutions based on commercial technologies. A prime example is advanced software functionality, which enables Nokia’s 5G systems to operate in GNSS-denied environments, along with their next-generation radio equipment, engineered for reduced size, weight, and power. Nokia’s 5G technology was instrumental in the success of the Joint Viking exercise, enhancing the Norwegian Armed Forces’ readiness for complex joint operations in challenging conditions,” said Kennet Nomeland, Radio Architect and Norway’s Ministry of Defense liaison for 5G COMPAD program.

    “The scalable, secure and reliable connectivity that 5G provides has an important role in strengthening the tactical communication capabilities of defense forces. The successful trial of 5G in the field at Joint Viking exercise is evidence of Nokia’s continued progress in the defense sector and highlights Norwegian Armed Forces’ position as a leader in deploying advanced communication technologies for tactical operations,” commented Giuseppe Targia, Head of Space and Defense at Nokia.

    Multimedia, technical information, and related news
    Web Page: Joint Viking 2025
    Web Page: Nokia communication technology for defense
    Web Page: Nokia 5G
    Web Page: Nokia 5G Core
    Product page: AirScale Radio Access

    About Nokia
    At Nokia, we create technology that helps the world act together.

    As a B2B technology innovation leader, we are pioneering networks that sense, think and act by leveraging our work across mobile, fixed and cloud networks. In addition, we create value with intellectual property and long-term research, led by the award-winning Nokia Bell Labs, which is celebrating 100 years of innovation.

    With truly open architectures that seamlessly integrate into any ecosystem, our high-performance networks create new opportunities for monetization and scale. Service providers, enterprises and partners worldwide trust Nokia to deliver secure, reliable and sustainable networks today – and work with us to create the digital services and applications of the future.

    Media inquiries
    Nokia Press Office
    Email: Press.Services@nokia.com

    Follow us on social media
    LinkedIn X Instagram Facebook YouTube

    The MIL Network

  • Trump says Russia, Ukraine agree to immediate ceasefire talks, Kremlin offers no timeframe

    Source: Government of India

    Source: Government of India (4)

    Donald Trump said after his call on Monday with President Vladimir Putin that Russia and Ukraine will immediately start negotiations for a ceasefire, but the Kremlin said the process would take time and the U.S. president indicated he was not ready to join Europe with fresh sanctions to pressure Moscow.

    In a social media post, Trump said he relayed the plan to Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelenskiy as well as the leaders of the European Union, France, Italy, Germany and Finland in a group call following his session with the Russian leader.

    “Russia and Ukraine will immediately start negotiations toward a Ceasefire and, more importantly, an END to the War,” Trump said, adding later at the White House that he thought “some progress is being made.”

    Putin thanked Trump for supporting the resumption of direct talks between Moscow and Kyiv after the two sides met in Turkey last week for their first face-to-face negotiations since March 2022. But after the Monday call he said only that efforts were “generally on the right track”.

    “We have agreed with the president of the United States that Russia will propose and is ready to work with the Ukrainian side on a memorandum on a possible future peace accord,” Putin told reporters near the Black Sea resort of Sochi.

    While the indications that Ukraine and Russia will continue direct contacts speak of progress after more than three years of the war, the Monday flurry of talks again failed to deliver on expectations for a major breakthrough.

    European leaders decided to increase pressure on Russia through sanctions after Trump briefed them on his call with Putin, German Chancellor Friedrich Merz said in an X post late on Monday.

    Trump did not appear ready to follow that move. Asked why he had not imposed fresh sanctions to push Moscow into a peace deal as he had threatened, Trump told reporters: “Well because I think there’s a chance of getting something done, and if you do that, you can also make it much worse. But there could be a time where that’s going to happen.”

    Trump said there were “some big egos involved.” Without progress, “I’m just going to back away,” he said, repeating a warning that he could abandon the process. “This is not my war.”

    NO DEADLINE FOR AGREEMENTS

    European leaders and Ukraine have demanded Russia agree to a ceasefire immediately, and Trump has focused on getting Putin to commit to a 30-day truce. Putin has resisted this, insisting that conditions be met first.

    Kremlin aide Yuri Ushakov said Trump and Putin did not discuss a timeline for a ceasefire but did discuss trading nine Russians for nine Americans in a prisoner swap. He said the U.S. leader called prospects for ties between Moscow and Washington “impressive.”

    Russian state news agencies cited Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov as saying that Moscow and Kyiv faced “complex contacts” to develop a unified text of a peace and ceasefire memorandum.

    “There are no deadlines and there cannot be any. It is clear that everyone wants to do this as quickly as possible, but, of course, the devil is in the details,” the RIA agency quoted him as saying.

    Former Swedish Prime Minister Carl Bildt said on X the call with Trump was “undoubtedly a win for Putin.”

    The Russian leader “deflected the call for an … immediate ceasefire and instead can continue military operations at the same time as he puts pressure on at the negotiating table,” he said.

    HIGH-LEVEL MEETING

    After speaking with Trump, Zelenskiy said Kyiv and its partners might seek a high-level meeting among Ukraine, Russia, the United States, European Union countries and Britain as part of a push to end the war.

    “Ukraine is ready for direct negotiations with Russia in any format that brings results,” Zelenskiy said on X.

    He said that this could be hosted by Turkey, the Vatican or Switzerland. It was not immediately clear if this would be part of the negotiations Trump said would start immediately.

    Trump said Pope Leo had expressed interest in hosting the negotiations at the Vatican. The Vatican did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

    The Kremlin’s Peskov said Putin and Trump discussed direct contacts between the Russian leader and Zelenskiy. Moscow also welcomed the Vatican’s proposal, but no decision had been made on a place for “possible future contacts,” he added.

    One person familiar with Trump’s call with the Ukrainian and European leaders said participants were “shocked” that Trump did not want to push Putin with sanctions.

    In a post on X, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen said only that the conversation with Trump was “good” and it was “important that the U.S. stays engaged.”

    Ukraine and its supporters have accused Russia of failing to negotiate in good faith, doing the minimum needed to keep Trump from applying new pressure on its economy.

    If Trump were to impose new sanctions, it would be a milestone moment given that he has appeared sympathetic towards Russia and torn up the pro-Ukraine policies of his predecessor, Joe Biden.

    Prodded by Trump, delegates from the warring countries met last week in Istanbul for the first time since 2022, but the talks failed to broker a truce. Hopes faded after Putin spurned Zelenskiy’s proposal to meet face to face there.

    Putin, whose forces control a fifth of Ukraine and are advancing, has stood firm on his conditions for ending the war, including the withdrawal of Ukrainian troops from four Ukrainian regions Russia claims.

    He said the memorandum Russia and Ukraine would work on about a future peace accord would define “a number of positions, such as, for example, the principles of settlement, the timing of a possible peace agreement.”

    “The main thing for us is to eliminate the root causes of this crisis,” Putin said. “We just need to determine the most effective ways to move towards peace.”

    REUTERS

  • MIL-Evening Report: Labor’s second-term defence priorities – could they include a pact with Europe?

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Peter Layton, Visiting Fellow, Strategic Studies, Griffith University

    1000 Words/Shutterstock

    An apt metaphor for the Department of Defence in Labor’s second term might be the Titanic. The good ship “defence” has hit an iceberg: the senior officers are reassuring all is fine, the band is playing and the crew are busy. But the ship is gradually sinking.

    The iceberg is the $A368 billion AUKUS nuclear submarine project. The scale of the program in terms of money, time and workforce is progressively damaging the rest of the defence portfolio. AUKUS is now so large it is seen as a fourth service, alongside the navy, army and air force.

    Given the challenges facing Australia’s defence budget, what are we to make of the proposed defence pact with the European Union?

    European defence partners

    An ever-changing world always intrudes on defence planning.

    The latest is the European Union (EU) suggesting a defence partnership with Australia. To some degree, this simply formalises existing arrangements and practices. Individual European nations, such as Germany and France, already have strategic partnerships with Australia, while Italy and Spain undertake defence training in Darwin.

    A new partnership would elevate Australia’s European defence relationships to a different level, given the EU is a supra-national grouping of 27 countries with a GDP comparable to the United States. On the upside, EU defence spending is steadily being increased, creating new possibilities for Australian defence industry exports and the joint manufacture of selected equipment such as Germany’s Boxer vehicle in Brisbane.

    But funding a deepening relationship with the EU while sustaining those in the Indo-Pacific would be challenging. And AUKUS means the government will need to carefully balance today’s demands with suddenly emerging pressures.

    Treading water

    If the Europeans do land a defence pact with Australia – will it be worth their while?

    In this decade, Australia’s defence budget will simply be marking time. AUKUS has already begun crowding out other defence possibilities that might better fit today’s changed strategic circumstances.

    The navy’s surface warship fleet will decline until well into the 2030s. Its ageing amphibious and submarine fleets have become unreliable and its two brand new replenishment oilers are both inexplicably unserviceable.

    The army, unsure of itself, is crafting a new “theory of army” to update strategic and operational principles.

    Billions are being spent buying new-build and refurbished armoured vehicles, and old-design helicopters. These projects commenced before Labor’s first term and are less suited to today’s needs.

    The RAAF is better off, having finally received the last of its F-35 fighters even if they need updating as soon as possible. Ideally, the air force should be investing now in future new equipment for delivery in the 2030s, when some current in-service aircraft approach their end of life. But thanks to AUKUS, there is no money for this.

    No time to waste

    Both the Morrsion and the first Albanese government emphasised that this decade is particularly dangerous: a major war might break out unexpectedly.

    Three areas stand out for Labor to get busy on:

    1. The Trump Factor

    The Trump factor is threatening the existing defence plans built around tight military integration with the US. US President Donald Trump’s policy volatility makes the US an unreliable ally. This uncertainty works against relying on defence plans that literally bet the future of the nation on US support in time of war.

    The new National Defence Strategy due in early 2026, must address the Trump factor in a robust and comprehensive manner. The scale of the problem may mean a new grand strategy is needed.

    2. Labor’s first term Strategic Defence Review

    This review was fundamentally flawed. It failed to consider AUKUS – or indeed the navy’s surface war fleet – in its overall advice on the design of the future Australian Defence Force. Nor did it include defence funding needs in any detail beyond “should be increased”.

    Consequently, the review provided an inadequate foundation on which to forecast a long term plan for the force. This plan is now being steadily distorted as factors not previously considered intrude. The flow on effect means the original planned growth in defence budgets is now seriously insufficient.

    For better or worse, defence must be rebuilt around AUKUS. The attempt to keep the two separate has failed. AUKUS is no longer just a submarine project, but the core of the future defence force.

    As a result, army modernisation and the navy’s large amphibious ships look vulnerable.

    3. Future opportunities

    There are opportunities for the Australian Defence Force, despite the challenges. For example, the very rapid rise of robots being demonstrated in Ukraine portends the future of warfare.

    High tech robotics are an investment opportunity for the Australian Defence Force.
    Parilov/Shutterstock

    Defence is presently trapped in the old paradigm of buying a few large and very expensive crewed platforms like AUKUS, and is neglecting emerging uncrewed system models that are small and affordable.

    The defence department lacks money to explore such new ideas but the government could use the mostly untapped A$15 billion reconstruction fund, which handily includes defence manufacturing as a priority.

    Australian defence industry is potentially on the cusp of becoming a regional uncrewed system manufacturer, including the high-end Ghost Bats and Ghost Sharks, or the more affordable Speartooths, Fathoms, Bluebottles and Atlases. Australian made uncrewed systems have been combat proven in Ukraine.

    The reconstruction fund could build this industry sector, moving defence into the future and ensuring defence industry survives the AUKUS iceberg.

    Peter Layton 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. Labor’s second-term defence priorities – could they include a pact with Europe? – https://theconversation.com/labors-second-term-defence-priorities-could-they-include-a-pact-with-europe-256580

    MIL OSI AnalysisEveningReport.nz

  • MIL-OSI New Zealand: Post-Cabinet Press Conference: Monday 19 May 2025

    Source: NZ Music Month takes to the streets

    POST-CABINET PRESS CONFERENCE: Monday, 19 May 2025

    PM:           Welcome. Hey, well, kia ora, good afternoon, everyone. Before I begin, can I just congratulate the legend that is Ardie Savea and just say how fantastic it is that he’s won the Super Rugby player of the tournament before the tournament is even finished, and what we saw on the weekend was a pretty standout performance and great leadership. 

    Anyway, I digress. I’ll get back to the purpose, which is that I want to say welcome to Budget Week. That’s what we’re here to do this week. I am joined by Finance Minister Nicola Willis, who just in three days’ time will deliver her second Budget, and it will be a Budget that provides economic stability, that supports investment, and makes New Zealand an attractive place for the world to trade and to do business with. It will be in stark contrast to what we’ve seen from the Opposition, which wants to ramp the debt up and hike income tax to the point where nurses will have their take-home pay reduced. And on top of all of that, they’re prepared to release violent prisoners into the community to make their spending promises stack up. Our budget will be more responsible than this. Our Budget will be a growth Budget, and as evidence of this, the finance Minister will soon walk you through some changes that we’re introducing to remove tax roadblocks to investment. 

    But before that, I want to talk about why we’re focusing on growth in this year’s Budget. The cost of living crisis, fuelled by the wasteful spending of the previous administration, has been hurting Kiwis for too long. The price we pay for almost everything has gone up harder and faster than we’ve been used to because of red hot inflation. The good news is that through careful economic management over the past 18 months, we have turned a corner and the economy is getting back on track. We have inflation back under control, getting it down from over 7 percent to 2.5 percent by stopping Government wasteful spending. That lower inflation has in turn then brought interest rates down and Kiwis are now seeing the benefit of that in lower mortgage repayments. 

    The economy is out of recession, with the Reserve Bank forecasting economic growth of 2.4 percent for 2025. New Zealand’s finances are under control and we’re on track to reach surplus in 2028 to 2029. We’ve put a lid on Government debt, which blew out by $120 billion between 2019 and 2024, a staggering $22,000 extra for every New Zealander. Rents are now flat after skyrocketing by $180 a week under Labour, and most importantly, most importantly, wages are growing faster than inflation, so now when Kiwis get a pay bump, it isn’t just being eaten up by everyday costs to the extent that it was under Labour, when the cost of living was so high that between 2020 and 2023, average wages rose only $82 a year after inflation. In contrast, the average annual wage after inflation has increased by more than $1,100 since the last election, and that’s great news, fantastic news for working Kiwis. 

    But there’s more for us to do and what New Zealand now needs is a sustained period where wages rise faster than the cost of what people are buying, so that they can get ahead of the price hikes that they saw under the previous Government. It’s only through growing the economy and encouraging more investment that we will achieve this. A growing economy, as we say, makes—it creates more jobs, it raises incomes, and it gives Kiwis more money to deal with the cost of living. 

    Our relentless focus on growth is why you won’t see an irresponsible spending spree in the Budget. New Zealand simply cannot afford it or put it at risk. Just like every household, we’ve made tough choices about what we spend our money on to make ends meet, but we’re confident that we’ve invested taxpayers’ money where it will have the most impact. And with that, I’ll hand over to Nicola to talk a little bit more about further action we’ll take in Budget 2025 to promote economic growth, with two tax changes designed to encourage greater investment in the economy from offshore and within New Zealand’s dynamic start-up community. 

    Hon Nicola Willis:     As the Prime Minister just said, an economic recovery is now underway in New Zealand that is good news for all Kiwis. However, we must not take that recovery for granted. Our Budget must address underlying challenges that could stand in the way of fiscal repair and economic growth. The Budget has been put together in very constrained circumstances. The last Government effectively left the kitty bare, worse than that, in serious overdraft, and New Zealand is now running out of credit cards.

    The most important thing our Government must ensure in this Budget is that we protect and enhance economic growth. To grow the economy, we need more investment in the things that make businesses productive. Low capital intensity and low rates of foreign direct investment have been identified as key contributors to New Zealand’s relatively low levels of productivity. They mean that our workers are often at a disadvantage when compared with their international counterparts because they are working with less sophisticated tools and machinery. Low rates of foreign investment also mean that New Zealand sometimes misses out on the knowledge and expertise that comes with foreign capital. 

    Therefore, I am announcing today that the Budget sets aside $65 million over the next four years to adjust New Zealand’s thin capitalisation regime in order to support more investment in New Zealand infrastructure. Right now, New Zealand’s thin capitalisation rules limit the amount of tax-deductible debt that foreign investors can put into New Zealand investments. The purpose of these rules is to prevent income being shifted offshore and to protect New Zealand’s tax base. However, there is a risk that we have identified that the rules may be deterring investment, particularly in capital-intensive infrastructure projects that are typically funded by large amounts of debt. Therefore, it is our intention to adjust the rules once we have finished consulting on the details. Inland Revenue is releasing a consultation document today, available on their website, so that changes can be made in the tax bill scheduled for introduction in August. 

    The Budget also sets aside another $10 million over four years to make it easier for Kiwi start-ups to compete and to attract and retain high-quality staff. In my relatively new role as Minister of Economic Growth, one of the things that I’ve been struck by is the large number of clever, enterprising Kiwis creating businesses out of new ways of doing things. Many of these new businesses include equity in the business as part of the payment package they offer their staff. But problems arise if tax bills for their income on these shares arrives when workers are unable to realise the value of their shares—that is, they haven’t sold them yet but they’re already having to pay tax on them. Therefore, we are changing the rules to allow tax to be deferred until what the tax experts call a liquidity event, such as the sale of the shares. We need to make it as easy as possible for the next Rocket Lab and Wētā FX to emerge. The changes will also be introduced in the August tax bill. 

    These tax changes are modest in scale, but they demonstrate the Government’s commitment to driving economic growth. I’ll have a little more to say about that topic on Budget Day. Prime Minister, back to you. 

    PM:           Well, thank you, Nicola. Just quickly on the week ahead, I’ll be in Wellington Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday, obviously, for the Budget on Thursday. On Friday, I’ll be in Auckland at various post-Budget events. And with that, we’re happy to take your questions. Sorry, can we go to Jo? 

    Media:      Is there any world where the Government is going to compromise on the sanctions that have been recommended in the Privileges Committee report in order to get something moved in the House more quickly tomorrow? 

    PM:           Those are decisions for the Privileges Committee. As you know, the debate will happen tomorrow and we’ll deal with that tomorrow. 

    Media:      The actual question, though. Is there any world where your party or the Government are prepared to compromise and reduce the 21 days for the two co-leaders and seven days for Hana-Rawhiti Maipi-Clarke, in order to reach a compromise with the Opposition, who feel very strongly against that punishment? Are you prepared to consider that and are you discussing it with any other parties? 

    PM:           No, we have a privileges committee that’s empowered to make those decisions and determine what’s the appropriate punishment. The issue here is not about haka and waiata, as I keep seeing reported. The issue here is about actually parties not following the rules of Parliament. For our democracy to work, we need to have rules in this place, otherwise it devolves into absolute chaos. It’s really important that we actually have—everyone who comes here understands their obligations to actually follow the rules of Parliament. And that’s what the Privileges Committee has determined, and we support it. 

    Media:      Is the National Party open to concessions, though? Otherwise this could drag on for months.

    PM:           No. No. 

    Media:      You’re not open to concessions? 

    PM:           No. The privileges committee make that decision. They are empowered. We have representatives, as every party does, in the privileges committee, and the determination from the privileges committee we support. 

    Media:      Are you comfortable that all of your MPs in your party are actually OK with the 21 days and seven days that have been laid out in that report? 

    PM:           Yes, our caucus position’s really clear. We support the privileges committee, of which we have representation on. 

    Media:      Have you asked [Inaudible]?

    PM:           I don’t need to, Jo. We know our position. Our position is we have representation on the privileges committee with National Party members, as do all other political parties. They have made a determination and we support that. 

    Media:      It’s no longer an issue for the privileges committee though, is it? It’s been referred to the House. It’s the House’s job to debate it. So the privileges committee has done its job. 

    PM:           Sure. 

    Media:      Now it’s the House’s turn to do its job. 

    PM:           Sure, and there’ll be a debate tomorrow. 

    Media:      Are you not worried that this debate is just going to stretch on for hours and hours, potentially days and days, and you’ve got a Budget coming up on Thursday? 

    PM:           Well, I’d just say if that’s the choice of the Opposition to actually filibuster that, that’s up to them. So be it. I’d just say to you that New Zealanders up and down this country actually want us focused on them. That’s what I’m doing. That’s what Nicola’s doing. That’s why we’re focused on a Budget that’s actually about growing the economy and supporting Kiwis. So we’re focused on what matters most to New Zealanders, and what matters right—most to them right now is that we’re actually helping them on the economy. 

    Media:      What is your response to rangatira Māori who say that the penalty, which Speaker Brownlee described as unprecedented, that race was an aggravating factor in the privileges committee’s decision? 

    PM:           Reject that outright. The privileges committee comprises of senior representatives from all the political parties in Parliament. They made a determination and that’s up to them. 

    Media:      So you want to get on with passing laws and stuff like that. This could prevent you from doing that. You say you want to make life better and you’re focused on growth, but this could drag on for ages—

    PM:           Well, let’s see. Let’s see. 

    Media:      —because it takes [Inaudible] over all of the Government’s [Inaudible]. 

    PM:           Let’s see. I mean, we’ll have an opportunity tomorrow, and I’d just say I think if the Opposition wants to go that way, I think that is not what most reasonable-minded New Zealanders watching what’s happening here would say that’s right. They want us to get on with the business of government and the business of—that’s of interest to New Zealanders. What we’re doing by putting together a Budget that’s about growth and is responsible. And, you know, frankly, if they want to muck around, then so be it. Sorry, Maiki. 

    Media:      A question to the Finance Minister. Minister, what’s your message to businesses who want to see greater support in terms of exports but also greater support to grow their businesses when it comes to this week’s Budget?

    Hon Nicola Willis:     We want to back business to succeed, we on your side and our Budget is designed to give you even more confidence for the future. We back business because we need you to create the jobs that New Zealanders need, to create the growing incomes that New Zealanders need. Make no mistake, this Government is on your side. 

    Media:      And just in terms of KiwiSaver, do you think that employees and employers should up their contributions in KiwiSaver? 

    Hon Nicola Willis:     I’m not going to make any comments on KiwiSaver today. Just a few days to wait. 

    Media:      [Inaudible] a 1 percent increase in—

    Hon Nicola Willis:     I’m not going to make any comments on KiwiSaver today, just a few days to wait. 

    Media:      You acknowledged that the announcement you made today is modest. I spoke to Cameron Bagrie, an economist. He said that New Zealand’s infrastructure deficit is so high that net government debt of around 40 to 50 percent of GDP is going to end up being the new normal. Do you accept that? 

    Hon Nicola Willis:     Well, the last Government left us with debt at extraordinary levels. It is now higher than it has been since the mid-1990s. We cannot let that debt keep blowing out forever because if we do so, we are putting future New Zealanders at risk. We’re putting all of us at risk if there’s a major event that requires more borrowing. So our Government has set out a clear strategy to get the debt curve bending down. That’s the responsible course of action and our Budget will demonstrate progress towards it. 

    Media:      Do we risk that the economy crumbles away without enough investment? 

    Hon Nicola Willis:     No. We risk the economy crumbling away if we allow major extra taxes to be put on New Zealanders, if we allow such excessive borrowing that it drives up inflation and interest rates. That is the prescription being offered by the Opposition and that would put New Zealand’s economic recovery at risk and every New Zealand family with it. 

    Media:      Prime Minister, what do you say to people who are looking for a vision from the Government for New Zealand, a vision not just for the next four years but a vision for the next decade? 

    PM:           Well, I think you’re going to see that with this Budget. I mean the Budget is part of our journey to make sure that this is a country that is growing strongly, that is set up and managed well financially and economically, and that actually New Zealanders know that if they work hard in New Zealand they can get ahead. And so everything we’re doing, as I said from the beginning of the year, is designed to come through the lens of growth. Growth matters above everything else. You know, we need economic growth in New Zealand so that we can put more money back into Kiwis’ pockets, but importantly, to deliver and invest in the public services that we actually know Kiwis want and deserve, and so that’s what we’re doing here. 

    And I think we’ve found the right way—you’ll see it on Thursday—where we’re actually saying, look, yeah, we don’t want to go commit to a whole bunch of new borrowing or new taxes. That’s not the way forward. I hear that from the Opposition. We’ve been there before. That’s what caused this problem in the beginning. But equally, we have started to turn the corner but we don’t want to put any of that at risk. And therefore, good, prudent, you know, responsible management, while also, as Nicholas foreshadowed, good investments in healthcare and education. You’ve started to see some of those pre-Budget announcements come through. Obviously, transport, infrastructure, and also economic growth. So, you know, we are—you know, we are balancing, I think we’ve got—we’ve got the balance right and New Zealanders will see that this is a really good step forward for us and where we want to go as a country. 

    Media:      Has Cabinet approved the draft of the Regulatory Standards Bill and will it be introduced to the House this week? 

    PM:           Again, we don’t talk about what we’ve discussed in Cabinet. I’d just say the Regulatory Standards Bill is, as you know, designed to improve the quality of lawmaking, to make it more transparent. 

    Media:      David Seymour quite specifically said that he was taking it to Cabinet today. Act has said the Bill is being introduced to Parliament this week, so it’s not a trade secret. Is that happening? 

    PM:           Well, David Seymour can say whatever he likes to. I’m just telling you my position is I don’t talk about what happens in Cabinet. 

    Media:      Is it going to be introduced to the House this week? 

    PM:           Again, you’ll have to wait and see. 

    Media:      What about the Waitangi Tribunal’s report last week that said that the Government had breached the Treaty in not consulting appropriately with Māori on the Bill? What’s your response to that? 

    PM:           Well, look, I mean, as I said, if you just take a step back, what is the original—what is the purpose of this bill? It is actually designed to make sure that Ministers are making good regulation. It’s to make sure there’s more transparency over regulation. It’s pretty, you know, dull but very worthy sort of stuff. It’s important. But importantly is also there’s a lot of consultation that’s needed because the devil’s in the detail, and so ultimately this Bill will come to the House. There’ll be a discussion through a select committee process. There’s complexity in it. The devil’s in the detail of actually what gets implemented, and we’ll work our way through that as we’ll have another conversation. 

    Media:      How is what you just said there relevant to the Tribunal’s report last week? 

    PM:           Well, the Tribunal—the Tribunal has a range of views on a range of things, which obviously we consider, but I’m just saying to you what the Bill was actually about. 

    Media:      So in terms of the Tribunal saying that you’ve breached the Treaty in failing to consult Māori appropriately, I mean, do you agree with that? 

    PM:           I disagree. I mean, I disagree. We consider what the Waitangi Tribunal will say and then, you know, you will see a Bill come to the House in due course. 

    Media:      The Deputy Prime Minister has said that he has expressed some sort of indication that he wants to see changes to the Bill. Are you clear on what those changes he will seek are? Are you—

    PM:           Well, I’ll let—I’ll let—

    Media:      [Inaudible] will that happen? 

    PM:           Yeah, look, I’ll Winston Peters talk for New Zealand First and their position around that, but I’d just say to you what we do acknowledge, a bit like fast track legislation, this is a really complex piece of legislation. It’s really important that actually the Bill is strengthened through the course of a parliamentary process of select committees and second readings, etc, and that’s what we’ll do here. 

    Media:      Prime Minister, this morning on ZB, when you were talking to Mike Hosking, he asked a question about the Māorification of New Zealand. Your support of the punitive measures levelled against Te Pāti Māori, the Regulatory Standards Bill, the review into the Waitangi Tribunal and the now defunct Treaty Principles Bill, is that the National coalition government’s strategy in the de-Māorification of New Zealand?

    PM:           Look, I’m not characterising it that way. We are—each of those issues are different issues and I’m happy to debate each and every one of them with you. You know, as I said—and you want to bundle them all up and make a question like that. I’m not responding to that. 

    Media:      Prime Minister, do you think it’s racist to say that New Zealand is being “Māori-fied”, that we’re seeing the Māorification of New Zealand? 

    PM:           Well, I wouldn’t use those words. They were questions that a member of the media asked me. All I’m just saying to you is that what we’re interested in is the Government’s making sure we advance outcomes for Māori and non-Māori. That’s why you’ve seen us invest $200 million, for example, in Māori housing. That’s why I was in, you know, Tairāwhiti last week, actually opening up another 149 houses that have been done in conjunction with iwi, Government, and business to deliver those homes. So there’s a lot of good things that we’re doing to advance interest for Māori and a lot of really positive conversations happening with iwi. A good example would be the billion-dollar investment between Brookfield and Waikato-Tainui that fell out of the back of the infrastructure summit, and is a good example of what we want to see a lot more of. 

    Media:      Understanding that those weren’t your words, they were words that were put to you, do you think that it’s a racist term? 

    PM:           I wouldn’t characterise or use that word in that way, personally. Just not the way I’d describe things. I want to make sure—

    Media:      Why did you not [Inaudible] the comment, then?

    PM:           I want to make sure that actually we’re delivering outcomes for Māori and non-Māori. I’ve been very straight up about that from day one. You guys get sick of me saying it but that’s what it’s about. 

    Media:      Prime Minister, Te Pāti Māori says that the public gallery in Parliament is going to be closed tomorrow. Are you aware of that, and is that appropriate to be closing the gallery when there’s such important debates like the privileges committee’s report tomorrow? 

    PM:           I’m unaware of that. Those are decisions, obviously, for the Speaker to make. 

    Media:      Do you think that’s appropriate, though, closing down the ability of the public to [Inaudible] that?

    PM:           Again, decisions for the Speaker. I’m responsible for leading the Executive. The Speaker’s responsible for Parliament. 

    Media:      Former Cook Islands Deputy Prime Minister Norman George has proposed a gradual reintegration of the Cook Islands into New Zealand, including having New Zealand take over services like education, health and policing. Is this something New Zealand would either consider entertaining in principle? 

    PM:           Well, look, I mean, we have a very special relationship with the Cook Islands. As you know, it’s coming up 60 years and, you know, we—with that it’s a very special constitutional arrangement where we have certain rights and responsibilities to each other, and obviously as a Realm country we take our obligations incredibly seriously. Any change or evolution of those arrangements, we’re always up for the conversation, but it would need to come from the Cook Islands people. 

    Media:      He also has suggested that Cook Islanders should have dedicated seats in the New Zealand Parliament, similar to Māori seats. What’s your view on his idea? 

    PM:           Well, look, again, you know, it’s—I’m not going to react just to an individual’s idea. Anything that is concrete and proposed would come through proper channels for proper debate, discussion. But we do have very strong constitutional arrangements with the Realm country arrangement that has obligations on both parties. But again, this is up to the Cook Islands people to determine, and we listen to them very carefully. 

    Media:      Prime Minister—

    PM:           Tom. 

    Media:      Hello, hello. 

    PM:           How are you?

    Media:      I’m grand. 

    PM:           Good. 

    Media:      It’s been two weeks, or nearly two weeks, since you brought in those pay equity changes. Why can’t you still say how much Treasury has appraised that you would save as a result of stopping those 33 claims? 

    PM:           Because it will all be revealed on Budget Day on Thursday when you get the total picture of our fiscal situation. 

    Media:      But it’s already been passed into law. Why can’t you just reveal the number that Treasury has [Inaudible]— 

    PM:           Well, the reason that I’ve said is the Budget number is sensitive and it needs to be seen in the context of our whole fiscal plan, which will be presented on Thursday. 

    Media:      Finance Minister, when do you hope to pass the Budget by, through the Parliament? 

    Hon Nicola Willis:     Well, we’ll introduce a number of pieces of legislation on Thursday. Some of them we’ll want to pass through all stages. Others will just be introduced for a first reading. 

    Media:      So have you got a date, and are you worried that your Budget will be delayed by the debate over the privileges committee? 

    Hon Nicola Willis:     I’m not concerned by that. I’m confident that the Budget will be a priority for all members of Parliament. After all, the Budget is what keeps the lights on in our hospitals, our schools, and ensures that New Zealanders can get their superannuation payments, their welfare payments, and I would be surprised if any member of Parliament would want to stand in the way of that happening. 

    Media:      Do you believe there is room for the Government to do more to encourage businesses to invest more in technology, machinery and that type of thing? 

    PM:           Yeah, look, I mean—I mean, obviously we want to encourage businesses to invest big time. There’s a number of things that we’re doing, we’ve already pre-announced. There’ll be, no doubt, other things we’ll talk about on Budget Day as well. But, you know, we want—we want—we’re doing everything we can, as you’ve seen over the course of the last 18 months, to make sure that our businesses—whether it’s about removing red tape and complexity and costs that are—that are loading them up. We want them freed up to be able to grow and expand their businesses so that they can take on more workers and pay higher wages. It’s pretty simple. 

    And so we are a pro-business Government, deliberately, because we know that’s what drives economic growth. We create the conditions for the growth, but it’s actually our business community that steps up and actually creates the businesses and the ideas that delivers and generates that growth. And so we want to do everything we can to get the settings as positive as possible for them to do the very best that they can. 

    Media:      If you were to accelerate depreciation on capital investments, would you be open to cherry-picking individual assets, or if you were to do that type of change, would you want to do it across the board? 

    PM:           Hypothetical conversation. All I was expressing was, you know, that’s an interesting thought and idea. I’m sure it comes with a huge cost as well so, I mean, let’s park that up and we’ll…

    Media:      Minister, is this the modest tax move that you said had moved the bar for the Treasury?

    Hon Nicola Willis:     Can I just be clear about something, which is there have been some commentators in the media in recent days who have proposed that there could be on the cards a 100 percent expensing or depreciation regime and that would come with a fiscal price tag of $34 billion over the next four years, more than $8 billion a year. So you’ll understand, no, that’s not on the cards for this Budget. 

    Media:      Minister, that’s obviously far too expensive but would you be open to an uplift of the depreciation rate of, say, 20 percent, as was it was before 2010? That type of change would be much cheaper. 

    Hon Nicola Willis:     Look, I’m going to leave comments on these matters to Budget Day. 

    PM:           Bryce, sorry.

    Media:      Have you thought about whether you want someone from the National caucus out to the protestors that will be out in front of Parliament on Thursday? 

    PM:           Look, we—I haven’t. It’s not been a topic of conversation thus far today. We’ve got our caucus meeting tomorrow. It might be something we discuss there. 

    Media:      Obviously, pay equity will probably form quite a big part of that. Do you think it’s important that someone from the caucus—and this might be something for you as well, Finance Minister—goes out there and explains why you did what you did?

    PM:           I genuinely haven’t had a conversation about that. In fairness, we haven’t had a caucus meeting this week. 

    Media:      Can you explain why the, I think, $75 million you announced today, the $160 million you announced yesterday, the $500 million you announced last week, and I think the $160 million you announced on Monday, why that’s not Budget-sensitive and yet the billions you’re cutting from pay equity are Budget-sensitive?

    PM:           Well, we have a series of pre-Budget announcements, which is what you’ve seen over the last couple of weeks as we’ve gone through different areas. Not everything’s been revealed and understandably so, but we need to be able to present that coherency of that total package and that fiscal position on Thursday and that’s why we’ve made that decision. 

    Media:      Why have you chosen these investments to publicise the figure ahead of Budget day and yet for the pay equity changes, which are currently the law, you haven’t allowed that figure to become public? 

    PM:           Well, again, as I—I don’t know how to explain it. I just answered that before. I mean, we see this as being part of a total fiscal package that we need to present on Budget day and as a result, that will be revealed in a couple of days’ time. 

    Media:      The stuff you’ve announced today and the film subsidies last week, that’s also part of the fiscal package—

    PM:           Sure. Sure it is. 

    Media:      —so what makes it different? 

    Media:           But we always announce—we always have pre-Budget announcements. There’s a series of them, a package of them. We made a set that we decided we wanted to announce before. There’ll be things that we also announce on Budget day as well. 

    Media:      Why did you choose not to put the figure of the pay equity change as a pre-Budget announcement, the number? 

    PM:           Well, as I said before, we want to be able to present the total fiscal package and that’s what we can do comprehensively on Budget Day. 

    Media:      Does “Budget-sensitive” just mean “things we don’t want to talk about before Budget Day”? 

    PM:           Not at all. You’ll hear us talking about pay equity and the projected costs and how they may be different on Budget day. 

    Media:      Nicole Willis, can I just ask you, would you personally like the Te Pāti Māori co-leaders to be able to participate—

    PM:           Have to say I like the way he used your surname, [Inaudible].

    Media:      —in those Budget discussions on Thursday as they occur? 

    Hon Nicola Willis:     Look, sometimes in Parliament it is not a matter of personal view. The privileges committee have made a ruling which is designed to uphold the standards of conduct in Parliament. There is a clear procedure by which that will be debated in Parliament and parties will cast their vote and I can confirm that the National Party will be supporting the privileges committee. 

    Media:      I’m just asking you personally though. This is your Budget. I’m sure you’ll get many different bits of commentary on what it may contain, but would you not appreciate the Te Pāti Māori co-leaders being able to have their opportunity to give their voice on what they see in it?

    Hon Nicola Willis:     Well, Tom, it’s not about me, but the reflection I would offer is that I think New Zealanders are sick of the circus in Parliament. They want to see their members of Parliament focused on the issues that matter to them, which fundamentally are around the cost of living, their health services, their education services, the future of the New Zealand economy. So I think any party that chooses to have a chaotic distraction from that is going to find themselves pretty quickly out of line with everyday Kiwis who just want to see MPs get on with serving them. 

    PM:           Sorry, can I just go to Benedict?

    Media:      Prime Minister, do you believe New Zealand communities have the resources they need, looking at addiction issues in particular, in terms of that surge of methamphetamine that we’re getting into New Zealand at the moment? 

    PM:           Yeah, look, firstly, can I thank you for your story, I saw the first part of it last night. Look, we—it is incredibly worrying what is happening with meth. From our best understanding, what we’re seeing is global prices have collapsed and within that context prices are lower in New Zealand, but still New Zealand’s relativity to global prices is still very, very high. And we’ve got—you know, as you would have found in your own reporting, actually people trying to get to the root cause of why has it spiked so dramatically in the latter part of 2024. That’s something that I’ve tasked our Ministers with as well. 

    I think there’s three things we’ve got to do. One is we have to make sure that we’ve got very strong borders in place. Two, we have to disrupt distribution, and you highlighted, I think, five towns last night where that’s a major challenge. And thirdly, we have to make sure we’ve got better addiction services in place as well. So I’ve asked the relevant Ministers to form a small sprint team. They’re due very shortly to come back to me as to what can we do immediately to jump on board that. But if we need more resources to fight that, we will put that in place. 

    Media:      Can we afford to do that though, with the tight Budget [Inaudible]—

    PM:           We can’t afford not to. Meth is a real scourge on all New Zealanders and I think everybody has, through a family or a friend, has had someone impacted by that across this country. And we’re doing everything we can to give police powers to crack down on gangs which distribute the illegal drugs, and meth in particular. We’re doing everything we can to give police powers and authority to really get down on—with the gang unit increases that we’ve put in place. Even the beat police being out on patrol, that’s helping. But again, you know, we’ve got a real issue here and actually we’ve really got to get to the root cause of it, and actually I suspect it will be in those three spaces but we need to make sure we’ve got a full court press on it, absolutely. 

    Media:      Prime Minister, just to be clear, do you rule out supporting any amendments at all to the committee findings? You won’t support any amendments throughout debate? 

    PM:           Again, our National Party position, and I can only speak to the National Party, is—

    Media:      But you will rule out supporting any debates at all? You won’t budge at all? You’ll stick to the letter, to what [Inaudible]—

    PM:           We have representation from our party on the privileges committee. The privileges committee has functioned over a number of years, dealing with a number of different disputes. We back the privileges committee decision and that’s what our party’s doing. 

    Media:      So no compromise on that? 

    PM:           No. 

    Media:      Prime Minister, David Seymour was critical of the pre-Budget announcement about film and television subsidies. He said it was not a good policy. Has he broken the collective responsibility clause in your coalition agreement? 

    PM:           Well, he may be expressing an Act Party view on that and, you know, whatever. I mean, the bottom line is that we’ve got a Government position, which is that we are backing this industry. The reality is that every—you may not like these subsidies and I get it. I usually don’t like subsidies to industries either. But every country on Earth offers rebates in the way that we do, and I’d just say to you that, you know, we have an outstanding film industry. It employs 24,000 people. I think over the last 10 years we’ve, you know, attracted $7.5 billion worth of productions, we’ve paid out about $1.5 billion of actual rebates, and when you think about it—since late ‘23 I think we’ve had 10 productions in this country, eight from Hollywood, including, you know, a Minecraft story as well. So I mean, I think, you know, this is an industry that’s doing incredibly well. The rebates kind of work but it’s just the ticket that you have to pay in order to actually get productions in your country, and I—and New Zealand’s a fantastic place to do film production. That’s why I talked about it in India and I talk about it everywhere I go. 

    Media:      In your coalition agreement though, it does say, “Once Cabinet makes a decision, Ministers must support it … regardless of their personal views”. Is he able to do this? 

    PM:           Well, I’d just say to you we’ve got a—we’ve got a Government position. We’re supporting it. It’s happening. The money’s going in. We’re backing this industry big time. That’s the Government’s position. 

    Media:      But Seymour’s criticising it, though. 

    PM:           Well, as I’ve said to you, like, you know, I just—I just wouldn’t get too—I wouldn’t get too hung up on it, I’d just—

    Media:      [Inaudible] don’t know whether he’s wearing his ministerial hat and when he’s wearing his Act hat. 

    PM:           No, I’d just—I’d just say to you, look, don’t get too hung up on it. I said to you from day one we’re in a three-party coalition in a mature MMP environment. If I’m sitting in the Netherlands or I’m sitting in Germany or I’m sitting in other countries that have the same system that we have, Finland, others, it’s quite normal there is different ways of expressing things and there’ll be differences from the different party leaders within a coalition. But I’m just saying to you, our Government position is really crystal clear. We are backing the film industry, period. 

    Media:      Has any progress been made with New Zealand First on a foreign buyers tax? 

    PM:           It’s still an ongoing—thank you for the question, Jo. It’s still an ongoing point of conversation. 

    Media:      Are you anticipating that you might be able to do anything in the Budget or perhaps this month, based on how far conversations have progressed? 

    PM:           Oh, look, again, I’m not pre-empting any Budget conversations, but—

    Media:      Is the progress that is taking place around moving thresholds?

    PM:           Well, as I’ve said to you before, we’ve got a position, which is that, you know, we went to the election with a policy. We think we probably could lift the—as I said this morning, we could lift the threshold but obviously that’s a discussion with New Zealand First we have to have. As you know, we also have policies that are different from New Zealand First. Think superannuation age. It’s no different here. So we’ve got to work our way through that and see if we can find a way through it. 

    Media:      Is there an appetite from New Zealand First? Because previously it was just, like, not interested. Is the reason that you are able to have talks because New Zealand First has actually expressed an appetite for, if the threshold was shifted, that they would be—

    PM:           Well, you saw public comments from Winston, I think it was, last year where he said, look, you know, there’s—you know, he’s not against investment into New Zealand and that’s been good. That’s evidenced by the pro-investment settings that we’ve been able to put through as a Government. But look, on that particular issue, which is not the be-all and end-all of attracting investment to New Zealand, it’s a component of it, it’s an important part, it’s a piece of it but it’s not the only part of it—

    Media:      Have you had any advice on how much of an impact it might have?

    PM:           No, no, no, we just—we have a coalition conversation, which we’ll continue to have. There’s a very strong position from New Zealand First, a strong position from National. We’ll see whether we can find a way through. If not, we’ll move forward. Sorry, Luke. 

    Media:      One for the Minister of Finance, please. Half a billion more for film subsidies, a bit for Elevate last week, broader Government procurement processes, perhaps taking on the supermarkets—it appears that you, over the last few months, have been taking what, compared to the past 30 years, might be a slightly unorthodox approach to centre-right economic management, particularly in the growth area. I’m kind of wondering if we can get a sense of whether there might be some more of that more expansive thinking in the Budget.

    Hon Nicola Willis:     Yeah, I’ve called it the growth Budget for a reason. I think the major challenge for New Zealand is not about how we can nickel and dime our way to surplus, it’s about how we can grow our economy faster. And if you look back over the past 30 years, we haven’t been growing fast enough and that’s why New Zealanders’ incomes haven’t risen as much as they have in many other countries. That’s why our Government’s books haven’t been in the position we would wish them to be in. 

    So in this Budget I very much had my Economic Growth Minister hat on, thinking about what are the things we can do now that will not only secure the economic recovery that’s currently underway, but will drive us onto a higher growth trajectory for the future. We have long-standing challenges with productivity and investment, and I’m determined that our Government will make changes now that will pay off for many years to come. It’s not just a short-term budget, it’s a budget for the long term. 

    Media:      So can we expect quite a number of, I guess, micro-economic changes of the sort that have been announced today in Thursday’s Budget? 

    Hon Nicola Willis:     There will be, and I just reiterate again, within the significant constraints that we face. The last Government left us in severe overdraft. There’s a huge amount of cleaning up for us to do, and so the vast majority of new initiatives that we will deliver in our Budget will be funded from savings, because without those savings, we would need to either impose significant additional taxes on New Zealanders or borrow to levels that would put our economy at risk. So, within those constraints, we have done our utmost to get behind growth. 

    Media:      The pre-Budget housing announcement to Toitū Tairāwhiti, a very good announcement to Toitū Tairāwhiti—

    PM:           Sorry, can you say that again? A good announcement?

    Media:      A very good announcement last week. 

    PM:           It was, wasn’t it? 

    Media:      Minister Willis, congratulations on the pre-Budget announcement on housing, Māori housing. The question is: can you confirm if Māori housing providers are actually outstripping the Government’s supply of housing to whānau? 

    Hon Nicola Willis:     Well, I’m very excited about the potential for the Government to work even more with Māori institutions to deliver housing, and that’s because oftentimes, whether it’s iwi, hapū, or other Māori-led organisations, what they bring to the equation is Māori land that would otherwise not be developed, and that of course reduces the potential cost of new housing. So that is something that Minister Potaka and Minister Bishop are very conscious of and as we move to deliver more affordable housing for New Zealanders, we want to make the most of those opportunities. 

    Media:      They’ve actually supplied almost 1,000 whare, which is actually more than what Kāinga Ora has supplied. So the question was: are Māori housing providers outgunning the state in building whare for whānau? 

    Hon Nicola Willis:     Well, I’d leave Mr Bishop to look at the specifics of those numbers, but what I would say is that Māori housing providers are making a significant and very much appreciated contribution to addressing New Zealand’s housing challenges. 

    PM:           And I’d just say I thought that—I thought that project was a very good one, to be honest, because it showed us the model going forward. There’s $200 million going into Māori housing, you know, that was 149 houses built in Tairāwhiti when we know there’s been a programme of about 500 houses that we’ve needed to get in there. But the combination of iwi working with Government, with business, to actually get the scale of those houses through, the quality of that build of house through, to identify the families that desperately need it—I met the families that were actually about to go into the first houses. It was a pretty special, pretty emotional day, actually. And also then to have a Government with Ministers like Tama Potaka and Chris Bishop that have actually created the environment for that to happen, I think is pretty cool. 

    So, OK, we’ll go to Lloyd and then we’ll go to Thomas. Last question. 

    Media:      Just to clarify, Minister Willis, on what you said about KiwiSaver, are you scrapping or tinkering with the Government’s contribution? 

    Hon Nicola Willis:     I said nothing about KiwiSaver and I won’t be saying anything about KiwiSaver until Budget day. 

    Media:      Can you please rule it out for Kiwis concerned that you’re about to scrap—

    Hon Nicola Willis:     I’m not ruling anything in or out. There’s just three days to go. It’ll be very clear on Budget Day. 

    Media:      OK, so you are tinkering with KiwiSaver settings? That’s the—

    Hon Nicola Willis:     I’ve made it clear that I want to see New Zealanders’ KiwiSaver balances grow and I’ll have more to say about that on Budget day. 

    Media:      So you won’t be cutting them? 

    Hon Nicola Willis:     I’ll have more to say about our KiwiSaver policy on Budget day. 

    PM:           It’s Monday today, Lloyd. Thursday’s coming shortly. OK, Thomas, last question. 

    Media:      The Clerk’s advice to the privileges committee revealed that a member on the committee sought advice on imprisonment as a potential punishment. Do you think that was overreach, [Inaudible]?

    PM:           Look, I’m sorry, I’m not going into the conversations of a privileges committee. We haven’t previously spoken about privileges committees. We let them get on and do their work with senior representation from all parties in Parliament to actually make sure that Parliament functions in the way that it’s supposed to function. All I think is if you’re a New Zealander watching Parliament and all of this, that looks like a massive distraction, frankly, from what they care about. We have a privileges committee. We have a clear process. We need to have rules in this place so that we can actually discuss difficult and emotional subjects without order breaking down, and we back this privileges committee and the decision they’ve made. 

    Media:      Do you think imprisonment probably takes that a couple of steps too far? 

    PM:           That’s not what the privileges committee has proposed. 

    Media:      No, but a member clearly thought that that was something that they might want advice on, to have it on the table.

    PM:           Well, I’m not going to comment on privileges committee’s conversation because I’m not a member of the privileges committee. That’s why we have a set of senior MPs that are part of that committee. It’s a very serious body. It deals with serious issues about parliamentary behaviour, and I think any conversation outside of that group is really unhelpful. We haven’t done that in the past. We expect those conversations to happen inside that committee and to be dealt with by that committee. They’re entrusted as parliamentarians to represent all the parties that are there. So, you know, for me, I’m just saying to you, yeah, we—you know, New Zealanders want us to get on and actually help them dealing with the cost of living, getting our economy growing, getting money in their back pockets. That’s what we’re focused on. 

    Media:      [Inaudible] Opposition favour the lower sanction against the Te Pāti Māori MPs out of a view to a potential post-election coalition talks? 

    PM:          That was the last question, Thomas, and as I said, I’ll refer you to my further—answer just before, which is we don’t talk—I don’t talk about privileges committee or what happens in there because I’m not a member of privileges committee, as you know. Cool, thank you, team. Have a good week. 

    conclusion of press conference

    MIL OSI New Zealand News

  • MIL-OSI China: Chinese FM urges China, Germany to deepen win-win cooperation, jointly oppose unilateralism, protectionism

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

    Chinese FM urges China, Germany to deepen win-win cooperation, jointly oppose unilateralism, protectionism

    BEIJING, May 19 — Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi on Monday urged China and Germany to deepen mutually beneficial cooperation and jointly oppose unilateralism and protectionism.

    Wang, also a member of the Political Bureau of the Communist Party of China Central Committee, made the remarks during his phone call with German Foreign Minister Johann Wadephul.

    Wang congratulated Wadephul on assuming office, saying that China-Germany relations carry significance beyond the bilateral scope and exert an important influence on global economic development and strategic stability.

    Noting that China and Germany share a comprehensive strategic partnership, Wang expressed his hope that the new German government will maintain this position and pursue a rational and pragmatic policy towards China.

    Emphasizing that the Taiwan question concerns China’s core interests, Wang said he believes that the German side will firmly adhere to the one-China principle, just as China has supported Germany’s reunification.

    For China and Germany, whose economies are highly complementary, industries deeply intertwined and interests closely integrated, deepening mutually beneficial cooperation is a natural choice, said Wang, stressing that both sides should prevent the undermining of normal bilateral cooperation in the name of so-called “de-risking.”

    This year marks the 50th anniversary of diplomatic relations between China and the European Union (EU), which is an important juncture bridging the past and the future, said Wang, expressing his hope that Germany will play an active role as a core major country of the EU, and inject fresh momentum into the development of China-EU relations through high-quality China-Germany cooperation.

    China expects that the EU will work with the Chinese side in the same direction, properly resolve the anti-subsidy case involving Chinese-made electric vehicles (EVs) at an early date, and promote the upgrading of China-EU cooperation in both quality and scale, he said.

    China and Germany should shoulder their responsibilities as major countries, jointly advocate and uphold free trade, jointly oppose unilateralism and protectionism, safeguard the security and stability of global industrial and supply chains, practice true multilateralism and uphold the international system with the United Nations at its core, he added.

    For his part, Wadephul said that the relationship between Germany and China is of great significance to the world economic development and the future of the international community, adding that the new German government attaches great importance to relations with China and is willing to pursue a proactive policy towards China.

    Germany has firmly adhered to the one-China policy and will continue to do so, and is willing to be a reliable and predictable partner of China, he said.

    Taking a leading role in the EU, Germany is willing to devote itself to resolving differences through dialogue and consultation, and supports the EU and China in resolving issues such as the anti-subsidy case against China’s EVs through negotiations, Wadephul said.

    The two sides also exchanged views on the Ukraine crisis. Wang said that China has been committed to promoting peace talks and supports reaching a fair, lasting and binding peace agreement through direct dialogues.

    Wadephul said he hopes that China will exert its influence to push for a ceasefire and bring the Ukraine crisis to an early end.

    MIL OSI China News

  • MIL-OSI USA: Energy Secretary Chris Wright Delivers Keynote Remarks on Completion of First B61-13 Production Unit at Pantex Plant

    Source: US Department of Energy

    AMARILLO— U.S. Secretary of Energy Chris Wright delivered keynote remarks today at the Department of Energy’s Pantex Plant in Amarillo, Texas, marking the completion of the first production unit of the B61-13 nuclear gravity bomb.

    The B61-13 is the latest modification to the B61 family of nuclear weapons and was completed nearly a year ahead of schedule and less than two years after the program was first announced, making it one of the most rapidly developed and fielded weapons since the Cold War. Under President Trump’s leadership, the Department is modernizing America’s nuclear stockpile to deliver peace through strength. The B61-13 builds on proven B61-12 production capabilities and incorporates modern safety, security, and accuracy features, with a yield tailored for hardened and large-area military targets. The B61-13 is one of seven warhead modernization programs NNSA is executing to ensure the long-term performance and credibility of the U.S. deterrent.

    Secretary Wright’s full remarks:

    It’s an honor to be here on this special day. Every time I hear our national anthem performed, I feel strong emotions. I feel first a sense of gratitude—gratitude for those that came before us and created this nation against all odds, that put their lives on the line and stuck to their principles, no matter what the pressure was. I also feel a sense of pride to be born in this country and to have the great luck to live as an American. The ideas of freedom, liberty, and justice for all—but freedom isn’t free. Freedom isn’t free.

    That national anthem was written over 200 years ago, the last time there were foreign troops on our soil. Most ideas or nations get taken over and they get snuffed out; they lose their way. We’re unique in history, and our nation has not. And that’s only because of the men and women in our country that have stood strong, both on the principles and with the might to defend our borders and to defend our ideals.

    And Pantex and the people of Amarillo have been central to that mission. And I’ll come back to that in a second.

    I bring regards from President Trump, who is incredibly committed to this mission of modernizing our nuclear stockpile as quickly and as efficiently—but as robustly and strongly—as we can.

    He got elected on really a simple principle: that prosperity at home and peace abroad are what America and the world needed. And those go together. A prosperous, strong America is the best way to guarantee peace abroad. A strong, principled America is central to world peace and to the lives of all of us—all our friends, all our families, and all our fellow Americans across the country.

    I have the incredible honor to be in this role. I’ve been an entrepreneur my whole life. The last time I had a boss, I was 19 years old. And then I met a new guy a little more than a year ago at dinner and a very candid dialogue about energy and about our country. And right away, he said, “You should be Secretary of Energy.”

    And then he came to me after the dinner and said, “Would you do it?” I said, if I’m asked to serve my country, there’s only one answer. I didn’t have to think about that one. I did look at my wife that night and she said, “Absolutely, we’re moving to DC. You know, I’m willing.”

    And my wife has been this lifelong partner for me, up for every adventure. So, I’ve been a very, very lucky guy.

    As an entrepreneur, I started a number of businesses, mostly around energy—technology and energy. That’s why I am an energy tech nerd. But I started—I named the last company Liberty Energy, two of my favorite words.

    We have 30-year life expectancy throughout all of human history. 20,000 years ago, before the invention of agriculture, and 200 years ago— there was 30 years of global life expectancy at birth. Today, it’s 73 years. Just a few generations back. Just an incredible transformation.

    What happened? There’s all sorts of history before 200 years ago. What happened? And to me, two fundamental things changed:

    The growth of bottom-up social organization—human liberty. Societies were top-down. Women were property of their husbands, of their fathers. Slavery was endemic across every major society throughout all of history. We didn’t start perfect in those ideals, but America started with a North Star—to bring liberty, not just to our country, to the world. That mission has been not complete, but remarkably, remarkably successful in making the lives we all have.

    And the partner in making that happen was energy. It was this explosion in available energy—from wood. Mostly wood, a little bit of wind, a little bit of water flowing. That’s what powered the world throughout all of human history. And then the arrival of coal and oil and natural gas. And then these derivative energy sources that are only possible because of coal, oil, and natural gas, like nuclear, large-scale hydro, wind, solar—everything else is really derivative of hydrocarbons.

    But those two things changed our world: liberty and energy.

    And I think President Trump realized that both of those were under some threat. We saw a growing movement in our country that maybe free speech and free interchange of ideas—maybe those were out of fashion. They didn’t fit with the world today.

    I think we saw—as we heard from the General earlier—we saw growing threats to our liberty around the world. To us, a rapidly rising China. It’s a huge, huge global threat we haven’t seen in our lifetimes. We’ve seen Russia’s activities and where Russia stands today. And, as we heard, the world has gotten more dangerous.

    We need very much today a strong America. We need a prosperous America to keep peace for our shores and peace abroad, to the extent we can achieve it.

    This community—the Pantex community and the broader Amarillo community—have been central to that for over 80 years. In World War II, much to our surprise with the bombing of Pearl Harbor. Within a few months, this facility was built and started quickly to build armaments to win the war. A war we fought in the Pacific. We fought in the Atlantic—by far the largest conflict in human history.

    You’re a ways away from any danger here from foreign enemies, but they’re there. This community rose up and cranked out armaments to allow our troops around the globe to win that war.

    In that war, we also had a very unique effort for science. That wartime mobilization meant creativity, meant patriotism, and a rushed effort—literally in two and a half years in Los Alamos—we developed nuclear weapons under the gun of both war and the knowledge that Nazi Germany also had a nuclear weapons program. Getting second wasn’t an option.

    But America rose to that challenge. And we developed nuclear weapons, which you learn in school are horrific and terrifying—and they are terrifying. I would say they’re not horrific. They and American strength and resolve have probably been the biggest bringers of peace in the world for 80 years, without any live conflict between major powers.

    There are plenty of wars around the world, and President Trump’s agenda is to bring as many of those conflicts as possible to an end. But your chance of dying from violent death in our generation—and our children’s generation—is the lowest it’s ever been.

    We have the news and we hear about all the conflicts around the world, but because of a strong America, because of an unbowed resolve, we have a much safer—not completely safe—but a much safer and more peaceful world that’s allowed ourselves, our children, our grandchildren to pursue wonderful, dreamy lives.

    But to maintain that, our biggest risk is complacency. That risk is there. And that risk has been mostly at bay because of the strength of our military and the commitment of American leadership, American citizens, and American resolve.

    Pantex is absolutely central to that.

    And there was a brief break from ’45 to ’51, where we won the war, but of course, the Cold War rose quickly. And we understood this feeling of security was very brief.

    The only way we could ensure security was to be the strongest, the most powerful, the most technologically advanced, and the most committed to our values of any nation on Earth.

    Pantex was reinvented as the final assembler, where all roads lead to our nuclear stockpile. This nuclear stockpile has had unbelievably positive effects—not just on the lives of Americans—but on the lives today of 8 billion people in the world that benefit from American strength and American security.

    But the backbone of that strength and security—the ultimate guarantor of the sovereignty of our nation—is our nuclear stockpile.

    You built that stockpile in the ’50s, ’60s, ’70s, and ’80s. Then we went into a more peaceful period. We disassembled some of those weapons—also done by you. We maintained that stockpile and those weapons throughout all that time period.

    And now, with age on those weapons and rising security risks around the world, we’re called to action to modernize multiple weapons systems in our stockpile. Who’s going to lead that effort? The people looking at me in the room right now, and your more than 4,000 other colleagues that are working hard right now to make our country safe and secure.

    I was honored—and a little bit emotional as well—to stamp that B61-13 today. That’s the cutting edge of this weapons stockpile. And amazingly—have you heard of anything today that’s done a year early? Anybody built a house or had a major project or done anything else—showed up to your contractors and they said, “good news is, we’re a year ahead of schedule?”

    I’m not sure I’ve ever heard that in my life. And I know this year in the broader program here, we’re 107% ahead of plan. That’s out of fashion the last few years—everything’s late, over budget, and delayed. But not here. Not in this community. Not in this complex.

    So, I end with a thanks— a thanks from me personally. I’m so proud to be on your team now. I’m here for the count. They’ll take me out in a few years, but I’m pretty motivated to be here and to be in this role.

    A thanks from President Trump. We got him to bring back common sense, strength in America. Resolve in America. We can do big things—and we can do them on time and on budget—because we are responsible to spend the taxpayer money of 340 million Americans.

    Your delivery—early, on budget—and the whole modernization program so far ahead of schedule, a huge warm thank you from President Trump.

    And I’ll end with a thank you for the American people—all the American people. They go to sleep more secure at night, not worried about foreign invaders. They’ve got worries, indeed, but it’s a luxury to worry about other things.

    If you’re worried about your physical security—of you and your kids—nothing else matters. Well, because of your tireless efforts here for generations, you give all Americans a feeling of security. I’ve got things to worry about, but my foreign enemies aren’t one of them.

    God bless you all. Thank you for your tremendous work. I’m proud to be your partner.

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI Russia: Chinese Foreign Minister Calls on China and Germany to Deepen Mutually Beneficial Cooperation, Jointly Oppose Unilateralism and Protectionism

    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 19 (Xinhua) — Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi on Monday called on China and Germany to deepen mutually beneficial cooperation and jointly oppose unilateralism and protectionism.

    Wang Yi, also a member of the Politburo of the CPC Central Committee, made the statement during a telephone conversation with German Foreign Minister Johann Wadephul.

    The Chinese diplomat congratulated his colleague on taking office, noting that Chinese-German relations go beyond bilateral relations in their significance and have an important impact on economic development and strategic stability throughout the world.

    Stressing that China and Germany enjoy a comprehensive strategic partnership, Wang Yi expressed hope that the new German government will remain committed to this status of bilateral relations and pursue a rational and pragmatic policy towards China.

    Wang Yi pointed out that the Taiwan issue is a matter of China’s fundamental interests. He expressed his belief that the German side will firmly adhere to the one-China principle, just as China once supported the reunification of Germany.

    Deepening mutually beneficial cooperation is a natural choice for China and Germany, whose economies are highly complementary, whose industries are deeply interconnected and whose interests are closely integrated, Wang said, stressing that both sides should not allow normal bilateral cooperation to be undermined in the interests of so-called risk reduction.

    As the Chinese Foreign Minister noted, this year marks the 50th anniversary of the establishment of diplomatic relations between China and the European Union, which is an important milestone connecting the past and the future. In this regard, Wang Yi expressed hope that Germany will play an active role as a key member state of the European Union and give new impetus to the development of relations between China and the EU through high-quality Sino-German cooperation.

    According to him, the Chinese side also expects the European Union to move towards China, promptly and properly resolve the anti-subsidy case against Chinese electric vehicles, and promote qualitative improvement of cooperation between China and the EU.

    Wang Yi added that China and Germany should shoulder their responsibilities as major countries, jointly advocate and adhere to free trade, oppose unilateralism and protectionism, ensure the security and stability of global industrial and supply chains, practice genuine multilateralism, and uphold the international system with the UN at its core. –0–

    MIL OSI Russia News

  • MIL-OSI Russia: Chinese Foreign Minister Calls on China and Germany to Deepen Mutually Beneficial Cooperation, Jointly Oppose Unilateralism and Protectionism /more details/

    Translation. Region: Russian Federal

    Source: People’s Republic of China in Russian –

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

    BEIJING, May 19 (Xinhua) — Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi on Monday called on China and Germany to deepen mutually beneficial cooperation and jointly oppose unilateralism and protectionism.

    Wang Yi, also a member of the Politburo of the CPC Central Committee, made the statement during a telephone conversation with German Foreign Minister Johann Wadephul.

    The Chinese diplomat congratulated his colleague on taking office, noting that Chinese-German relations go beyond bilateral relations in their significance and have an important impact on economic development and strategic stability throughout the world.

    Stressing that China and Germany enjoy a comprehensive strategic partnership, Wang Yi expressed hope that the new German government will remain committed to this status of bilateral relations and pursue a rational and pragmatic policy towards China.

    Wang Yi pointed out that the Taiwan issue is a matter of China’s fundamental interests. He expressed his belief that the German side will firmly adhere to the one-China principle, just as China once supported the reunification of Germany.

    Deepening mutually beneficial cooperation is a natural choice for China and Germany, whose economies are highly complementary, whose industries are deeply interconnected and whose interests are closely integrated, Wang said, stressing that both sides should not allow normal bilateral cooperation to be undermined in the interests of so-called risk reduction.

    As the Chinese Foreign Minister noted, this year marks the 50th anniversary of the establishment of diplomatic relations between China and the European Union, which is an important milestone connecting the past and the future. In this regard, Wang Yi expressed hope that Germany will play an active role as a key member state of the European Union and give new impetus to the development of relations between China and the EU through high-quality Sino-German cooperation.

    According to him, the Chinese side also expects the European Union to move towards China, promptly and properly resolve the anti-subsidy case against Chinese electric vehicles, and promote qualitative improvement of cooperation between China and the EU.

    Wang added that China and Germany should shoulder their responsibilities as major countries, jointly advocate and adhere to free trade, oppose unilateralism and protectionism, ensure the security and stability of global industrial and supply chains, practice genuine multilateralism, and uphold the international system with the UN at its core.

    J. Wadephul, for his part, stated that German-Chinese relations are of great importance for the development of the world economy and for the future of the international community. He pointed out that the new German government pays close attention to relations with China and intends to pursue an active policy towards the PRC.

    As J. Wadephul emphasized, Germany has firmly adhered to the one-China policy in the past and will continue to do so in the future, wishing to be a reliable and predictable partner for the Chinese side.

    As a leading member of the European Union, Germany intends to make efforts to resolve differences through dialogue and consultation and supports the EU and China in resolving issues such as the anti-subsidy case against Chinese electric vehicles through negotiations, the German diplomat assured.

    The two sides also exchanged views on the Ukrainian crisis. Wang Yi said China has made continuous efforts to advance peace talks and supports achieving a fair, lasting and legally binding peace agreement through direct dialogue.

    J. Wadeful, in turn, expressed hope that China will use its influence to promote a ceasefire and a speedy end to the crisis in Ukraine. –0–

    MIL OSI Russia News

  • MIL-OSI USA: Chairman Aguilar: Republicans are throwing millions of Americans off their health insurance

    Source: US House of Representatives – Democratic Caucus

    The following text contains opinion that is not, or not necessarily, that of MIL-OSI – May 14, 2025

    CHAIRMAN AGUILAR: Good morning. Pleased to be joined with the Vice Chair of the House Democratic Caucus, Ted Lieu.

    This week, Republicans have laid out exactly who they are fighting for. After weeks of promises that they wouldn’t cut Medicaid, their budget contains drastic cuts that will throw millions off of health insurance. After campaigning on helping working-class Americans get ahead, their budget, once again, rewards billionaires and wealthy corporations and makes it harder for families to make ends meet. They are watching prices go up because of Trump’s reckless tariffs, and their response is to take food off of the table for women, veterans and children. The Republican budget doesn’t address the cost-of-living crisis, it makes it worse. The cost of groceries, clothing and everyday necessities are still too high, and Republicans want to add to that and make health care more expensive on top of it. This isn’t about helping people find good-paying jobs or a shot at a better life. This is simply about helping people like Elon Musk pay less in taxes.

    House Democrats believe that we can shore up these basic-needs programs and help everyday Americans reach their full potential. It’s long past time that the wealthiest of Americans pay their fair share and make it easier for working families to afford basic needs like health care and housing. These devastating cuts will make Americans—particularly children—sicker, hungrier and poorer. They’re shortchanging the future just so their friends can continue to get richer. The American people cannot afford the Republican budget and House Democrats are using every tool at our disposal to stop it. I want to thank our Energy and Commerce Members who continue to meet, Ways and Means Members who continue to highlight the unfairness of this plan that Republicans are putting forward and the Agriculture Committee, who will continue to fight for nutrition programs throughout the day. Vice Chair Ted Lieu.

    VICE CHAIR LIEU: Thank you, Chairman Aguilar. Omaha, Nebraska is the sixth-largest city in America led by a Republican. And last night, in a stunning upset, Democrats flipped that seat from Red to Blue. I want to congratulate Mayor-Elect John Ewing Jr., who’s going to be the new mayor of Omaha, Nebraska. We also know that voters are very angry at Republicans who continue to enable Donald Trump’s harmful policies. And the Republican mayor, in this case, aligned herself completely with Donald Trump, and the voters spoke out in Omaha, and now we have a Democratic Mayor-Elect.

    I also want to talk about now the Qatari luxury palace in the sky gift to Donald Trump. There is no such thing as a free palace in the sky. What do foreign countries want when they gift massive amounts of money and other gifts to the President? Donald Trump should reject this gift of the luxury palace in the sky, Boeing 747, completely and righteously. Because we are the United States of America, we don’t need gifts from foreign countries. We can build our own very impressive Air Force One. We don’t need to fly a Qatari plane around as our Air Force One. That’s also un-American. I also want to note that new reporting came out showing that to retrofit this Qatari 747 would take perhaps up to a billion dollars, because you can’t just fly a palace in the sky from a foreign country. You have to actually make it safe and secure. You have to make this plane ready to launch nuclear weapons. You can’t have people eavesdropping on it, and so it’s going to cost way more money to do it this way. And again, people need to ask why is a foreign country trying to give this massive gift to Donald Trump? And think about the precedent it would set. Would it be okay if Brunei gifted a luxury 757 to J.D. Vance for Air Force Two? Would it be okay if Germany gave a Porsche SUV to Senator Thune as his official car? Would it be okay if Italy gave a bunch of expensive Armani suits to Speaker Johnson for his official duties? No, it wouldn’t be okay. Also, because the Constitution says you can’t do this, it requires Congressional approval for the President to accept the gift of this size. And we urge the Republicans in Congress to stand up, speak out and call for a vote if Donald Trump were to accept this essential bribe from a foreign government. 

    And then let me now conclude on Medicaid. We now know that the Republicans lied when they said that they weren’t going to cut Medicaid. They’re cutting Medicaid by a massive amount of money, one of the largest cuts in U.S. history. Over 13.7 million people would be kicked off Medicaid. I also note that two-thirds of nursing home patients rely on Medicaid. This is also going to close down rural hospitals. It’s going to make it so that health care for all of us becomes more expensive, because if you don’t have health care under Medicaid, you’re still going to get treated. You just walk into the emergency room, and it costs even more money for all of us. So we urge Republicans to reject this massive Medicaid cut. And I just want to say, we told you so. We told you that Republicans were going to cut Medicaid, and now we know that they are doing it. So they lied, we told the truth, again.

    Video of the full press conference and Q&A can be viewed here.

    ###

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI USA: German Verdi Trade Union Stands in Solidarity with IAM Union Lufthansa Technik Puerto Rico Workers Amid Stalled Contract Talks

    Source: US GOIAM Union

    As Lufthansa Technik Puerto Rico workers continue their fight for a fair first contract, international support is growing. The German service-sector union Verdi has called on Deutsche Lufthansa AG to intervene and support its Puerto Rican subsidiary in resolving long-standing contract disputes with the IAM Union.

    “Negotiations are proving very difficult, particularly with regard to overtime pay and wage increases,” said Verdi Union Vice Chair Christine Behle in a letter to Lufthansa’s leadership. “This is neither acceptable to the employees in Puerto Rico nor to Verdi. Nor does it do justice to the daily performance.”

    The IAM has been in negotiations with Lufthansa Technik Puerto Rico for over a year, advocating for a contract that guarantees fair pay, safer working conditions, and respect on the job for the skilled aviation maintenance workers who keep commercial aircraft flying safely.

    “It is unacceptable that a German company wants to impose worse conditions for employees outside of Germany,” Behle continued in a message of encouragement to the workers in Aguadilla, Puerto Rico. “We stand for good working conditions all over the world and send you our solidarity greetings.”

    “These workers have been shortchanged for too long, and we’re here to make them whole,” said IAM Southern Territory General Vice President Craig Martin. “They’ve put in the work, kept planes flying, and met every expectation. It’s time the company steps up and delivers the respect, wages, and protections these workers have more than earned.”

    The IAM Union has vowed to continue standing with its members in Puerto Rico, demanding that the company return to the bargaining table with proposals that reflect its workers’ hard work and professionalism.

    “The letter from Verdi underscores a growing global concern: Lufthansa Technik’s failure to reach a fair deal with its Puerto Rican workforce not only reflects poorly on the company’s international labor practices, but also contradicts the values it claims to uphold in its home country,” said IAM Air Transport Territory General Vice President Richie Johnsen.

    Share and Follow:

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI Canada: Joint donor statement on humanitarian aid to Gaza

    Source: Government of Canada News

    May 19, 2025 – Ottawa, Ontario – Global Affairs Canada

    The foreign ministers of Australia, Canada, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Japan, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Portugal, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden and the United Kingdom, as well as the the EU High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy and Vice-President of the European Commission, the EU Commissioner for Equality, Preparedness and Crisis Management and the EU Commissioner for the Mediterranean, today issued the following statement:

    “Whilst we acknowledge indications of a limited restart of aid, Israel blocked humanitarian aid entering Gaza for over two months. Food, medicines and essential supplies are exhausted. The population faces starvation. Gaza’s people must receive the aid they desperately need.

    “Prior to the aid block, the UN and humanitarian NGOs delivered aid into Gaza, working with great courage, at the risk of their lives and in the face of major access challenges imposed by Israel. These organisations subscribe to upholding humanitarian principles, operating independently, with neutrality, impartiality and humanity. They have the logistical capacity, expertise and operational coverage to deliver assistance across Gaza to those who need it most.

    “Israel’s security cabinet has reportedly approved a new model for delivering aid into Gaza, which the UN and our humanitarian partners cannot support. They are clear that they will not participate in any arrangement that does not fully respect the humanitarian principles. Humanitarian principles matter for every conflict around the world and should be applied consistently in every warzone. The UN has raised concerns that the proposed model cannot deliver aid effectively, at the speed and scale required. It places beneficiaries and aid workers at risk, undermines the role and independence of the UN and our trusted partners, and links humanitarian aid to political and military objectives. Humanitarian aid should never be politicised, and Palestinian territory must not be reduced nor subjected to any demographic change.

    “As humanitarian donors, we have two straightforward messages for the Government of Israel: allow a full resumption of aid into Gaza immediately and enable the UN and humanitarian organizations to work independently and impartially to save lives, reduce suffering and maintain dignity. We remain committed to meeting the acute needs we see in Gaza. We also reiterate our firm message that Hamas must immediately release all remaining hostages and allow humanitarian assistance to be distributed without interference. It is our firm conviction that an immediate return to a ceasefire and working towards the implementation of a two-state solution are the only way to bring peace and security to Israelis and Palestinians and ensure long-term stability for the whole region.”

    MIL OSI Canada News

  • Bihar showcases agri-food strength at International Buyer-Seller Meet 2025 in Patna

    Source: Government of India

    Source: Government of India (4)

    Bihar took centre stage in India’s agri-food export push as the International Buyer-Seller Meet (IBSM) 2025 commenced in Patna on Monday. Organised by the Ministry of Food Processing Industries (MoFPI) in collaboration with APEDA, TPCI, and the Government of Bihar, the two-day event aims to boost food exports, facilitate global trade linkages, and unlock the state’s rich agricultural potential.

    The inaugural session was graced by Union Minister of Food Processing Industries Chirag Paswan, Bihar Deputy Chief Minister Vijay Kumar Sinha, Industries Minister Nitish Mishra, and senior officials from MoFPI, APEDA, TPCI, and the Bihar government.

    With participation from 70 international buyers representing 20 countries, including six global retail chains, along with 50 domestic and 20 institutional buyers, the meet is expected to generate strong procurement momentum through 400+ curated B2B meetings. Products such as rice, spices, makhana, and fruits are in focus, with global players like LuLu Group (UAE), SARTAJ (Japan), Datar & Sons (UAE) and Global Foods Trading (Germany) showing strong sourcing interest.

    In his keynote address, Union Minister Chirag Paswan described the meet as a “turning point for rural prosperity” and reiterated the Government’s commitment to making Bihar a hub in India’s journey towards ‘Viksit Bharat @2047’. He noted, “We envision Bihar’s youth becoming job creators, not job seekers. The government will fully facilitate every investor.”

    Highlighting Bihar’s ancient legacy and agricultural strengths, the Minister revealed that in FY 2024–25 alone, 10,270 loans worth ₹624.42 crore were sanctioned under the PMFME Scheme in Bihar—the highest among all Indian states. He also emphasized the upcoming NIFTEM institute in Bihar, calling it a future centre of innovation and research in food technology.

    The event also witnessed the launch of a strategic report titled “Strategies to Boost India’s Makhana Exports”, reaffirming Bihar’s global leadership in this GI-tagged product.

    Bihar Deputy Chief Minister Vijay Kumar Sinha underlined food processing as the best way to double farmers’ income, while Industries Minister Nitish Mishra spoke about the Muzaffarpur Mega Food Park and rapid land allotment through Bihar’s Single Window Clearance System. APEDA Chairman Abhishek Dev emphasized that efforts like Tracenet 2.0 will enhance traceability and export readiness of Indian produce.

    So far, 12 companies have confirmed long-term procurement commitments across rice, pulses, spices, fruits, vegetables, and makhana, marking a major milestone in Bihar’s export journey.

    The IBSM 2025 also includes exhibitions, technical sessions, and investment discussions to catalyse partnerships and promote Bihar’s food processing ecosystem. The meet sets the stage for the state’s emergence as a key contributor to India’s agri-export ambitions.

    Finally, the Union Minister invited stakeholders to World Food India 2025, MoFPI’s flagship global event, which will further showcase India’s and Bihar’s growing footprint in global food markets.

     

  • MIL-OSI United Kingdom: Joint donor statement on humanitarian aid to Gaza 

    Source: United Kingdom – Executive Government & Departments

    News story

    Joint donor statement on humanitarian aid to Gaza 

    Joint statement on behalf of 25 humanitarian partners on aid to Gaza and the proposal for a new aid delivery model.

    Joint statement:

    “Whilst we acknowledge indications of a limited restart of aid, Israel blocked humanitarian aid entering Gaza for over two months. Food, medicines and essential supplies are exhausted. The population faces starvation. Gaza’s people must receive the aid they desperately need.  

    “Prior to the aid block, the UN and humanitarian NGOs delivered aid into Gaza, working with great courage, at the risk of their lives and in the face of major access challenges imposed by Israel. These organisations subscribe to upholding humanitarian principles, operating independently, with neutrality, impartiality and humanity. They have the logistical capacity, expertise and operational coverage to deliver assistance across Gaza to those who need it most.  

    “Israel’s security cabinet has reportedly approved a new model for delivering aid into Gaza, which the UN and our humanitarian partners cannot support. They are clear that they will not participate in any arrangement that does not fully respect the humanitarian principles. Humanitarian principles matter for every conflict around the world and should be applied consistently in every warzone. The UN has raised concerns that the proposed model cannot deliver aid effectively, at the speed and scale required. It places beneficiaries and aid workers at risk, undermines the role and independence of the UN and our trusted partners, and links humanitarian aid to political and military objectives.  Humanitarian aid should never be politicised, and Palestinian territory must not be reduced nor subjected to any demographic change.  

    “As humanitarian donors, we have two straightforward messages for the Government of Israel: allow a full resumption of aid into Gaza immediately and enable the UN and humanitarian organisations to work independently and impartially to save lives, reduce suffering and maintain dignity. We remain committed to meeting the acute needs we see in Gaza. We also reiterate our firm message that Hamas must immediately release all remaining hostages and allow humanitarian assistance to be distributed without interference. It is our firm conviction that an immediate return to a ceasefire and working towards the implementation of a two-state solution are the only way to bring peace and security to Israelis and Palestinians and ensure long-term stability for the whole region.”

    This statement has been signed by:

    • The Foreign Ministers of Australia, Canada, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Japan, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Portugal, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden and the UK. 

    • The EU High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy and Vice-President of the European Commission, the EU Commissioner for Equality, Preparedness and Crisis Management and the EU Commissioner for the Mediterranean.

    Media enquiries

    Email newsdesk@fcdo.gov.uk

    Telephone 020 7008 3100

    Email the FCDO Newsdesk (monitored 24 hours a day) in the first instance, and we will respond as soon as possible.

    Updates to this page

    Published 19 May 2025

    MIL OSI United Kingdom

  • MIL-OSI Russia: Rising to the Challenge: Europe’s Path to Growth and Resilience

    Source: IMF – News in Russian

    May 19, 2025

    Good afternoon,

    Thank you, Karel, for the introduction and CEPS for hosting this event. I would also like to extend a warm thank you to Cinzia and Maarten for taking time out of your busy schedules, and to all of you for joining us today.

    Europe has achieved much over the last 75 years.

    The “economic miracle” of the post-WWII period brought the rapid recovery in income levels. The “Great Moderation” (1980s-2000) following the oil crises in the 1970s offered stable growth at declining inflation rates. And advances in regional integration—for example through the Single European Act in 1986–and global trade helped lift productivity and income levels in Europe. The result was income per capita in advanced European countries growing by two and a half times between 1960 and the end of the century, on par with the US.

    Europe has shown grit when it mattered. Resolute policymaking helped overcome the double blow of the Global Financial Crisis and the European debt crisis. And Europe stepped up again during the Covid-19 pandemic and the energy crisis following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.

    But more work needs to be done.

    The world is changing fast. Today, we are confronted with a more shock-prone, uncertain, and fragmented world. This adds to a series of domestic challenges in Europe. Some are longstanding: The great European project remains unfinished, the population is aging, climate change requires attention, and there is a worrying productivity gap with the most dynamic economies. Other challenges have become prominent only more recently, such as the need to bolster national and energy security. And, in many countries, there is limited fiscal space to meet these growing challenges.

    Europe must once again step up if it wants to preserve its prosperity. Kicking the can down the road will soon make it impossible to fulfill commitments to social welfare, climate action, and national defense. Delivering on these fronts is existential—Europe’s economic and social model is at stake.

    The deteriorating external environment weighs on Europe’s economic outlook.

    In our latest World Economic Outlook, we project global growth to reach only 2.8 percent this year, in part due to ongoing trade and policy uncertainty. In the United States, growth is expected to slow to 1.8 percent from heightened tariffs, economic uncertainty, and softer demand, while China’s growth forecast is lowered to 4 percent. These numbers do not reflect the latest developments, which could mean lower tariffs than assumed in April. But uncertainty remains extraordinarily high and holds back consumption and investment.

    And trade and policy uncertainty also led us to downgrade growth in Europe despite some offsetting factors: Germany plans to ramp-up infrastructure spending and European defense spending is projected to increase significantly.

    • For the euro area, we expect growth at 0.8 and 1.2 percent in 2025 and 2026, a reduction of 0.2 percentage points in both years since our January projection. Growth in the more trade-exposed CESEE region slows by even more, reaching 2.4 in 2025 and 2.7 in 2026, a downgrade of 0.6 and 0.4 percentage points, respectively.
    • High frequency indicators and euro area GDP flash estimates (excluding volatile figures for Ireland) in the first quarter of the year are consistent with our projections.

    Inflation is decelerating and approaching targets, driven by lower energy prices and tepid demand.

    There are notable risks around the baseline.

    First, an escalation of trade tensions would further weaken external demand and increase uncertainty.

    Second, a reconfiguration of supply chains could impact activity and inflation. In our view, trade diversion to Europe from countries more affected by US tariffs is a small risk on aggregate. But it could lead to losses in export shares for specific sectors in some countries, especially those CESEE countries with persistent real wage growth.

    A third risk is a delay in the necessary fiscal consolidation, which could reignite concerns about repayment capacity.

    So, how can Europe rise to these challenges and secure its prosperity?

    Europe needs an ambitious and concerted push to advance long-stalled reforms to boost growth and economic resilience.

    Action should be carried out both at the EU level to deepen the single market, and domestically to make product and labor markets more growth friendly.

    The forthcoming EU budget for 2028-2034 should support and incentivize the reform push and meet the growing need for European public goods.

    This reform effort must be anchored in a steady macro-policy response and open trade policies.

    Let me look at some of the details.

    Starting with macroeconomic policy…

    …central banks should continue to normalize monetary policy while remaining focused on durably reaching price stability targets. The ECB should lower its policy rate to 2 percent this summer and maintain it there, barring major shocks. In CESEE countries, where inflation is still higher and more persistent, central banks should ease cautiously.

    Fiscal policymakers will have to find ways to accommodate rising spending needs in a sustainable way. In countries where public debt is already high, consolidation is warranted, and reprioritization is necessary to accommodate new spending needs.

    Regarding trade policy, Europe—and indeed everyone—needs more trade.

    The global trade regime has shifted, and some reallocation of resources and reconfiguration of value chains appear inevitable. At the same time, it is important to not over-react.

    For example, while US-China tariffs may divert some trade to Europe, we estimate that even with April’s high tariff rates the aggregate effects would be small—to the order of 0.25 percent of EU GDP or about 3 percent of extra-EU imports. Although the effects could be more pronounced in certain industries, it is far from clear whether safeguard measures are required. Where measures are deployed, they must align with WTO principles, be time-limited, and clearly communicated.

    Europe should avoid tariff escalation; and it should protect people, not stand in the way of structural change.

    Let me now turn to the structural policies Europe needs to boost growth and resilience.

    I will focus on EU and domestic reforms with the highest urgency and potential. I will emphasize their complementarity and the need to pursue comprehensive reform packages to enhance political support.

    I will also highlight the key role that the next EU budget can play in supporting the reform effort, and ultimately secure Europe’s prosperity.

    First, it is high time to reboot the EU single market.

    Europe has come a long way, but the EU single market remains far from complete. For instance, it can take up to 6 months for an EU worker who relocates to another EU country to be legally employed there. Large differences across bankruptcy procedures discourage cross-border investment, while having national stock markets introduces vast inefficiencies in the allocation of capital across the continent. This fragmentation increases costs and hurts business dynamism and growth.

    Full integration of the single market would yield tremendous benefits. Our modeling work shows that a 10 percent reduction in barriers to intra-EU goods trade and multinational production would lift GDP by around 7 percent [4]. But we need to take concrete steps in this direction. In a forthcoming paper [5], we list four priority areas:

    1. Adopting high-quality insolvency rules within a 28th regime for firms to simplify the regulatory landscape
    2. Advancing the capital markets union to boost venture capital and equity investment
    3. Increasing labor mobility across the EU, and
    4. Better integrating the European electricity market

    Presenting these reforms as a package may increase the buy-in from member states that see benefits in some areas more than others, while remaining realistic on feasibility.

    We find that just this package of selected actionable measures could raise EU GDP by approximately 3 percent over the next 10 years—a significant downpayment on the full potential gains from completing the single market.

    Second, advancing EU and domestic policy actions together would magnify the growth impact of reforms.

    In another paper to be published in a few days [6], we also highlight the significant potential gains from domestic reforms.  A package of reform priorities addressing policy gaps in labor markets, business regulation, and credit and capital markets could boost output by approximately 5 percent in advanced European economies and up to 7 percent in CESEE countries over the medium term.

    A coordinated reform effort at both domestic and EU levels would likely yield benefits that exceed the cumulative returns from isolated actions in the two areas. For example, advancing the capital markets union would boost the effect of domestic initiatives to support innovative startups. And improving skill levels at the national level will amplify EU R&D efforts.

    Across all areas, think smart and big. Structuring reforms as “packages” in which everyone can see direct benefits can enhance domestic political support and facilitate successful implementation.

    Third, the EU budget has the potential to be a powerful lever for advancing policy priorities across both the European Union and its member states.

    The EU’s Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF) has helped tackle shared challenges—promoting economic convergence through cohesion policy and strengthening resilience via NextGenerationEU. To meet existing and emerging challenges, we suggest that the 2028–2034 MFF be revamped along three key lines [7].

    1. Prioritize European public goods. The EU budget should allocate more resources to key areas of shared strategic interest—such as R&D, the clean energy transition, energy security, and defense. These are domains where collective investment delivers greater efficiency and cost savings compared to national-level efforts. To meet these needs, expenditure targeted at European public goods would need to increase from 0.4 percent of GNI to 0.9 percent.
    2. Maximize the budget impact. With over 50 programs, the current EU budget is fragmented, limiting its effectiveness. Consolidating programs around core EU priorities and shifting toward a performance-based budgeting model would enhance efficiency, improve coordination among member states, and better align national reforms with EU-level objectives.
    3. Strengthen financing through enhanced own resources and borrowing capacity. Establishing borrowing as a regular financing tool—backed by robust own resources for repayment—would enable more strategic, long-term investment while spreading the financial burden more evenly across time and member states.

    Fourth, a more integrated Europe is also a more resilient Europe.

    The spike and volatility in energy prices following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, along with last month’s blackouts in Spain and Portugal, underscore the urgency of a coordinated European energy policy and establishing an integrated energy infrastructure.

    On the financial side, advancing the capital markets union would not only channel savings into productive investment, but also facilitate portfolio diversification and significantly improve risk sharing.

    Fiscal policy—particularly the EU budget—has an important role to play in supporting energy integration and risk sharing.

    Let me conclude by stressing that Europe stands at a critical junction.

    The world is changing, and Europe must once again demonstrate its ability to step up and deliver. Strengthening –and, yes, even upholding—prosperity requires a decisive and concerted reform push at both domestic and EU levels that enhances growth and resilience while maintaining openness to the world.

    It is time to act now. It is time to act together.

    References

    [1] Eble, Stephanie, Alexander Pitt, Irina Bunda, Oyun Erdene Adilbish, Nina Budina, Gee Hee Hong, Moheb T Malak, Sabiha Mohona, Alla Myrvoda, and Keyra Primus. 2025. “Long-Term Spending Pressures in Europe,” IMF Departmental Papers 2025/002.

    [2] Scott R. Baker, Nicholas Bloom, Steven J. Davis. 2016. “Measuring Economic Policy Uncertainty,” The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Volume 131, Issue 4, Pages 1593–1636.

    [3] Boehm, Christoph E., Andrei A. Levchenko, and Nitya Pandalai-Nayar. 2023. “The Long and Short (Run) of Trade Elasticities,” American Economic Review 113 (4): 861–905.

    [4] Baba, Chikako, Ting Lan, Aiko Mineshima, Florian Misch, Magali Pinat, Asghar Shahmoradi, Jiaxiong Yao, and Rachel van Elkan. 2023. “Geoeconomic Fragmentation: What’s at Stake for the EU,” IMF Working Paper 2023/245, International Monetary Fund, Washington, DC.

    [5] Arnold, Nathaniel, Allan Dizioli, Alexandra Fotiou, Jan Frie, Burcu Hacibedel, Tara Iyer, Huidan Lin, Malhar Nabar, Hui Tong, and Frederik Toscani. Forthcoming. “Lifting Binding Constraints on Growth in Europe. Actionable Priorities to Deepen the Single Market,” IMF Working Paper.

    [6] Budina, Nina, Oyun Adilbish, Diego Cerdeiro, Romain Duval, Balázs Égert, Dmitriy Kovtun, Anh Thi Ngoc Nguyen, Augustus Panton, and Catalina Michelle Tejada. Forthcoming. “Europe’s National-Level Structural Reform Priorities,” IMF Working Paper.

    [7] Busse, Matthias, Huidan Lin, Malhar Nabar, and Jiae Yoo. Forthcoming. “Making the EU’s Multiannual Financial Framework Fit for Purpose,” IMF Working Paper.

    [8] Darvas, Zsolt, and Conor McCaffrey. 2024. “Management of debt liabilities in the EU budget under the post-2027 MFF,” November 2024.

    [9] Draghi, Mario. 2024. “The future of European competitiveness,” September 2024.

    [10] Cimadomo, Jacopo, Massimo Giuliodori, Andras Lengyel, Haroon Mumtaz. 2023. “Changing patterns of risk-sharing channels in the United States and the euro area,” ECB Working Paper No 2849.

    IMF Communications Department
    MEDIA RELATIONS

    PRESS OFFICER:

    Phone: +1 202 623-7100Email: MEDIA@IMF.org

    https://www.imf.org/en/News/Articles/2025/05/19/sp051925-ak-rising-to-the-challenge-europe-path-to-growth-and-resilience

    MIL OSI

    MIL OSI Russia News

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Attractiveness – Results of the EY barometer (15.05.25)

    Source: Republic of France in English
    The Republic of France has issued the following statement:

    France is proud to be the leading European destination for Foreign Direct Investments (FDI) for the sixth consecutive year, ahead of the United Kingdom and Germany. This achievement came during a difficult and uncertain period, both politically and economically, and during a year (2024) when Europe experienced a reduction in FDI. France also remains the leading European destination for industrial investment and R&D. It has bolstered its position as a leader in artificial intelligence a few months after President Macron announced a record €109 billion in investments at the AI Action Summit on February 6.

    A few days before the 8th edition of the Choose France summit, these latest figures underscore the impact of the reforms undertaken since 2017 to make the country more competitive and more attractive to foreign investors, as well as the French economy’s assets in a very competitive international environment. France remains the top European destination for these Foreign Direct Investments, especially in sectors that are strategic for our sovereignty and our future: quantum AI, energy, R&D, the agri-foods industry and artificial intelligence. These investments benefit all French regions: 75% of them are outside Ile-de-France, and 33% of new and expanded facilities are located in areas with fewer than 100,000 inhabitants and account for 30% of the jobs created there.

    This barometer is also a call for French and European mobilization. The EY report emphasizes that in order to restore confidence, France must work on its competitiveness and industrial sovereignty while maintaining its commitment to innovation, its support for entrepreneurs and its investments in infrastructure. It is this approach that the government is taking, under the leadership of President Macron, particularly with regard to the country’s reindustrialization.

    MIL OSI Europe News

  • MIL-OSI Global: Covid-19 death tolls in Europe highlight stark regional differences in 2020 and 2021

    Source: The Conversation – France – By Florian Bonnet, Démographe et économiste, spécialiste des inégalités territoriales, Ined (Institut national d’études démographiques)

    The political decisions made during 2020 and 2021 to combat the Covid-19 pandemic profoundly altered daily life. Professionally, societies faced partial unemployment and widespread adoption of remote work; personally, individuals endured lockdowns and social distancing measures. These interventions aimed to reduce infection rates and ease pressure on healthcare systems, with the primary public health goal of minimizing deaths.


    A weekly e-mail in English featuring expertise from scholars and researchers. It provides an introduction to the diversity of research coming out of the continent and considers some of the key issues facing European countries. Get the newsletter!

    More than five years after the pandemic began, what do we know about its impact on human longevity? Here’s a closer look.

    A decline in global life expectancy

    Initial assessments of the pandemic’s toll have been refined over time. According to a World Health Organization (WHO) report published in May 2024, global life expectancy declined by 1.8 years between 2019 and 2021, erasing a decade of progress. These estimates rely on “excess mortality”, a metric that measures the difference between observed mortality during the pandemic and expected mortality in its absence.

    Excess mortality can be quantified using different indicators, such as the number of excess deaths. However, comparing this indicator between countries of different sizes and age structures can be challenging. Another informative metric is the loss of life expectancy at birth, calculated globally by organisations such as the WHO.

    The regular calculation, publication and dissemination of excess mortality indicators are vital for comparing the pandemic’s impact across countries at the national level. However, it is important to recognise that the pandemic did not affect all areas within countries equally. Variability in the severity of the pandemic’s impact often stemmed from differing confinement strategies implemented to contain the virus.

    This uneven distribution highlights the need to quantify these indicators at a more granular geographical level. Such localised analysis can reveal the regions most severely affected, providing valuable insights into the pandemic’s effects and enabling the development of targeted response strategies.

    In a series of studies conducted in 2024, we introduced an innovative method to calculate excess mortality at the regional level. We used this method to estimate excess mortality in 561 European regions in 2020 and expanded the scope to 569 regions across 25 countries in 2020 and 2021. The findings, based on loss of life expectancy at birth, reveal stark contrasts in the pandemic’s impact across Europe.

    In 2020, significant declines in life expectancy were observed in northern Italy and Spain

    Figure 1 illustrates the spatial distribution of estimated losses of life expectancy in 2020. These losses were highest in northern Italy and central Spain. In the Italian regions of Bergamo and Cremona, life expectancy dropped by nearly four years, while Piacenza experienced a decline of three and a half years. In Spain, the regions of Segovia, Ciudad Real, Cuenca and Madrid saw losses of approximately three years.

    The losses were even more pronounced among men (data not presented here), who were disproportionately affected by the pandemic. In Cremona, the decline in life expectancy among men reached nearly five years, while in Bergamo, it was close to four and a half years.

    Figure 1: Estimated loss of observed life expectancy at birth (e0) in 2020 across 569 regions in 25 European countries. Estimates are for both sexes combined.
    Fourni par l’auteur

    Eastern Europe, particularly Poland, along with eastern Sweden and northern and eastern France, also experienced significant, though less severe, declines. In France, the Paris region and areas near the German border recorded the highest losses, ranging from 1.5 to 2 years.

    In contrast, other regions saw much smaller impacts. This is particularly true for southern Italy, much of Scandinavia and Germany, southern parts of the United Kingdom, and western France. In these regions, observed life expectancy is close to what would have been expected in the absence of the pandemic. In France, the implementation of lockdown measures in March and November likely prevented the pandemic from spreading across the entire country from the initial clusters in the north and east.

    In 2021, a shift in the pandemic toward Eastern Europe

    Figure 2 shows the estimated losses of life expectancy in 2021. At a glance, the regions most affected by excess mortality during the Covid-19 pandemic differed significantly from those in 2020. The most substantial losses were concentrated in Eastern Europe.

    Figure 2: Estimated loss of observed life expectancy at birth (e0) in 2021 across 569 regions in 25 European countries. Estimates are for both sexes combined.
    Fourni par l’auteur

    Among regions where life expectancy declined by more than two years, 61 of Poland’s 73 regions, 12 of the Czech Republic’s 14 regions, all eight Hungarian regions, and seven of Slovakia’s eight regions were affected. In contrast, only one Italian region and one Spanish region experienced losses exceeding two years, despite these countries being heavily impacted in 2020.

    Germany saw much greater losses in 2021 than in 2020, particularly in its eastern regions, where declines often exceeded 1.5 years. In southern Saxony, Halle and Lusatia, losses approached two years. Conversely, Spain and Scandinavia recorded the lowest declines in life expectancy.

    In France, the losses were more uniform than in 2020, generally ranging from 0 to 1.5 years. The highest loss occurred in the Parisian suburbs, particularly Seine-Saint-Denis, where life expectancy fell by 1.5 years – or two years for men.

    What is the overall assessment for these two years?

    To determine the overall impact of 2020 and 2021 in terms of life expectancy loss, we used an indicator that sums up the years of life lost due to the pandemic over this two-year period. This method allows us to rank the 569 European regions.

    The regions most affected were Pulawy, Bytom and Przemyski in southeastern Poland, along with Kosice and Presov in eastern Slovakia. Among the top 50 regions, Eastern Europe dominated, with 36 Polish regions, six Slovakian regions, two Czech regions, one Hungarian region, and both Lithuanian regions included. Italian regions such as Cremona, Bergamo and Piacenza also ranked high, falling between the 15th and 30th positions. In France, Seine-Saint-Denis ranked 81st, while all other French regions were outside the top 100.

    It is crucial to analyse the impact of a crisis like the Covid-19 pandemic at a fine geographical scale, as within-country disparities can be significant. This was particularly evident in Italy in 2020, where the north was far more affected than the south, and in Germany in 2021, with stark differences between the west and the east.

    Our study highlighted the severe impact of the pandemic in specific European regions, where life expectancy losses exceeded three years. The most affected regions shifted over time, moving from areas with traditionally high life expectancy (such as northern Italy, central Spain and the greater Paris region) in 2020 to regions with traditionally lower life expectancy (Eastern Europe) in 2021. France was relatively spared compared to the rest of Europe, with the notable exception of Seine-Saint-Denis.

    The coming years will be critical in determining whether life expectancy levels can return to their long-term trajectories or if the pandemic has caused lasting structural changes in certain regions.

    Les auteurs ne travaillent pas, ne conseillent pas, ne possèdent pas de parts, ne reçoivent pas de fonds d’une organisation qui pourrait tirer profit de cet article, et n’ont déclaré aucune autre affiliation que leur organisme de recherche.

    ref. Covid-19 death tolls in Europe highlight stark regional differences in 2020 and 2021 – https://theconversation.com/covid-19-death-tolls-in-europe-highlight-stark-regional-differences-in-2020-and-2021-246374

    MIL OSI – Global Reports

  • MIL-OSI Global: Trump’s lifting of Syria sanctions is a win for Turkey, too – pointing to outsized role middle powers can play in regional affairs

    Source: The Conversation – Global Perspectives – By Hyeran Jo, Associate Professor of Political Science, Texas A&M University

    Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan and Syrian President Ahmad al-Sharaa meet in Turkey on April 11, 2025. TUR Presidency/ Murat Cetinmuhurdar/Handout/Anadolu via Getty Images

    President Donald Trump announced while in Saudi Arabia on May 14, 2025, that the United States would lift sanctions on Syria. The turnaround was a huge victory for the government of Syrian President Ahmad al-Sharaa as he attempts to consolidate power nearly six months on from his movement’s stunning toppling of the longtime regime of Bashar al Assad.

    But it wasn’t all down to Syria lobbying on its own behalf. In announcing the policy shift, Trump largely attributed the shift to his Saudi hosts as well as Turkey. Both nations are longtime Assad foes who quickly championed al-Sharaa and have been pushing the U.S. to normalize ties with Syria’s new government.

    Turkey, whose resources and land have been heavily affected by instability in neighboring Syria, was particularly instrumental in pushing Trump to accept the post-Assad government, even over objections from Israel.

    As experts in international relations and Turkish law and politics, we believe the developments in Syria point to the outsized role a small-to-middle power like Turkey can have in regional and international matters. That is particularly true in the Middle East, where world powers such as the U.S. are perceived to have a declining and at times unpredictable influence.

    An opening in Syria

    After 13 years of devastating civil war, Syria faces a slew of large challenges, including the immediate task of state building. Not only is violence still readily apparent in Syria itself – as the recent killing of Alawites, allegedly by government forces, or fighters aligned with them, showed – but neighboring Israel has also repeatedly attacked positions in Syria in an attempt to weaken the new government. To Israel’s government, a strong, militarized Syria would pose a threat, particularly in regard to the unstable border at the Golan Heights.

    Despite the issues that confront Syria’s new government, it has nonetheless demonstrated a remarkable aptitude for gaining international acceptance – a notable fact given al-Sharaa’s leadership ties to the Hayat Tahrir al-Sham, a formerly al-Qaeda linked group listed as one of the U.S. foreign terrorist organizations since 2014.

    Turkey presses its influence

    In this context, Turkey’s hand has been especially important.

    Since Trump took office, Turkish President Tayyip Erdogan has pressed the American president to lift sanctions. The two men had struck up a strong relationship during the first Trump administration, with the U.S. president declaring himself to be a “big fan” of the Turkish leader.

    Turkey’s behind-the-scenes diplomacy can be seen as part of its broader effort to fill the vacuum left by Assad’s fall. Doing so not only bolsters Erdogan’s position as a regional player, but it also advances his domestic agenda.

    Turkey has moved quickly on numerous fronts in charting the future course of Syria by pursuing economic and security projects in the country. First and foremost, Turkey has upped its investment in Syria.

    Also, as it did in Libya and Somalia, Turkey has contributed to the training and equipping of new Syrian security forces.

    In the northeast Syrian province of Idlib, Turkey is funding education, health care and electricity, and the Turkish lira is the de facto currency across northwestern Syria.

    The roots of these engagements lie in Turkey’s interest in managing its own security situation.

    Since 1984, Turkey has been fighting Kurdish separatist groups, most notably the Kurdistan Workers’ Party, or PKK, which is aligned with the Kurdish YPG militia in northeast Syria – one of the groups that fought Assad’s forces during Syria’s civil war.

    A Syrian Kurd waves the flag of YPG near Qamishli’s airport in northeastern Syria on Dec. 8, 2024.
    Delil Souleiman/AFP via Getty Images

    Assad’s fall led to Russia’s retreat from Syria. Meanwhile, Iranian influence, too, has waned as a result of not only Assad’s departure, but also the military downgrading of Hezbollah in neighboring Lebanon. And the U.S. no longer actively supports the Kurdish YPG militia in northeast Syria.

    Into this void of external influence, Turkey quickly seized an opportunity to reshape the security landscape.

    Ankara, which still controls large chunks of territory in Syria’s northeast from the fight against Assad and Syrian Kurdish groups, agreed to a Syrian plan to incorporate the YPG, the armed wing of the Kurdish Syrian Democratic Forces, or SDF, into the new Syrian army.

    The Turkish perspective has long been that the fight against the PKK can succeed in the long run only with stability on Syrian soil. Now, the PKK is trying to reach peace with the Turkish government, but whether the SDF in Syria will disarm and disband is far from certain. As such, having a strong, stable Syrian government in which a Kurdish majority is accommodated may be in Ankara’s best interests.

    Meanwhile, al-Sharaa’s success in rebuilding Syria after the civil war would also help Turkey on another front: the issue of Syrian refugees.

    Turkey currently hosts around 3.2 million refugees from Syria – the most of any country. The sheer number and length of stay of these displaced people have put a strain on Turkey’s economy and social relations, leading to clashes between Turks and Syrian refugees.

    There is also a broad consensus in Turkey that the Syrian refugee problem in Turkey can be solved only through a comprehensive return strategy.

    Although naturalized Syrians in Turkey make up an important constituency within the voter base of Erdogan’s ruling AK Party, the only solution currently envisaged by the Turkish president and his allies is repatriation. For this, rapid and stable development of infrastructure and the housing stock in Syria is considered essential.

    Donald Trump looks on as Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman greets Syrian President Ahmad al-Sharaa on May 14, 2025. The confab also had Turkish fingerprints all over it.
    Bandar Aljaloud/Saudi Royal Palace via AP

    Prospects for small-to-middle powers

    Turkey’s strategic opportunity in Syria is not without clear risks, however. The incursions by the Israeli military illustrates the challenge Turkey faces in advancing its own interests in Syria. It is notable that Trump’s announcement on sanctions was seemingly made without the knowledge – and against the wishes – Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

    Additionally, Turkey is looking to finesse a growing role in the region into strengthening its position over the long-running dispute in Cyprus. The island, which lies a couple of hundred miles off Syria’s coast, is divided into two regions, with Greek Cypriots in the south and a breakaway Turkish Cypriot north – with only Turkey recognizing the self-declared state in the north. Turkey is trying to regulate maritime jurisdiction in the eastern Mediterranean through an agreement with Syria, but the plan is stalled since the European Union supports Greece’s position in Cyprus.

    The Turkish moves in Syria are nonetheless being broadly felt elsewhere. Arab nations like Saudi Arabia and Qatar support the post-Assad arrangement in Syria and see their own interests being served alongside Turkey’s, although the rivalry of the Sunni world is at stake.

    The lifting of sanctions by the U.S. will have long-term political impacts beyond short-term economic impacts. Syria has little direct trade with the U.S., only exporting its agricultural products and antiques. But the appearance of political legitimacy and recognition is a diplomatic win for Turkey, as well as for Syria. The political opening brings with it the promise of future investment in Syria.

    Turkey’s dealing with Syria showcases how small-to-middle powers can chart the waters of statecraft in their own way. The days of international affairs being dominated by superpowers appear to be over – as many have long predicted. And in Syria, Turkey is providing a blueprint for how small-to-middle powers can work that to their advantage.

    Hyeran Jo receives funding from the Carnegie Corporation of New York (CCNY). The article was made possible in part by the CCNY grant (G-PS-24-62004, Small State Statecraft and Realignment). She is also a senior fellow at the Center on Armed Groups and a member of an expert advisory group at the Institute for Integrated Transitions. The statements made and views expressed are solely the responsibility of the author.

    Ece Göztepe Çelebi receives funding from the Carnegie Corporation of New York (CCNY). The article was made possible in part by the CCNY grant (G-PS-24-62004, Small State Statecraft and Realignment). She is a Turkish and Comparative Constitutional Law professor at the Law Faculty of Bilkent University (Ankara/Turkey). The statements made and views expressed are solely the responsibility of the author.

    ref. Trump’s lifting of Syria sanctions is a win for Turkey, too – pointing to outsized role middle powers can play in regional affairs – https://theconversation.com/trumps-lifting-of-syria-sanctions-is-a-win-for-turkey-too-pointing-to-outsized-role-middle-powers-can-play-in-regional-affairs-254162

    MIL OSI – Global Reports

  • MIL-OSI Russia: Urgent: China, Germany must prevent so-called ‘risk reduction’ from undermining normal bilateral cooperation: Chinese FM

    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 19 (Xinhua) — China and Germany should not allow so-called “risk mitigation” to undermine normal bilateral cooperation, Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi said Monday.

    Wang Yi, also a member of the Politburo of the CPC Central Committee, made the remarks during a telephone conversation with German Foreign Minister Johann Wadephul. –0–

    MIL OSI Russia News

  • MIL-OSI Global: Believe it or not, there was a time when the US government built beautiful homes for working-class Americans to deal with a housing crisis

    Source: The Conversation – USA – By Eran Ben-Joseph, Professor of Landscape Architecture and Urban Planning, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT)

    The U.S. Housing Corporation built nearly 300 homes in Bremerton, Wash., during World War I. National Archives

    In 1918, as World War I intensified overseas, the U.S. government embarked on a radical experiment: It quietly became the nation’s largest housing developer, designing and constructing more than 80 new communities across 26 states in just two years.

    These weren’t hastily erected barracks or rows of identical homes. They were thoughtfully designed neighborhoods, complete with parks, schools, shops and sewer systems.

    In just two years, this federal initiative provided housing for almost 100,000 people.

    Few Americans are aware that such an ambitious and comprehensive public housing effort ever took place. Many of the homes are still standing today.

    But as an urban planning scholar, I believe that this brief historic moment – spearheaded by a shuttered agency called the United States Housing Corporation – offers a revealing lesson on what government-led planning can achieve during a time of national need.

    Government mobilization

    When the U.S. declared war against Germany in April 1917, federal authorities immediately realized that ship, vehicle and arms manufacturing would be at the heart of the war effort. To meet demand, there needed to be sufficient worker housing near shipyards, munitions plants and steel factories.

    So on May 16, 1918, Congress authorized President Woodrow Wilson to provide housing and infrastructure for industrial workers vital to national defense. By July, it had appropriated US$100 million – approximately $2.3 billion today – for the effort, with Secretary of Labor William B. Wilson tasked with overseeing it via the U.S. Housing Corporation.

    Over the course of two years, the agency designed and planned over 80 housing projects. Some developments were small, consisting of a few dozen dwellings. Others approached the size of entire new towns.

    For example, Cradock, near Norfolk, Virginia, was planned on a 310-acre site, with more than 800 detached homes developed on just 100 of those acres. In Dayton, Ohio, the agency created a 107-acre community that included 175 detached homes and a mix of over 600 semidetached homes and row houses, along with schools, shops, a community center and a park.

    Designing ideal communities

    Notably, the Housing Corporation was not simply committed to offering shelter.

    Its architects, planners and engineers aimed to create communities that were not only functional but also livable and beautiful. They drew heavily from Britain’s late-19th century Garden City movement, a planning philosophy that emphasized low-density housing, the integration of open spaces and a balance between built and natural environments.

    Milton Hill, a neighborhood designed and developed by the United States Housing Corporation in Alton, Ill.
    National Archives

    Importantly, instead of simply creating complexes of apartment units, akin to the public housing projects that most Americans associate with government-funded housing, the agency focused on the construction of single-family and small multifamily residential buildings that workers and their families could eventually own.

    This approach reflected a belief by the policymakers that property ownership could strengthen community responsibility and social stability. During the war, the federal government rented these homes to workers at regulated rates designed to be fair, while covering maintenance costs. After the war, the government began selling the homes – often to the tenants living in them – through affordable installment plans that provided a practical path to ownership.

    A single-family home in Davenport, Iowa, built by the U.S. Housing Corporation.
    National Archives

    Though the scope of the Housing Corporation’s work was national, each planned community took into account regional growth and local architectural styles. Engineers often built streets that adapted to the natural landscape. They spaced houses apart to maximize light, air and privacy, with landscaped yards. No resident lived far from greenery.

    In Quincy, Massachusetts, for example, the agency built a 22-acre neighborhood with 236 homes designed mostly in a Colonial Revival style to serve the nearby Fore River Shipyard. The development was laid out to maximize views, green space and access to the waterfront, while maintaining density through compact street and lot design.

    At Mare Island, California, developers located the housing site on a steep hillside near a naval base. Rather than flatten the land, designers worked with the slope, creating winding roads and terraced lots that preserved views and minimized erosion. The result was a 52-acre community with over 200 homes, many of which were designed in the Craftsman style. There was also a school, stores, parks and community centers.

    Infrastructure and innovation

    Alongside housing construction, the Housing Corporation invested in critical infrastructure. Engineers installed over 649,000 feet of modern sewer and water systems, ensuring that these new communities set a high standard for sanitation and public health.

    Attention to detail extended inside the homes. Architects experimented with efficient interior layouts and space-saving furnishings, including foldaway beds and built-in kitchenettes. Some of these innovations came from private companies that saw the program as a platform to demonstrate new housing technologies.

    One company, for example, designed fully furnished studio apartments with furniture that could be rotated or hidden, transforming a space from living room to bedroom to dining room throughout the day.

    To manage the large scale of this effort, the agency developed and published a set of planning and design standards − the first of their kind in the United States. These manuals covered everything from block configurations and road widths to lighting fixtures and tree-planting guidelines.

    A single-family home in Bremerton, Wash., built by the U.S. Housing Corporation.
    National Archives

    The standards emphasized functionality, aesthetics and long-term livability.

    Architects and planners who worked for the Housing Corporation carried these ideas into private practice, academia and housing initiatives. Many of the planning norms still used today, such as street hierarchies, lot setbacks and mixed-use zoning, were first tested in these wartime communities.

    And many of the planners involved in experimental New Deal community projects, such as Greenbelt, Maryland, had worked for or alongside Housing Corporation designers and planners. Their influence is apparent in the layout and design of these communities.

    A brief but lasting legacy

    With the end of World War I, the political support for federal housing initiatives quickly waned. The Housing Corporation was dissolved by Congress, and many planned projects were never completed. Others were incorporated into existing towns and cities.

    Yet, many of the neighborhoods built during this period still exist today, integrated in the fabric of the country’s cities and suburbs. Residents in places such as Aberdeen, Maryland; Bremerton, Washington; Bethlehem, Pennsylvania; Watertown, New York; and New Orleans may not even realize that many of the homes in their communities originated from a bold federal housing experiment.

    These homes on Lawn Avenue in Quincy, Mass., in 2019 were built by the U.S. Housing Corporation.
    Google Street View

    The Housing Corporation’s efforts, though brief, showed that large-scale public housing could be thoughtfully designed, community oriented and quickly executed. For a short time, in response to extraordinary circumstances, the U.S. government succeeded in building more than just houses. It constructed entire communities, demonstrating that government has a major role and can lead in finding appropriate, innovative solutions to complex challenges.

    At a moment when the U.S. once again faces a housing crisis, the legacy of the U.S. Housing Corporation serves as a reminder that bold public action can meet urgent needs.

    Eran Ben-Joseph 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. Believe it or not, there was a time when the US government built beautiful homes for working-class Americans to deal with a housing crisis – https://theconversation.com/believe-it-or-not-there-was-a-time-when-the-us-government-built-beautiful-homes-for-working-class-americans-to-deal-with-a-housing-crisis-253512

    MIL OSI – Global Reports

  • MIL-OSI: TrueCommerce EDI Achieves SAP® Certified Integration with RISE with SAP S/4HANA® Cloud

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    COVENTRY, England and PITTSBURGH , May 19, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — TrueCommerce announced today that its EDI solution has achieved SAP® certification as integrated with RISE with SAP S/4HANA® Cloud. The integration supports versions 2023 and newer of the S/4HANA Cloud Private Edition, and complements TrueCommerce’s existing SAP-certified EDI integration with SAP S/4HANA Cloud Public Edition

    “Coming on the heels of our EDI integration with SAP S/4HANA Cloud Public, this latest certification for SAP S/4HANA Cloud Private extends our EDI integration offering for companies on the path to digital transformation with S/4HANA Cloud,” said Ryan Tierney, SVP of Product at TrueCommerce, a global provider of supply chain and trading partner connectivity, integration and omnichannel solutions. “As we continue to expand our portfolio, we remain focused on the future—providing our customers with cutting-edge options and the flexibility to choose the integration approach that best aligns with their unique business needs and positions them for long-term growth.” 

    Key features and benefits of TrueCommerce EDI Integration for SAP S/4HANA Cloud Private Edition include: 

    • Enhanced Efficiency and Compliance: The integration helps streamline operations by automating the exchange of critical business documents, reducing manual processes, and decreasing the potential for errors.
    • Advanced Shipping Notice (ASN) Support: Compliance with trading partners’ requirements is crucial, and the TrueCommerce solution supports various ASN types, enabling robust compliance.
    • Multi-threading Capabilities: This feature enables the simultaneous exchange of multiple large transactions—resulting in fewer delays and faster processing.
    • Integrated Documents: The integration includes comprehensive support for order-to-cash, procure-to-pay, and warehousing workflows—simplifying supply chain processes.
    • Drop Shipping and eCommerce: TrueCommerce supports drop ship orders and integrates with multiple sales channels, empowering businesses to quickly respond to market demands.

    The SAP Integration and Certification Center (SAP ICC) has certified that TrueCommerce’s EDI Integration for SAP S/4HANA Cloud Private Edition (version number 8.12.2.110) integrates with RISE with SAP S/4HANA Cloud using standard integration technologies. 

    Connect with TrueCommerce 

    About TrueCommerce 
    At TrueCommerce, we empower businesses to improve their supply chain performance and drive better business outcomes. Through a single connection to our high-performance global supply chain network, businesses receive more than just EDI, they get access to a fully integrated network that connects their customers, suppliers, logistics partners and internal systems. Our cloud-based, fully managed services help businesses achieve end-to-end supply chain management, streamlined delivery, and simplified operations. With 25+ years of expertise and trusted partnership, TrueCommerce helps businesses reach their true supply chain potential today while preparing them for the future with our integration-agnostic network. That’s why thousands of companies—from SMBs to the global Fortune 100, across various industries—rely on us. To learn more, visit https://www.truecommerce.com
    TrueCommerce is a trademark of True Commerce, Inc. All other trademarks are property of their respective owners. 

    SAP and other SAP products and services mentioned herein as well as their respective logos are trademarks or registered trademarks of SAP SE in Germany and other countries. Please see https://www.sap.com/copyright for additional trademark information and notices. All other product and service names mentioned are the trademarks of their respective companies.

    The MIL Network

  • MIL-OSI USA: Jefferson, Liquidity Facilities: Purposes and Functions

    Source: US State of New York Federal Reserve

    Thank you, President Bostic, for that kind introduction and for the opportunity to talk to this group today.1 I am delighted to be here, and I look forward to discussions at this important conference.
    The theme of today’s conference is developments in financial intermediation and potential implications for monetary policy. As this conference embarks on a larger discussion of the role of banks and nonbanks in various market segments—including credit markets, Treasury and money markets, and payments—I believe it is worth taking a step back to explore an important background factor, which is how and why central banks provide liquidity.

    The provision of liquidity by central banks is a foundational element of financial intermediation. Central banks should be able to provide liquidity effectively for the financial system to function smoothly. Today, I will take this opportunity to discuss some aspects of liquidity provision by the central banks. Of course, the main forms of liquidity provided by central banks—namely, currency and bank reserves—are the foundation of safe liquidity in the economy. It is vital for a central bank to make clear that it stands ready to provide liquidity should stress emerge. But a central bank must also take steps to minimize moral hazard. “Moral hazard” in this context refers to the concern that publicly provided liquidity might encourage private financial institutions to take on excessive risk.
    What I would like to focus on in this speech are two types of liquidity provision that aim to reduce the frictions associated with the basic operations of banks. The first type of liquidity is intraday credit, which is key in handling payment system frictions during the day, and the second one is overnight credit, which deals with a range of frictions.2 I will also highlight some design features of broadly similar liquidity facilities in three other advanced economies: the U.K., Japan, and the euro area. I believe it is valuable to look at other central banks’ experiences with liquidity provision, which entails recognizing the important differences that exist across jurisdictions and mandates and considering what lessons can be learned.
    At their core, liquidity facilities support the smooth operation and stability of the banking system, the effective implementation of monetary policy, and the furtherance of a safe and efficient payment system. This activity in turn supports the flow of credit to businesses and households. Last year, the Federal Reserve Board issued a public request for information (RFI) seeking to identify operational frictions in these facilities, and those comments are under review. I hope that today’s discussion about how facilities operate in the U.S. and around the globe can further that dialogue among participants at this conference.
    How It Works in the U.S.Let me start by discussing how liquidity provisions work in the U.S., as summarized in slide 3. Banks maintain deposit accounts at the Federal Reserve (Fed). The balances in these accounts, known as reserves, are the most liquid assets that banks have and are used to meet payment flows as households and business customers of banks carry out their regular business. Banks often experience mismatches in the timing of payment inflows and outflows, which could occasionally cause the balance in a bank’s account at the Fed to become negative. To help institutions manage this mismatch and promote the smooth functioning of the payment system, the Fed extends intraday credit, also known as daylight overdrafts.
    Intraday credit facilities provide temporary credit to depository institutions such as commercial banks and credit unions to foster the smooth functioning of the payment system. If a bank temporarily lacks the funds to process payments, it can use intraday credit to avoid delaying payments until it has sufficient liquidity. The Fed provides intraday credit on both a collateralized and an uncollateralized basis. Collateralized intraday credit is provided free of charge, whereas uncollateralized credit incurs a fee. Since this type of credit is provided on an intraday basis, the Fed expects banks to have positive balances in their accounts by the end of the operational day. If a bank has a negative balance at the end of day, it incurs an overnight overdraft and pays a penalty.
    The Fed also provides overnight credit through the discount window to approved counterparties against a broad range of collateral. This type of liquidity provision is designed to mitigate short-term misallocations of liquidity. For example, a bank may need to settle a large payment at the end of the day, but it may temporarily have insufficient funds in its account to do so. To meet the payment obligation, the bank could borrow in private interbank markets—in which financial institutions lend funds to each other on a short-term basis—or from the central bank. The rate on overnight credit also helps central banks with monetary policy implementation. In addition, overnight liquidity facilities often serve as a first line of defense against stresses, and they stand ready to provide liquidity when institutions face outflows.
    All discount window loans are collateralized, and a wide range of bank assets, including a variety of loans and securities, are eligible to serve as collateral.3 The Fed operates three separate facilities under the discount window: primary credit, secondary credit, and seasonal credit.
    The first one, primary credit, is available to generally sound banks at a rate that is currently set at the top of the target range for the federal funds rate. Providing liquidity at this rate supports the implementation of monetary policy because institutions can turn to the Fed if conditions tighten in money markets that might otherwise push overnight money market rates above levels that would be consistent with the Fed’s target range. As I noted earlier, primary credit also helps deal with idiosyncratic funding challenges that banks might be experiencing. Most of the funding provided is on an overnight basis; however, funding is available for up to 90 days.
    The next one, secondary credit, is available to banks that are not sufficiently healthy to have access to primary credit. It is available at a higher rate, features higher haircuts on collateral, and is limited to overnight credit.4
    The third facility, seasonal credit, provides short-term liquidity to smaller institutions that experience sizable seasonal fluctuations in their balance sheets. Typically, these are banks located in agricultural or tourist areas.
    Short-Term Credit Provision across JurisdictionsLooking at central banks’ experiences across jurisdictions provides useful insights about different approaches to providing liquidity.5 Central banks choose a combination of interest rates, collateral requirements, collateral valuation practices, and other design features to encourage usage of facilities while minimizing undesired consequences—in particular, moral hazard. For example, a central bank facility that provides liquidity at an attractive interest rate could be very effective in ensuring that shocks to the financial system do not disrupt the flow of credit but may potentially increase moral hazard. If that facility only accepted a narrow set of high-quality collateral, however, then the moral hazard associated with it could be reduced. Alternatively, the usage of a facility that charges an interest rate above the market rate (a so-called penalty rate) is likely limited, but if the facility accepted a broad range of collateral, usage can be encouraged.6 In these two examples, the counterbalancing choices are with respect to the interest rate charged and the eligible collateral. Different central banks might prefer one approach over the other depending on specific aspects of their frameworks and banking systems.
    Of course, there are challenges in comparing liquidity facilities across jurisdictions given important differences with respect to central banks’ legal authorities, monetary policy frameworks, the size of the economy and financial sector, and institutional structures. This divergence is also true across the four advanced economies that I will consider today: the U.S., the U.K., Japan, and the euro area. There can be large differences in each jurisdiction’s banking sector and central bank balance sheets relative to the size of their economies, highlighting the need to use caution when comparing aspects of their liquidity provision.
    With that caveat in mind, let’s look at the design features of some foreign central bank liquidity facilities that are fairly similar to the Fed’s discount window. As shown in figure 1, the Bank of England (BOE) operates two such short-term facilities: an operational standing facility and a discount window. The operational standing facility features lower rates but restricts acceptable collateral to high-quality, highly liquid sovereign debt. The discount window facility accepts a broader range of collateral but charges a higher rate.
    Which facility an eligible borrower turns to in the U.K. depends on the sorts of collateral that are being pledged. In the U.S., whether an institution has access to primary or secondary credit depends on the condition of the borrower. The BOE monitors borrower conditions, and the Fed also sets haircuts on collateral based on asset riskiness. The differences in design considerations could influence how eligible borrowers integrate these facilities into their regular liquidity management practices.
    The Bank of Japan (BOJ) has two facilities: one that provides overnight loans and another that provides somewhat longer-term funding up to three months. Because the BOJ has been operating a system with a very large supply of reserves for some time, its lending facilities tend not to be used extensively, other than in stress periods.
    The European Central Bank (ECB) operates a marginal lending facility quite similar to the Fed’s discount window. It can meet the idiosyncratic funding needs of individual banks and serves as a ceiling on interbank rates and thus helps the ECB implement monetary policy. This facility is an important element of the ECB framework even though the ECB’s approach to monetary policy implementation involves providing the banking system with a sizable amount of reserves through weekly (repo) lending operations.7
    The international differences show that central banks can accomplish their objectives using facilities with quite different designs. As I noted earlier, one of the vital purposes of a short-term liquidity facility is to be able to provide support to the banking systems during stress. The Fed, the BOE, the BOJ, and the ECB have been able to do so. Figure 2 shows short-term credit provision over time for the four central banks: the BOJ, the green line; the Fed, the black line; the ECB, the blue line; and the BOE, the red line.8 Each line is the monthly short-term credit outstanding as a share of central bank assets in 2019. This figure illustrates a few important points.
    First, at most times, use of the short-term central bank liquidity facilities is modest. Second, central bank provision of short-term liquidity can increase very rapidly during times of stress.9 For example, the Fed and the ECB provided substantial short-term liquidity during the 2007–09 financial crisis. Third, the figure also illustrates that stress is not always global in nature and peak usage does not necessarily coincide. For instance, short-term liquidity provision rose in the euro area during the European sovereign debt crisis that began in late 2009 and peaked in 2012, but it did not increase much in the U.S. Similarly, short-term liquidity provision increased in the U.S. during the March 2023 banking stress episode, but it did not increase in the euro area. I also want to highlight that during stress events, central banks complement their regular short-term standing liquidity facilities with other facilities. Therefore, stress events may not necessarily result in an increase in liquidity provision through a short-term standing facility.
    Now let’s turn to more recent developments. Over the past few years, as central banks have shrunk their balance sheets, liquidity has been gradually reduced, which has made the existing liquidity provision tools more relevant. The BOE and the ECB have indicated that they are moving toward operating frameworks in which short-term liquidity providing repo operations will play a key role.10
    The Fed has stated that it will continue to operate in an ample-reserves regime. In this regime, the primary credit rate is positioned to be slightly above the rate expected to prevail in interbank markets so use of the discount window should typically remain modest. Still, the facility remains available to be used. Figure 3 shows the discount window credit as a share of Fed assets over the past decade. As you can see from this figure, over the past few years, the discount window has been used more than was the case before the pandemic. Increased usage may be due to the discount rate being set closer to private market rates than was the case before the pandemic, the availability of longer maturity loans, and shifts in communication.
    Intraday Credit Provision across JurisdictionsJust as there are differences with respect to the provision of overnight liquidity across central banks, there are also differences in the provision of intraday credit. One difference is with respect to unresolved intraday overdrafts. As I noted earlier, it is possible for banks to incur overnight overdrafts if they fail to take such action as requesting an overnight loan, although overnight overdrafts are not considered business as usual and carry a penalty rate in the U.S., currently set at the primary credit rate plus 400 basis points.11 The BOJ does something quite similar. By charging a high penalty on overnight overdrafts, both the Fed and the BOJ discourage overdrafts.
    In contrast to the Fed and the BOJ, the ECB and the BOE can automatically convert most of the intraday overdrafts into an overnight loan from the business-as-usual facility seamlessly, without action on the part of the bank, against the same collateral at the end of the day.12 That feature creates a greater similarity between intraday credit and overnight credit in those jurisdictions. The relationship between intraday credit and overnight credit is going to be an important one for central banks amid developments in payment systems, including advances in technology and the expansion of payment system operating hours.
    ConclusionToday, I provided an overview of the Fed’s provision of liquidity through the discount window and intraday credit and highlighted some similarities and differences across jurisdictions. In summary, the Fed’s discount window and intraday credit facilities have many features that are similar to those found in other central bank facilities. While differences in institutional, legal, and financial system structures across jurisdictions make central bank short-term lending context specific, looking at the experiences of central banks across other jurisdictions is informative, as central banks share similar goals and face similar challenges when it comes to liquidity provision.
    The Fed is continually assessing and striving to improve the operational aspects of discount window and intraday credit. The Federal Reserve System has made several important advancements to ensure that liquidity provision meets the needs of the 21st century economy. For example, Reserve Banks have worked to streamline the use of electronic files when establishing access to the discount window and made technological advancements in the process for requesting a discount window loan. The Federal Reserve System launched a convenient online portal called “Discount Window Direct” for requesting and prepaying discount window loans that is generally accessible to banks 24–7. To improve familiarity with the discount window, Reserve Banks have conducted outreach to banks and made efforts to guide them in using the program.
    To complement these efforts, the Board issued an RFI last September seeking input on the operations of the discount window and intraday credit. Any issues identified in the responses to the RFI can help the Fed understand further improvements that may promote efficiency and reduce the burden on banks.
    I look forward to hearing insights you may have into central banks’ liquidity facilities and how these issues intersect with the topics that will be discussed at this conference. Thank you!
    ReferencesArseneau, David, Mark Carlson, Kathryn Chen, Matt Darst, Dylan Kirkeeng, Elizabeth Klee, Matt Malloy, Benjamin Malin, Emilie O’Malley, Friederike Niepmann, Mary-Frances Styczynski, Melissa Vanouse, and Alexandros P. Vardoulakis (2025). “Central Bank Liquidity Facilities around the World,” FEDS Notes. Washington: Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, February 26.
    Jefferson, Philip N. (2024a). “A History of the Fed’s Discount Window: 1913–2000,” speech delivered at Davidson College, Davidson, North Carolina, October 8.
    Jefferson, Philip N. (2024b). “The Fed’s Discount Window: 1990 to the Present,” speech delivered at the Charlotte Economics Club, Charlotte, North Carolina, October 9.

    1. The views expressed here are my own and are not necessarily those of my colleagues on the Federal Reserve Board or the Federal Open Market Committee. Return to text
    2. I refer to primary credit lending as overnight lending for simplicity even though banks are able to borrow for maturities of up to three months. The vast majority of primary credit lending is overnight. See Jefferson (2024a) and (2024b) for a summary of the evolution of the discount window. Return to text
    3. Examples of assets that may serve as collateral include, but are not limited to, U.S. Treasury securities, investment-grade corporate bonds, U.S. government agency-backed mortgage securities, commercial and industrial loans, commercial real estate loans, agricultural loans secured by farmland, one- to four-family mortgage loans, and auto loans. For more detail on assets that may serve as collateral, please see Federal Reserve Banks (n.d.), “Collateral Eligibility – Securities and Loans,” Discount Window Direct. Return to text
    4. The Fed lends less than the fair market value of the collateral provided to manage the credit risk associated with its lending operations. For example, if a bank needs a loan of $100, a portfolio of securities valued at $200 may be required to be posted if the discount or haircut associated with that portfolio is 50 percent. The difference between the amount that the Fed will lend on a particular asset and the fair market value of that asset reflects the haircut, or margin. These haircuts differ, for instance, with the historical price volatility and credit risk associated with the asset. Information on the haircuts for different assets may be found at Federal Reserve Banks (n.d.), “Collateral Valuation,” Discount Window Direct. Return to text
    5. See Arseneau and others (2025). Return to text
    6. A penalty rate in the Board’s emergency lending regulation is defined as a rate that is higher than the market rate in normal circumstances, affords liquidity in unusual and exigent circumstances, and encourages repayment of the credit and discourages use of the program or facility as the unusual and exigent circumstances that motivated the program or facility recede and economic conditions normalize. See Regulation A—Extensions of Credit by Federal Reserve Banks, 12 CFR pt. 201.4(d)(7) (2024). Return to text
    7. See Isabel Schnabel (2024), “The Eurosystem’s Operational Framework,” speech delivered at the Money Market Contact Group meeting, Frankfurt, Germany, March 14. Return to text
    8. Values in figure 2 represent the marginal lending facility for the euro area, the complementary lending facility for Japan, the operational standing lending facility for the U.K., and primary credit for the U.S. Return to text
    9. See Jefferson (2024a) for a longer historical perspective on the Fed’s liquidity provision over time. Return to text
    10. See, for example, B (2024), “Transitioning to a Repo-Led Operating Framework,” discussion paper (London: BOE, December 9).
    See, for example, Schnabel, “The Eurosystem’s Operational Framework.” Return to text
    11. See Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (2023), Federal Reserve Policy on Payment System Risk (PDF), (Washington: Board of Governors), p. 33. Return to text
    12. The BOE is a special case because, for most institutions, intraday overdrafts are seamlessly converted into an overnight loan if the institution signed up to use the operational standing facility in advance. Institutions that have not signed up in advance and end the day with an overdrawn reserve account face an overdraft charge of 2 percent plus the Bank Rate or another rate set at discretion. Return to text

    MIL OSI USA News

  • Portugal’s far-right wins record support as centre-right falls short of majority

    Source: Government of India

    Source: Government of India (2)

    ortugal’s far-right Chega won a record vote share in Sunday’s snap election and was vying to become the main opposition party as the ruling centre-right Democratic Alliance (AD) again fell short of a majority needed to end a long period of instability.

    Prime Minister Luis Montenegro – whose grouping won the most seats – said the election result was a vote of confidence in his party. However, with votes from abroad still to be counted Chega could supplant the centre-left Socialists as leader of the opposition, ending five decades of dominance by the country’s two major parties.

    “We’ve done what no other party has ever achieved in Portugal. We can safely declare in front of all the country today that bipartisanship in Portugal is over,” Chega leader Andre Ventura told a crowd of jubilant supporters in Lisbon.

    “Nothing will be as it was,” he said, highlighting the fact that the continued rise of Chega, which he founded just six years ago, proved most opinion polls wrong.

    Chega gained 8 seats for a total of 58 in the 230-seat parliament, winning a record 1.34 million votes, or 22.6%.

    Montenegro, whose AD won 89 seats – up nine from the previous election – and 32.1% of the vote, has refused to make any deals with Chega and said he would form a new minority government.

    Chega, which has allied with Europe’s hard-right, anti-immigration parties, such as Marine le Pen’s Rassemblement National in France and Germany’s AfD, has proposed tougher sentences for criminals, including chemical castration for repeat rapists, and called for an end to “open doors” immigration. It has also accused mainstream parties of perpetuating corruption.

    Continued political instability could delay structural reforms and major projects in Portugal, including lithium mining in the north, and potentially compromise the efficient deployment of EU funds and the long-delayed privatization of TAP airline.

    The election, the third in as many years, was called one year into an AD minority government’s term after Montenegro failed to win a vote of confidence in March when the opposition questioned his integrity over dealings of his family’s consultancy firm. He has denied any wrongdoing.

    “The Portuguese don’t want any more snap elections, they want a four-year legislature,” Montenegro said as his supporters chanted “Let Luis work,” his campaign slogan.

    Voters appeared to punish the Socialists for their role in bringing down Montenegro’s government with the party falling to 58 seats from 78, prompting leader Pedro Nuno Santos to say he would step down.

    In Lisbon, some residents were worried about what Chega’s surge could mean for Portugal’s democracy, comparing the party to U.S. President Donald Trump’s government.

    Chega’s Ventura, who was hospitalised during the campaign after collapsing on stage with an esophageal spasm, said his health issues would not hold him back.

    “There are moments in life during which God says, just stop a little bit,” he said. “This time I am not going to listen. I am not going to stop until I become the prime minister of Portugal.”

    (Reuters)

  • Jaishankar engages with strategic experts in the Netherlands, calls for stronger India-EU ties

    Source: Government of India

    Source: Government of India (4)

    External Affairs Minister S. Jaishankar, during his official visit to the Netherlands on Monday, engaged with strategic experts in The Hague, highlighting the importance of deepening India-Netherlands and India-European Union relations in a rapidly evolving global landscape marked by multi-polarity and strategic autonomy.

    In a post on X, Jaishankar said: “A good exchange of views with strategic experts in The Hague this morning. Discussed why India and the Netherlands/EU should engage more deeply in an era of multi-polarity and strategic autonomy.”

    https://x.com/DDNewslive/status/1924413567106740449/photo/4

    Jaishankar arrived in the Netherlands on Monday as part of a multi-nation official visit that also includes Denmark and Germany, scheduled from May 19 to 24. According to a statement from the Ministry of External Affairs (MEA), the visit aims to strengthen bilateral relations and enhance cooperation on global and regional issues of mutual interest.

    During his engagements, Jaishankar is expected to meet with the leadership of all three countries, covering a comprehensive agenda that spans political, economic, and strategic collaboration.

    This marks Jaishankar’s first foreign visit following the recent four-day military confrontation between Indian and Pakistani forces.

    ANI

  • MIL-OSI: Infinium will deploy Electric Hydrogen’s electrolyzer plant at large-scale eFuels facility in Texas

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    PECOS, Texas, May 19, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Electric Hydrogen, an American manufacturer of high-power electrolyzer plants, announced today that Infinium, a leading producer of commercial eFuels, has selected Electric Hydrogen’s 100 megawatt (MW) HYPRPlant for its large-scale eFuels facility in Texas, Project Roadrunner.

    Electric Hydrogen’s HYPRPlant is a complete solution that lowers hydrogen total installed project cost by up to 60% relative to other electrolyzer solutions. The company manufactures HYPRPlants in the United States: its proprietary electrochemical stacks are built in Electric Hydrogen’s Massachusetts gigafactory while the chemical process modules are manufactured in Texas, drawing on strong local expertise from the oil and gas industry. Electric Hydrogen’s innovative technology and modular manufacturing approach make the HYPRPlant less expensive and more reliable than imported Chinese product, enhancing American energy technology leadership and competitiveness.

    “We are very pleased to be working with Electric Hydrogen and have been impressed with the HYPRPlant design and commercial package,” said Robert Schuetzle, CEO of Infinium. “Low-cost renewable hydrogen is a critical component to eFuel production, and the industry needs the kind of innovation and thoughtful execution we have seen from Electric Hydrogen.”

    Once production begins, Project Roadrunner—expected to be the largest eFuels production facility in the world—will produce sustainable aviation fuel (eSAF), eDiesel and eNaphtha from CO2, power and water for the aviation, heavy-duty trucking, plastics and maritime sectors. The project will bolster American technological advances and bring skilled jobs and economic growth to West Texas. Many of those workers are expected to bring skills and expertise they developed in the oil and gas sector. The facility is projected to commence commercial e-fuels production in 2027.

    “This cutting-edge project exemplifies how low-cost, industrial-scale clean hydrogen production will drive new markets for American-made fuels and support the buildout of domestic manufacturing facilities,” said Raffi Garabedian, Electric Hydrogen’s CEO and Co-founder. “We’re honored to be selected as Infinium’s electrolyzer manufacturer of choice.”

    Brookfield Asset Management and Breakthrough Energy Catalyst are financing partners for Infinium’s Project Roadrunner, making it the world’s first large-scale project-financed eFuels project. The project will supply sustainable aviation fuel over a 10-year period to International Airlines Group (IAG), one of the largest airline companies in the world through subsidiaries Aer Lingus, British Airways, Iberia, LEVEL and Vueling.

    This project announcement follows the unveiling of HYPRPlant, the announcement of Electric Hydrogen’s strategic partnership with Texas-based Titan Production Equipment and the company’s selection as Uniper’s exclusive electrolysis partner for the 200MW Green Wilhemshaven project in Northern Germany.

    To learn more about Electric Hydrogen’s HYPRPlant, visit https://eh2.com/.

    About Electric Hydrogen 
    Electric Hydrogen manufactures, delivers and commissions the world’s most powerful electrolyzers to make clean hydrogen projects economically viable today. The company’s complete HYPRPlant includes all system components required to turn water and electricity into the lowest cost clean hydrogen. Electric Hydrogen has a team of more than 300 people in the United States and Europe. The company was founded in 2020 and is headquartered in Devens, Massachusetts. To learn more about how critical industries leverage Electric Hydrogen’s advanced proton exchange membrane (PEM) technology, visit https://eh2.com/.

    About Infinium
    Infinium is a leading provider of gas conversion solutions and developer of eFuels projects. Our offerings include ultra-low carbon synthetic eFuels, solutions enabling monetization of flare gas and RNG, and patented technology designed to support the rapidly evolving energy industry. Infinium is a company of “firsts”—the first to produce commercial volumes of power-to-liquid clean eFuels; the first to develop and deploy modular gas conversion technology; and the only clean fuels innovator offering end-to-end solutions to customers at every step in their energy journey. Industry leaders including Amazon, American Airlines, Borealis and IAG are customers of Infinium. Learn more at www.infiniumco.com.

    Contact
    V2 Communications for Electric Hydrogen
    electrichydrogen@v2comms.com

    Photos accompanying this announcement are available at:

    https://www.globenewswire.com/NewsRoom/AttachmentNg/3117612d-0390-47a5-95db-6815670b9948

    https://www.globenewswire.com/NewsRoom/AttachmentNg/99612c8f-dd87-434c-af24-cb006611fd8a

    The MIL Network

  • MIL-OSI Europe: OSCE strengthens Montenegro’s border security with training on arms and human trafficking

    Source: Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe – OSCE

    Headline: OSCE strengthens Montenegro’s border security with training on arms and human trafficking

    Participants in an OSCE training for Montenegrin border and criminal police officers on combating arms and human trafficking, Bar, 13 May 2025. (OSCE/Katerina Koci) Photo details

    The OSCE is helping strengthen Montenegro’s ability to combat arms and human trafficking through targeted training for border and criminal police officers. From 13 to 16 May in Bar, Montenegro, the OSCE Transnational Threats Department (TNTD), in close co-ordination with the OSCE Mission to Montenegro, trained 15 officers from Montenegro’s Police Directorate as part of its ongoing support for border security and management.
    The course marked another deployment of the OSCE-led Mobile Training Team (MTT). It brought together expert trainers from the national police forces of North Macedonia and Tunisia, the OSCE Forum for Security and Co-operation, and INTERPOL’s I-Force Project as well as national experts from the Ministry of the Interior, the criminal police and the Forensic Centre of Montenegro, along with representatives from the US Embassy including the Director of its Bureau of International Narcotics and Law Enforcement Affairs.
    “This course is part of our long-standing support to participating States in strengthening border security in a human right-based way. Montenegro’s location, bordering the Schengen area, places it at a crucial juncture in the regional and European security landscape: a place where threats can be intercepted, co-operation can begin, and resilience is built,” highlighted Siv-Katrine Leirtroe, Head of TNTD’s Border Security and Management Unit.
    Participants took part in hands-on scenario-based exercises, real-life operational case studies and theoretical sessions tailored to Montenegro’s context. The training focused on detecting and responding to indicators of trafficking in human beings using a victim-centred approach. The segment on arms trafficking furthermore explored Montenegro’s national profile and regional trafficking trends, introducing international tools such as INTERPOL’s iARMS database. The course promoted stronger interagency co-operation and emphasized human rights principles as well as gender- and age-sensitive approaches in border security controls.
    “For Montenegro, the fight against trafficking in weapons and human beings is a key priority in safeguarding national and regional security. Only through co-ordinated efforts, information exchange, and continuous training can we effectively respond to threats that undermine the rule of law and the safety of our citizens,” said Predrag Savovic, Senior Police Inspector, Head of the Small Arms and Light Weapons Commission of Montenegro. 
    This training course is part of the OSCE extrabudgetary project “Training and Deployment of OSCE Mobile Training Team to Better Address Challenges in Identifying the Cross-Border Movement of Foreign Terrorist Fighters and Other Cross-Border Crimes in the OSCE Area–Phase II”, funded by Germany and the United States.

    MIL OSI Europe News

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Ethiopia Unveils Strategic Initiative to Green Its Financial System and Drive Sustainable Investment

    Source: European Investment Bank

    EIB

    • EIB Greening Financial Systems Programme to work with the National Bank of Ethiopia and Commercial banks to enhance technical understanding of climate risks, enhance climate finance and develop Ethiopian green taxonomy 
    • Ethiopia latest country to join pioneering climate resilience initiative backed by Germany

    The Greening Financial Systems Programme was officially launched in Ethiopia today by Ethiopian and international partners at the Ethiopia Finance Forum.

    This transformative initiative aims to strengthen the resilience of Ethiopia’s financial sector to climate change by embedding climate risk into regulatory frameworks, advancing climate-related disclosures, and supporting the financing of sustainable projects across the country.

    The National Bank of Ethiopia: Driving the green finance agenda

    At the heart of this initiative is the National Bank of Ethiopia (NBE), which is spearheading efforts to integrate climate considerations into the core of the financial sector. Recognizing the growing risks climate change poses to financial stability, the NBE is undertaking a strategic reform to align Ethiopia’s financial system with national climate objectives and international sustainability standards.

    Demonstrating its strong institutional commitment, the NBE has established a high-level internal oversight and coordination team to guide the implementation, monitor progress, and ensure effective follow-up of the GFS Programme. This team brings together senior experts from across the Bank to oversee integration of climate risk considerations into supervisory frameworks and to coordinate with stakeholders on the development of green finance tools.

    The GFS Programme will support the NBE in:

    • Integrating climate-related financial risks into its supervisory and regulatory frameworks.
    • Enhancing climate risk management capabilities across the financial sector.
    • Developing a climate risk disclosure and reporting framework aligned with international best practices.
    • Strengthening institutional capacity through tailored training programs and technical support.
    • Coordinating the development of a National Green Taxonomy that will guide financial institutions and investors on what constitutes environmentally sustainable economic activities.

    “The financial sector has a critical role to play in mobilising the significant finance required for Ethiopia’s transition to a climate-resilient, green economy. The Greening Financial Systems initiative will enhance our capacity to guide the sector in adapting to a changing climate and unlocking green investment opportunities,” said H.E. Mamo E. Mihretu, Governor of the National Bank of Ethiopia.

    The technical assistance agreements were signed during the forum by Mr. Solomon Desta, Vice Governor for Financial Institutions at the National Bank of Ethiopia, and Ms. Leyla Traoré, Head of the EIB Representation to Ethiopia and the African Union. The event was attended by the German Ambassador to Ethiopia and the African Union, the EU Ambassador to Ethiopia, and representatives from the Ministry of Finance of Ethiopia.

    The EIB is delighted to welcome Ethiopia to the Greening Financial Systems Programme. By supporting the National Bank of Ethiopia, we are building an enabling environment that will unlock vital climate action and green investments, contributing to Ethiopia’s ambitious climate goals,” said Ambroise Fayolle, Vice President of the European Investment Bank.

    Funded by Germany through the International Climate Initiative (IKI), and implemented by the EIB, the GFS Programme in Ethiopia forms part of a broader international initiative that also includes Albania, Armenia, Georgia, Kenya, Nigeria, North Macedonia, and Rwanda.

    Strengthening financial institutions for climate resilience

    Beyond regulatory enhancements, the programme also supports Ethiopian commercial banks and financial institutions to build green finance capabilities. This includes:

    • Developing green lending portfolios.
    • Improving internal climate risk assessments.
    • Introducing climate-sensitive credit evaluation frameworks.
    • Facilitating access to green finance instruments and capacity-building workshops.

    By complementing the regulatory improvements led by the NBE, this support aims to mobilize private finance for environmentally sustainable investments, helping banks identify viable green projects and reduce exposure to climate-related risks.

    Laying the foundation for a national green taxonomy

    A key priority under the NBE’s leadership is the development of Ethiopia’s first National Green Taxonomy, a classification system that will define which economic activities and investments are considered sustainable and climate aligned. The taxonomy will:

    • Provide clarity and consistency in green investment classification.
    • Serve as a reference for financial institutions, regulators, and investors.
    • Support the alignment of domestic practices with international ESG and sustainability standards.

    This process will be accompanied by consultations with stakeholders and the preparation of reporting guidelines for the taxonomy’s application across the financial sector.

    Ethiopia is among the countries most vulnerable to climate change, with growing risks from extreme weather, drought, and food insecurity. These risks pose serious threats to the economy and the stability of the financial system.

    The National Bank of Ethiopia’s proactive leadership and institutional commitment—in collaboration with the EIB and international partners—underscores a bold national effort to build climate resilience. Through the GFS Programme, Ethiopia is positioning its financial system to not only manage risks but also seize green investment opportunities that contribute to long-term, sustainable economic growth.

    “Germany is proud to support Ethiopia’s efforts to green its financial system through the International Climate Initiative. The IKI Fund is one of the key instruments of the German Federal Government for international climate action to support strategies for countries that seek to achieve the green transformation. Strengthening financial resilience and unlocking green investment is crucial for Ethiopia’s sustainable future.” said H.E. Jens Hanefeld, German Ambassador to Ethiopia.

    This programme underscores the close partnership between the European Union and Ethiopia in addressing the urgent challenge of climate change. By strengthening the financial sector’s capacity to manage climate risks and finance green projects, we are jointly advancing sustainable development and building resilience,” added H.E. Mrs. Sofie From-Emmesberger, EU Ambassador to Ethiopia.

    Background information

    About EIB Global

    The European Investment Bank (ElB) is the long-term lending institution of the European Union, owned by its Member States. It finances investments that contribute to EU policy objectives.

    EIB Global is the EIB Group’s specialised arm devoted to increasing the impact of international partnerships and development finance, and a key partner of Global Gateway. We aim to support €100 billion of investment by the end of 2027 — around one-third of the overall target of this EU initiative. Within Team Europe, EIB Global fosters strong, focused partnerships alongside fellow development finance institutions and civil society. EIB Global brings the EIB Group closer to people, companies and institutions through our offices across the world. High-quality, up-to-date photos of our headquarters for media use are available here.

    http://twitter.com/EIB

    https://www.linkedin.com/company/eib-global/

    More information about the Greening Financial Systems (GFS) technical assistance programme is here.

    MIL OSI Europe News