Category: Health

  • MIL-OSI Asia-Pac: Yogotsav Programme organised in Karbi Anglong; Assam Unites for Yoga

    Source: Government of India

    Yogotsav Programme organised in Karbi Anglong; Assam Unites for Yoga

    Event Marks 78 Days to International Day of Yoga 2025

    Posted On: 04 APR 2025 5:11PM by PIB Delhi

    As the countdown to the International Day of Yoga (IDY) 2025 continues, the spirit of yoga echoed across Diphu Police Reserve Camp Field, Karbi Anglong, Assam, where a vibrant Yogotsav Programme marked day 78 of the 100-day countdown to IDY. The event brought together nearly 380 enthusiastic participants, including police personnel and local citizens, in a unified celebration of wellness and inner harmony.

    Glimpses from the Yogotsav Programme organised at the Diphu Police Reserve Camp Field, Karbi Anglong, Assam on 04.04.2025

     

    Spearheaded by the Morarji Desai National Institute of Yoga (MDNIY) under the aegis of the Ministry of Ayush, Government of India, this Yogotsav is part of a nationwide initiative to raise awareness about yoga’s transformative power—physically, mentally, and spiritually.

    The event witnessed the participation of 380 persons, including police personnel and public

    The event wasn’t just a display of asanas—it was a resounding call to embrace balance, discipline, and holistic health, echoing India’s vision of creating a healthier, happier world through the timeless wisdom of yoga.

    The event began with the practice of the Common Yoga Protocol (CYP) led by Dibya Jyoti Deka, a distinguished Yoga Teacher, who has been conducting yoga sessions for the Governor of Assam for the past five years, his expert guidance and calm yet energizing instructions set a serene and disciplined tone for the morning.

    Following the CYP, Yogacharya Subhasish Kar delivered an insightful session on “Yogic Tips for Better Health,” offering simple, practical ways to improve physical and mental wellness through daily yoga practices.

    A key highlight of the programme was a live Jal Neti Practical Workshop, where participants were guided through this traditional yogic cleansing technique—highly regarded for its benefits in respiratory and sinus health.

    Glimpses from the Yogotsav Programme organised at the Diphu Police Reserve Camp Field, Karbi Anglong

     

    The programme concluded with a resonating message of wellness, harmony, and the importance of incorporating yoga into daily life. As a countdown event, it effectively set the stage for the upcoming International Day of Yoga 2025, reinforcing yoga’s integral role in promoting holistic well-being for individuals and communities.

    ****

    MV/AKS

    (Release ID: 2118884) Visitor Counter : 52

    MIL OSI Asia Pacific News

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Minutes – Thursday, 3 April 2025 – Strasbourg – Final edition

    Source: European Parliament

    PV-10-2025-04-03

    EN

    EN

    iPlPv_Sit

    Minutes
    Thursday, 3 April 2025 – Strasbourg

     Abbreviations and symbols

    + adopted
    rejected
    lapsed
    W withdrawn
    RCV roll-call votes
    EV electronic vote
    SEC secret ballot
    split split vote
    sep separate vote
    am amendment
    CA compromise amendment
    CP corresponding part
    D deleting amendment
    = identical amendments
    § paragraph

    IN THE CHAIR: Younous OMARJEE
    Vice-President

    1. Opening of the sitting

    The sitting opened at 09:00.


    2. Council positions at first reading (Rule 64)

    – Position of the Council at first reading with a view to the adoption of a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on European Union labour market statistics on businesses, repealing Council Regulation (EC) No 530/1999 and Regulations (EC) No 450/2003 and (EC) No 453/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council – Adopted by the Council on 24 March 2025 (17082/1/2024 – COM(2025)0134 – C10-0054/2025 – 2023/0288(COD))
    referred to committee responsible: ECON

    – Position of the Council at first reading with a view to the adoption of a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Regulation (EU) 2016/1011 as regards the scope of the rules for benchmarks, the use in the Union of benchmarks provided by an administrator located in a third country, and certain reporting requirements – Adopted by the Council on 24 March 2025 (05123/1/2025 – COM(2025)0155 – C10-0055/2025 – 2023/0379(COD))
    referred to committee responsible: ECON

    – Position of the Council at first reading with a view to the adoption of a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on a Border Regions’ instrument for development and growth (BRIDGEforEU) – Adopted by the Council on 24 March 2025 (17102/1/2024 – COM(2025)0131 – C10-0057/2025 – 2018/0198(COD))
    referred to committee responsible: REGI

    The three-month period available to Parliament under Article 294 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union for it to adopt its positions would begin the following day, 4 April 2025.


    3. European Action Plan on Rare Diseases (debate)

    Commission statement: European Action Plan on Rare Diseases (2025/2637(RSP))

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

    The following spoke: Tomislav Sokol, on behalf of the PPE Group, Vytenis Povilas Andriukaitis, on behalf of the S&D Group, Ondřej Knotek, on behalf of the PfE Group, Michele Picaro, on behalf of the ECR Group, Stine Bosse, on behalf of the Renew Group, Tilly Metz, on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group, Catarina Martins, on behalf of The Left Group, Christine Anderson, on behalf of the ESN Group, András Tivadar Kulja, Romana Jerković, Gerald Hauser, Francesco Torselli, Vlad Vasile-Voiculescu, Ignazio Roberto Marino, Ondřej Dostál, Adam Jarubas, Nicolás González Casares, Marie-Luce Brasier-Clain (the President reminded Members to keep to the subject of the debate), Billy Kelleher, Diana Iovanovici Şoşoacă, Rosa Estaràs Ferragut, Nikos Papandreou, Margarita de la Pisa Carrión, Michalis Hadjipantela, Marta Temido, Viktória Ferenc, who also answered a blue-card question from András Tivadar Kulja, Letizia Moratti, Estelle Ceulemans, Laurent Castillo and Leire Pajín.

    The following spoke under the catch-the-eye procedure: Maria Grapini, Alexander Jungbluth, Lukas Sieper and Kateřina Konečná.

    The following spoke: Olivér Várhelyi.

    The following spoke: András Tivadar Kulja who made a personal statement in response to the intervention by Alexander Jungbluth.

    The debate closed.


    4. Establishment of a European Day of the Righteous (debate)

    Commission statement: Establishment of a European Day of the Righteous (2025/2638(RSP))

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

    The following spoke: Letizia Moratti, on behalf of the PPE Group, Pierfrancesco Maran, on behalf of the S&D Group, Julien Leonardelli, on behalf of the PfE Group, Antonella Sberna, on behalf of the ECR Group, Billy Kelleher, on behalf of the Renew Group, Catarina Vieira, on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group, Petr Bystron, on behalf of the ESN Group, Ernő Schaller-Baross, Arkadiusz Mularczyk and Cristian Terheş.

    The following spoke under the catch-the-eye procedure: Liudas Mažylis, Juan Fernando López Aguilar, Vytenis Povilas Andriukaitis, Sebastian Tynkkynen, Petras Gražulis and Lukas Sieper.

    The following spoke: Olivér Várhelyi.

    IN THE CHAIR: Roberts ZĪLE
    Vice-President

    The debate closed.


    5. 110th anniversary of the Armenian genocide (debate)

    Commission statement: 110th anniversary of the Armenian genocide (2025/2639(RSP))

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

    The following spoke: Miriam Lexmann, on behalf of the PPE Group, Yannis Maniatis, on behalf of the S&D Group, Pierre-Romain Thionnet, on behalf of the PfE Group, Nicolas Bay, on behalf of the ECR Group, Nathalie Loiseau, on behalf of the Renew Group, Markéta Gregorová, on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group, Pernando Barrena Arza, on behalf of The Left Group, Stanislav Stoyanov, on behalf of the ESN Group, Reinhold Lopatka, Vasile Dîncu, Julie Rechagneux, Bert-Jan Ruissen, Helmut Brandstätter, Marie Toussaint, Marina Mesure, Sander Smit, Evin Incir, Paolo Inselvini, Tomislav Sokol and Marcos Ros Sempere.

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

    The following spoke: Olivér Várhelyi.

    The debate closed.

    (The sitting was suspended at 11:14.)


    IN THE CHAIR: Christel SCHALDEMOSE
    Vice-President

    6. Resumption of the sitting

    The sitting resumed at 12:03.


    7. Request for the waiver of immunity

    The competent German authorities had sent the President a request for Petr Bystron’s immunity to be waived in connection with judicial proceedings in Germany.

    Pursuant to Rule 9(1), the request had been referred to the committee responsible, in this case the JURI Committee.


    8. Verification of credentials

    On the basis of a unanimous proposal by the JURI Committee issued at its meeting of 18 March 2025, Parliament verified the credentials of Sirpa Pietikäinen, Andi Cristea and Liudas Mažylis in accordance with Rule 3(4).

    The following spoke: Anders Vistisen, Matthieu Valet and Tomasz Froelich, on certain amendments tabled (the President provided some clarifications).


    9. Voting time

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


    9.1. Establishing an EU talent pool ***I (vote)

    Report on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing an EU talent pool [COM(2023)0716 – C9-0413/2023 – 2023/0404(COD)] – Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs. Rapporteur: Abir Al-Sahlani (A10-0045/2025) (This document is not available in all languages)

    (Majority of the votes cast)

    DECISION TO ENTER INTO INTERINSTITUTIONAL NEGOTIATIONS (request by the PfE, ECR, The Left and ESN Groups to put this decision to the vote) (Rule 72)

    Approved

    Detailed voting results


    9.2. Granting equivalence with EU requirements to Moldova and Ukraine as regards field inspections and production of seed ***I (vote)

    Report on the proposal for a decision of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Council Decision 2003/17/EC as regards the equivalence of field inspections carried out in the Republic of Moldova on fodder plant seed-producing crops and on the equivalence of fodder plant seed produced in the Republic of Moldova, and as regards the equivalence of field inspections carried out in Ukraine on beet seed-producing crops and oil plant seed-producing crops and on the equivalence of beet seed and oil plant seed produced in Ukraine [COM(2024)0052 – C9-0026/2024 – 2024/0027(COD)] – Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development. Rapporteur: Veronika Vrecionová (A10-0043/2025) (This document is not available in all languages)

    (Majority of the votes cast)

    DECISION TO ENTER INTO INTERINSTITUTIONAL NEGOTIATIONS (request by the PfE Group to put this decision to the vote) (Rule 72)

    Approved

    Detailed voting results


    9.3. Estimates of revenue and expenditure for the financial year 2026 – Section I – European Parliament (vote)

    Report on Parliament’s estimates of revenue and expenditure for the financial year 2026 [2024/2111(BUI)] – Committee on Budgets. Rapporteur: Matjaž Nemec (A10-0048/2025)

    MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION

    Adopted

    The following had spoken:

    Matjaž Nemec (rapporteur), before the vote, to make a statement under Rule 165(4).

    Detailed voting results


    9.4. Prosecution of journalists in Cameroon, notably the cases of Amadou Vamoulké, Kingsley Fomunyuy Njoka, Mancho Bibixy, Thomas Awah Junior, Tsi Conrad (vote)

    Motions for resolutions RC-B10-0230/2025 (minutes of 3.4.2025, item I), B10-0230/2025, B10-0231/2025, B10-0232/2025, B10-0233/2025, B10-0234/2025, B10-0235/2025 and B10-0236/2025 (minutes of 2.4.2025, item I) (2025/2627(RSP))

    (Majority of the votes cast)

    JOINT MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION

    Adopted

    (Motions for resolutions B10-0231/2025 and B10-0234/2025 fell.)

    Detailed voting results


    9.5. Execution spree in Iran and the confirmation of the death sentences of activists Behrouz Ehsani and Mehdi Hassani (vote)

    Motions for resolutions RC-B10-0220/2025 (minutes of 3.4.2025, item I), B10-0220/2025, B10-0222/2025, B10-0224/2025, B10-0225/2025 and B10-0226/2025 (minutes of 2.4.2025, item I) (2025/2628(RSP))

    (Majority of the votes cast)

    JOINT MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION

    Adopted

    (Motion for a resolution B10-0222/2025 fell.)

    Detailed voting results


    9.6. Immediate risk of further repression by Lukashenka’s regime in Belarus – threats from the Investigative Committee (vote)

    Motions for resolutions RC-B10-0219/2025 (minutes of 3.4.2025, item I), B10-0218/2025, B10-0219/2025, B10-0221/2025, B10-0223/2025, B10-0227/2025 and B10-0229/2025 (minutes of 2.4.2025, item I) (2025/2628(RSP))

    (Majority of the votes cast)

    JOINT MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION

    Adopted

    (Motion for a resolution B10-0218/2025 fell.)

    Detailed voting results


    9.7. Amending Directives (EU) 2022/2464 and (EU) 2024/1760 as regards the dates from which Member States are to apply certain corporate sustainability reporting and due diligence requirements ***I (vote)

    Amending Directives (EU) 2022/2464 and (EU) 2024/1760 as regards the dates from which Member States are to apply certain corporate sustainability reporting and due diligence requirements [COM(2025)0080 – C10-0038/2025 – 2025/0044(COD)] – Committee on Legal Affairs

    (Majority of the votes cast)

    PROPOSAL TO REJECT THE COMMISSION PROPOSAL

    Rejected

    COMMISSION PROPOSAL and AMENDMENTS

    Approved

    Parliament’s first reading thus closed.

    Detailed voting results


    9.8. Energy-intensive industries (vote)

    Motion for a resolution B10-0209/2025 (minutes of 3.4.2025, item I) (2025/2536(RSP))

    The debate had taken place on 2 April 2025 (minutes of 2.4.2025, item 4).

    (Majority of the votes cast)

    MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION

    Adopted

    The following had spoken:

    Pascale Piera, to move an oral amendment to add a new paragraph after paragraph 1. Parliament had not agreed to put the oral amendment to the vote as more than 39 Members had opposed it.

    Detailed voting results


    9.9. Targeted attacks against Christians in the Democratic Republic of the Congo – defending religious freedom and security (vote)

    Motions for resolutions RC-B10-0211/2025, B10-0211/2025, B10-0212/2025, B10-0213/2025, B10-0214/2025, B10-0215/2025, B10-0216/2025 and B10-0217/2025 (minutes of 3.4.2025, item I) (2025/2612(RSP))

    The debate had taken place on 1 April 2025 (minutes of 1.4.2025, item 17).

    (Majority of the votes cast)

    REQUEST FOR POSTPONEMENT (The Left Group)

    Rejected

    JOINT MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION

    Adopted

    (Motions for resolutions B10-0212/2025 and B10-0213/2025 fell.)

    The following had spoken:

    Marc Botenga, on behalf of The Left Group, before the vote, to request that the vote be postponed under Rule 206(4) and Patryk Jaki, against that request.

    Detailed voting results

    9

    (The sitting was suspended at 12:40.)


    IN THE CHAIR: Javi LÓPEZ
    Vice-President

    10. Resumption of the sitting

    The sitting resumed at 15:01.


    11. Approval of the minutes of the previous sitting

    The minutes of the previous sitting were approved.


    12. Health care related tourism: protecting EU patients abroad (debate)

    Commission statement: Health care related tourism: protecting EU patients abroad (2025/2640(RSP))

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

    The following spoke: Tomislav Sokol, on behalf of the PPE Group, Maria Grapini, on behalf of the S&D Group, Margarita de la Pisa Carrión, on behalf of the PfE Group, Michele Picaro, on behalf of the ECR Group, Billy Kelleher, on behalf of the Renew Group, Valentina Palmisano, on behalf of The Left Group, Siegbert Frank Droese, on behalf of the ESN Group, Seán Kelly, Cynthia Ní Mhurchú and Liudas Mažylis.

    The following spoke under the catch-the-eye procedure: Bogdan Rzońca, Lukas Sieper and Alvise Pérez.

    The following spoke: Olivér Várhelyi.

    The debate closed.


    13. Explanations of vote


    13.1. Targeted attacks against Christians in the Democratic Republic of the Congo – defending religious freedom and security (RC-B10-0211/2025) (oral explanations of the vote)

    Seán Kelly


    13.2. Written explanations of the vote

    In accordance with Rule 201, written explanations of the vote could be found on the Members’ pages on Parliament’s website.


    14. Approval of the minutes of the sitting and forwarding of texts adopted

    In accordance with Rule 208(3), the minutes of the sitting would be put to the House for approval at the start of the next sitting.

    With Parliament’s agreement, the texts adopted during the part-session would be forwarded to their respective addressees without delay.


    15. Dates of the next part-session

    The next part-session would be held from 5 May 2025 to 8 May 2025.


    16. Closure of the sitting

    The sitting closed at 15:39.


    17. Adjournment of the session

    The session of the European Parliament was adjourned.

    Alessandro Chiocchetti

    Roberta Metsola

    Secretary-General

    President


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


    I. Motions for resolutions tabled

    Prosecution of journalists in Cameroon, notably the cases of Amadou Vamoulké, Kingsley Fomunyuy Njoka, Mancho Bibixy, Thomas Awah Junior, Tsi Conrad

    Joint motion for a resolution tabled under Rule 150(5) and Rule 136(4):

    on the prosecution of journalists in Cameroon, notably the cases of Amadou Vamoulké, Kingsley Fomunyuy Njoka, Mancho Bibixy, Thomas Awah Junior and Tsi Conrad (2025/2627(RSP)) (RC-B10-0230/2025)
    (replacing motions for resolutions B10-0230/2025, B10-0232/2025, B10-0233/2025, B10-0235/2025, B10-0236/2025 and B10-0237/2025)
    Sebastião Bugalho, Tomáš Zdechovský, Michael Gahler, Isabel Wiseler-Lima, Michał Wawrykiewicz, Tomas Tobé, Luděk Niedermayer, Seán Kelly, Vangelis Meimarakis, Andrey Kovatchev, Wouter Beke, Danuše Nerudová, Loránt Vincze, Jessica Polfjärd, Łukasz Kohut, Antonio López-Istúriz White, Miriam Lexmann, Inese Vaidere
    on behalf of the PPE Group
    Yannis Maniatis, Francisco Assis, Marta Temido
    on behalf of the S&D Group
    Waldemar Tomaszewski, Małgorzata Gosiewska, Sebastian Tynkkynen, Joachim Stanisław Brudziński, Assita Kanko, Alexandr Vondra, Ondřej Krutílek, Veronika Vrecionová, Adam Bielan
    on behalf of the ECR Group
    Jan-Christoph Oetjen, Oihane Agirregoitia Martínez, Petras Auštrevičius, Malik Azmani, Dan Barna, Olivier Chastel, Engin Eroglu, Svenja Hahn, Karin Karlsbro, Ilhan Kyuchyuk, Marie-Agnes Strack-Zimmermann, Hilde Vautmans, Lucia Yar
    on behalf of the Renew Group
    Catarina Vieira
    on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group
    Rima Hassan
    on behalf of The Left Group

    Execution spree in Iran and the confirmation of the death sentences of activists Behrouz Ehsani and Mehdi Hassani

    Joint motion for a resolution tabled under Rule 150(5) and Rule 136(4):

    on the execution spree in Iran and confirmation of the death sentences of activists Behrouz Ehsani and Mehdi Hassani (2025/2628(RSP)) (RC-B10-0220/2025)
    (replacing motions for resolutions B10-0220/2025, B10-0224/2025, B10-0225/2025, B10-0226/2025 and B10-0228/2025)
    Sebastião Bugalho, Loucas Fourlas, Michael Gahler, Isabel Wiseler-Lima, Michał Wawrykiewicz, Tomas Tobé, Davor Ivo Stier, Luděk Niedermayer, Seán Kelly, Vangelis Meimarakis, Andrey Kovatchev, Wouter Beke, Danuše Nerudová, Loránt Vincze, Jessica Polfjärd, Łukasz Kohut, Antonio López-Istúriz White, Tomáš Zdechovský, Miriam Lexmann, Inese Vaidere, Milan Zver
    on behalf of the PPE Group
    Yannis Maniatis, Francisco Assis, Daniel Attard, Evin Incir
    on behalf of the S&D Group
    Adam Bielan, Mariusz Kamiński, Reinis Pozņaks, Jadwiga Wiśniewska, Rihards Kols, Michał Dworczyk, Sebastian Tynkkynen, Maciej Wąsik, Aurelijus Veryga, Dick Erixon, Charlie Weimers, Beatrice Timgren, Ondřej Krutílek, Veronika Vrecionová, Waldemar Tomaszewski, Małgorzata Gosiewska, Assita Kanko, Alexandr Vondra
    on behalf of the ECR Group
    Helmut Brandstätter, Oihane Agirregoitia Martínez, Petras Auštrevičius, Malik Azmani, Dan Barna, Olivier Chastel, Veronika Cifrová Ostrihoňová, Engin Eroglu, Bart Groothuis, Svenja Hahn, Karin Karlsbro, Ilhan Kyuchyuk, Nathalie Loiseau, Urmas Paet, Hilde Vautmans, Lucia Yar
    on behalf of the Renew Group
    Hannah Neumann
    on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

    Immediate risk of further repression by Lukashenka’s regime in Belarus – threats from the Investigative Committee

    Joint motion for a resolution tabled under Rule 150(5) and Rule 136(4):

    on the immediate risk of further repression by Lukashenka’s regime in Belarus – threats from the Investigative Committee (2025/2629(RSP)) (RC-B10-0219/2025)
    (replacing motions for resolutions B10-0219/2025, B10-0221/2025, B10-0223/2025, B10-0227/2025 and B10-0229/2025)
    Sebastião Bugalho, Miriam Lexmann, Michael Gahler, Isabel Wiseler-Lima, Michał Wawrykiewicz, Tomas Tobé, Dariusz Joński, Luděk Niedermayer, Seán Kelly, Vangelis Meimarakis, Andrey Kovatchev, Wouter Beke, Danuše Nerudová, Loránt Vincze, Jessica Polfjärd, Sandra Kalniete, Łukasz Kohut, Antonio López-Istúriz White, Tomáš Zdechovský, Inese Vaidere
    on behalf of the PPE Group
    Yannis Maniatis, Francisco Assis, Robert Biedroń
    on behalf of the S&D Group
    Adam Bielan, Małgorzata Gosiewska, Mariusz Kamiński, Bogdan Rzońca, Arkadiusz Mularczyk, Jadwiga Wiśniewska, Rihards Kols, Michał Dworczyk, Sebastian Tynkkynen, Maciej Wąsik, Reinis Pozņaks, Ivaylo Valchev, Marlena Maląg, Aurelijus Veryga, Joachim Stanisław Brudziński, Dick Erixon, Charlie Weimers, Beatrice Timgren, Ondřej Krutílek, Veronika Vrecionová, Assita Kanko, Alexandr Vondra, Roberts Zīle
    on behalf of the ECR Group
    Michał Kobosko, Oihane Agirregoitia Martínez, Petras Auštrevičius, Malik Azmani, Dan Barna, Helmut Brandstätter, Olivier Chastel, Veronika Cifrová Ostrihoňová, Engin Eroglu, Svenja Hahn, Karin Karlsbro, Ľubica Karvašová, Ilhan Kyuchyuk, Jan-Christoph Oetjen, Urmas Paet, Marie-Agnes Strack-Zimmermann, Eugen Tomac, Hilde Vautmans, Lucia Yar, Dainius Žalimas
    on behalf of the Renew Group
    Mārtiņš Staķis
    on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group
    Merja Kyllönen, Jonas Sjöstedt, Hanna Gedin, Per Clausen, Jussi Saramo, Li Andersson

    Energy-intensive industries

    Motions for resolutions tabled under Rule 136(2) to wind up the debate:

    on energy-intensive industries (2025/2536(RSP)) (B10-0209/2025)
    Giorgio Gori, Wouter Beke, Brigitte van den Berg, Benedetta Scuderi
    on behalf of the ITRE Committee

    Targeted attacks against Christians in the Democratic Republic of the Congo – defending religious freedom and security

    Motions for resolutions tabled under Rule 136(2) to wind up the debate:

    on the targeted attacks against Christians in the Democratic Republic of the Congo: defending religious freedom and security (2025/2612(RSP)) (B10-0211/2025)
    Hilde Vautmans, Abir Al-Sahlani, Dan Barna, Urmas Paet, Yvan Verougstraete
    on behalf of the Renew Group

    on targeted attacks against Christians in the Democratic Republic of the Congo – defending religious freedom and security (2025/2612(RSP)) (B10-0212/2025)
    Alexander Sell, Tomasz Froelich
    on behalf of the ESN Group

    on the targeted attacks against Christians in the Democratic Republic of the Congo: defending religious freedom and security (2025/2612(RSP)) (B10-0213/2025)
    Pierre-Romain Thionnet, Matthieu Valet, Susanna Ceccardi, Silvia Sardone, Roberto Vannacci, Hermann Tertsch, Jorge Martín Frías
    on behalf of the PfE Group

    on the targeted attacks against Christians in the Democratic Republic of the Congo: defending religious freedom and security (2025/2612(RSP)) (B10-0214/2025)
    Mounir Satouri
    on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

    on the targeted attacks against Christians in the Democratic Republic of the Congo: defending religious freedom and security (2025/2612(RSP)) (B10-0215/2025)
    Lukas Mandl, David McAllister, Andrzej Halicki, Michael Gahler, Sebastião Bugalho, Željana Zovko, François-Xavier Bellamy, Christophe Gomart, Ingeborg Ter Laak, Andrey Kovatchev, Miriam Lexmann, Rasa Juknevičienė, Antonio López-Istúriz White
    on behalf of the PPE Group

    on the targeted attacks against Christians in the Democratic Republic of the Congo: defending religious freedom and security (2025/2612(RSP)) (B10-0216/2025)
    Adam Bielan, Mariusz Kamiński, Sebastian Tynkkynen, Cristian Terheş, Maciej Wąsik, Aurelijus Veryga, Jadwiga Wiśniewska, Małgorzata Gosiewska, Waldemar Tomaszewski, Joachim Stanisław Brudziński
    on behalf of the ECR Group

    on targeted attacks against Christians in the Democratic Republic of the Congo: defending religious freedom and security (2025/2612(RSP)) (B10-0217/2025)
    Yannis Maniatis, Marit Maij
    on behalf of the S&D Group

    Joint motion for a resolution tabled under Rule 136(2) and (4):

    on the targeted attacks against Christians in the Democratic Republic of the Congo: defending religious freedom and security (2025/2612(RSP)) (B10-0211/2025)
    (replacing motions for resolutions B10-0211/2025, B10-0214/2025, B10-0215/2025, B10-0216/2025 and B10-0217/2025)
    Lukas Mandl, David McAllister, Andrzej Halicki, Michael Gahler, Sebastião Bugalho, Željana Zovko, François-Xavier Bellamy, Christophe Gomart, Ingeborg Ter Laak, Andrey Kovatchev, Miriam Lexmann, Rasa Juknevičienė, Antonio López-Istúriz White
    on behalf of the PPE Group
    Yannis Maniatis, Marit Maij
    on behalf of the S&D Group
    Patryk Jaki, Adam Bielan, Bert-Jan Ruissen, Waldemar Tomaszewski, Aurelijus Veryga, Sebastian Tynkkynen, Bogdan Rzońca, Arkadiusz Mularczyk, Mariusz Kamiński, Marlena Maląg, Marion Maréchal, Małgorzata Gosiewska, Alberico Gambino, Nicolas Bay, Waldemar Buda, Piotr Müller, Maciej Wąsik, Kosma Złotowski, Jacek Ozdoba, Daniel Obajtek, Tobiasz Bocheński, Jadwiga Wiśniewska, Joachim Stanisław Brudziński, Carlo Fidanza, Cristian Terheş
    on behalf of the ECR Group
    Hilde Vautmans, Petras Auštrevičius, Dan Barna, Olivier Chastel, Ľubica Karvašová, Ilhan Kyuchyuk, Urmas Paet, Lucia Yar
    on behalf of the Renew Group
    Mounir Satouri
    on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group


    II. Petitions

    Petitions Nos 0260-25 to 0376-25 had been entered in the register on 28 March 2025 and had been forwarded to the committee responsible, in accordance with Rule 232(9) and (10).

    The President had, on 28 March 2025, forwarded to the committee responsible, in accordance with Rule 232(15), petitions addressed to the European Parliament by natural or legal persons who were not citizens of the European Union and who did not reside, or have their registered office, in a Member State.


    III. Decisions to draw up own-initiative reports

    Decisions to draw up own-initiative reports (Rule 55)

    (Following the Conference of Presidents’ decision of 26 March 2025)

    AFCO Committee

    – Implementation of the Charter on Fundamental Rights of the European Union in the EU legal framework (2025/2075(INI))
    (opinion: LIBE)

    AFET, DEVE committees

    – Global Gateway – past impacts and future orientation (2025/2073(INI))
    (opinion: INTA)

    CONT Committee

    – Evaluating the successes achieved and lessons learned from EU enlargements since 2004 in the implementation of the EU budget (2025/2071(INI))

    ECON Committee

    – Access to finance for SMEs and scale-ups (2025/2072(INI))

    FEMM Committee

    – Gender inequalities in health, specifically as regards gender-specific conditions (2025/2074(INI))
    (opinion: SANT)

    Decisions to draw up own-initiative reports (Rules 55 and 213)

    (Following the Conference of Presidents’ decision of 26 March 2025)

    EUDS Special Committee

    – Findings and recommendations of the Special Committee on the European Democracy Shield (2025/2069(INI))

    HOUS Special Committee

    – Housing crisis in the European Union with the aim of proposing solutions for decent, sustainable and affordable housing (2025/2070(INI))


    IV. Consent procedure

    Reports with a motion for a non-legislative resolution (Rule 107(2))

    (Following notification by the Conference of Committee Chairs on 26 March 2025)

    INTA Committee

    – The termination of the Voluntary Partnership Agreement (VPA) between the EU and the Republic of Cameroon on forest law enforcement, governance and trade in timber and timber products to the European Union (FLEGT) (2024/0245M(NLE) – 2024/0245(NLE))
    (opinion: DEVE)


    V. Documents received

    The following documents had been received:

    1) from other institutions

    – Proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Regulations (EU) 2015/1017, (EU) 2021/523, (EU) 2021/695 and (EU) 2021/1153 as regards increasing the efficiency of the EU guarantee under Regulation (EU) 2021/523 and simplifying reporting requirements (COM(2025)0084 – C10-0036/2025 – 2025/0040(COD))
    In accordance with Rules 151(1) and 152(1), the President would consult the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions on this proposal.
    referred to committee responsible: BUDG, ECON
    opinion: ENVI, ITRE, TRAN

    2) from Members

    – Catherine Griset. Motion for a resolution on promoting knowledge learning and transfer in the crafts and heritage restoration professions (B10-0153/2025)
    referred to committee responsible: CULT

    – Beatrice Timgren. Motion for a resolution on reassessing the European Green Deal: innovation before costly emission cuts (B10-0170/2025)
    referred to committee responsible: ENVI
    opinion: ITRE

    – Virginie Joron. Motion for a resolution on the annulment of the elections in Romania (B10-0172/2025)
    referred to committee responsible: LIBE

    – Ľuboš Blaha, Fernand Kartheiser, Hans Neuhoff, Friedrich Pürner, Şerban Dimitrie Sturdza, Filip Turek, Claudiu-Richard Târziu, Milan Uhrík and Petar Volgin. Motion for a resolution on the deteriorating rule of law situation in Romania (B10-0173/2025)
    referred to committee responsible: LIBE

    – Christine Anderson, Anja Arndt, René Aust, Arno Bausemer, Zsuzsanna Borvendég, Irmhild Boßdorf, Markus Buchheit, Petr Bystron, Ivan David, Ondřej Dostál, Tomasz Froelich, Petras Gražulis, Roman Haider, Gerald Hauser, Marc Jongen, Alexander Jungbluth, Mary Khan, Maximilian Krah, Rada Laykova, Luis-Vicențiu Lazarus, Milan Mazurek, Alexander Sell, Petra Steger, Stanislav Stoyanov, Marcin Sypniewski and Stanisław Tyszka. Motion for a resolution on political repression and fundamental rights in Bulgaria (B10-0198/2025)
    referred to committee responsible: LIBE


    ATTENDANCE REGISTER

    Present:

    Aaltola Mika, Adamowicz Magdalena, Aftias Georgios, Agirregoitia Martínez Oihane, Agius Peter, Agius Saliba Alex, Alexandraki Galato, Allione Grégory, Al-Sahlani Abir, Anadiotis Nikolaos, Anderson Christine, Andersson Li, Andresen Rasmus, Andrews Barry, Andriukaitis Vytenis Povilas, Angel Marc, Annemans Gerolf, Annunziata Lucia, Arias Echeverría Pablo, Arimont Pascal, Arłukowicz Bartosz, Arnaoutoglou Sakis, Arndt Anja, Arvanitis Konstantinos, Asens Llodrà Jaume, Assis Francisco, Attard Daniel, Aubry Manon, Auštrevičius Petras, Azmani Malik, Bajada Thomas, Baljeu Jeannette, Ballarín Cereza Laura, Bardella Jordan, Barley Katarina, Barna Dan, Barrena Arza Pernando, Bartulica Stephen Nikola, Bartůšek Nikola, Bausemer Arno, Bay Nicolas, Bay Christophe, Beke Wouter, Beleris Fredis, Bellamy François-Xavier, Benjumea Benjumea Isabel, Berendsen Tom, Berger Stefan, Berlato Sergio, Bernhuber Alexander, Biedroń Robert, Bielan Adam, Bischoff Gabriele, Blaha Ľuboš, Blinkevičiūtė Vilija, Blom Rachel, Bloss Michael, Bocheński Tobiasz, Boeselager Damian, Bogdan Ioan-Rareş, Bonaccini Stefano, Bonte Barbara, Borchia Paolo, Borrás Pabón Mireia, Borvendég Zsuzsanna, Bosanac Gordan, Boßdorf Irmhild, Bosse Stine, Botenga Marc, Boyer Gilles, Boylan Lynn, Brandstätter Helmut, Brasier-Clain Marie-Luce, Braun Grzegorz, Brejza Krzysztof, Bricmont Saskia, Brnjac Nikolina, Brudziński Joachim Stanisław, Buchheit Markus, Buczek Tomasz, Buda Daniel, Buda Waldemar, Budka Borys, Bugalho Sebastião, Buła Andrzej, Bullmann Udo, Burkhardt Delara, Buxadé Villalba Jorge, Bystron Petr, Bžoch Jaroslav, Camara Mélissa, Canfin Pascal, Carberry Nina, Cârciu Gheorghe, Carême Damien, Casa David, Caspary Daniel, Castillo Laurent, Cavazzini Anna, Cavedagna Stefano, Ceccardi Susanna, Cepeda José, Ceulemans Estelle, Chahim Mohammed, Chaibi Leila, Chastel Olivier, Chinnici Caterina, Christensen Asger, Ciccioli Carlo, Cifrová Ostrihoňová Veronika, Ciriani Alessandro, Clausen Per, Clergeau Christophe, Cormand David, Corrado Annalisa, Costanzo Vivien, Cotrim De Figueiredo João, Cowen Barry, Cremer Tobias, Crespo Díaz Carmen, Cristea Andi, Crosetto Giovanni, Cunha Paulo, Dahl Henrik, Danielsson Johan, Dávid Dóra, David Ivan, Decaro Antonio, de la Hoz Quintano Raúl, Della Valle Danilo, Deloge Valérie, De Masi Fabio, De Meo Salvatore, Demirel Özlem, Devaux Valérie, Dibrani Adnan, Diepeveen Ton, Dieringer Elisabeth, Dîncu Vasile, Di Rupo Elio, Disdier Mélanie, Dobrev Klára, Doherty Regina, Doleschal Christian, Dömötör Csaba, Do Nascimento Cabral Paulo, Donazzan Elena, Dorfmann Herbert, Dostalova Klara, Dostál Ondřej, Droese Siegbert Frank, Düpont Lena, Dworczyk Michał, Ecke Matthias, Ehler Christian, Ehlers Marieke, Eriksson Sofie, Erixon Dick, Eroglu Engin, Estaràs Ferragut Rosa, Everding Sebastian, Ezcurra Almansa Alma, Falcă Gheorghe, Falcone Marco, Farantouris Nikolas, Farreng Laurence, Ferber Markus, Ferenc Viktória, Fernández Jonás, Firmenich Ruth, Flanagan Luke Ming, Fourlas Loucas, Fourreau Emma, Fragkos Emmanouil, Freund Daniel, Frigout Anne-Sophie, Friis Sigrid, Fritzon Heléne, Froelich Tomasz, Fuglsang Niels, Funchion Kathleen, Furet Angéline, Furore Mario, Gahler Michael, Galán Estrella, Gálvez Lina, Gambino Alberico, García Hermida-Van Der Walle Raquel, Garraud Jean-Paul, Gasiuk-Pihowicz Kamila, Geadi Geadis, Gedin Hanna, Geese Alexandra, Geier Jens, Geisel Thomas, Gemma Chiara, Gerbrandy Gerben-Jan, Germain Jean-Marc, Gerzsenyi Gabriella, Geuking Niels, Gieseke Jens, Giménez Larraz Borja, Girauta Vidal Juan Carlos, Glavak Sunčana, Glück Andreas, Glucksmann Raphaël, Goerens Charles, Gomart Christophe, Gómez López Sandra, Gonçalves Bruno, Gonçalves Sérgio, González Casares Nicolás, González Pons Esteban, Gori Giorgio, Gosiewska Małgorzata, Gotink Dirk, Gozi Sandro, Grapini Maria, Gražulis Petras, Gregorová Markéta, Grims Branko, Griset Catherine, Gronkiewicz-Waltz Hanna, Groothuis Bart, Grossmann Elisabeth, Grudler Christophe, Gualmini Elisabetta, Guarda Cristina, Guetta Bernard, Guzenina Maria, Győri Enikő, Gyürk András, Hadjipantela Michalis, Haider Roman, Halicki Andrzej, Hansen Niels Flemming, Hassan Rima, Hauser Gerald, Häusling Martin, Hava Mircea-Gheorghe, Heide Hannes, Heinäluoma Eero, Herbst Niclas, Herranz García Esther, Hetman Krzysztof, Hohlmeier Monika, Hojsík Martin, Holmgren Pär, Homs Ginel Alicia, Humberto Sérgio, Ijabs Ivars, Imart Céline, Incir Evin, Inselvini Paolo, Iovanovici Şoşoacă Diana, Jalloul Muro Hana, Jamet France, Jarubas Adam, Jerković Romana, Jongen Marc, Joński Dariusz, Joron Virginie, Jouvet Pierre, Joveva Irena, Juknevičienė Rasa, Junco García Nora, Jungbluth Alexander, Kalfon François, Kaliňák Erik, Kaljurand Marina, Kalniete Sandra, Kamiński Mariusz, Kanev Radan, Kanko Assita, Karlsbro Karin, Kartheiser Fernand, Karvašová Ľubica, Katainen Elsi, Kefalogiannis Emmanouil, Kelleher Billy, Keller Fabienne, Kelly Seán, Kemp Martine, Kennes Rudi, Khan Mary, Kircher Sophia, Knafo Sarah, Knotek Ondřej, Kohut Łukasz, Kolář Ondřej, Kollár Kinga, Kols Rihards, Konečná Kateřina, Kopacz Ewa, Körner Moritz, Kountoura Elena, Kovařík Ondřej, Kovatchev Andrey, Krištopans Vilis, Kruis Sebastian, Krutílek Ondřej, Kubín Tomáš, Kuhnke Alice, Kulja András Tivadar, Kulmuni Katri, Kyllönen Merja, Kyuchyuk Ilhan, Lakos Eszter, Lalucq Aurore, Lange Bernd, Langensiepen Katrin, Laššáková Judita, László András, Latinopoulou Afroditi, Laureti Camilla, Laykova Rada, Lazarov Ilia, Lazarus Luis-Vicențiu, Le Callennec Isabelle, Leggeri Fabrice, Lenaers Jeroen, Leonardelli Julien, Lewandowski Janusz, Lexmann Miriam, Liese Peter, Lins Norbert, Loiseau Nathalie, Løkkegaard Morten, Lopatka Reinhold, López Javi, López Aguilar Juan Fernando, Lövin Isabella, Luena César, Łukacijewska Elżbieta Katarzyna, Lupo Giuseppe, McAllister David, Maestre Cristina, Magoni Lara, Maij Marit, Maląg Marlena, Manda Claudiu, Mandl Lukas, Maniatis Yannis, Mantovani Mario, Maran Pierfrancesco, Marczułajtis-Walczak Jagna, Mariani Thierry, Marino Ignazio Roberto, Marquardt Erik, Martins Catarina, Marzà Ibáñez Vicent, Mato Gabriel, Matthieu Sara, Mavrides Costas, Mayer Georg, Mazurek Milan, Mažylis Liudas, McNamara Michael, Mebarek Nora, Mehnert Alexandra, Meimarakis Vangelis, Mendia Idoia, Mertens Verena, Mesure Marina, Metsola Roberta, Metz Tilly, Mikser Sven, Millán Mon Francisco José, Miranda Paz Ana, Molnár Csaba, Montero Irene, Montserrat Dolors, Morace Carolina, Morano Nadine, Moratti Letizia, Moreira de Sá Tiago, Moreno Sánchez Javier, Moretti Alessandra, Motreanu Dan-Ştefan, Mularczyk Arkadiusz, Müller Piotr, Mureşan Siegfried, Muşoiu Ştefan, Nagyová Jana, Nardella Dario, Navarrete Rojas Fernando, Nemec Matjaž, Nerudová Danuše, Nesci Denis, Neuhoff Hans, Neumann Hannah, Nevado del Campo Elena, Niebler Angelika, Niedermayer Luděk, Niinistö Ville, Nikolic Aleksandar, Ní Mhurchú Cynthia, Noichl Maria, Nordqvist Rasmus, Novakov Andrey, Nykiel Mirosława, Obajtek Daniel, Ódor Ľudovít, Oetjen Jan-Christoph, Ohisalo Maria, Oliveira João, Omarjee Younous, Ó Ríordáin Aodhán, Orlando Leoluca, Ozdoba Jacek, Paet Urmas, Pajín Leire, Palmisano Valentina, Panayiotou Fidias, Papadakis Kostas, Papandreou Nikos, Pappas Nikos, Pascual de la Parte Nicolás, Patriciello Aldo, Paulus Jutta, Pedulla’ Gaetano, Pellerin-Carlin Thomas, Peltier Guillaume, Penkova Tsvetelina, Pennelle Gilles, Pereira Lídia, Pérez Alvise, Peter-Hansen Kira Marie, Petrov Hristo, Picaro Michele, Picula Tonino, Piera Pascale, Pietikäinen Sirpa, Pimpie Pierre, de la Pisa Carrión Margarita, Polato Daniele, Polfjärd Jessica, Popescu Virgil-Daniel, Pozņaks Reinis, Prebilič Vladimir, Princi Giusi, Protas Jacek, Rackete Carola, Radtke Dennis, Rafowicz Emma, Ratas Jüri, Rechagneux Julie, Regner Evelyn, Repasi René, Repp Sabrina, Ressler Karlo, Reuten Thijs, Riba i Giner Diana, Ricci Matteo, Ripa Manuela, Rodrigues André, Ros Sempere Marcos, Roth Neveďalová Katarína, Rougé André, Ruissen Bert-Jan, Ruotolo Sandro, Rzońca Bogdan, Saeidi Arash, Salini Massimiliano, Salis Ilaria, Salla Aura, Sánchez Amor Nacho, Sanchez Julien, Sancho Murillo Elena, Saramo Jussi, Sardone Silvia, Šarec Marjan, Sargiacomo Eric, Satouri Mounir, Saudargas Paulius, Sbai Majdouline, Sberna Antonella, Schaldemose Christel, Schaller-Baross Ernő, Schenk Oliver, Scheuring-Wielgus Joanna, Schieder Andreas, Schilling Lena, Schneider Christine, Schwab Andreas, Seekatz Ralf, Sell Alexander, Serrano Sierra Rosa, Serra Sánchez Isabel, Sidl Günther, Sienkiewicz Bartłomiej, Sieper Lukas, Simon Sven, Singer Christine, Sinkevičius Virginijus, Sjöstedt Jonas, Śmiszek Krzysztof, Smith Anthony, Smit Sander, Sokol Tomislav, Solier Diego, Solís Pérez Susana, Sommen Liesbet, Sonneborn Martin, Sorel Malika, Sousa Silva Hélder, Søvndal Villy, Squarta Marco, Staķis Mārtiņš, Stancanelli Raffaele, Ştefănuță Nicolae, Steger Petra, Stier Davor Ivo, Storm Kristoffer, Stöteler Sebastiaan, Stoyanov Stanislav, Strada Cecilia, Streit Joachim, Strik Tineke, Strolenberg Anna, Sturdza Şerban Dimitrie, Stürgkh Anna, Szczerba Michał, Szekeres Pál, Szydło Beata, Tamburrano Dario, Tânger Corrêa António, Tarczyński Dominik, Tarquinio Marco, Tarr Zoltán, Târziu Claudiu-Richard, Tavares Carla, Tegethoff Kai, Temido Marta, Teodorescu Georgiana, Terheş Cristian, Ter Laak Ingeborg, Terras Riho, Tertsch Hermann, Thionnet Pierre-Romain, Timgren Beatrice, Tinagli Irene, Tobback Bruno, Tobé Tomas, Tolassy Rody, Tomac Eugen, Tomašič Zala, Tomaszewski Waldemar, Tomc Romana, Tonin Matej, Toom Jana, Topo Raffaele, Torselli Francesco, Tosi Flavio, Toussaint Marie, Tovaglieri Isabella, Toveri Pekka, Tridico Pasquale, Tsiodras Dimitris, Turek Filip, Tynkkynen Sebastian, Uhrík Milan, Ušakovs Nils, Vaidere Inese, Valchev Ivaylo, Valet Matthieu, Van Brempt Kathleen, Van Brug Anouk, Vandendriessche Tom, Van Dijck Kris, Van Lanschot Reinier, Van Leeuwen Jessika, Vannacci Roberto, Van Overtveldt Johan, Van Sparrentak Kim, Varaut Alexandre, Vasconcelos Ana, Vasile-Voiculescu Vlad, Vautmans Hilde, Vedrenne Marie-Pierre, Ventola Francesco, Veryga Aurelijus, Vešligaj Marko, Vicsek Annamária, Vieira Catarina, Vigenin Kristian, Vilimsky Harald, Vincze Loránt, Vind Marianne, Vistisen Anders, Vivaldini Mariateresa, Volgin Petar, von der Schulenburg Michael, Vondra Alexandr, Voss Axel, Vrecionová Veronika, Vázquez Lázara Adrián, Waitz Thomas, Walsh Maria, Walsmann Marion, Warborn Jörgen, Warnke Jan-Peter, Wąsik Maciej, Wawrykiewicz Michał, Wechsler Andrea, Weimers Charlie, Werbrouck Séverine, Wiezik Michal, Winkler Iuliu, Winzig Angelika, Wiseler-Lima Isabel, Wiśniewska Jadwiga, Wolters Lara, Yar Lucia, Yon-Courtin Stéphanie, Yoncheva Elena, Zacharia Maria, Zalewska Anna, Žalimas Dainius, Zan Alessandro, Zarzalejos Javier, Zdechovský Tomáš, Zdrojewski Bogdan Andrzej, Zijlstra Auke, Zīle Roberts, Zingaretti Nicola, Złotowski Kosma, Zovko Željana, Zver Milan

    MIL OSI Europe News

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Hearings – Chemical Submission: non-consensual administration of psychoactive substances – 09-04-2025 – Committee on Women’s Rights and Gender Equality – Committee on Public Health

    Source: European Parliament

    On Wednesday, 9 April 2025, the FEMM Committee jointly with the Committee on Public Health will hold a hearing on “Hearing on Chemical Submission: non-consensual administration of psychoactive substances“.

    The hearing aims to shed light on the widespread phenomenon of chemical submission, emphasizing that it extends beyond bars and nightclubs and can occur in various social settings, including within families, friendships, and professional circles. Chemical submission poses serious risks to a victim’s (sexual) autonomy, safety, and well-being. While anyone can be affected, women are disproportionately targeted, particularly in cases of sexual violence.

    MIL OSI Europe News

  • MIL-OSI Security: United States Files False Claims Act Complaint Against Vohra Wound Physicians Management and Its Owner Alleging False Claims for Wound Care Services

    Source: United States Attorneys General 5

    The United States filed a complaint under the False Claims Act against Vohra Wound Physicians Management LLC (Vohra) and its founder and majority owner, Dr. Ameet Vohra, for allegedly causing the submission of false claims to Medicare for overbilled and medically unnecessary wound care services. Vohra is one of the nation’s largest specialty wound care providers and contracts with hundreds of nursing homes and skilled nursing facilities throughout the country to provide wound care services to those facilities’ patients at their bedside.

    “Providers that overbill the government for services, or bill for services that are unreasonable or medically unnecessary, undermine the integrity of the Medicare program and waste taxpayer dollars,” said Deputy Assistant Attorney General Michael D. Granston of the Justice Department’s Civil Division. “The Justice Department will hold accountable providers who prioritize their own enrichment over the medical needs of their patients.”

    “This office is committed to protecting our nation’s seniors and the important federal programs that support them,” said U.S. Attorney Hayden O’Byrne for the Southern District of Florida. “When providers seek to misappropriate public funds for private gain, we will work with our partners to pursue those responsible.”

    “Healthcare fraud is harmful to all consumers, artificially and unnecessarily increasing the costs of care for everyone,” said Acting U.S. Attorney Tara M. Lyons for the Southern District of Georgia. “Identifying and ending fraudulent billing activity is essential to keeping healthcare costs manageable for patients and for taxpayer-funded healthcare programs.”

    According to the United States’ complaint, Vohra and Dr. Vohra knowingly engaged in a nationwide scheme to falsely bill Medicare for surgical debridement procedures to maximize revenue.  Debridement is a procedure to remove impediments to healing from a wound, such as dead or unhealthy tissue, and can be accomplished in several ways including nonsurgical and surgical methods.

    The complaint alleges that the defendants pursued their fraudulent scheme in three primary ways. First, Vohra created a proprietary Electronic Medical Record (EMR) software that was programmed to bill debridements as surgical procedures even when they were not. Second, Vohra hired physicians without wound care expertise and provided training that omitted relevant Medicare payment rules and intentionally conflated the definitions of surgical and nonsurgical debridement procedures. Third, Vohra set corporate debridement targets based solely on revenue goals and pressured its physicians to meet those targets. As a result, Vohra allegedly caused the submission of claims for surgical debridement services that were not medically necessary and used billing codes that represented more complex procedures than were actually performed (commonly referred to as “upcoding”).   

    The complaint also alleges that the defendants programmed Vohra’s proprietary EMR software to improperly apply the Modifier 25 billing code and charge Medicare for exams that were not separately billable from surgical debridement procedures performed on the same day. Because surgical debridements are billed as global surgical packages and include payment for an examination, evaluation and management (E&M) services are only payable on the same day if a significant service is performed that is separately identifiable from the surgical debridement as signified by Modifier 25. According to the United States’ complaint, Vohra’s proprietary EMR software automatically added Modifier 25 to its E&M claims without regard to whether the modifier was appropriate, thereby causing the submission of claims for E&M services that were not payable.

    This matter is being handled by the Civil Division’s Commercial Litigation Branch, Fraud Section, and the U.S. Attorney’s Offices for the Southern District of Florida and Southern District of Georgia.  Investigative support is being provided by the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) Office of Inspector General. The lawsuit was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida and is captioned United States v. Dr. Ameet Vohra; Vohra Wound Care Management, LLC; and VHS Holdings, PA, No. 25-cv-21570 (S.D. Fla.).

    Trial Attorney Kirsten Mayer of the Civil Division’s Fraud Section, Assistant U.S. Attorney Ryan Grover for the Southern District of Georgia, and Assistant U.S. Attorney Christopher Cheek for the Southern District of Florida are handling the matter.

    The investigation and prosecution of this matter illustrates the government’s emphasis on combating healthcare fraud. One of the most powerful tools in this effort is the False Claims Act. Tips and complaints from all sources about potential fraud, waste, abuse, and mismanagement can be reported to the HHS at 800-HHS-TIPS (800-447-8477).

    The claims asserted in the government’s complaint are allegations only, and there has been no determination of liability.

    MIL Security OSI

  • MIL-OSI Security: Hospital, Medical Imaging Services Company, and Others to Pay $3.1 Million to Resolve False Claims Act Allegations

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

    EL PASO, Texas – The United States has reached agreements with several individuals and entities to resolve allegations of improper billing for medical imaging services at a surgical hospital in El Paso. Desert Imaging Services, L.P., In Tandem Solutions Group, LLC, and Leroy Candelaria agreed to pay the United States $693,913; Donald Burris and Vox Intus, LLC agreed to forfeit $325,000; and East El Paso Physician’s Medical Center, LLC, doing business as Foundation Surgical Hospital of El Paso, agreed to entry of a consent judgment in the amount of $2,081,739.

    The United States alleged that the settling parties engaged in an illegal kickback and pass-through billing scheme in which Desert Imaging used Foundation Surgical Hospital’s National Provider Identifier (NPI) to submit claims for medical imaging services. Although the patients who received these services had no connection with the hospital, billing the claims as hospital outpatient services allowed Desert Imaging to obtain a higher rate of reimbursement from Federal healthcare programs. In exchange for letting Desert Imaging use its NPI, Foundation Surgical Hospital retained 17% of payments on the claims.

    The settlements announced today resolve a lawsuit filed under the qui tam or whistleblower provision of the False Claims Act, which permits private parties to file suit on behalf of the United States for false claims and share in a portion of the government’s recovery. The qui tam lawsuit is captioned United States and Texas ex rel. Motts v. East El Paso Physician’s Medical Center, et al., Case No. EP-18-CV-348-LS (W.D. Tex.).

    Assistant United States Attorney Thomas Parnham and former Assistant United States Attorney Eddie Castillo handled this matter on behalf of the government.

    The claims resolved by the settlement are allegations only and there has been no determination of liability.

    ###

    MIL Security OSI

  • MIL-OSI Global: Shop smarter, not harder. How gentle messaging can help the planet more than tough talk

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Jasmine Mohsen, Doctoral Researcher in Consumer Psychology and Consumer Behaviour, University of Leeds

    Heavy-handed messaging? Andy Soloman/Shutterstock

    Fast fashion is booming, but so is its environmental toll. With up to 10% of global carbon emissions linked to the industry, the over-consumption of cheap clothing has made sustainability campaigns more vital than ever. Yet, even as awareness of fast fashion’s environmental harm grows, many consumers remain resistant to changing their shopping habits.

    My recent research investigated a surprising obstacle to these campaigns: the language used to drive change. I explored how assertive messages such as: “Stop shopping to save the planet!” fare when pitted against softer suggestions along the lines of: “Consider shopping less for a greener future.”

    The results reveal that pushy messaging not only fails but actively backfires, triggering anger and resistance that can undermine the campaign’s goals.

    At the heart of this resistance lies psychological reactance – a defensive reaction to perceived threats to personal freedom. Humans value autonomy, and messages that come across as commands (“must”, “stop”, “don’t”) can spark a “boomerang effect”, prompting people to defy the directive – even if they agree with its underlying intent.

    This reluctance may be attributed to the fact that buying clothes is frequently linked to self-esteem, social desirability and confidence. Shopping is often an enjoyable and empowering experience, driven by personal choice and satisfaction. But when marketing relies on guilt or pressure, this positive engagement can shift to discomfort and resistance. Rather than nurturing real connections with brands’ messages, forceful campaigns risk weakening trust and consumer loyalty.

    In the study, 196 participants in the US were shown posters designed as part of a campaign to reduce consumption. One group saw an assertive poster demanding they stop shopping to help the environment. The other saw a suggestive poster encouraging wise shopping for the same goal. Participants then completed surveys assessing their emotional responses and willingness to alter their behaviour.

    The findings were clear. Assertive messages provoked stronger feelings of anger and defensiveness in the face of a perceived threat than suggestive ones. These negative emotions led to lower compliance with the campaign’s goals, showing that pushy language can diminish – rather than enhance – effectiveness.

    The role of anger

    The emotional fallout of assertive messaging doesn’t stop there. The study found that anger, sparked by perceived restrictions, affects consumer behaviour. Participants who felt their freedom was threatened were not only less likely to reduce shopping but also more likely to dismiss the campaign altogether. Anger adds another barrier to encouraging sustainable habits.

    However, this anger can also fuel a desire to regain autonomy, pushing consumers toward action that reaffirms their independence. This could be resisting the message or making choices that feel self-directed – it may even drive consumers towards unsustainable choices.

    The findings uncovered several insights for anyone designing campaigns to encourage sustainable consumption.




    Read more:
    Five consumer myths to ditch in 2025


    First, go with suggestion over command. Messages framed as friendly suggestions, such as “consider” or “you might”, are less likely to provoke resistance and more likely to inspire positive change.

    Second, focus on empowerment. Highlighting the autonomy of the consumer and the benefits of participation can encourage them to cooperate without threatening their individual freedom.

    Third, educate with empathy. Campaigns that inform consumers about the environmental impact of their habits, without using forceful language, are better received.

    In 2011, outdoor clothing brand Patagonia launched an advert with the message “Don’t Buy This Jacket” – a good example of assertive language and reverse psychology. The campaign sent a message about buying less and taking care of the environment. As a strategy, this is known as “demartketing”.

    Interestingly, although it used the “don’t” command, Patagonia was giving people a choice to ignore the message or question why they were buying the jacket in the first place. Although Patagonia’s sales jumped by 30% the following year, the campaign was about more than selling. The company wanted to encourage people to think about the impact of Black Friday as well as their wider buying habits, and to consider repairing things, reusing them or buying clothing that would last longer.

    Of course, these insights extend beyond fast fashion. Judgemental messaging has been shown to fail in areas such as smoking cessation, exercise and diet campaigns, suggesting that softer approaches may work better across a range of public health and environmental initiatives.

    The environmental cost of fast fashion is undeniable, with millions of tons of clothing wasted annually and more than a billion tons of greenhouse gases emitted each year. Encouraging consumers to embrace sustainable habits, from buying secondhand to adopting minimalism, is vital. However, as our research shows, how we ask for that change makes all the difference.

    If we want people to shop less for the planet’s sake, it might be worth abandoning the “here’s what you must do” messaging in favour of strategies that respect their freedom. This could be a powerful way to shift behaviour towards a sustainable future – one suggestion at a time.

    Jasmine Mohsen 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. Shop smarter, not harder. How gentle messaging can help the planet more than tough talk – https://theconversation.com/shop-smarter-not-harder-how-gentle-messaging-can-help-the-planet-more-than-tough-talk-249217

    MIL OSI – Global Reports

  • MIL-OSI USA: Goldman, Gillibrand, Schumer, Jeffries, Garbarino, and Nadler Lead Bipartisan Letter Demanding President Trump Reverse Cuts to World Trade Center Health Program

    Source: US Congressman Dan Goldman (NY-10)

    Firing of WTCHP Administrator, Purges of NIOSH Staff Devastate Program’s Ability to Provide Health Care to 137,000 9/11 Survivors and First Responders 

     

    Trump Administration Plans to Fire All NIOSH Staff in the Coming Days 

     

    Read the Letter Here 

    Washington, D.C – Congressman Dan Goldman (NY-10) today, alongside Senator Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY), Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY), House Democratic Leader Hakeem Jeffries (NY-08), and Representatives Jerrold Nadler (NY-12) and Andrew Garbarino (NY-02) led a bipartisan letter calling on President Trump and HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. to reverse cuts to National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) staff that provide critical support for the World Trade Center Health Program (WTCHP).  

    “We were appalled at the recent announcement that the Department of Health and Human Services cut two-thirds of the staff at the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH), under which the WTCHP operates,” the Members wrote.  

    The WTCHP, which provides health care for 137,000 9/11 survivors and first responders, does not employ any physicians and relies heavily on NIOSH staff to deliver care and reward research grants on 9/11 conditions and treatments. Under the law, medical doctors need to certify new enrollees’ medical conditions before they can begin receiving care. The WTCHP has always used NIOSH staff doctors to certify these conditions, and firing them prevents the program from onboarding new 9/11 survivors and first responders or updating existing enrollees’ diagnoses. 

    “We understand that your plan is to ultimately eliminate all NIOSH staff in the next few days. The WTCHP relies on NIOSH staff to fulfill many of its obligations under the law, and eliminating staff that implement it, especially as more and more responders and survivors fall ill with 9/11-related conditions, will directly interfere with program operations and undermine access to the treatment these heroes have earned and deserve,” the Members continued. 

    The Trump Administration also fired Dr. John Howard, who has served as the WTCHP’s administrator since its creation and has been re-appointed to the role by Democratic and Republican presidents, including by President Trump in his first term. Dr. Howard plays a critical role as the final decision-maker in determining which petitioned conditions should be covered and ensures the WTCHP is adhering to the laws enacted by Congress. Removing him severely damages the program’s ability to effectively serve its 137,000 enrollees, as well as the estimated 400,000 individuals who were exposed to toxins on 9/11. 

    Furthermore, NIOSH’s research and work are essential not only to the work of the WTCHP, but to advancing occupational health and safety across the United States. NIOSH employees and contractors ensure the safety of miners, firefighters, nurses, and other workers by implementing safety standards and conducting research on protective equipment. The administration’s terminations severely hamper efforts to safeguard the health and safety of employees across the country. 

    “Congress has continually reaffirmed its bipartisan commitment to the responders and survivors of the September 11th attacks. We stand ready to work with you to reverse these cuts to ensure that current and future participants receive the coverage and care that Congress has continuously provided,” the Members concluded.  

    Read the letter here or below. 

    Dear President Trump and Secretary Kennedy,   

    The World Trade Center Health Program (WTCHP) provides critical medical treatment, research, and monitoring to over 137,000 responders and survivors of the September 11th terrorist attacks, living in every state and nearly every Congressional district. The WTCHP serves first responders and survivors from the World Trade Center and lower Manhattan, the Pentagon, and the crash site in Shanksville, Pennsylvania. This vital program provides life-saving care to the heroes who answered the call to serve in one of our nation’s darkest hours and the survivors who are forced to live with the health consequences from the attacks every single day.   

    We were appalled at the recent announcement that the Department of Health and Human Services cut two-thirds of the staff at the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH), under which the WTCHP operates. We understand that your plan is to ultimately eliminate all NIOSH staff in the next few days.   

    Since the establishment of the WTCHP in 2011, the number of program enrollees has more than doubled from 61,000 to 137,000. The WTCHP relies on NIOSH staff to fulfill many of its obligations under the law, and eliminating staff that implement it, especially as more and more responders and survivors fall ill with 9/11-related conditions, will directly interfere with program operations and undermine access to the treatment these heroes have earned and deserve.   

    For example, the WTCHP does not employ any staff physicians or individuals with medical degrees. Under the statute medical doctors need to approve certifications of members coming forward with new conditions that meet the requirements of the law for them to receive treatment.  The WTCHP has always used NIOSH doctors to perform this work.  

    Additionally, the WTCHP does not have a staff epidemiologist and has always used NIOSH epidemiologists to review pending petitions for considering whether to add new conditions to the list of covered conditions. The WTCHP also currently uses NIOSH staff to determine the awards of research grants in the amount of nearly $20 million dollars a year, an annual requirement of the program to fund research on 9/11 conditions and care.  

    We are extremely concerned regarding the dismissal of Dr. John Howard, the Program Administrator of WTCHP. Since the program’s inception, Dr. Howard has faithfully served as the Administrator, playing a critical role as the final decision-maker on determining which petitioned conditions should be covered and ensuring the WTCHP is adhering to the explicit statutes enacted by Congress. His institutional knowledge is unmatched and allows the program to operate effectively and efficiently. It is estimated that over 400,000 individuals were exposed to toxins or other hazards on 9/11, and we are gravely concerned that his termination will undermine the essential work the WTCHP does. 

    Finally, we are concerned about the termination of the staff at the Office of Acquisition Services at NIOSH. The Office of Acquisition Services oversees all contracts for the WTCHP’s Nationwide Provider Network (NPN), which is a vast network of contracted health providers throughout the country that provide the medical monitoring and treatment for program enrollees who live outside the New York metropolitan area. This office ensures these contracts and providers meet the needs of enrollees and provides oversight and quality assurance for the NPN. Without this coordinating mechanism, current contracts could receive little oversight and that future contracts could lapse, undermining access to enrollee care.  

    We are asking that the Administration provide answers on how the WTCHP will be impacted by these massive layoffs. Please respond to the below list of questions by April 9th, 2025.   

    1. Is the Administration planning to terminate all NIOSH staff?  

    2. What was the justification for the termination of Dr. Howard?   

    3. Since there are no doctors on the staff of the WTCHP, and the statue requires doctors to sign off on certifications that allow for treatment of members, what is the administration’s plan to rectify this as all of the NIOSH medical staff that performed this function have been terminated?  

    4. Since the WTCHP used the staff of NIOSH, especially epidemiologists to review pending petitions under the law to consider covering new conditions, what provisions has HHS made to supply the necessary staff to fulfill that role for the WTCHP?  

    5. What is the status of pending petitions to add autoimmune disease and cardiac conditions to the program? The program announced in December 2024 that eligible individuals can expect an answer by March 2025.  

    6. WTCHP utilized NIOSH staff to determine the approximately $20 million of annual research awards required under the statute that are normally announced in March. What staff will be assisting WTCHP in making these decisions and when will the awards for 2025 be announced?   

    7. Has the administration consulted with advocates or career staff on the impacts these cuts may have on WTCHP service delivery?   

      1. If you have not, please explain why.   

    8. What office will oversee the contracts and contracting process if there is no staff at the Office of Acquisition Services?   

    Congress has continually reaffirmed its bipartisan commitment to the responders and survivors of the September 11th attacks. We stand ready to work with you to reverse these cuts to ensure that current and future participants receive the coverage and care that Congress has continuously provided.  

    ### 

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI USA: Rep. Young Kim Pushes Bipartisan Resolution Championing Financial Health for Every American

    Source: United States House of Representatives – Representative Young Kim (CA-39)

    Washington, DC – Today, Financial Literacy and Wealth Creation Caucus Co-Chairs Congresswomen Young Kim (CA-40) and Joyce Beatty (OH-03) introduced H.Res.292, a resolution to recognize April as Financial Literacy Month to increase public awareness of the value of financial capability and the need for sound money management practices. Financial Literacy Month also provides an opportunity to advocate for financial education in public schools, establishing a solid financial foundation for future generations of Americans.

    “Financial literacy empowers individuals and families to make informed decisions, from budgeting and saving to investing and planning for retirement. In California, where the cost of living continues to rise, understanding personal finance is more important than ever. The earlier Americans learn how to manage their finances, the better prepared they will be to secure their financial future and avoid pitfalls like fraud or debt,” said Congresswoman Young Kim. “As we recognize April as Financial Literacy Month, I am proud to work as Financial Literacy and Wealth Creation Co-Chair with Rep. Joyce Beatty to champion financial education and ensure all Californians have the tools to build wealth and protect their financial well-being for generations to come.”

    “Encouraging financial literacy among students, seniors, and hardworking American consumers is essential,” said Congresswoman Beatty. “When people are equipped with the tools to develop healthy financial habits, they are empowered to take control of their personal finances and create better economic outcomes for their families—now and for generations to come. Financial literacy is a vital skill that can mean the difference between economic hardship and lasting financial freedom. Alongside Congresswoman Kim, I’m proud to lead the effort in the U.S. House of Representatives to make financial capability a reality for every American.”

    “Financial Literacy Month highlights the importance of equipping students with essential financial knowledge. Requiring high school students to take personal finance courses ensures they graduate with the skills needed to make informed financial decisions and build a prosperous future,” said Leslie Finnan, Senior Advocacy Director of the Council for Economic Education (CEE). “CEE supports teachers in delivering this critical education, empowering the next generation to succeed financially and contribute to their communities.”

    “Financial education is an essential component of improving overall financial well-being, resulting in numerous demonstrated financial and societal benefits,” says Billy Hensley, Ph.D., President and CEO of the National Endowment for Financial Education (NEFE). “I commend Congresswomen Joyce Beatty and Young Kim for their bipartisan commitment to advancing financial literacy. Their leadership is instrumental in empowering all communities, promoting economic equality and advancing a more inclusive financial system. Efforts to improve financial well-being fuel the momentum toward a reality where everyone has the resources needed to thrive. NEFE believes that consequential collaboration will create a future where impactful financial education is accessible to all.”

    “Financial literacy is a vital foundation for building financial health,” said Jennifer Tescher, Founder and CEO of the Financial Health Network. “Yet today, only about one in three Americans is considered financially healthy—a reminder that knowledge must be paired with well-designed products, timely guidance, and supportive policies. At the Financial Health Network, we have seen the benefits of multiple stakeholders working across sectors to ensure that people can navigate their financial lives with confidence. Financial Literacy Month is a valuable moment to recommit to that shared goal.”

    The resolution is cosponsored by Reps. Don Bacon (NE-02), André Carson (IN-07), Ed Case (HI-01), Emanuel Cleaver (MI-05), Brian Fitzpatrick (PA-01), Mike Flood (NE-01), Sylvia Garcia (TX-29), Henry “Hank” Johnson (GA-04), Dan Meuser (PA-09), Tim Moore (NC-14), Maria Elvira Salazar (FL-27), David Scott (GA-13), Terri Sewell (AL-07), Melanie Stansbury (NM-01), Shri Thanedar (MI-13), David Valadao (CA-22), and Nikema Williams (GA-05).

    Read the full resolution text HERE.

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Answer to a written question – Establishing a nitrogen oxides (NOx) emission control area in the Mediterranean – E-000548/2025(ASW)

    Source: European Parliament

    1. According to the European Maritime Transport Environmental report[1], which is cross-referred by the 2nd Zero Pollution Monitoring and Outlook Report[2], Sulphur oxides (SOx) emissions in the EU have dropped by about 70% since 2014, largely due to the introduction of SOx Emission Control Areas (ECAs) in Northern EU[3]. The new Mediterranean SOx ECA, set to take effect on 1 May 2025, will deliver further reductions together with the one upcoming in the North-East Atlantic Ocean[4]. Meanwhile, also in line the 4th Clean Air Outlook[5], Nitrogen oxides (NOx) emissions rose by an average of 10% between 2015 and 2023: NOx increased by 33% and 8% in the Atlantic and Mediterranean basins and decreased by 17%, 7% and 6% in the North, Black and Baltic Seas, respectively. NOx ECAs in Northern EU have proved useful in controlling NOx and their extension to EU waters could prevent to surpass NOx from land sources by 2030[6].

    This is why, to protect public health and the environment, the Commission and the Mediterranean States are working on cost and benefits analysis (CBA) for a NOx ECA under the Barcelona Convention[7].

    2. The parties to the Barcelona Convention will note the ongoing CBAs at their 24th Conference in December 2025; they will decide on the Med NOx ECA at later sessions. The Commission has been consistently stressing the urgency of regulating and enforcing NOx from ships in the Mediterranean. However, decisions in the region are complex given the high number of States and stakeholders involved and their socioeconomic differences[8].

    In line with the EU’s Zero Pollution[9], and One Health[10] ambitions, the Commission will continue engaging at all levels to further reduce NOx from ships.

    • [1] https://emsa.europa.eu/emter-2025/full-report.html
    • [2] https://www.eea.europa.eu/en/analysis/publications/zero-pollution-monitoring-and-outlook-report
    • [3] The request of the North East Atlantic ECA designation (controlling both SOx and Nitrogen oxides (NOx)) by the EU and non-EU littoral States for both SOx and NOx will be discussed at IMO this year; it will likely enter into force in 2027. Non-EU States are: United Kingdom, Iceland, Faroe Islands and Greenland.
    • [4] ECAs for both SOx and NOx have also been established in the North and the Baltic Sea IMO under Annex VI to MARPOL Convention in early 2000 and 2021 respectively. NOx control applies to new builds.
    • [5] https://environment.ec.europa.eu/topics/air/clean-air-outlook_en
    • [6] https://pure.iiasa.ac.at/id/eprint/15729/1/RR-18-002.pdf
    • [7] https://www.unep.org/unepmap/who-we-are/barcelona-convention-and-protocols
    • [8] For example, the decision to control SOx in the Mediterranean region took about 10 years and required massive engagement from the EU at all levels, led by the Commission.
    • [9] https://environment.ec.europa.eu/strategy/zero-pollution-action-plan_en
    • [10] https://health.ec.europa.eu/one-health_en
    Last updated: 4 April 2025

    MIL OSI Europe News

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Written question – The explosive state of public health, which rewards private groups – E-001242/2025

    Source: European Parliament

    Question for written answer  E-001242/2025
    to the Commission
    Rule 144
    Lefteris Nikolaou-Alavanos (NI)

    The health situation in Greece remains explosive, with the ongoing degradation of the public system, the commercialisation of its services, long waits for appointments, staff shortages, 24 % of the population unable to cover medical needs due to costs and private health spending reaching 33 %. This tragic situation is evident throughout Europe. These are the consequences of the criminal cost-benefit policy based on EU guidelines, which in Greece are being implemented by the New Democracy Government following on from the previous SYRIZA-PASOK Governments.

    In Greece, with the implementation of the unacceptable measure of afternoon surgeries – the legitimisation of the traditional ‘little sweetener’ – the cost that ordinary households are being asked to pay out of their pockets has sky-rocketed.

    In light of the above:

    • 1.What is the Commission’s position on the fact that, under the ‘Prevention Programme’ in Greece, the Recovery Fund is subsidising groups for carrying out analyses and tests, for which – due to the miserable state of the public health system – those who are ultimately diagnosed positively are asked to put their hands in their pockets and expand the clientele of health marketers?
    • 2.What is the Commission’s position on the fact that, while private health groups are breaking one profitability record after another, 20 % of households across Europe, according to the World Health Organization, are experiencing catastrophic health spending, while their disposable income has stagnated and – to put it more accurately – actually shrunk?

    Submitted: 25.3.2025

    Last updated: 4 April 2025

    MIL OSI Europe News

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Text adopted – Human rights and democracy in the world and the European Union’s policy on the matter – annual report 2024 – P10_TA(2025)0059 – Wednesday, 2 April 2025 – Strasbourg

    Source: European Parliament

    The European Parliament,

    –  having regard to the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union,

    –  having regard to the European Convention on Human Rights,

    –  having regard to Articles 2, 3, 8, 21 and 23 of the Treaty on European Union (TEU),

    –  having regard to Articles 17 and 207 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU),

    –  having regard to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and other United Nations human rights treaties and instruments,

    –  having regard to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights,

    –  having regard to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights,

    –  having regard to the Geneva Convention relative to the Treatment of Prisoners of War,

    –  having regard to the United Nations 1951 Refugee Convention and the 1967 Protocol thereto,

    –  having regard to the United Nations Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide of 1948 and United Nations Human Rights Council Resolution 43/29 of 22 June 2020 on the prevention of genocide,

    –  having regard to the United Nations Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women of 18 December 1979,

    –  having regard to the United Nations Convention against Torture and other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment of 10 December 1984 and the Optional Protocol thereto, adopted on 18 December 2002,

    –  having regard to the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities of 12 December 2006 and the Optional Protocol thereto, adopted on 13 December 2006,

    –  having regard to the International Convention on the Suppression and Punishment of the Crime of Apartheid of 1976,

    –  having regard to the Declaration on the Elimination of All Forms of Intolerance and of Discrimination Based on Religion or Belief, proclaimed by United Nations General Assembly Resolution 36/55 of 25 November 1981,

    –  having regard to the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Persons Belonging to National or Ethnic, Religious and Linguistic Minorities of 18 December 1992,

    –  having regard to the United Nations Declaration on Human Rights Defenders, adopted by consensus by the United Nations General Assembly Resolution 53/144 on 9 December 1998,

    –  having regard to the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples of 13 September 2007,

    –  having regard to the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Peasants and Other People Working in Rural Areas of 28 September 2018,

    –  having regard to the Programme of Action of the Cairo International Conference of Population and Development in 1994 and its review conferences,

    –  having regard to the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child of 20 November 1989 and the two Optional Protocols thereto, adopted on 25 May 2000,

    –  having regard to the United Nations Arms Trade Treaty, which entered into force on 24 December 2014, and the EU Code of Conduct on Arms Exports of 5 June 1998,

    –  having regard to the United Nations Beijing Declaration and Platform for Action of September 1995 and its review conferences,

    –  having regard to the United Nations 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development adopted on 25 September 2015, in particular goals 1, 3, 4, 5, 8, 10 and 16 thereof,

    –  having regard to the United Nations Global Compact for Safe, Orderly and Regular Migration adopted on 19 December 2018 and the United Nations Global Compact on Refugees adopted on 17 December 2018,

    –  having regard to the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court adopted on 17 July 1998, which entered into force on 1 July 2002,

    –  having regard to the Agreement between the European Union and the International Criminal Court on cooperation and assistance of 10 April 2006(1),

    –  having regard to the Council of Europe Conventions of 4 April 1997 for the Protection of Human Rights and Dignity of the Human Being with regard to the Application of Biology and Medicine, and the Additional Protocols thereto, of 16 May 2005 on Action against Trafficking in Human Beings, and of 25 October 2007 on the Protection of Children against Sexual Exploitation and Sexual Abuse,

    –  having regard to the Council of Europe Convention of 11 May 2011 on preventing and combating violence against women and domestic violence (the Istanbul Convention), which not all Member States have ratified but which entered into force for the EU on 1 October 2023,

    –  having regard to Protocols Nos 6 and 13 to the Council of Europe Convention of 28 April 1983 for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms concerning the Abolition of the Death Penalty,

    –  having regard to Council Regulation (EU) 2020/1998 of 7 December 2020 concerning restrictive measures against serious human rights violations and abuses(2),

    –  having regard to Regulation (EU) 2021/947 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 9 June 2021 establishing the Neighbourhood, Development and International Cooperation Instrument – Global Europe(3),

    –  having regard to the Council conclusions of 22 January 2024 on EU Priorities in UN Human Rights Fora in 2024,

    –  having regard to the EU Action Plan on Human Rights and Democracy 2020-2024, adopted by the Council on 17 November 2020 and its Mid-term Review adopted on 9 June 2023,

    –  having regard to the Council conclusions of 27 May 2024 on the alignment of the EU Action Plan on Human Rights and Democracy 2020-2024 with the Multiannual Financial Framework 2021-2027,

    –  having regard to the EU Gender Action Plan (GAP) III – an ambitious agenda for gender equality and women’s empowerment in external action (JOIN(2020)0017),

    –  having regard to the EU Gender Equality Strategy 2020-2025 (COM(2020)0152),

    –  having regard to the EU LGBTIQ Equality Strategy 2020-2025 (COM(2020)0698),

    –  having regard to the EU strategy on the rights of the child (COM(2021)0142),

    –  having regard to the EU Strategy for the Rights of Persons with Disabilities 2021-2030 (COM(2021)0101),

    –  having regard to the EU anti-racism action plan 2020-2025 (COM(2020)0565),

    –  having regard to the EU Roma strategic framework for equality, inclusion and participation (COM(2020)0620),

    –  having regard to the EU Guidelines on human rights defenders, adopted by the Council on 14 June 2004 and revised in 2008, and the second guidance note on the Guidelines’ implementation, endorsed in 2020,

    –  having regard to the EU Guidelines on violence against women and girls and combating all forms of discrimination against them, adopted by the Council on 8 December 2008,

    –  having regard to the EU Guidelines on promoting compliance with international humanitarian law (IHL) of 2005, as updated in 2009,

    –  having regard to the EU Guidelines on the death penalty, as updated by the Council on 12 April 2013,

    –  having regard to the EU Guidelines to promote and protect the enjoyment of all human rights by LGBTI persons, adopted on 24 June 2013,

    –  having regard to the EU Guidelines on the promotion and protection of freedom of religion or belief, adopted by the Council on 24 June 2013,

    –  having regard to the EU Guidelines on freedom of expression online and offline, adopted by the Council on 12 May 2014,

    –  having regard to the EU Guidelines on non-discrimination in external action, adopted by the Council on 18 March 2019,

    –  having regard to the EU Guidelines on safe drinking water and sanitation, adopted by the Council on 17 June 2019,

    –  having regard to the revised EU Guidelines on EU policy towards third countries on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, adopted by the Council on 16 September 2019,

    –  having regard to the revised EU Guidelines on human rights dialogues with partner/third countries, approved by the Council on 22 February 2021,

    –  having regard to the revised EU Guidelines on children and armed conflict, approved by the Council on 24 June 2024,

    –  having regard to the Commission communication of 12 September 2012 entitled ‘The roots of democracy and sustainable development: Europe’s engagement with Civil Society in external relations’ (COM(2012)0492),

    –  having regard to the Council conclusions of 10 March 2023 on the role of the civic space in protecting and promoting fundamental rights in the EU,

    –  having regard to Directive (EU) 2024/1760 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 June 2024 on corporate sustainability due diligence and amending Directive (EU) 2019/1937 and Regulation (EU) 2023/2859(4),

    –  having regard to the Commission proposal of 14 September 2022 for a regulation of the European Parliament and the Council on prohibiting products made with forced labour on the Union market (COM(2022)0453),

    –  having regard to the joint proposal from the Commission and the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy of 3 May 2023 for a Council regulation on restrictive measures against serious acts of corruption (JOIN(2023)0013),

    –  having regard to the 2023 EU Annual Report on Human Rights and Democracy in the World,

    –  having regard to its Sakharov Prize for Freedom of Thought, which in 2024 was awarded to María Corina Machado, as the leader of the democratic forces in Venezuela, and President-elect Edmundo González Urrutia, representing all Venezuelans inside and outside the country fighting for the reinstitution of freedom and democracy,

    –  having regard to its resolution of 15 January 2019 on EU Guidelines and the mandate of the EU Special Envoy on the promotion of freedom of religion or belief outside the EU(5),

    –  having regard to its resolution of 23 October 2020 on Gender Equality in EU’s foreign and security policy(6),

    –  having regard to its resolution of 19 May 2021 on human rights protection and the EU external migration policy(7),

    –  having regard to its resolution of 8 July 2021 on the EU Global Human Rights Sanctions Regime (EU Magnitsky Act)(8),

    –  having regard to its resolution of 28 February 2024 on human rights and democracy in the world and the European Union’s policy on the matter – annual report 2023(9), and to its previous resolutions on earlier annual reports,

    –  having regard to its resolutions on breaches of human rights, democracy and the rule of law (known as urgency resolutions), adopted in accordance with Rule 150 of its Rules of Procedure, in particular those adopted in 2023 and 2024,

    –  having regard to Rule 55 of its Rules of Procedure,

    –  having regard to the opinion of the Committee on Women’s Rights and Gender Equality,

    –  having regard to the report of the Committee on Foreign Affairs (A10-0012/2025),

    A.  whereas the EU is founded on the values of respect for human dignity, freedom, democracy, equality, the rule of law and respect for human rights, as set out in Articles 2 and 21 TEU; whereas the EU’s action worldwide must be guided by the universality and indivisibility of human rights and by the fact that the effective protection and defence of human rights and democracy is at the core of the EU’s external action;

    B.  whereas rulings of the European Court of Human Rights are an essential part of the human rights architecture in Europe;

    C.  whereas consistency and coherence across the EU’s internal and external policies are key for achieving an effective and credible EU human rights policy, and in defending and supporting freedom and democracy;

    D.  whereas democratic systems are the most suitable to guarantee that every person has the ability to enjoy their human rights and fundamental freedoms; whereas effective rules-based multilateralism is the best organisational system to defend democracies;

    E.  whereas the EU strongly believes in and fully supports multilateralism, a rules-based global order and the set of universal values, principles and norms that guide the UN member states and that the UN member states have pledged to uphold, in accordance with the UN Charter; whereas a world of democracies, understood as a world of political systems that defend and protect human rights worldwide, is a safer world, as democracies have significant checks and balances in place to prevent the unpredictability of autocracies;

    F.  whereas gender equality is paramount to the development of free and equal societies; whereas the human rights of women, girls and non-binary people are still not guaranteed throughout the world, and the space for civil society organisations, especially women’s rights, indigenous and grassroots organisations, is shrinking in many countries;

    G.  whereas the rise in authoritarianism, totalitarianism and populism threatens the global rules-based order, the protection and promotion of freedom and human rights in the world, as well as the values and principles on which the EU is founded;

    H.  whereas in December 2023, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights celebrated its 75th anniversary; whereas today, more than ever since the UN’s foundation, totalitarian regimes challenge the UN Charter’s basic principles, seek to rewrite international norms, undermine multilateral institutions and threaten peace and security globally;

    I.  whereas in November 2024, the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child celebrated its 35th anniversary;

    J.  whereas the United Nations Beijing Declaration and Platform for Action is regarded as a turning point for the global agenda on gender equality and will celebrate its 30th anniversary in 2025;

    K.  whereas the legitimacy and functioning of the international rules-based order are dependent on compliance with the orders of, and respect for, international bodies, such as United Nations General Assembly and Security Council resolutions and orders and decisions of the International Court of Justice and the International Criminal Court (ICC); whereas multilateralism is being challenged by increasing global threats, such as terrorism and extremism, which threaten compliance with such orders and decisions, as well as, generally, with provisions of international law, human rights law and international humanitarian law in emerging and ongoing conflict situations; whereas international institutions, their officials, and those cooperating with them, are the subject of attacks and threats; whereas the international community, including the EU, has a responsibility to uphold the international rules-based order by enforcing universal compliance, including by its partners;

    L.  whereas the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court establishes a framework of accountability for genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes; whereas the independence of the ICC is vital to ensure that justice is delivered impartially and without political interference;

    M.  whereas the 2023 Mid-term Review of the EU Action Plan on Human Rights and Democracy 2020-2024, now extended to 2027, has shown that, despite the progress achieved so far, more needs to be done, in cooperation with like-minded democratic partners, especially in the context of the unprecedented challenges the world has experienced since its adoption;

    N.  whereas human rights defenders (HRDs) and civil society organisations (CSOs) are crucial partners in the EU’s efforts to safeguard and advance human rights, democracy and the rule of law, as well as to prevent conflicts globally; whereas state and non-state actors around the world are increasingly censoring, silencing and harassing, among others, HRDs, CSOs, journalists, religious communities, opposition leaders and other vulnerable groups in their work, shrinking the civil space ever further; whereas this behaviour includes measures encompassing strategic lawsuits against public participation (SLAPPs), restrictive government policies, transnational repression, defamation campaigns, discrimination, intimidation and violence, including extrajudicial and extraterritorial killings, abductions, and arbitrary arrests and detention; whereas attacks on HRDs are increasingly extending to their families and communities, including those living in exile;

    O.  whereas gender equality is a core EU value, and the human rights of women and girls, including their sexual and reproductive rights, continue to be violated across the world; whereas women experience unique and disproportionate impacts from conflicts, climate change and migration, including increased risks of gender-based violence, economic marginalisation and barriers to accessing resources; whereas women HRDs and CSOs continue to experience shrinking space for their critical work, as well as threats of violence, harassment and intimidation;

    P.  whereas the past year has been marked by a further proliferation of laws on ‘foreign agents’ or foreign influence, including in countries with EU candidate status, targeting CSOs and media outlets and attempting to prevent them from receiving financial support from abroad, including from the EU and its Member States, fostering a climate of fear and self-censorship;

    Q.  whereas in 2024, more than half the world’s population went to the polls, and many of these elections were marked by manipulation, disinformation and attempts at interference from inside or outside the country;

    R.  whereas the 2024 World Press Freedom Index by Reporters Without Borders (RSF) warns of a decline in the intent of states and other political forces to protect press freedom; whereas, according to the RSF’s 2024 Round-up, 54 journalists and media workers were killed, most of them in conflict zones, 550 were being detained, 55 were being held hostage, and 95 were missing in 2024;

    S.  whereas 251 million children and young people are deprived of their fundamental right to education and remain out of school, according to the UNESCO Global Education Monitoring Report 2024; whereas girls and women are affected not only by poverty but also by cultural norms, gender bias, child marriage and violence through official, discriminatory policies that prevent them from accessing education and the labour market and attempt to erase them from public life;

    T.  whereas at least one million people are unjustly imprisoned for political reasons, among them several laureates and finalists of Parliament’s Sakharov Prize for Freedom of Thought;

    U.  whereas, according to Article 21 TEU, the Union must seek to develop relations and build partnerships with third countries based, among other principles, on democracy, the rule of law, the universality and indivisibility of human rights and fundamental freedoms, respect for human dignity, the principles of equality and solidarity, and respect for the principles of the United Nations Charter and international law; whereas numerous EU partners, despite benefiting for years from various preferences and advantages stemming from agreements with the EU, fail to comply with their obligations;

    V.  whereas environmental harm and the impacts of climate change are intensifying precariousness, marginalisation and inequality, and increasingly displacing people from their homes or trapping them in unsafe conditions, thereby heightening their vulnerability and jeopardising their human rights;

    Global challenges to democracy and human rights

    1.  Reasserts the universality, interdependence, interrelatedness and indivisibility of human rights and the inherent dignity of every human being; reaffirms the duty of the EU and its Member States to promote and protect democracy and the universality of human rights around the world; calls for the EU and its Member States to lead by example, in line with its values, to promote and strictly uphold human rights and international justice;

    2.  Insists that respect, protection and fulfilment of human rights and fundamental freedoms must be the cornerstone of the EU’s external policy, in line with its founding principles; strongly encourages the EU and its Member States, to that end, to strive for a continued ambitious commitment to make freedom, democracy and human rights and their protection a central part of all EU policies in a streamlined manner and to enhance the consistency between the EU’s internal and external policies in this field, including through all of its international agreements;

    3.  Stresses that the EU must be fully prepared to counter the rise of authoritarianism, totalitarianism and populism, as well as the increasing violations of the principles of universality of human rights, democracy and international humanitarian law;

    4.  Condemns the increasing trend of violations and abuses of human rights and democratic principles and values across the world, such as, among others, threats of backsliding on human rights, notably women’s rights, as well as executions, extrajudicial killings, arbitrary arrests and detentions, torture and ill treatment, gender-based violence, clampdowns on civil society, political opponents, marginalised and vulnerable groups including children and elderly people, migrants, refugees and asylum seekers, and ethnic and religious minorities; condemns, equally, slavery and forced labour, excessive use of violence by public authorities, including violent crackdowns on peaceful protests and other assemblies, systematic and structural discrimination, instrumentalisation of the judiciary, censorship and threats to independent media, including threats in the digital sphere such as online surveillance and internet shutdowns, political attacks against international institutions and the rules-based international order, and increasing use of unlawful methods of war in grave breach of international humanitarian law and human rights law; deplores the weakening of the protection of democratic institutions and processes, and the shrinking space for civil societies around the world; denounces the transnational repression, by illiberal regimes, of citizens and activists who have sought refuge abroad, including on EU soil; condemns the arrest and sentencing by an Algerian court to five years in prison of the Franco-Algerian writer Boualem Sansal; calls for his immediate release and hopes that the Algerian authorities will see the urgent need for this;

    5.  Notes with deep concern the ongoing international crisis of accountability and the challenge to the pursuit of ending impunity for violations of core norms of international human rights and humanitarian law in conflicts around the world; reaffirms the neutrality and importance of humanitarian aid in all conflicts and crises; underlines the serious consequences of discrediting and attacking the organisations of multilateral forums, such as the UN, which can foster a culture of impunity and undermine the trust in and functioning of the UN system; calls for the EU to uphold the international legal system and take effective measures to enforce compliance;

    6.  Notes with satisfaction that there are also ‘human rights bright spots’ within this context of major challenges to human rights worldwide; highlights, in particular, the work of CSOs and HRDs; underlines the need for a more strategic communication on human rights and democracy by spreading news about positive results, policies and best practices; supports the Good Human Rights Stories initiative as a way of promoting positive stories about human rights and recommends that it be updated; underlines the role of the EU’s public and cultural diplomacy, as well as international cultural relations, in the promotion of human rights, and calls for the Strategic Communication and Foresight division of the European External Action Service (EEAS) to increase its efforts in this regard;

    Strengthening the EU’s toolbox for the promotion and protection of human rights and democracy around the world

    7.  Notes with concern the increasing divide worldwide; stresses the shared responsibility of the EU to continue defending democratic values and principles and human rights, international justice, peace and dignity around the world, which are even more important to defend in the current volatile state of global politics; calls upon the EU to keep communication channels open with different stakeholders and to continue to develop a comprehensive toolbox to strengthen human rights and democracy globally;

    EU action plan on human rights and democracy

    8.  Observes that the EU and its Member States have made substantial progress in implementing the EU action plan on human rights and democracy, although they have not reached all of its goals, in part also due to the unprecedented challenges the world has experienced since its adoption; welcomes, in this sense, the extension of the action plan until 2027, with a view to maximising the synergies and complementarity between human rights and democracy at local, national and global levels;

    EU Special Representative (EUSR) for Human Rights

    9.  Fully supports the work of the EUSR for Human Rights in contributing to the visibility and coherence of the EU’s human rights actions in its external relations; upholds the EUSR’s central role in the EU’s promotion and protection of human rights by engaging with non-EU countries and like-minded partners; underlines the need for close cooperation between the EUSR for Human Rights and other EUSRs and Special Envoys in order to further improve this coherence, and calls for greater visibility for the role of the EUSR for Human Rights; calls for the EUSR to be supported in his work with increased resources and better coordination with EU delegations around the world; regrets, despite continuous calls, Parliament’s exclusion from the process of selecting the EUSR; insists on the need for the EUSR to report back to Parliament regularly;

    Neighbourhood, Development and International Cooperation Instrument – Global Europe and the human rights and democracy thematic programme

    10.  Recalls the fundamental role of the Neighbourhood, Development and International Cooperation Instrument (NDICI) – Global Europe, including its thematic programme on human rights and democracy, as a flagship EU instrument in promoting and protecting human rights and democracy around the world; highlights the need to engage with civil society in all the EU’s relevant external activities, including the Global Gateway Strategy which is financed through the NDICI-Global Europe; reiterates the importance of streamlining a human-rights based approach in the EU’s external action instruments; underlines Parliament’s role in the instrument’s programming process and calls on the Commission and the EEAS to share all relevant information in a timely manner in order to enable Parliament to play its role accordingly, in particular during high-level geopolitical dialogues with the Commission and in the mid-term review process as well as in its resolutions; calls on the EEAS and the Commission to ensure that a response is provided to the recommendation letters following each geopolitical dialogue and each resolution; urges the Commission to develop and launch a comprehensive, centralised website dedicated to the NDICI-Global Europe, including information on all the multiannual indicative programmes, detailing their respective budgets, associated actions and the financial allocations they are backing, organised both by country and by theme; notes that the NDICI-Global Europe and all future instruments must focus on the fundamental drivers of ongoing challenges, including the need to strengthen the resilience of local communities and democracy support activities by supporting economic development;

    11.  Calls for independent, ex ante assessments to determine the possible implications and risks of projects with regard to human rights, in line with Article 25(5) of Regulation (EU) 2021/947; calls for independent human rights monitoring throughout the implementation of projects in third countries, especially in relation to projects entailing a high risk of violations; calls for a suspension of projects that (in)directly contribute to human rights violations in non-EU countries; reiterates the prohibition on allocating EU funds to activities that are contrary to EU fundamental values, such as terrorism or extremism; calls on the Commission to share all human rights-related assessments with Parliament in a proactive manner;

    EU trade and international agreements

    12.  Reiterates its call to integrate human rights assessments and include robust clauses on human rights in agreements between the EU and non-EU countries, supported by a clear set of benchmarks and procedures to be followed in the event of violations; calls on the Commission and the EEAS to ensure that the human rights clauses in current international agreements are actively monitored and effectively enforced and to improve their communication with Parliament concerning considerations and decisions regarding this enforcement; reiterates that in the face of persistent breaches of human rights clauses by its partner countries, including those related to the Generalised Scheme of Preferences Plus programme, the EU should react swiftly and decisively, including by suspending the agreements in question if other options prove ineffective; calls for the EU Ombudsman’s recommendation concerning the creation of a complaint-handling portal to be implemented, within the framework of EU trade and financial instruments, or for the Commission’s Single Entry Point to be adapted to allow complaints regarding failure to comply with human rights clauses to be submitted; calls on the EU institutions to engage regularly with the business community and civil society in order to strengthen the links between international trade, human rights and economic security; calls for the EU to ensure human rights promotion and protection through its Global Gateway investments and projects, by ensuring that they do no harm;

    EU human rights dialogues

    13.  Stresses the important role of human rights dialogues within the EU’s human rights toolbox and as a key vehicle for the implementation of the EU action plan on human rights and democracy; highlights that these dialogues must address the overall situation of human rights and democracy with the relevant countries; notes that human rights dialogues should be seen as a key element of sustained EU engagement and not as a free-standing instrument, and that the persistent failure of non-EU countries to genuinely engage in dialogues and to implement key deliverables should lead to the use of other appropriate foreign policy tools; recalls that these dialogues need to be used in conjunction and synergy with other instruments, using a more-for-more and a less-for-less approach; reiterates the need to raise individual cases, in particular those of Sakharov Prize laureates and those highlighted by Parliament in its resolutions, and ensure adequate follow-up; calls on the EEAS and EU delegations to increase the visibility of these dialogues and their outcomes, ensuring that they are results-oriented and based on a clear set of benchmarks that can be included in a published joint press statement, and to conduct suitable follow-up action on it; calls for the enhanced and meaningful involvement of civil society in the dialogues; stresses that genuine CSOs must not be impeded from participating in human rights dialogues and that any dialogue must include all genuine CSOs without any limitations;

    EU Global Human Rights Sanctions Regime (GHRSR – EU Magnitsky Act)

    14.  Welcomes the increasing use of the EU GHRSR as a key political tool in the EU’s defence of human rights and democracy across the world; regrets, however, that its use has continued to be limited, especially in the current geopolitical landscape; notes, however, the challenges that the requirement of unanimity poses in the adoption of sanctions and reiterates its call on the Council to introduce qualified majority voting for decisions on the GHRSR; recalls, in this regard, the formal request submitted by Parliament to the Council in 2023, on calling an EU reform convention, with the aim, among others, of increasing the number of decisions taken by qualified majority; calls for a stronger use of the GHRSR and other ad hoc sanctions regimes on those responsible for serious violations of human rights and international humanitarian law, including high-level officials; fully supports the possibility of imposing targeted anti-corruption sanctions within the EU framework in this regard, which has been a long-standing priority of Parliament, whether through its inclusion in the GHRSR or under a different regime; highlights the need for the complete enforcement of sanctions and calls for circumventions to be tackled;

    Democracy support activities

    15.  Reiterates its concern regarding the increasing attacks by authoritarian and illiberal regimes on democratic principles, values and pluralism; stresses that the defence and support of democracy around the world is increasingly becoming of geopolitical and strategic interest; emphasises the importance of Parliament’s efforts in capacity-building for partner parliaments, promoting mediation and encouraging a culture of dialogue and compromise, especially among young political leaders, and empowering women parliamentarians, HRDs and representatives from civil society and independent media; reiterates its call on the Commission to continue and expand its activities in these areas by increasing funding and support for EU bodies, agencies and other grant-based organisations; stresses the critical importance of directly supporting civil society and persons expressing dissenting views, particularly in the current climate of growing global tensions and repression in increasing numbers of countries; reiterates the importance of EU election observation missions and Parliament’s contribution to developing and enhancing their methodology; calls for the development of an EU toolbox to be used in cases of disputed or non-transparent election results in order to prevent political and military crises in the post-election environment; calls for enhanced EU action to counter manipulative and false messages against the EU in election campaigns, in particular in countries that receive significant EU humanitarian and development assistance and in countries that are candidates for EU membership; calls for enhanced collaboration between Parliament’s Democracy Support and Election Coordination Group, the relevant Commission directorates-general and the EEAS; calls on the EU to raise gender equality issues, including sexual and reproductive health and rights, with non-EU countries; calls for human rights dialogues to be given more visibility, ensuring that they are results-oriented and based on a clear set of benchmarks that enable effective monitoring, including through effective ex ante and ex post consultation with civil society and through the publication of joint press statements and the execution of appropriate follow-up actions;

    16.  Underlines the importance of strengthening the participation of women in democratic systems order to tackle the discrepancy in the representation of women in decision-making; calls for the EU’s external action to facilitate better participation of women in politics, business and civil society;

    EU support for human rights defenders

    17.  Is extremely concerned by the continuing restriction of civil society space and rising threats to the work of HRDs and members of CSOs, as well as their families, communities and lawyers, and finds particularly concerning the increasingly sophisticated means used to persecute them; strongly condemns their arbitrary detentions and killings; deplores the harassment of CSOs through legislative provisions such as foreign agents laws and similar, and other restrictions they face; deplores the fact that women HRDs continue to face relentless and ever more sophisticated violations against them, including targeted killings, physical attacks, disappearances, smear campaigns, arrests, judicial harassment and intimidation; notes with concern that these attacks seem designed to systematically silence women HRDs and erase their voices from the public sphere; supports wholeheartedly the work of HRDs and EU action to ensure their protection worldwide; underscores the pressing need for a comprehensive and timely revision of the EU Guidelines on HRDs, with a view to addressing the emerging challenges and threats, and to ensuring their applicability and effectiveness in the protection of HRDs globally, while integrating gender-sensitive and intersectional approaches in the updated Guidelines, reflecting the diverse backgrounds and experiences of HRDs, and taking into account the specific vulnerabilities they may face; calls for the complete and consistent application of the EU Guidelines on HRDs by the EU and its Member States; calls for efforts to enhance communication strategies to increase the visibility of EU actions and channels for the protection of and the support mechanisms for HRDs;

    18.  Raises serious concerns over the increasing phenomenon of transnational repression against HRDs, journalists and civil society; calls for the formulation of an EU strategy harmonising national responses to transnational repression;

    19.  Expresses deep concern regarding the increasingly precarious financial landscape faced by HRDs and communities advocating for rights, particularly within a global context characterised by intensifying repression; notes that, as a result of the current geopolitical context, HRDs’ need for support has increased; calls, therefore, for the EU and its Member States to make full use of their financial support for HRDs, ensuring the establishment of flexible, accessible and sustained funding mechanisms that enable these defenders to continue their vital work in the face of mounting challenges;

    20.  Insists that the EEAS, the Commission and the EU delegations pay particular attention to the situation of the Sakharov Prize laureates and finalists at risk and take resolute action, in coordination with the Member States and Parliament, to ensure their well-being, safety or liberation; pays tribute to the Sakharov Prize laureates and finalists who have lost their lives in the fight for human rights, democracy and freedom;

    21.  Welcomes the update of the EU Visa Code Handbook in relation to HRDs and calls for its full and consistent application by the Member States; reiterates its call for the Commission to take a proactive role in the establishment of a coordinated approach among the Member States for HRDs at risk;

    Combating impunity and corruption

    22.  Underlines that both impunity and corruption enable and aggravate human rights violations and abuses and the erosion of democratic principles; welcomes the anti-corruption actions in EU external policies in the joint communication from the Commission and the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy of 3 May 2023 on the fight against corruption (JOIN(2023)0012), which should be followed by the implementation of a strict anti-corruption framework into law, such as through the EU’s Anti-Corruption Directive, and by comprehensively addressing this issue within the EU’s anti-corruption strategy; supports the anti-corruption provisions included in the EU trade agreements with non-EU countries; stresses the important role of civil society and journalists in non-EU countries in the oversight of the fight against impunity and corruption; calls for the EU and its Member States to increase their efforts in justice reforms, the fight against impunity, and the improvement of transparency and of anti-corruption institutions in non-EU countries; encourages the EU and its Member States to coordinate more closely with allies and partners wherever possible in order to counter systemic corruption that enables autocrats to maintain power, deprives societies of key resources and undermines democracy, human rights and the rule of law;

    23.  Insists on the need for the EU to take clear steps to recognise the close link between corruption and human rights violations in order to target economic and financial enablers of human rights abusers;

    EU actions at multilateral level

    24.  Reaffirms that promoting the respect, protection and fulfilment of human rights around the world requires strong international cooperation at a multilateral level; underlines the particularly important role of the UN and its bodies as the main forum which must be able to effectively advance efforts for peace and security, sustainable development and respect for human rights and international law; calls for the EU and its Member States to continue supporting the work of the UN, its agencies and special procedures, both politically and financially, to ensure that it is fit for purpose, and to push back against the influence of authoritarian and totalitarian regimes; stresses that the current multilateral order needs to fully incorporate into its architecture the new global actors, especially those focusing on democracy and human rights; reiterates the need for the EU and its Member States to speak with one voice at the UN and in other multilateral forums in order to effectively tackle global challenges to human rights and democracy in multilateral forums and to support the strongest possible language in line with international human rights standards; calls, to this end, for progress in ensuring that the EU has a seat in international organisations, including the UN Security Council, in addition to the existing Member States’ seats; calls for EU delegations to play a stronger role in multilateral forums, for which they should have appropriate resources available;

    25.  Is deeply concerned by growing attacks against the rules-based global order by authoritarian and totalitarian regimes, including through unprovoked and unjustified aggression against peaceful neighbours and through the undermining of the functioning of UN bodies, namely the abuse of veto power at the UN Security Council; underlines that the diminished effectiveness of these bodies brings with it real costs in terms of conflicts, lives lost and human suffering, and seriously weakens the general ability of countries to deal with global challenges; calls on the Member States and like minded partners to develop a robust strategy and to intensify their efforts to reverse this trend and to send a united and strong message of support to those organisations when they are attacked or threatened; believes that the UN, its bodies, and other multilateral organisations are in need of reform, in order to address these growing challenges and threats;

    26.  Strongly regrets the decision of some countries to withdraw from the UN Human Rights Council;

    27.  Reiterates the strong support of the EU for the International Court of Justice and the ICC as essential, independent and impartial jurisdictional institutions amid a particularly challenging time for international justice; recalls that a well-funded ICC is essential for the effective prosecution of serious international crimes; welcomes the political and financial support the EU has given to the ICC, including the Office of the Prosecutor (OTP) of the ICC, and the launch of the ‘Global initiative to fight against impunity for international crimes’ offering financial support to CSOs dedicated to fostering justice and accountability for international crimes and serious human rights violations, including by facilitating survivors’ participation in legal proceedings; calls for the EU and its Member States to continue and intensify their support to the ICC – including to the ICC Trust Fund for Victims – with the necessary means, including resources and political backing, and to use all instruments at their disposal to combat impunity worldwide and enable the ICC to fulfil its mandate effectively; calls on all the Member States to respect and implement the actions and decisions of the International Court of Justice and all organs of the ICC, including the OTP and the Chambers, to urge other countries to join and cooperate with the court, including to enforce ICC arrest warrants, and to support their work as an independent and impartial international justice institution everywhere in the world; regrets the failure of some ICC member states to execute ICC arrest warrants, thereby undermining the court’s work; calls for the EU to urge non-EU countries, including its major partners, to recognise the ICC and become a state party to the Rome Statute;

    28.  Reiterates the strong support of the EU for the European Court of Human Rights; urges all signatory States to the European Convention on Human Rights to fully abide by rulings of the Court;

    29.  Stresses the importance of not politicising the ICC, as trust in the court is eroded if its mandate is misused; condemns, in particular and in the most critical terms, the political attacks, sanctions and other coercive measures introduced or envisaged against the ICC itself and against its staff; calls on the Member States and the EU institutions to cooperate to work on solutions in order to protect the institution of the ICC and its staff from any future sanctions that would threaten the functioning of the court;

    30.  Expresses its utmost concern over the sanctions against the ICC, its prosecutors, judges and staff, which constitute a serious attack on the international justice system; calls on the Commission to urgently activate the Blocking Statute and on the Member States to increase their diplomatic efforts in order to protect and safeguard the ICC as an indispensable cornerstone of the international justice system;

    31.  Recognises universal jurisdiction as an important tool of the international criminal justice system to prevent and combat impunity and promote international accountability; calls on the Member States to apply universal jurisdiction in the fight against impunity;

    32.  Calls for the EU and its Member States to lead the global fight against all forms of extremism and welcomes the adoption of an EU strategy to this end; demands that the fight against terrorism be at the top of the EU’s domestic and foreign affairs agenda;

    Upholding international humanitarian law

    33.  Notes with concern the increasing disregard for international humanitarian law and international human rights law, particularly in the form of ongoing conflicts around the world; strongly condemns the increase in deliberate, indiscriminate and disproportionate attacks on civilians and civilian objects in multiple conflict settings; underlines that it is of the utmost importance that all UN and humanitarian aid agencies are able to provide full, timely and unhindered assistance to all people in vulnerable situations and calls on all parties to armed conflicts to fully respect the work of these agencies and ensure they can meet the basic needs of civilians without interference; denounces attempts to undermine UN agencies delivering humanitarian aid; urges all parties to armed conflicts to protect civilian populations, humanitarian and medical workers, and journalists and media workers; calls on all parties to armed conflicts to respect the legitimacy and inviolability of UN peacekeeping missions; calls on all states to unconditionally and fully conform with international humanitarian law; calls on the international community, and the Member States in particular, to promote accountability and the fight against impunity for grave breaches of international humanitarian law; calls for the systematic creation of humanitarian corridors in regions at war and in combat situations, whenever necessary, in order to allow civilians at risk to escape conflicts, and strongly condemns any attacks on them; demands unhindered access for humanitarian organisations monitoring and assisting prisoners of war, as provided for in the Geneva Convention on Prisoners of War; expects international organisations to abide by international law regarding the treatment of prisoners of war; calls for international cooperation and assistance in the return of forcibly deported persons, in particular children and hostages;

    34.  Is seriously concerned by the persistence of the scourge of protracted occupation or annexation of territories; calls for special attention to be paid to the human rights situation in the illegally occupied territories, including in cases of protracted occupation, and for effective measures to be taken with the aim of preventing grave human rights abuses on the ground, including the violation of right to life, restriction of freedom of movement, and discrimination;

    35.  Reiterates its call on the Member States to help contain armed conflicts and serious violations of human rights or international humanitarian law by strictly abiding by the provisions of Article 7 of the UN Arms Trade Treaty of 2 April 2013 on Export and Export Assessment and Council Common Position 2008/944/CFSP of 8 December 2008 defining common rules governing control of exports of military technology and equipment;

    36.  Urges reliable, like-minded third countries to strengthen their defence, resilience and civil preparedness capabilities, in order to effectively deter aggression and uphold human rights globally;

    37.  Given the gendered impacts of armed conflicts, deplores the insufficient priority and focus given to sexual and gender-based violence and to sexual and reproductive health and rights (SRHR) across the EU’s humanitarian and refugee response; reiterates that humanitarian crises intensify SRHR- and gender-related challenges and recalls that in crisis zones, particularly among vulnerable groups such as refugees and migrants, women and girls are particularly exposed to sexual violence, sexually transmitted diseases, sexual exploitation, rape as a weapon of war and unwanted pregnancies; calls on the Commission and the Member States to give high priority to gender equality and SRHR in their humanitarian aid and refugee response, as well as accountability and access to justice and redress for sexual and reproductive rights violations and gender-based violence, including in terms of training for humanitarian actors, and existing and future funding;

    Team Europe approach

    38.  Recognises the potential for stronger alignment in approaches to human rights protection and promotion between EU institutions, Member States’ embassies and EU delegations in non-EU countries, particularly in encouraging those countries to comply with their international obligations and to refrain from harassment and persecution of critical voices; emphasises the opportunity for Member States’ embassies to take an increasingly active role in advancing and safeguarding human rights, while also supporting civil society in these countries; calls for the EU and its Member States to use all possible means to assess detention conditions, and observe trials and court procedures, to increase pressure and awareness, and in order to urge countries and actively work towards the release of political prisoners; highlights the importance of shared responsibility between Member States and EU delegations in these efforts; calls for the EU and its Member States to intensify their collective efforts to promote the respect, protection and fulfilment of human rights and to support democracy worldwide; encourages careful monitoring and assessment of the capacity of EU delegations to ensure that each one has a designated point of contact for cases of human rights violations, and that this mandate is allocated sufficient resources to respond in an effective and timely manner; reiterates, in this context, the importance, for the EU delegations, of existing EU guidelines related to specific areas of human rights;

    Responding to universal human rights and democracy challenges

    Right to freedom from torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment

    39.  Condemns any action or attempt to legalise, instigate, authorise, consent or acquiesce to torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment methods under any circumstances; condemns the increasing reports of the use of torture by state actors in many different contexts, including in custodial and extra-custodial settings – of political prisoners, among others – and in conflict situations around the world, notably in violation of the Geneva Convention on Prisoners of War, as well as the killing of prisoners of war, which amounts to a war crime, and reiterates the non-derogable nature of the right to be free from torture or other forms of inhuman or degrading treatment; reiterates the EU’s zero-tolerance policy to torture and other ill-treatment and calls on the relevant institutions, including the European Court of Human Rights, to take a thorough stance on any such case;

    40.  Reiterates its calls for universal ratification of the UN Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment and its Optional Protocol thereto, and for the need for states to bring their national provisions in this respect in line with international standards; reiterates, in accordance with the revised Guidelines on the EU’s policy towards third countries on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, adopted by the Council on 16 September 2019, the importance of engaging with relevant stakeholders in the fight to eradicate torture, and to monitor places of detention;

    Right to freedom of peaceful assembly and association

    41.  Reiterates the need to protect the EU democratic space and the exercise of fundamental freedoms therein, particularly freedoms of assembly and association; highlights the growing violent repression of protest and peaceful assemblies within the EU civic space, with cases of torture and ill-treatment resulting in deaths and other serious violations; underscores the need to strengthen this fundamental right in conjunction with the absolute prohibition of torture and ill-treatment;

    Right to food, water and sanitation

    42.  Recalls that the right to food, including having physical and economic access to adequate food or the means to its procurement, is a human right; is extremely concerned about the challenges to the right to food worldwide, especially in situations of war and conflicts; condemns the increasing reports of the weaponisation of food in situations of armed conflict; calls for the EU and its Member States to promote mandatory guidelines on the right to food without discrimination within the UN system; urges the EU and the Member States to fully support, politically and financially, organisations and agencies working to secure the right to food in conflict zones; recalls the importance of the UN Declaration on the Rights of Peasants and Other People Working in Rural Areas in view of attaining food security; commends the work of the UN World Food Programme, in this regard;

    43.  Reaffirms the rights to safe drinking water and to sanitation as human rights, both rights being complementary; underlines that access to clean drinking water is indispensable to a healthy and dignified life and is essential for the maintenance of human dignity; highlights the fact that the right to water is a fundamental precondition for the enjoyment of other rights, and as such must be guided by a logic grounded in the public interest, and in common public and global goods; underscores the importance of the EU Guidelines on safe drinking water and sanitation, and urges the EU institutions and the Member States to implement and promote their application in non-EU countries and in multilateral forums;

    Climate change and the environment

    44.  Highlights that climate change and its impact on the environment has direct effects on the effective enjoyment of all human rights; recognises the important work of CSOs, indigenous peoples and local communities, land and environmental HRDs and indigenous activists for the protection of a clean, healthy and sustainable environment, including access to land and water sources; deplores the risks that environmental HRDs and indigenous activists face and calls for their effective protection to be guaranteed; notes that communities contributing the least to climate change are the ones more likely to be affected by climate risks and natural disasters and calls, in this regard, for increasing support to the most vulnerable groups; recalls that indigenous peoples and local communities play an important role in the sustainable management of natural resources and the conservation of biodiversity; recalls that the transition to clean energy must be fair and respect everyone’s fundamental rights; reiterates the importance of the achievement of the UN sustainable development goals (SDGs) for the protection of the human rights of present and future generations;

    45.  Notes with deep concern the increasing threats to a clean, healthy and sustainable environment posed by the deployment of weapons of mass destruction and other forms of warfare that adversely and disproportionately affect the environment; stresses the need to effectively address the displacement of people caused by environmental destruction and climate change, which increases the risk of human rights violations and heightens vulnerabilities to different forms of exploitation; recognises that children face more acute risks from climate-related disasters and are also one of the largest groups to be affected; calls for the EU to focus on addressing the impacts of climate change on the enjoyment of the rights of the child;

    Rights of the child

    46.  Calls for a systematic and consistent approach to promoting and defending children’s rights, including for those most marginalised and those in the most vulnerable situations, through all of the EU’s external policies; calls for more concerted efforts to promote the respect, protection and fulfilment of children’s rights in crisis or emergency situations; condemns the decline in respect for the rights of the child and the increasing violations and abuses of these rights, including through violence, early and forced marriage, sexual abuse including genital mutilation, trafficking, child labour, honour killings, recruitment of child soldiers, lack of access to education and healthcare, malnutrition and extreme poverty; further condemns the increase in deaths of children in situations of armed conflict and stresses the need for effective protection of children’s rights in active warfare; calls for new EU initiatives to promote and protect children’s rights, with a view to rehabilitating and reintegrating conflict-affected children, ensuring that they have a protected, family- and community-based environment as a natural context for their lives, in which assistance and education are fundamental elements; reiterates its call for a systematic and consistent approach to promoting and defending children’s rights through all EU external policies; calls on all countries to ratify the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child as a matter of urgency, in order to allow for the universal ratification of this foundational instrument;

    47.  Emphasises the urgent necessity to uphold the rights of pregnant women, ensuring that they receive comprehensive support for their health, safety and dignity that includes guaranteed access to maternal healthcare services, availability of childcare facilities such as nurseries, and the establishment of fair workplace policies that protect their well-being, income and career advancement;

    48.  Stresses the importance of closing the financing gap that would enable countries to meet their SDG 4 targets on quality education and ensure access to education for all children and young people; reiterates its calls to address cultural norms and gender biases that prevent girls and women from receiving an education and urges the creation of gender-responsive education systems worldwide;

    49.  Stresses that education represents the starting point for cultivating principles and values that contribute to the personal development of children, as well as to social cohesion and democracy, and the rule of law around the world; to that end calls for the EU to promote its values through supporting access to education and learning for women and girls;

    Rights of women and gender equality

    50.  Stresses that women’s rights and gender equality are indispensable and indivisible human rights, as well as a basis for the rule of law and inclusive resilient democracies; deplores the fact that millions of women and girls continue to experience discrimination and violence, especially in the context of conflicts, post-conflict situations and displacements, and are denied their dignity, autonomy and even life; condemns the impunity with which perpetrators commit violations against women HRDs; is appalled by the use of rape and sexual violence as a weapon of war and stresses the need to shed light on these instances, and for better international cooperation on fighting impunity for these crimes; calls for the EU, its Member States and like-minded partners to step up their efforts to ensure the full enjoyment and protection of women’s and girls’ human rights, and to incorporate a gender mainstreaming approach across all policies, taking into account the differentiated impacts of global challenges such as climate change or conflicts; emphasises that SRHR are fundamental human rights that must be upheld globally and in the Member States and expresses deep concern over global setbacks in gender equality and SRHR; reaffirms that the denial of quality and comprehensive sexual and reproductive health services constitutes a form of gender-based violence; stresses the importance of leading by example; calls for the EU to prioritise access to SRHR as part of the promotion of human rights and the achievement of sustainable development goals; condemns in the strongest terms the increasing attacks on SRHR around the world, as well as gender-based violence, including the use of sexual violence as a weapon of war; calls for the EU and its Member States to uphold SRHR as human rights, enshrine the right to legal and safe abortion in the Charter of Fundamental Rights and prioritise access to SRHR in order to advance human rights and sustainable development goals; strongly deplores cases of female genital mutilation, honour killings, child marriages and forced marriages; welcomes the accession of the EU to the Istanbul Convention and strongly encourages the remaining Member States to ratify the Istanbul Convention without further delay; calls for the EU and its international partners to strengthen their efforts to ensure that women fully enjoy human rights and are treated equally to men; emphasises the importance of safeguarding the rights of women, ensuring that their health, safety and dignity are protected, particularly in the context of healthcare access and workplace protections; underlines the need to keep opposing and condemning, in the strongest terms, anti-abortion laws that punish women and girls with decades-long jail sentences, even in cases of rape, incest or when the life of the pregnant woman is at risk; stresses the need to pursue efforts to fully eradicate the practice of female genital mutilation; fully supports the role of the EU Ambassador for Gender and Diversity;

    51.  Recognises that the promotion and protection of SRHR is essential to achieving gender equality and affirms the right to access comprehensive SRHR services, including modern contraception, free, safe and legal abortion, maternal, prenatal and postnatal healthcare, assisted reproduction and access to education and information on SRHR, including comprehensive sexuality education, without any form of discrimination, coercion or violence; echoes human rights bodies’ recognition that banning abortion may subject women to suffering amounting to torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment;

    52.  Recognises that gender apartheid constitutes a systematic and institutionalised form of oppression, depriving women and girls of fundamental rights solely on the basis of their gender; notes with deep concern the entrenchment of gender apartheid in certain regions, where women face extensive restrictions on education, employment, healthcare and freedom of movement, often underpinned by legal and cultural frameworks that reinforce gender-based discrimination; urges the EU and the Member States to proactively address gender apartheid through strengthened diplomatic efforts, targeted economic measures and accountability mechanisms that support civil society organisations advocating for gender equality; calls for the formal recognition of gender apartheid as a distinct human rights violation and for support for international initiatives for its classification as a crime against humanity, thus contributing to the establishment of a global accountability standard;

    Rights of refugees and asylum seekers

    53.  Denounces the erosion of the human rights and the safety of refugees, asylum seekers and forcibly displaced persons; reaffirms their inalienable human rights and fundamental right to seek asylum; recalls the obligation of states to protect them in accordance with international law; underlines the importance of identification and registration of individuals, including children, as a key tool for protecting refugees and ensuring the integrity of refugee protection systems, preventing human trafficking and the recruitment of children into armed militias; calls for the EU and its Member States to effectively uphold their rights in the EU’s asylum and migration policy and in the EU’s cooperation with partner countries in this regard; deplores the increasing xenophobia, racism and discrimination towards migrants, as well as the different forms of violence they face, including during their displacement, and the many barriers they face, including in access to healthcare; condemns the instrumentalisation of migration at EU borders by foreign actors, which constitutes hybrid attacks against the Member States as well as a dehumanisation of migrants; stresses that the EU should step up its efforts to acknowledge and develop ways to address the root causes of irregular migration and forced displacement, building the resilience of migrants’ communities of origin and helping them offer their members the possibility to enjoy a decent life in their home country; calls for the EU and its Member States to continue and, where possible, step up their support for countries hosting the most refugees, as well as for transit countries; reiterates that close cooperation and engagement with non-EU countries, with full respect for fundamental rights, remain key to preventing migrant smuggling; stresses, in this regard, that the dissemination of information and awareness-raising campaigns on the risks of smuggling are crucial, as well as of the migration laws of the destination countries, in order to prevent the undertaking of unnecessarily risky journeys by those who do not have grounds for asylum; calls for EU-funded humanitarian operations to take into consideration the specific needs and vulnerabilities of children and to ensure their protection while they are displaced; underlines the importance of developing an effective framework of safe and legal pathways to the EU and welcomes, in this regard, the Commission communication on attracting skills and talent to the EU(10), including the development of talent partnerships with partner countries; calls for respect for the principle of non-refoulement to countries where the life and liberty of people would be threatened; calls for the EU and its Member States to discuss the phenomenon of instrumentalised migration orchestrated by authoritarian regimes and organised crime groups, and emphasises the need to conduct a comprehensive analysis of this phenomenon, develop effective countermeasures, and consider its implications for the human rights framework;

    Rights of LGBTIQ+ persons

    54.  Condemns the human rights violations, including discrimination, persecution, violence and killings, stigmatisation, hate crimes, hate speech, conversion therapies, intersex genital mutilation and sexual violence against lesbian, gay, bisexual, trans, non-binary, intersex and queer (LGBTIQ+) persons around the world; calls for the EU and its Member States to denounce these injustices and commit to protecting the rights, dignity and safety of LGBTIQ+ individuals; is extremely concerned by the spreading of hatred and anti-LGBTIQ+ narratives and legislation that target LGBTIQ+ persons and HRDs; denounces, in this regard, conversion practices targeting LGBTIQ+ persons aimed at changing, repressing or suppressing the sexual orientation, gender identity and/or gender expression of their victims; calls for the implementation of an EU-wide policy to illegalise practices of this kind; calls for the adoption of policies that protect LGBTIQ+ people and give them the tools to safely report a violation of their rights, in line with the EU Guidelines to Promote and Protect the Enjoyment of all Human Rights by LGBTI Persons; emphasises the increasing concerns and fears within LGBTIQ+ communities and urges the EU to take a firm stance against any legislative or social actions that endanger LGBTIQ+ people; expresses special concern over LGBTIQ+ people living under non-democratic regimes or in conflict situations, and calls for rapid response mechanisms to protect them as well as their defenders; reiterates its calls for the full implementation of the LGBTIQ Equality Strategy 2020-2025 as the EU’s tool for improving the situation of LGBTIQ+ people around the world; calls for the use of the death penalty to be rejected under all circumstances, including any legislation that would impose the death penalty for homosexuality; calls for the EU and its Member States to further engage the countries with such legislation in reconsidering their position on the death penalty; notes further that the imposition of the death penalty on the basis of such legislation is arbitrary killing per se, and a breach of Article 6 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights;

    Rights of persons with disabilities

    55.  Is concerned by the challenges to the full enjoyment of the rights of persons with disabilities; reiterates its calls for the EU to assist partner countries in the development of policies in support of carers of persons with disabilities; calls for the raising of social awareness and the combating of discriminatory behaviours against persons with disabilities; points to the additional complications faced by persons with disabilities in conflict situations and natural disasters, as they are more vulnerable to violence and often do not receive adequate support; urges all parties to conflict situations worldwide to take adequate measures to mitigate the risks to them as much as possible; emphasises the need to safeguard children with disabilities from any form of exploitation; calls for the EU, in its external policy, to make use of the strategy for the rights of persons with disabilities 2021-2030 as a tool to improve the situation of persons with disabilities, particularly concerning poverty and discrimination, but also problems with access to education, healthcare and employment, and participation in political life; encourages the EU to support partner countries in developing inclusive economic policies that promote accessible vocational training and employment opportunities for persons with disabilities, fostering their full and active economic participation;

    Rights of elderly people

    56.  Reiterates its call for the EU and its Member States to develop new avenues to strengthen the rights of elderly people, taking into account the multiple challenges they face, such as age-based discrimination, poverty, violence and a lack of social protection, healthcare and other essential services, as well as barriers to employment; calls for the implementation of specific measures to combat the risk of poverty for older women through increased social support; underlines the work of the UN Open-ended Working Group on Ageing on a legally binding instrument to strengthen the protection of the human rights of older people and calls for the EU and its Member States to consider actively supporting that work; stresses the need for a cross-cutting intergenerational approach in EU policies, in order to build and encourage solidarity between young people and elderly people;

    Right to equality and non-discrimination

    57.  Reiterates its condemnation of all forms of racism, intolerance, antisemitism, Islamophobia, persecution of Christians, xenophobia and discrimination on the basis of race, ethnicity, nationality, social class, disability, caste, religion, belief, age, sexual orientation or gender identity; condemns the growing international threat of hate speech and speech that incites violence, including online; reiterates the crucial role of education and dialogue in promoting tolerance, understanding and diversity; calls for the adoption or the strengthening of mechanisms for reporting discriminatory behaviours as well as access to effective legal remedies, to help end the impunity of those who engage in this behaviour;

    Right to life: towards the universal abolition of the death penalty

    58.  Reiterates its principled opposition to the death penalty, which is irreversible and incompatible with the right to life and with the prohibition of torture, and a cruel, inhuman and degrading punishment; stresses that the EU must be relentless in its pursuit of the universal abolition of the death penalty as a major objective of its human rights foreign policy; notes that despite the trend in some non-EU countries to take steps towards abolishing the death penalty, significant challenges in this regard still exist; deplores the fact that in other non-EU countries the number of death sentences that have been carried out has reached its highest level in the last five years; reiterates its call for all countries to completely abolish the death penalty or establish an immediate moratorium on the use of the death penalty (sentences and executions) as a first step towards its abolition; urges, in this regard, the EU to intensify diplomatic engagement with countries that continue to practise the death penalty, encouraging dialogue and cooperation on human rights issues and providing support for the development of judicial reforms that could lead towards its abolition;

    Right to freedom of thought, conscience, religion and belief

    59.  Reiterates its concern regarding violations of the right to freedom of thought, conscience, religion and belief; is concerned about the worldwide increase in intolerance towards different religious communities; deplores the instrumentalisation of religious or belief identities for political purposes and the exclusion of persons belonging to religious and belief minorities and religious communities, including from political participation, as well as the destruction and vandalism of sites and works of art of cultural and historical value, in certain non-EU countries; stresses that the freedom to choose one’s religion, to believe or not to believe is a human right that cannot be punished; condemns, therefore, the existence and implementation of so-called apostasy laws and blasphemy laws that lead to harsh penalties, degrading treatment and, in some cases, even to death sentences; calls for the abolition of apostasy laws and blasphemy laws; stresses that the Special Envoy for the promotion and protection of freedom of religion or belief outside the EU should be granted more resources so that he can efficiently carry out his mandate; highlights the need for the Special Envoy to continue to work closely and in a complementary manner with the EUSR for Human Rights and the Council Working Party on Human Rights; calls for the EU and its Member States to step up their efforts to protect the right to freedom of thought, conscience, religion or belief, to raise these issues at UN human rights forums and to continue working with the relevant UN mechanisms and committees; calls for the EU to request and consolidate reports by EU delegations on the state of freedom of thought, conscience, religion and belief;

    60.  Recalls that most of the drivers of violent conflicts worldwide involve minority grievances of exclusion, discrimination and inequalities linked to violations of the human rights of minorities, as observed by the UN Special Rapporteur on minority issues; stresses the need to mainstream the protection of the rights of minorities and for the development of protection mechanisms at the level of the UN; recalls the obligations of states to protect the rights of their national, ethnic, cultural, religious or linguistic minorities within their respective territories; calls on the Commission to support the protection of the rights of persons belonging to minorities worldwide, including this as a priority under the human rights and democracy thematic programme of the EU’s NDICI-Global Europe;

    Right to freedom of expression, academic freedom, media freedom and the right to information

    61.  Emphasises the critical significance of freedom of expression and access to trustworthy and diverse sources of information for sustaining democracy and a thriving civic space; recalls that democracies can only function when citizens have access to independent and reliable information, making journalists key players in the safeguarding of democracy; is therefore seriously concerned about the increasing restrictions on freedom of expression in numerous countries worldwide, particularly for journalists, through censorship, enforced self-censorship, so-called foreign agents laws and the misuse of counter-terrorism or anti-corruption laws to suppress journalists and civil society groups; is concerned by the use of hate speech against journalists, both online and offline, leading to a deterrent effect; raises concerns, additionally, about the physical security of journalists and media workers and their being targeted in conflict zones; deplores the fact that in 2024, 54 journalists and media workers were killed – most of them in conflict zones – 550 were being detained, 55 were being held hostage, and 95 were missing;

    62.  Calls urgently for the EU to back trustworthy media and information outlets that promote the accountability of authorities and support democratic transitions, while stressing the need to preserve the principles of pluralism, transparency and independence; highlights the role played by fact checkers in the media landscape, ensuring that the public can trust the information they receive; is concerned that they are therefore major targets for attacks by illiberal regimes that originate and disseminate disinformation, propaganda and fake news; condemns the extensive use of SLAPPs to silence journalists, activists, trade unionists and HRDs globally; welcomes, in this context, the directive designed to shield journalists and HRDs from abusive legal actions and SLAPPs; encourages lawmakers in non-EU countries to develop legislation with the same goal, as part of broader efforts to promote and protect media freedom and pluralism; requests that attacks on media freedom, as well as the persistent and systematic erosion of the right to information, be taken into account in the EU’s monitoring of the compliance of international agreements;

    63.  Welcomes the Commission’s plan to finance initiatives that support journalists on legal and practical matters, including beyond the EU, through the European Democracy Action Plan; calls for the EU to strengthen its efforts to aid targeted journalists globally, recalling that independent journalists are on the frontline of the fight against disinformation, which undermines democracies; acknowledges the contribution to achieving this goal of programmes such as the now-defunct Media4Democracy and other EU-funded activities, including those of the European Endowment for Democracy; strongly regrets the decision to halt funding to Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, Radio Free Asia and Voice of America, which are outlets with a vital role in combating disinformation, promoting democratic values and reporting in places where press freedom is severely curtailed or non-existent; calls for the EU to urgently step in and provide the funding needed in order to ensure that reliable news sources available in countries that restrict press freedom;

    64.  Remains deeply concerned by the deteriorating state of press freedom around the world; condemns the censorship of journalists, HRDs and CSOs through the application of so-called foreign agents laws, as well as other legislative and non-legislative measures adopted by authoritarian and illiberal regimes;

    65.  Reaffirms its commitment to protecting and promoting academic freedom as a key component of open and democratic societies; underlines the attacks to academic freedom not only by authoritarian and totalitarian regimes, but also by extreme and populist forces worldwide; calls for the development of benchmarks for academic freedom into institutional quality assurance within academic rankings, procedures and criteria;

    66.  Underlines the indispensable work of organisations such as Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty in their promotion of democracy, media pluralism and access to neutral information; draws attention to the fact that where the voice of democracy is cancelled, it is easy for propaganda against democratic values to take over; highlights the need to ensure the consistent financing of such institutions, and calls for the EU to step up the financing of such organisations and fill researching gaps that may occur;

    67.  Notes with concern that more than half of the world’s population lives within environments of completely or severely restricted levels of academic freedom, which has severe consequences for the right to education, the enjoyment of the benefits of scientific progress and the freedom of opinion and expression; urges the EU and its Member States to step up their efforts to halt censorship, threats or attacks on academic freedom, and especially the imprisonment of scholars worldwide; welcomes the inclusion of academics at risk in the EU Human Rights Defenders Mechanism; calls on the Commission to ensure continued high-level support for the Global Campus of Human Rights, which has provided a safe space for students and scholars who had to flee their countries for defending democracy and human rights;

    Rights of indigenous peoples

    68.  Notes with regret that indigenous peoples continue to face widespread and systematic discrimination and persecution worldwide, including forced displacements; condemns arbitrary arrests and the killing of human rights and land defenders who stand up for the rights of indigenous peoples; stresses that the promotion of the rights of indigenous peoples and their traditional practices are key to achieving sustainable development, combating climate change and conserving biodiversity; urges governments to pursue development and environmental policies that respect economic, social and cultural rights, and that are inclusive of indigenous peoples and local populations, in line with the UN SDGs; reiterates its call for the EU, its Member States and their partners in the international community to adopt all necessary measures for the recognition, protection and promotion of the rights of indigenous people, including as regards their languages, lands, territories and resources, as set out in the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, including the principle of free, prior and informed consent; calls on all states to ensure that indigenous peoples and local communities are included in the deliberations and decision-making processes of international climate diplomacy; encourages the Commission to continue to promote dialogue and collaboration between indigenous peoples and the EU;

    Right to public participation

    69.  Deplores that the right to participate in free and fair elections is not respected in authoritarian, illiberal, and totalitarian regimes; highlights that these regimes conduct fake elections with the aim of entrenching their power, as they lack real political contestation and pluralism; is alarmed by current trends in electoral processes, such as the increasing decline in electoral participation and democratic performance or the growing disputes concerning the credibility of elections; highlights with deep concern the growing interference by some states in other countries’ elections through hybrid tactics; reaffirms the necessity of increasing political representation of women, young people and vulnerable groups and to guarantee the public participation of minorities; underlines that distrust in the electoral process can be exacerbated not only by irregularities but also by public statements, including from participants; emphasises that public perception of electoral process is as crucial as the process itself, as its manipulation can lead to polarisation or targeted attacks; calls on non-EU countries to reinforce their efforts to clearly communicate all the steps of their respective electoral processes and systems, as well as the existing accountability mechanisms in case of irregularities; calls on the EEAS and the Commission to analyse and report to Parliament their initiatives to tackle the challenges posed by artificial intelligence (AI) in electoral processes;

    Human rights, business and trade

    70.  Stresses the role of trade as a major instrument to promote and improve the human rights situation in the EU’s partner countries; urges the Commission to improve coordination between the EU’s trade, investment and development policies and prioritise and promote the development of human rights through EU trade policies, including the Generalised Scheme of Preferences Plus; notes, however, that there has been little to no improvement in some of the countries concerned; stresses the responsibilities of states and other actors, such as corporations, to mitigate the effects of climate change, prevent their negative impact on human rights and promote appropriate policies in compliance with human rights obligations; deplores the detrimental effects of some excessive and exploitative business activities on human rights and democracy; welcomes the harmonisation resulting from the adoption of the Directive on corporate sustainability due diligence with binding EU rules on responsible corporate behaviour with regard to human, labour and environmental rights; further welcomes the Regulation on prohibiting products made with forced labour on the Union market(11) and calls for its swift implementation at Member State level; calls for the implementation of the EU Ombudsman’s recommendation concerning the creation of a complaint-handling portal, within the framework of EU trade and financial instruments, and for the adaptation of the Commission’s Single Entry Point to allow for the submission of complaints regarding failures to comply with human rights clauses, which should be accessible, citizen-friendly and transparent; calls for the EU to continue its efforts to eliminate child labour, and forced and bonded labour; stresses the importance of remediation and access to justice measures that are in line with the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights, including financial and non-financial measures in consultation with the victims; calls on the Council to adopt an ambitious mandate for the EU to engage in the ongoing negotiations on the UN legally binding instrument on business and human rights as soon as possible;

    71.  Highlights that in many regions of the world, micro-, small and medium-sized enterprises (MSMEs) are often the driving force of local economies with an increasing number of women running them; underlines that MSMEs account for 90 % of businesses, 60 to 70 % of employment and 50 % of gross domestic product worldwide; highlights the importance of MSMEs in their contribution to the 2030 Agenda and the achievement of the SDGs, namely those on the eradication of poverty and decent working conditions for all;

    Human rights and digital technologies

    72.  Is concerned by the threat that AI can pose to democracy and human rights, especially if it is not duly regulated; highlights the need for oversight, robust transparency and appropriate safeguards for new and emergent technologies, as well as a human-rights based approach; welcomes the Council conclusions on Digital Diplomacy of 26 June 2023 to strengthen the EU’s role and leadership in global digital governance, in particular its position as a shaper of the global digital rulebook based on democratic principles; welcomes, in this regard, the adoption of the EU Artificial Intelligence Act which aims to harmonise the rules on AI for protecting human rights, and the advantages that AI can bring to human wellbeing; is deeply concerned about the harmful consequences of the misuse of AI and deepfakes, particularly for women and children; notes with concern the adverse effects of the ‘fake content industry’ on the right to information and press freedom, including the rapid development of AI and the subsequent empowerment of the disinformation industry(12); condemns the use of new and emerging technologies, such as facial recognition technology and digital surveillance, as coercive instruments and their use in the increasing harassment, intimidation and persecution of HRDs, activists, journalists and lawyers; calls on the Council for the listing under the EUGHRSR of state and non-state actors that are engaging in these practices; notes with concern the rapid development of AI in military applications, as well as the potential development and deployment of autonomous systems that could make life-or-death decisions without human input;

    73.  Recalls that the international trade in spyware to non-EU countries where such tools are used against human rights activists, journalists and government critics, is a violation of the fundamental rights enshrined in the Charter;

    74.  Welcomes the adoption in May 2024 of the first Council of Europe Framework Convention on Artificial Intelligence and Human Rights, Democracy and the Rule of Law, aimed at ensuring that activities within the entire life cycle of AI systems are fully consistent with human rights, democracy and the rule of law; reiterates the need for greater legislative attention to be paid to the profound changes arising from activities within the life cycle of AI systems, which have the potential to promote human prosperity, individual and social well-being, sustainable development, gender equality, and the empowerment of all women and girls, but also pose the risk of creating or exacerbating inequalities and incentivising cyber and physical violence, including violence experienced by women and individuals in vulnerable situations;

    75.  Stresses that the internet should be a place where freedom of expression prevails; considers, nevertheless, that the rights of individuals need to be respected; is of the opinion that, where applicable, what is considered to be illegal offline, should be considered illegal online; expresses concern for the growing number of internet shutdowns; highlights that internet shutdowns are often used by authoritarian regimes, among others, to silence political dissidence and curb political freedom; calls urgently for the EU to combat this alarming phenomenon, including considering allowing EU-based providers to offer safe communication tools to people who have been thereby deprived of online access; urges the EU to take a firm stance against any attempts by tech giants to circumvent or undermine national legal systems and independent court decisions, and to protect democratic principles and implement measures to maintain the integrity of elections, as well as to protect the right to information, especially during electoral periods;

    o
    o   o

    76.  Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council, the Commission, the Vice-President of the Commission / High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, the European Union Special Representative for Human Rights, the governments and parliaments of the Member States, the United Nations Security Council, the United Nations Secretary-General, the President of the 79th session of the United Nations General Assembly, the President of the United Nations Human Rights Council, the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights and the European Union Heads of Delegation.

    (1) OJ L 115, 28.4.2006, p. 50, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/agree_internation/2006/313/oj.
    (2) OJ L 410 I, 7.12.2020, p. 1, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2020/1998/oj.
    (3) OJ L 209, 14.6.2021, p. 1, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2021/947/oj.
    (4) OJ L, 2024/1760, 5.7.2024, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/dir/2024/1760/oj.
    (5) OJ C 411, 27.11.2020, p. 30.
    (6) OJ C 404, 6.10.2021, p. 202.
    (7) OJ C 15, 12.1.2022, p. 70.
    (8) OJ C 99, 1.3.2022, p. 152.
    (9) OJ C, C/2024/6741, 26.11.2024, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2024/6741/oj.
    (10) Commission communication of 27 April 2022 on attracting skills and talent to the EU (COM(2022)0657).
    (11) Proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on prohibiting products made with forced labour on the Union market (COM(2022)0453).
    (12) Reporters Without Borders, ‘2023 World Press Freedom Index – journalism threatened by fake content industry’ https://rsf.org/en/2023-world-press-freedom-index-journalism-threatened-fake-content-industry.

    MIL OSI Europe News

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Text adopted – Guidelines for the 2026 budget – Section III – P10_TA(2025)0051 – Wednesday, 2 April 2025 – Strasbourg

    Source: European Parliament

    The European Parliament,

    –  having regard to Article 314 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU),

    –  having regard to Article 106a of the Treaty establishing the European Atomic Energy Community,

    –  having regard to Council Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2020/2093 of 17 December 2020 laying down the multiannual financial framework for the years 2021-2027(1) and to the joint declaration agreed between Parliament, the Council and the Commission in this context(2) and the related unilateral declarations(3),

    –  having regard to Council Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2022/2496 of 15 December 2022 amending Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2020/2093 laying down the multiannual financial framework for the years 2021 to 2027(4),

    –  having regard to the Council Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2024/765 amending Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2020/2093 laying down the multiannual financial framework for the years 2021 to 2027(5) (MFF Revision),

    –  having regard to its position of 16 December 2020 on the draft Council regulation laying down the multiannual financial framework for the years 2021 to 2027(6),

    –  having regard to its resolution of 15 December 2022 on upscaling the 2021-2027 multiannual financial framework: a resilient EU budget fit for new challenges(7),

    –  having regard to its resolution of 3 October 2023 on the proposal for a mid-term revision of the multiannual financial framework 2021-2027(8),

    –  having regard to its resolution of 27 February 2024 on the draft Council regulation amending Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2020/2093 laying down the multiannual financial framework for the years 2021 to 2027(9),

    –  having regard to Council Decision (EU, Euratom) 2020/2053 of 14 December 2020 on the system of own resources of the European Union and repealing Decision 2014/335/EU, Euratom(10),

    –  having regard to the Commission proposal of 22 December 2021 for a Council decision amending Decision (EU, Euratom) 2020/2053 on the system of own resources of the European Union (COM(2021)0570) and its position of 23 November 2022 on the proposal(11),

    –  having regard to Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2024/2509 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 September 2024 on the financial rules applicable to the general budget of the Union (recast)(12) (the Financial Regulation),

    –  having regard to Regulation (EU) 2021/1119 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 June 2021 establishing the framework for achieving climate neutrality and amending Regulations (EC) No 401/2009 and (EU) 2018/1999 (‘European Climate Law’)(13),

    –  having regard to the EU’s obligations under the Paris Agreement and its commitments under the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework,

    –  having regard to the EU gender equality strategy 2020-2025,

    –  having regard to its resolution of 10 May 2023 on the impact on the 2024 EU budget of increasing European Union Recovery Instrument borrowing costs(14),

    –  having regard to Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2020/2092 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 December 2020 on a general regime of conditionality for the protection of the Union budget(15),

    –  having regard to the Interinstitutional Agreement of 16 December 2020 between the European Parliament, the Council of the European Union and the European Commission on budgetary discipline, on cooperation in budgetary matters and on sound financial management, as well as on new own resources, including a roadmap towards the introduction of new own resources(16),

    –  having regard to the Interinstitutional Proclamation on the European Pillar of Social Rights(17) of 13 December 2017,

    –  having regard to the general budget of the European Union for the financial year 2025(18) and the joint statements agreed between Parliament, the Council and the Commission annexed hereto,

    –  having regard to Enrico Letta’s report entitled ‘Much more than a market’, presented in the European Parliament on 21 October 2024,

    –  having regard to Mario Draghi’s report entitled ‘The future of European competitiveness’, presented in the European Parliament on 17 September 2024,

    –  having regard to Sauli Niinistö’s report entitled ‘Safer together – Strengthening Europe’s civilian and military preparedness and readiness’, presented in the European Parliament on 14 November 2024,

    –  having regard to the presentation of the EU Competitiveness Compass by Commission President Ursula von der Leyen on 29 January 2025,

    –  having regard to the joint white paper of 19 March 2025 for European Defence Readiness providing a framework for the ReArm Europe plan (JOIN(2025)0120),

    –  having regard to the Commission communication of 26 February 2025 entitled ‘The Clean Industrial Deal: A joint roadmap for competitiveness and decarbonisation’ (COM(2025)0085),

    –  having regard to the proposal of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 February 2025 amending Regulations (EU) 2015/1017, (EU) 2021/523, (EU) 2021/695 and (EU) 2021/1153 as regards increasing the efficiency of the EU guarantee under Regulation (EU) 2021/523 and simplifying reporting requirements (COM(2025)0084),

    –  having regard to the Council conclusions of 18 February 2025 on the budget guidelines for 2026,

    –  having regard to Rule 95 of its Rules of Procedure,

    –  having regard to the opinions of the Committee on Foreign Affairs, the Committee on Transport and Tourism, the Committee on Regional Development and the Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development,

    –  having regard to the letters from the Committee on Budgetary Control, the Committee on the Environment, Climate and Food Safety, the Committee on Industry, Research and Energy, the Committee on Culture and Education and the Committee on Constitutional Affairs,

    –  having regard to the report of the Committee on Budgets (A10-0042/2025),

    Budget 2026: building a resilient, sustainable and prosperous future for Europe

    1.  Highlights the anticipated economic growth projected for 2025 and 2026 within the EU(19), accompanied by an easing of inflation; notes nonetheless the uncertainties stemming from Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine, which directly threatens the security of the EU, and the worsening effects of climate change and the biodiversity crisis, also manifested in the increasing frequency and intensity of natural disasters, which are compounded by new significant geopolitical changes and a deteriorating international rules-based order, heightened security threats and a rise in global protectionism; emphasises that, in such an increasingly volatile landscape, it is imperative for the EU to enhance its defence and security capabilities, social, economic and territorial cohesion and political and strategic autonomy, decrease its dependence, increase its competitiveness and ensure a prosperous future for the continent and its people, who are currently facing an increasingly high cost of living;

    2.  Is determined to ensure that the 2026 budget, by focusing on strategic preparedness and security, economic competitiveness and resilience, sustainability, climate, as well as strengthening the single market, provides the people in the EU with a robust ecosystem and delivers on their priorities, thus reinforcing a socially just and prosperous Europe; underlines the need for additional investment in security and defence, research, innovation, small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs), health, energy, migration, as well as land and maritime border protection, inclusive digital and green transitions, job creation, and the provision of opportunities for young people; insists that this be accompanied by administrative simplification, as indicated in the Competitiveness Compass; insists that the EU budget is the largest investment instrument with leverage effect, complementing national budgets and therefore enabling the EU to navigate the complexities of a rapidly changing world while ensuring prosperity, social cohesion and stability for its people; is strongly of the opinion that the EU should use this leverage effect to the maximum degree to boost the Union’s objectives and policymaking, as well as private investment;

    Investing in a solid, sustainable and resilient economy

    3.  Is adamant that sound economic resilience and sustainability can be achieved in the EU by boosting public and private investment, increasing innovation and supporting competitiveness, including by addressing the skills gap and fostering more industrial production in Europe as a source for robust economic growth and quality jobs, and thereby guaranteeing the Union’s strategic autonomy, ensuring that the EU remains agile and self-reliant in the face of global challenges, disruptions and volatility; highlights the need to promote innovation, prioritise education, reduce costs and the administrative burden, and strengthen the single market, particularly as regards services;

    4.  Reaffirms, in this regard, that research and innovation remain crucial for the EU’s success in cutting-edge industries and new clean and sustainable technologies; recalls the long-standing goal of increasing research and innovation investment to 3 % of gross domestic product (GDP); calls, therefore, for increased funding to be provided under Horizon Europe to fund at least 50 % of all excellent proposals in all scientific disciplines, enable researchers as well as companies, especially SMEs, to bring new developments to the market, and to scale up, ensure solid economic growth and boost the Union’s competitiveness in the global economy, thereby preventing actors from leaving for competing regions while also ensuring that Europe has the knowledge base it needs to pursue the Green Deal commitments;

    5.  Highlights the importance of targeted support in encouraging public-private partnerships and accessible and increased financing to support SMEs as the backbone of the European economy and a vector for pioneering innovation, emphasising the role of the European Innovation Council, InvestEU and the SME component of the single market programme in empowering start-ups and scale-ups of innovative companies, supporting them in their growth and contributing to a greater role for the EU economy on the global stage; expresses its concern that, according to the interim evaluation of InvestEU, envelopes for many financial products may run out by the end of 2025 without budgetary reinforcements; takes note of the Commission proposal in this regard; underlines, furthermore, the importance of the single market programme to leverage the full potential of the EU’s cross-border dimension;

    6.  Stresses that the modernisation of the economy will require blending public and private investment; emphasises, in this regard, the necessity of private investments to maximise the leverage effect of public spending; recalls that these efforts should lead to simplification and reduce the financial burden for the EU’s SMEs while maintaining EU standards;

    7.  Underscores the urgency of further accelerating the digital and green transitions as catalysts for a future-oriented and resource-efficient economy that remains attractive for innovative businesses and that is based on market-driven investments providing quality jobs and leaving no one behind; advocates substantial investment in forward-looking digital infrastructure, underpinned by well-regulated, human-centred and trustworthy artificial intelligence and cybersecurity; stresses the need to improve citizens’ basic digital skills to match the needs of companies and to equip citizens to counter disinformation; stresses, further, the need to increase the resilience of the Union’s democracy in fighting malign foreign interference;

    8.  Recognises the strategic value of the Trans-European Transport Network (TEN-T) and the Connecting Europe Facility (CEF) for contributing to the economic, social and climate goals of the EU’s cross-border transport infrastructure; calls for network extensions, particularly towards candidate countries and the EU’s strategic partners, as regards the EU’s sustainable and smart mobility strategy and the complementarities between the TEN-T and the Trans-European Networks for Energy (TEN-E);

    A better-prepared Union, capable of effectively responding to crises

    9.  Underlines the need to enhance EU security and defence capabilities to create a genuine defence union and to better prepare for and respond to unprecedented geopolitical challenges and new hybrid security threats; stresses the essential role of common investment, research, production and procurement mechanisms, including in new disruptive technologies supporting an independent EU defence industry; considers that there is an EU added value in security and defence cooperation that not only makes Europe and its people safer but also leads to greater efficiency, potential savings, quality job creation and enhanced strategic autonomy; calls therefore for immediate upscaling and much better coordination of defence spending by Member States; stresses in particular the need to provide adequate resources to innovate and enhance Member States’ military capabilities, as well as their interoperability; takes note, in line with the Commission’s ‘ReArm Europe’ plan, of its call for the European Investment Bank (EIB) and other international financial institutions and private banks in Europe to invest more actively in the European defence industry while safeguarding their operations and financing capacity; recalls the importance of investing in and developing dual-use equipment and, particularly, of strengthening EU military mobility as regards funding dual-use transport infrastructure along priority axes; calls on the Commission to assess the possibility of using calls for this purpose under the CEF transport programme, in the light of the military mobility funding gap; underlines the urgent need to strengthen the EU’s cybersecurity capabilities to fight hybrid warfare;

    10.  Recalls the role of the EU’s space programme in enhancing the strategic security of the Union through a variety of civil and military applications; underlines that a strong European space sector is fundamental for European security, open strategic autonomy, secure connectivity, the protection of critical infrastructure and advancing the twin green and digital transitions, and therefore requires sufficient resources;

    11.  Highlights, in the face of new challenges in internal and external security, the importance of ensuring proper implementation of the Asylum and Migration Pact, in full compliance with international human rights law, and of respecting the principles of solidarity and the fair sharing of responsibility; stresses that effective management and protection of the EU’s external borders, inland, air and maritime, are essential for maintaining the freedoms of the Schengen area and crucial for the security of the EU and its citizens; emphasises the need to better protect people by preventing trafficking and enhance support to strengthen cross-border cooperation between the Member States and the Union in combating terrorism, organised crime, drug trafficking and criminal networks, particularly those involved in migrant smuggling and human trafficking, so as to reinforce law enforcement and the judicial response to these criminal networks, as well as to support Member States facing hybrid threats, in particular the instrumentalisation of migrants on the Union’s borders as defined in the Crisis Regulation(20);

    12.  Expresses its deep concern over the fact that the Commission has funded or co-financed campaigns promoting the wearing of the veil, asserting, for example, that ‘freedom is in the hijab’; emphasises that the Union’s budget must no longer finance future campaigns that directly or indirectly promote the wearing of the veil;

    13.  Recalls the vital role that the Integrated Border Management Fund, the Border Management and Visa Instrument (BMVI) and the Asylum, Migration and Integration Fund play in protecting external borders; calls, in addition, for adequate funding for border protection capabilities as an essential part of a comprehensive migration policy, including physical infrastructure, buildings, equipment, systems and services required at border crossing points, as provided for in Annex III to the BMVI Regulation(21), and for the requirements to be met in terms of reception conditions, integration, return and readmission procedure; reaffirms that cooperation agreements on migration and asylum management with non-EU countries in full respect of international law can help to prevent and counter irregular migration and strengthen border security;

    14.  Acknowledges the common agricultural policy (CAP) as a key strategic European policy for food security and greater EU autonomy in affordable and high-quality food production; stresses the crucial role of the CAP in ensuring a decent income for EU farmers as well as a productive, competitive and sustainable European agriculture; regrets that direct payments have significantly decreased in real terms due to inflation, while the administrative burden on farmers has increased due to the accumulation of bureaucracy; urges the Commission to reduce the administrative burden while maintaining high production standards and the requirement to implement EU legislation; calls for adequate resources and for direct payments to be protected to help farmers cope with the impact of inflation, fuel costs, changes in the global food and trade market and adverse climate events, affecting agricultural production and threatening food security, including in the outermost regions; highlights, in this regard, the role of the agricultural reserve; emphasises the need to help small and medium-sized farms and new and young farmers by supporting generational renewal and ensuring continued support for the promotion of EU agricultural products; underlines the need for appropriate support for research and innovation to make the agricultural sector more sustainable, including water management, in particular through the Horizon Europe programme, without reducing European agricultural production and while preventing European farmers from facing unfair competition from imported products that do not meet our standards; welcomes the Commission’s preparation of a second simplification package; underscores that food security is an essential component for geopolitical stability;

    15.  Stresses the strategic role of fisheries and aquaculture and the need for them to be adequately supported financially; acknowledges that the common fisheries policy ensures a stable income and long-term future for fishers by contributing to protecting sustainable marine ecosystems, which are key to the sector’s competitiveness; insists that special attention must be devoted to the EU’s fishing fleet in order to improve safety and security, including by combating illegal fishery actions and improving working conditions, energy efficiency and sustainability, as well as by renewing the fleet; reaffirms that the European Maritime, Fisheries and Aquaculture Fund should support a human resources policy capable of addressing future challenges, in order to promote an inclusive, diversified and sustainable blue economy; expresses its concern about the effect of the end of the Brexit transition period in June 2026 on the fishing and aquaculture sectors;

    16.  Points out that, at the end of 2023, around 20 million children were at risk of poverty or social exclusion, which is roughly one quarter of all children in the EU; believes, therefore, that the EU’s budget needs to step up efforts to combat poverty among children, including migrant children, children with disabilities and children living in precarious family situations, in accordance with the European Child Guarantee; reiterates its earlier calls for the ESF+ envelope to include a specific and significant budget for fighting child poverty;

    17.  Stresses that enhancing energy security and independence remains fundamental for the EU; highlights the EU’s role in ensuring security of energy supply, assisting households, farmers and businesses in mitigating price volatility and managing price gaps in comparison to the rest of the world; calls, therefore, for additional investment in critical infrastructure and connectivity, including large-scale cross-border electricity grids and hydrogen infrastructure for hard-to-abate sectors, which are an essential prerequisite to the decarbonisation of European industry, in low-carbon and renewable energy sources and connectivity, in particular by properly funding the CEF, as well as in energy efficiency; highlights the need to adapt European infrastructure to meet future energy demands as part of the transition to a clean and modern economy; underlines the importance of investing in new, expanding and modernising interconnector capacity for electricity trading, in particular cross-border capacity, for a fully integrated EU energy market that enhances Europe’s diversified supply security and resilience to energy market disruptions, reducing external dependencies and ultimately ensuring affordable and sustainable energy for EU citizens and businesses; stresses, in this regard, the need to strengthen cooperation with Africa;

    18.  Recalls, in this context, the current housing crisis in Europe, including the lack of decent and affordable housing; calls, therefore, for swift additional investments through a combination of funding sources, including the EIB and national promotional banks, in areas with a positive impact on reducing the cost of living for households, improving the energy efficiency of buildings and deploying renewable energy sources; calls for a coordinated approach at EU level that respects the principle of subsidiarity, encourages best practices and effectively uses all relevant funding mechanisms in addressing this pressing challenge;

    19.  Is highly concerned by the strong impacts of climate change and the biodiversity crisis both in Europe and globally and by the fact that the year 2024 was assessed to be the planet’s warmest year on record; calls for sufficient funding for the LIFE programme to finance climate and environment-related projects, including in the area of climate change mitigation and adaptation, and for increased budgetary flexibility to adequately respond to natural disasters in the EU; regrets that increasing numbers of natural disasters have led to a high number of victims, as well as to long-term devastating effects on citizens, farmers and businesses based and working in the regions concerned, as well as in the ecosystems impacted; calls for increased funding for the EU Solidarity Fund, RESTORE (Regional Emergency Support to Reconstruction) and the EU Civil Protection Mechanism, including for increasing rescEU capacities, which allow for more cost-efficient capacity building, in order to support Member States quickly and effectively in overwhelming crisis situations; recognises the EU’s role as a hub for coordinating and improving Member States’ preparedness and capacities to respond immediately to large-scale, high-impact emergencies, and its added value both for Member States and citizens; stresses, in this regard, that the EU Civil Protection Mechanism is a tangible expression of European solidarity, reinforcing the EU’s role as a crisis responder; acknowledges that the European Union Solidarity Fund or any other fund alone cannot fully compensate for the extreme weather events of increased frequency and severity caused by climate change today and in the future; stresses the need to invest in and prioritise preparedness, prevention, and adaptation measures, prioritising nature-based solutions; stresses that it is crucial to ensure that Union spending contributes to climate mitigation, adaptation efforts and water resilience infrastructure; emphasises that these investments are far lower than the cost of climate inaction;

    Enhancing citizens’ opportunities in a vibrant society

    20.  Insists that continued investment in EU4Health and Cluster Health in Horizon Europe are key to improving health and preparedness for future health crises, thereby improving the health status of EU citizens; stresses the need for health investments for maximum impact; highlights its support for a holistic regulatory and funding approach to Europe’s life sciences and biotech ecosystem, including the creation of cutting-edge European clusters of excellence, as a central pillar of a stronger European health union, to which a European plan for cardiovascular diseases and lifestyles should be added, focusing on primary and secondary prevention as key objectives to increase life expectancy in the EU; highlights the need to create a more supportive care system to respond to demographic challenges and the ageing population; reiterates its support for Europe’s Beating Cancer Plan, as well as the importance of European investment in tackling childhood diseases, rare diseases and antimicrobial resistance; reiterates the importance of the gender aspect of health, including sexual and reproductive health and access to services; is highly concerned by the current mental health crisis in Europe, affecting in particular the young generation, exacerbated by recent global events, which requires immediate action to be taken; underlines the need to prevent shortages of critical medicines, medical countermeasures and healthcare workers faced by some Member States; calls, in this respect, for better coordination at EU level and joint procurement of medicines in order to reduce costs;

    21.  Stresses the importance of investing in young generations and their skills, as major agents of change and progress, by ensuring access to quality education; considers it essential that all students, without discrimination and in every EU Member State, should have full access to the Erasmus+ programme and underlines the essential role of Erasmus+ in facilitating cultural exchange, strengthening European identity and promoting peace through mutual understanding and cooperation, making it a cornerstone of European integration and unity; recalls the need to tackle the skills deficit, the brain drain and the correlation between market needs and skills; considers that for the EU workforce to remain competitive in the future, establishing key areas for training and reskilling is needed; stresses that further investment is required in modernising the Union’s education systems, by equipping them for the digital and green transitions, creating talent booster schemes and incentivising young entrepreneurs; points, in this respect, to the relevance of sufficient financial resources for EU programmes such as the European Social Fund Plus, Erasmus+ and the EU Solidarity Corps, which have proven highly effective in helping to achieve high employment levels and fair social protection, in broadening education and training across the Union, as well as in promoting new job opportunities and fostering skills, youth participation and equal opportunities for all; calls on the Commission to do its utmost so that all university students remain eligible to participate in the Erasmus+ programme, including in Hungary;

    22.  Recalls that families are the main pillar that supports the burden of social expenditure in the EU, especially those with children in their care; notes, at the same time, that families are also those who are suffering the most and enduring the consequences of the successive economic crises that we have suffered over the last 15 years; stresses, for all these reasons, that they must be the subject of special attention in the relevant aspects of the EU budget and of the European Pillar of Social Rights priorities;

    23.  Recalls the role of the EU budget in contributing to the objectives of the European Pillar of Social Rights; highlights the role of the EU budget in contributing to initiatives that reinforce social dialogue and facilitate labour mobility, including in the form of training, networking and capacity building;

    24.  Highlights the ever-increasing threats and dangers of organised and targeted disinformation campaigns against the EU by foreign stakeholders undermining European democracy; calls for the mobilisation of all relevant Union programmes, including Creative Europe, to fund actions in 2026 that promote inclusive digital and media literacy, in particular for young people, combating disinformation, countering online hate speech and extremist content, while encouraging active participation of citizens in democratic processes and safeguarding media freedom and pluralism for good cultural resilience, all of which are fundamental to a thriving democracy; deplores the recent decisions by the US administration to cut funding to Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty and Voice of America and calls on the Commission and the Member States to explore all the possible options to provide further funding to these media outlets in the light of these developments;

    25.  Calls on the Commission to increase EU funding for protecting citizens of all religions and public spaces against terrorist threats, combating radicalisation and terrorist content online, as well as countering hate speech and rising antisemitism, anti-Christian hatred, anti-Muslim hatred and racism;

    26.  Regrets the increasing number of hate crimes directed against Christians and other religious communities; recalls that Christians are the most persecuted religious community in the world; further urges the Commission to dedicate funding to prevent the targeting of religious communities, and in particular Christian and Jewish communities, which have been targeted in Europe in recent months; urges the Commission to prioritise the protection of citizens and all religious communities and to support the combating of terrorist threats, particularly focusing on radicalisation and terrorist content online;

    27.  Calls on the Commission to ensure the swift, full and proper implementation and robust enforcement of the Digital Services Act(22), the Digital Market Act(23) and the Artificial Intelligence Act(24), also by allocating sufficient human resources; stresses the importance of tackling foreign interference, addressing the dangers of biased algorithms, and safeguarding transparency, accountability and the integrity of the digital public space;

    28.  Underlines the added value of funding programmes in the areas of democracy, rights and values; recalls the important role that the EU budget plays in the promotion of the European values enshrined in Article 2 of the Treaty on European Union and in supporting the key principles of democracy, the rule of law, solidarity, inclusiveness, justice, non-discrimination and equality, including gender equality; reaffirms, furthermore, the essential role of the Citizens, Equality, Rights and Values programme in promoting European values and citizens’ rights, in particular its Union Values strand, as well as gender equality, thereby sustaining and further developing an open, rights-based, democratic, equal and inclusive society based on the rule of law; stresses the need for targeted measures to address gender disparities and promote equal opportunities through EU funding allocations; stresses that supporting investigative journalism with sufficient resources is a strategic investment in democracy, transparency and social justice; reiterates the importance of the Daphne and Equality and Rights programmes, and stresses that necessary resources should be devoted to combating discrimination in all its forms, as well as tackling forms of violence;

    29.  Emphasises the valuable work carried out under the Union Values strand, which provides, among other things, direct funding to civil society organisations as key actors in vibrant democracies; stresses that citizens and civil society organisations, promoting the will and interest of citizens, represent the core of European democracy; underlines, in this regard, the importance of all EU programmes and increased funding in supporting the genuine engagement of civil society, particularly in the context of the impact of reduced funding for civil society by the EU’s international partners;

    30.  Calls for the full and urgent implementation of the Agreement establishing an interinstitutional body for ethical standards for members of institutions and advisory bodies referred to in Article 13 of the Treaty on European Union; believes that the Huawei corruption scandal adds special urgency to starting the work of the body without delay; commits to providing the necessary financial and human resources to allow the body to fulfil its mandate and implement its tasks properly;

    31.  Considers it essential for the Union’s stability and progress and its citizens’ trust to ensure the proper use of Union funds and to take all steps towards protecting the Union’s financial interests, in particular by applying the rule of law conditionality; underscores the undeniable connection between respect for the rule of law and efficient implementation of the Union’s budget in accordance with the principles of sound financial management under the Financial Regulation; reiterates that under the Rule of Law Conditionality Regulation(25), the imposition of appropriate measures must not affect the obligations of governments to implement the programme or fund affected by the measure, and in particular the obligations they have towards final recipients; insists, therefore, that in cases of breaches of the rule of law by national governments, the Commission should explore alternative ways to implement the budget, including by assessing the possibility of diverting sources to directly and indirectly managed programmes, in order to ensure that local and regional authorities, civil society and other beneficiaries can continue to benefit from Union funding, without weakening the application of the regulation; highlights the role of the European Court of Auditors and its constant activity in defence of transparency, accountability and strict compliance with the regulations on all of the funds and programmes;

    A strong Union in a changing world

    32.  Observes that the need for the EU to maintain and augment its presence on the global stage is increasingly crucial amid escalating global conflicts, geopolitical shifts and foreign influence efforts worldwide, particularly considering developments with other major global providers of aid; stresses that in order to achieve this, the Union requires sufficient funding and resources to act, including to respond to major crises in its neighbourhood and throughout the world, in particular in the light of the sudden decrease in international funding; stresses the importance of the humanitarian aid programme and regrets that resources are not increasing in line with record-high needs; underscores the need to strengthen the EU’s role as a leading humanitarian actor while effectively addressing emerging crises, particularly in regions facing protracted conflict, displacement, food insecurity and natural disasters; emphasises that the Union also requires sufficient resources for long-term investments in building global partnerships, and points out the importance of the participation of non-EU countries in Union programmes, where appropriate;

    33.  Underlines that the EU’s security environment has changed dramatically following Russia’s illegal, unprovoked and unjustified war of aggression against Ukraine and unpredictable changes in the policies of its main allies; recalls the importance of enhancing citizens’ safety and of achieving efficiency in the area of defence and strategic autonomy, through a comprehensive approach to security that covers military and civilian capabilities, external relations and internal security; stresses the importance of the Internal Security Fund to ensure funding to tackle increased levels of serious organised crime with a cross-border dimension and cybercrime; recognises the pressure which increased defence spending represents for Member Sates’ national budgets; stresses the importance of Member States stepping up their efforts and increasing funding for their defence capabilities, in a consistent and complementary manner in line with the NATO guideline;

    34.  Stresses that, beyond the enormous sacrifices of the people of Ukraine in withstanding Russia’s war of aggression for our common European security, this war has also had substantial economic and social consequences for people throughout Europe; recalls that certain Member States, in particular those with a land border with Russia and/or Belarus in the Baltic region, and frontline Member States, as well as vulnerable sectors of the economy, remain particularly exposed to the consequences of the war and deserve support in areas such as agriculture, infrastructure and military mobility, in the spirit of EU solidarity;

    35.  Firmly reiterates its unconditional and full support for Ukraine in its fight for its freedom and democracy against Russian aggression, as the war on its soil has passed the three-year mark; underlines the ongoing need for high levels of funding, including in humanitarian aid and for repairs to critical infrastructure, and for improved capacity along the EU-Ukraine Solidarity Lanes; welcomes the renewed and reinforced intention of the Commission and Member States to work in a united way to address Ukraine’s pressing defence needs and to further support the Ukrainian economy by providing regular and predictable financial support and facilitating investment opportunities; welcomes the agreement with the Council on macro-financial assistance for Ukraine of up to EUR 35 billion, making use of the proceeds of frozen Russian assets through the new Ukraine Loan Cooperation Mechanism, in order to support Ukraine’s recovery, reconstruction and modernisation, as well as to foster Ukraine’s progress on its path to EU accession; stresses the importance of ensuring accountability regarding core international crimes;

    36.  Insists on the benefits of pre-accession funds, both for the enlargement countries and for the EU itself, as the funding creates more stability in the region; welcomes the implementation of the Growth Plan for the Western Balkans to further support the economic convergence of Western Balkan countries with the EU’s single market through investment and growth in the region; insists on the need to deploy the necessary funds to support Moldova’s accession process, in line with the EU’s commitment to enlargement and regional stability; underlines the role of the Reform and Growth Facility for the Republic of Moldova and highlights the necessity of securing sufficient financial resources for its full implementation; underlines the importance of sustained support for candidate countries in implementing the necessary accession-related reforms, in particular regarding the rule of law, anti-corruption and democracy and in enhancing their resilience and preventing and countering hybrid threats; calls on the Commission to allocate additional funding to support civil society, independent media organisations and journalists;

    37.  Underlines, furthermore, that EU neighbourhood policy, namely its Eastern and Southern Partnerships, contributes to the overall goal of increasing the stability, prosperity and resilience of the EU’s neighbours and thereby of increasing the security of our continent; stresses, therefore, the importance of reinforcing the Southern and Eastern Neighbourhood budget lines in order to support political, economic and social reforms in the regions, facilitate peace processes and reconstruction and provide assistance to refugees, in particular through continuous, reinforced and predictable funding and continuous implementation on the ground; recalls that the EU must continue to alleviate other crises and assist the most vulnerable populations around the world through its humanitarian aid programme, as well as by maintaining its global positioning with the Neighbourhood, Development and International Cooperation Instrument for supporting global challenges and promoting human rights, freedoms and democracy, as well as for the capacity building of civil society organisations and for delivering on the Union’s international climate and biodiversity commitments, within a comprehensive monitoring and control system;

    Cross-cutting issues in the 2026 budget

    38.  Underlines that the repayment of the European Union Recovery Instrument (EURI) borrowing costs is a legal obligation for the EU and therefore non-discretionary; notes that borrowing costs depend on the pace of disbursements under the Recovery and Resilience Facility (RRF) as well as on market fluctuations in bond yields and are therefore inherently partly unpredictable and volatile; insists, therefore, on the need for the Commission to provide reliable, timely and accurate information on NextGenerationEU (NGEU) borrowing costs and on expected RRF disbursements throughout the budgetary procedure as well as on available decommitments; expects the Commission to update the decommitments forecast when it presents the draft budget; recalls that the three institutions agreed that expenditures covering the financing costs of NGEU must aim at not reducing EU programmes and funds;

    39.  Recalls its support for the amended Commission proposals for the introduction of new own resources; is highly concerned by the complete lack of progress on the new own resources in the Council, in particular in view of increasing investment and unforeseen needs; considers that the introduction of new own resources, in line with the roadmap in the interinstitutional agreement of 2020, is essential to cover NGEU borrowing costs while shielding the margins and flexibility mechanisms necessary to cater for these needs;

    40.  Highlights again Parliament’s full support for the cohesion policy and its key role in delivering on the EU’s policy priorities and its general growth; reiterates that the cohesion policy’s optimal added value for citizens depends on its effective and timely implementation; in the same vein, urges the Member States and the Commission to accelerate the implementation of operational programmes under shared management funds as well as of the recovery and resilience plans so as to ensure swift budgetary execution and to avoid accumulated payment backlogs in the two last years of the MFF period, in particular through additional capacity building and technical assistance for Member States; reaffirms the imperative of a robust and transparent mechanism for accurately monitoring disbursements to beneficiaries;

    41.  Notes that particular attention must be paid to rural and remote areas, areas affected by industrial transition and regions which suffer from severe and permanent natural or demographic handicaps, such as islands and outermost, cross-border and mountain regions and all those affected by natural disasters; stresses that these regions should benefit from adequate funding to offset the special characteristics and constraints of their structural social and economic situation, as referred to in Article 349 TFEU; stresses the vital importance of the POSEI programme for maintaining agricultural activity in the outermost regions and bringing food to local markets; calls for the programme budget to be increased to reflect the real needs of farmers in these regions; notes that there has been no such increase since 2013, despite the fact that farmers in these regions face higher production costs due to inflation and climate change; stresses also that the Overseas Countries and Territories associated with the EU, as referred to in Articles 198-204 TFEU, should benefit from adequate funding for their sustainable economic and social development, in the light of their geopolitical importance for global maritime trade routes and key partnerships such as those on sustainable raw materials value chains;

    42.  Reiterates that EU programmes, policies and activities, where relevant, should be implemented in such a way that promotes gender equality in the delivery of their objectives; welcomes the Commission’s work on developing gender mainstreaming in order to meaningfully measure the gender impact of Union spending, as set out in the interinstitutional agreement;

    43.  Takes note that the climate mainstreaming target of 30 % is projected to be met by 33,5 % in 2025, while the biodiversity target will be below 8,5 % in 2025, and unless dedicated action is undertaken the 10 % target will not be met in 2026; stresses the need for continuous efforts towards the achievement of the climate and biodiversity mainstreaming targets laid down in the interinstitutional agreement in the Union budget and the EURI expenditures;

    44.  Stresses that the 2026 Union budget should be aligned with the Union’s ambitions of making the Union climate neutral by 2050 at the latest, as well as the Union’s international commitments, in particular under the Paris Agreement and the Kunming-Montreal Agreement, and should significantly contribute to the implementation of the European Green Deal and the 2030 biodiversity strategy;

    45.  Recalls that effective programme implementation is achievable only with the backing of a committed administration; emphasises the essential work carried out by bodies and decentralised agencies and asserts that they must be properly staffed and sufficiently resourced, while taking into account inflation, so that they can fulfil their responsibilities effectively and contribute to the achievement of the Union political priorities, also when given new tasks and mandates;

    46.  Recalls that, in accordance with the Financial Regulation, when implementing the budget, Member States and the Commission must ensure compliance with the Charter of Fundamental Rights and respect the Union’s values enshrined in Article 2 TEU; underlines in particular Articles 137, 138 and 158 of the Financial Regulation and recalls the Commission and the Member States’ obligation to exclude from Union funds any persons or entities found guilty by a final judgment of terrorist offences, as well as by final judgments of terrorist activities, inciting, aiding, abetting or attempting to commit such offences, and corruption or other serious offences; highlights the need to leverage efforts in tackling fraud both at Union and Member State level and to this end ensure appropriate financial and human resources covering the Union’s full anti-fraud architecture; recalls the importance of providing the Union Anti-Fraud Programme with sufficient financial resources;

    47.  Underlines the importance of effective communication and the visibility of EU policies and programmes in raising awareness of the added value that the EU brings to citizens, businesses and partners;

    o
    o   o

    48.  Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council, the Commission and the Court of Auditors.

    (1) OJ L 433 I, 22.12.2020, p. 11, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2020/2093/oj.
    (2) OJ C 444 I, 22.12.2020, p. 4.
    (3) OJ C 445, 29.10.2021, p. 252.
    (4) OJ L 325, 20.12.2022, p. 11, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2022/2496/oj.
    (5) OJ L, 2024/765, 29.2.2024, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2024/765/oj.
    (6) OJ C 445, 29.10.2021, p. 240.
    (7) OJ C 177, 17.5.2023, p. 115.
    (8) OJ C, C/2024/1195, 23.02.2024, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2024/1195/oj.
    (9) OJ C, C/2024/6751, 26.11.2024, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2024/6751/oj.
    (10) OJ L 424, 15.12.2020, p. 1, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/dec/2020/2053/oj.
    (11) OJ C 167, 11.5.2023, p. 162.
    (12) OJ L 2024/2509, 26.9.2024, p. 1, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2024/2509/oj.
    (13) OJ L 243, 9.7.2021, p. 1, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2021/1119/oj.
    (14) OJ C, C/2023/1084, 15.12.2023, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2023/1084/oj.
    (15) OJ L 433 I, 22.12.2020, p. 1, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2020/2092/oj.
    (16) OJ L 433 I, 22.12.2020, p. 28, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/agree_interinstit/2020/1222/oj.
    (17) OJ C, 2017/428, 13.12.2017, p. 10.
    (18) OJ L, 2025/31, 27.2.2025, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/budget/2025/31/oj.
    (19) European Commission: Directorate-General for Economic and Financial Affairs, European economic forecast – Autumn 2024, Publications Office of the European Union, 2024.
    (20) Regulation (EU) 2024/1359 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 14 May 2024 addressing situations of crisis and force majeure in the field of migration and asylum and amending Regulation (EU) 2021/1147 (OJ L, 2024/1359, 22.5.2024, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2024/1359/oj).
    (21) Regulation (EU) 2021/1148 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 7 July 2021 establishing, as part of the Integrated Border Management Fund, the Instrument for Financial Support for Border Management and Visa Policy (OJ L 251, 15.7.2021, p. 48, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2021/1148/oj).
    (22) Regulation (EU) 2022/2065 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 19 October 2022 on a Single Market For Digital Services and amending Directive 2000/31/EC (OJ L 277, 27.10.2022, p. 1, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2022/2065/oj).
    (23) Regulation (EU) 2022/1925 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 14 September 2022 on contestable and fair markets in the digital sector and amending Directives (EU) 2019/1937 and (EU) 2020/1828 (OJ L 265, 12.10.2022, p. 1, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2022/1925/oj).
    (24) Regulation (EU) 2024/1689 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 June 2024 laying down harmonised rules on artificial intelligence and amending Regulations (EC) No 300/2008, (EU) No 167/2013, (EU) No 168/2013, (EU) 2018/858, (EU) 2018/1139 and (EU) 2019/2144 and Directives 2014/90/EU, (EU) 2016/797 and (EU) 2020/1828 (OJ L, 2024/1689, 12.7.2024, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2024/1689/oj).
    (25) Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2020/2092 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 December 2020 on a general regime of conditionality for the protection of the Union budget (OJ L 433I, 22.12.2020, p. 1, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2020/2092/oj).

    MIL OSI Europe News

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Highlights – Chemical Submission: non-consensual administration of psychoactive substances – Committee on Women’s Rights and Gender Equality

    Source: European Parliament

    On Wednesday, 9 April 2025, the FEMM Committee jointly with the Committee on Public Health will hold a hearing on “Hearing on Chemical Submission: non-consensual administration of psychoactive substances“.

    The hearing aims to shed light on the widespread phenomenon of chemical submission, emphasizing that it extends beyond bars and nightclubs and can occur in various social settings, including within families, friendships, and professional circles. Chemical submission poses serious risks to a victim’s (sexual) autonomy, safety, and well-being. While anyone can be affected, women are disproportionately targeted, particularly in cases of sexual violence.

    MIL OSI Europe News

  • MIL-OSI Canada: Money for school project planning

    Source: Government of Canada regional news (2)

    MIL OSI Canada News

  • MIL-OSI USA: Dingell Leads 40 Colleagues in Demanding Answers About CDC and SAMHSA Rescinding Billions in Funding

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

    Congresswoman Debbie Dingell (MI-06) led 40 of her House colleagues in sending a letter to Department of Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. demanding answers about the agency’s actions to pull back billions of dollars of funding sent to state and community health departments by the Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA). 

    “The agency rescinding $11.4 billion of authorized funding without any congressional action or input is extremely concerning. This funding includes support for state and local health department employees who work around vaccines which are paramount for defending our population from any disease,” the lawmakers wrote. “Especially with the outbreak of measles and avian flu, our nation needs a robust public health system for effectively investigating and tracking disease outbreak and disseminating that data. With the cuts to the agency, we are worried that sufficient support will no longer be available leading to a breakdown in our public health infrastructure.”

    “We are also concerned about the future of vaccines. Funds supporting vaccine implementation were expected to expire in 2027, and we are alarmed that they could now be cut two years short. These immunization programs are used to educate people in communities about vaccines and preventable diseases and support surveillance and lab capacity to track infectious diseases. Inadequate funding will severely limit outreach to vulnerable populations including rural communities and nursing homes for vaccines. In addition, this funding supports staff who work on multiple projects, and it is unclear which other programs may be affected until staff have left,” the lawmakers continued.” Beyond infectious diseases control and prevention, the CDC also provides critical support for the management of other chronic diseases. This includes people with asthma, allergies, diabetes, and heart disease. These patients are at greater risk for more serious infection or hospitalization from infectious diseases, and they rely on a strong public health infrastructure with employees to carry out critical public health interventions tailored to the needs of the local community. We fear clawing back this funding will impact the health of people living with chronic conditions across the nation.”

    “Regarding SAMHSA, we are concerned about $1 billion of grants that will be discontinued. Such cuts and restructuring will deteriorate our mental health infrastructure,”the lawmakers concluded. “We know that over 84.5 million American adults have a substance use or mental health condition, and we cannot cut resources for these services. Last year alone, SAMHSA distributed over $6.9 billion in grants to fight the opioid epidemic, end suicide deaths, and transform the lives of countless Americans facing substance use disorder and mental illness.”

    Specifically, the lawmakers requested answers to the following questions: 

    1. Does the Department certify that all the nearly $11.4B funds being rescinded from CDC are non-obligated, expired by statute funds? If so, please specify under which statue they are expired.
    2. Does the Department certify that the $1B being rescinded from SAMHSA are nonobligated, expired by statue funds? If so, please specify under which statue they are expired.
    3. Please provide a detailed list of the state, local, territorial, and tribal health departments that will be impacted, and how much funding they will lose and from which authorization or appropriation legislation the funding is being rescinded.
    4. Has HHS determined how this funding cut will impact payroll or cause staff layoffs throughout local health departments? If so, how will HHS track this?
    5. Please provide the agency’s plan to maintain FY2024 appropriated activities for the following diseases in light of the announced reduction in funds:
      1. COVID-19
      2. Measles
      3. H1N1
      4. RSV
      5. Whooping Cough
      6. Tuberculosis
      7. Avian Flu
      8. Healthcare-Associated Infection (HAI)
      9. Antimicrobial Resistance (AR) Programs

    View the full text of the letter here. 

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI USA: Investing in AI Within the SUNY System

    Source: US State of New York

    overnor Kathy Hochul today announced that eight SUNY campuses are developing departments, centers, and institutes of AI and Society to engage diverse disciplines and communities, broaden AI development to prepare students for the future and advance the use of AI for the public good. Through this program, the state has provided $5 million in funding to foster collaboration across disciplines to promote inclusive AI research, to address ethical concerns in the use of AI, and to advance responsible data use.

    “The progression of AI research in New York State is going to inspire other states to follow our path,” Governor Hochul said. “Investing in AI within the SUNY system is an investment in our students to expand their knowledge about what the future will bring. We are not just preparing students for AI – we’re shaping how AI serves society, ensuring it strengthens communities and our economy.”

    Investments announced today will launch the following projects:

    • University at Albany- Launching a new AI & Society College & Research Center
    • Binghamton University- Creating the Institute for AI and Society
    • University at Buffalo- Creating the Department of AI and Society
    • SUNY Downstate- Establishing the Global Center for AI, Society and Mental Health
    • SUNY ESF- Establishing the Center for Artificial Intelligence, Society, and the Environment (AISE) (seed funding)
    • SUNY Poly- Developing an Institute for AI and Society (seed funding)
    • Stony Brook University- Creating the Department of Technology, AI and Society
    • Upstate Medical- Forming the AI for Health Equity, Analytics, and Diagnostics (AHEAD) Center (seed funding)

    SUNY Chancellor John B. King Jr. said, “Thanks to Governor Hochul’s leadership, SUNY researchers, faculty, and students are leading the way in using AI to advance the public good. SUNY’s commitment to academic excellence includes making it possible for students from a wide range of disciplines to come together, explore new ideas, and develop the skills that will lead to lifelong success.”

    SUNY Board Trustee Courtney Burke said, “As SUNY and the State of New York continue to invest in AI research for public good, these grants will allow our campuses a vital opportunity to expand their existing AI programs and further stretch the advantages of AI on and off campus. The SUNY Board of Trustees looks forward to witnessing the impact of this investment on each campus selected.”

    SUNY is delivering on Governor Hochul’s vision of artificial intelligence for the public good. Projects are up and running at the first “alpha” phase of the Empire AI computing center, housed at University at Buffalo (UB) and Empire AI brings together researchers from SUNY’s four University Centers – the University at Albany, Binghamton University, UB, and Stony Brook University – as well as the City University of New York, Cornell University, Columbia University, New York University, the Flatiron Institute, and Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute. Governor Hochul’s FY2026 Executive Budget provides additional resources to expand Empire AI’s computing capacity and provide additional computing resources for SUNY researchers. Early SUNY projects include:

    • Binghamton University is conducting research on large language models and antisemitism on social media in order to detect hateful content. Another project is on 3D foundation models for high-throughput characterization of metal-organic frameworks for climate change applications.
    • A team at UB is working on a comprehensive solution to characterize and treat every disease.
    • Stony Brook University researchers have a project on transforming how vaccines are developed by creating an innovative AI-driven platform for antigen design.

    In addition, SUNY has also updated its General Education Framework to incorporate AI as part of the Information Literacy core competency.

    Empire State Development President, CEO and Commissioner Hope Knight said, “New York State is the heart of innovation, and thanks to Governor Hochul’s leadership, ESD is investing in the industries – like artificial intelligence – that will power the Empire State’s long-term economy. SUNY’s funding for dedicated departments to advance AI & Society will help ensure the benefits of this revolutionary technology are used to foster positive interdisciplinary collaboration and problem-solving, promote the public good, and support inclusive economic opportunity for all New Yorkers.”

    State Senator Toby Ann Stavisky said, “Artificial intelligence is the technology of the future and its impact on society will be transformative in ways that we can only imagine. By providing funding to launch the Departments on AI and Society at eight different SUNY campuses, we guarantee that New York will be at the forefront of the development of AI and its subsequent research will be conducted in an ethical and responsible manner. I applaud Governor Hochul and Chancellor King for the first in the nation plan to ensure AI serves the public good.”

    State Senator Kristin Gonzalez said, “Thank you to SUNY and Governor Hochul for reaffirming New York State’s commitment to advancing AI initiatives that serve the public good, ensuring ethical innovation and inclusive progress. I’m really excited for the insights and work from the new Departments of AI and Society that will help shape a future where technology enriches and strengthens communities.”

    Assemblymember Steve Otis said, “Through the leadership of Governor Kathy Hochul, SUNY Chancellor John King, and the State Legislature, New York State is leading the nation in ‘public purpose’ focused AI research and development. The Empire AI Consortium is an innovative model for prioritizing public benefit projects and research in AI development. SUNY has been a leader in AI for many years and is at the forefront of taking AI to the next level. We must continue to support funding for these initiatives.”

    Assemblymember Alicia Hyndman said, “SUNY’s commitment to advancing artificial intelligence for the public good is a critical step in ensuring that emerging technologies are used responsibly and equitably. Under Governor Hochul’s leadership, these investments in AI research and education will not only drive innovation but also help address pressing societal challenges – from combating online hate to improving healthcare solutions. With the rapid rise of AI, it is essential that we learn how to better understand and harness its potential to advance our state. I applaud Chancellor King and SUNY for fostering interdisciplinary collaboration that will prepare our students for the future while ensuring AI serves all communities fairly and ethically.”

    About The State University of New York
    The State University of New York is the largest comprehensive system of higher education in the United States, and more than 95 percent of all New Yorkers live within 30 miles of any one of SUNY’s 64 colleges and universities. Across the system, SUNY has four academic health centers, five hospitals, four medical schools, two dental schools, a law school, the country’s oldest school of maritime, the state’s only college of optometry, and manages one US Department of Energy National Laboratory. In total, SUNY serves about 1.4 million students amongst its entire portfolio of credit- and non-credit-bearing courses and programs, continuing education, and community outreach programs. SUNY oversees nearly a quarter of academic research in New York. Research expenditures system-wide are nearly $1.16 billion in fiscal year 2024, including significant contributions from students and faculty. There are more than three million SUNY alumni worldwide, and one in three New Yorkers with a college degree is a SUNY alum. Learn more about how SUNY creates opportunities.

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI USA: Welch Joins Hirono, Senate Democrats to Reintroduce Legislation to Guarantee Legal Representation for Unaccompanied Children in Immigration Proceedings

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator Peter Welch (D-Vermont)
    WASHINGTON, DC – U.S. Senator Peter Welch joined U.S. Senator Mazie K. Hirono (D-Hawaii), both members of the Senate Judiciary Committee, and 25 of their colleagues in introducing The Fair Day in Court for Kids Act of 2025, legislation to provide unaccompanied children with legal representation for their court when they appear in proceedings before an immigration judge. This comes after the Trump Administration’s recent termination of a contract that provides legal services for approximately 26,000 unaccompanied children who appear in immigrant court.
    “There is one word to describe what the Trump Administration is doing to unaccompanied migrant children—cruel,” said Senator Welch. “These children can’t be expected to navigate our complex immigration system and should never be forced to face off against seasoned government attorneys alone, but that’s what President Trump is doing. In response to the administration’s actions, Congress must reaffirm America’s commitment to due process and ensure all unaccompanied children are afforded legal counsel. Justice demands it.”
    “Children cannot represent themselves in Court—it’s that simple,” said Senator Hirono. “Legal representation helps ensure unaccompanied minors in our court system get the fair hearing they’re entitled to, and is critical to the function of immigration court proceedings. As the Trump Administration continues its war on immigrants, The Fair Day in Court for Kids Act will safeguard legal representation for unaccompanied children, helping to protect them from heightened risk of mistreatment, exploitation, and trafficking.”
    Nearly half of all unaccompanied children represent themselves during legal proceedings and it is extremely difficult for children to successfully navigate the U.S. immigration system without an attorney—unrepresented children appear alone in immigration court to face a judge and an adversarial government attorney seeking their removal from the United States. Many of these children, potentially as young as 3-years old, are unable to speak English and unable to understand our complicated legal system. Immigration judges are nearly 100 times less likely to grant relief to unaccompanied children without counsel compared to those with counsel. The federal government previously provided legal representation to some unaccompanied minors in accordance with the Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act of 2008, which created special protections for children who arrive in the U.S. without a parent or a legal guardian. Now, the Trump Administration is working to terminate those services completely.
    “The Trump Administration’s breathtakingly cruel decision to strip tens of thousands of tiny children of access to a lawyer shows exactly why this legislation is so important,” said Senator Blumenthal (D-Conn.). “The right to legal counsel is a central tenet of our justice system. Yet unaccompanied immigrant children as young as 3 and 4 years old are expected to navigate the cold complexities of our legal system with no one to help them through the process. The consequences of sending these children back to the countries they are fleeing can be literally life-and-death and presents grave human-trafficking risks. We have a moral obligation to ensure that that decision is made with due process, including access to an attorney.”
    “Abandoning immigrant children to navigate a complicated legal system alone with their future on the line is beneath who we are as Americans,” said Senator Coons (D-Del.). “I’m proud to cosponsor the Fair Day in Court for Kids Act, which would address this shocking policy in our legal system by giving children the representation they need and ensuring they have a fair day in court.”
    “The idea that small children could represent themselves in a court of law is ridiculous,” said Senator Cortez Masto (D-Nev.). “The immigration court system is complicated and confusing, and we shouldn’t expect any minor to navigate it on their own. This commonsense bill would fix a glaring flaw in our immigration system.”
    “It is deeply, cruelly unfair that so many unaccompanied children—including some who don’t speak English or are too young to understand what a judge is asking them—are forced to represent themselves in immigration court without a lawyer,” said Senator Duckworth (D-Ill.) “Having attorney representation can make the difference between safely remaining in the United States or being deported back to the same dangerous conditions they fled in the first place. This commonsense bill would help right this wrong and provide these children the legal representation they need to effectively navigate our complex immigration system.”
    “Time and time again, children, as young as three years old, enter the U.S. immigration court system without an attorney present. And now, the Trump Administration is trying to force these children to face an immigration judge alone. Not only do attorneys help these children navigate a complicated system, but they also play a critical role in preventing and stopping trafficking, abuse, and neglect,” said Senator Durbin (D-Ill.).  “That is why I am signing on to the Fair Day in Court for Kids Act, which would ensure that no child has to navigate our complex legal process without representation.”
    “Alongside Senator Hirono, we are leading an effort to ensure that children are treated fairly and humanely with access to legal representation,” Senator Ossoff (D-Ga.) said.
    “As the Trump administration continues to generate distress with its immigration actions — including the recent cancellation of a vital contract that provides legal services to unaccompanied migrant children — we must ensure that we protect the safety, welfare, and legal rights of vulnerable minors,” said Senator Markey (D-Mass.). “The Fair Day in Court for Kids Act of 2025 would provide unaccompanied children with the critical legal representation they need, ensuring that kids do not have to go to court alone.”
    “President Trump’s inhumane immigration policies are putting kids in danger by forcing unaccompanied children to represent themselves in court,” said Senator Merkley (D-Ore.). “It’s unimaginably cruel, and we must fight to ensure every child has a fair chance to accurately present their case for legal protection in our country.”
    “For unaccompanied children caught up in our immigration courts, navigating our complex immigration system alone is virtually impossible. The numbers speak for themselves: unaccompanied children without counsel are almost 100 times less likely to receive protection from deportation,” said Senator Padilla (D-Calif.). “The Trump Administration’s decision to stop funding legal representation for these children is needlessly cruel and severely misguided. At the very least, these children deserve legal representation to help ensure their voices are heard.”
    “Children shouldn’t be forced to navigate the immigration system alone—especially when their future is on the line,” said Senator Schatz (D-Hawaii). “This legislation ensures that unaccompanied kids have legal representation and due process rights, no matter where they come from.”
    “Forcing toddlers to represent themselves in immigration court does not make us safer, yet that’s exactly what’s happening because of this Administration,” said Senator Smith (D-Minn.).  “Children should worry about growing up and going to school, not about facing a prosecutor and judge alone. This bill would provide some much-needed support for children caught up in our broken immigration system, and make sure their rights are respected and protected.”
    “It’s unacceptable to force unaccompanied children to navigate immigration court by themselves – yet that’s the frightening reality that far too many face. This legislation will help prevent this unjust practice, and ensure they have a lawyer when they come before a court,” said Senator Van Hollen (D-Md.).
    “Forcing toddlers to navigate their immigration hearing without a lawyer is cruel and violates their due process rights,” said Senator Warren (D-Mass.). “This bill will provide them with the necessary protections to ensure they are treated with dignity and have a fair shot in court.”
    “No kid should ever have to represent themself in court – period,” Wyden said (D-Ore.). “It should go without saying that courts are meant to be navigated by the attorneys who understand America’s complex legal system. The Trump administration’s decision to gut legal representation for unaccompanied kids is not only immoral but also blatantly illegal. Forcing unaccompanied babies, toddlers, and youth to go without representation will leave kids vulnerable to exploitation, abuse, and trafficking. Congress must ensure children have real legal counsel and protect them from harm.”
    Specifically, the The Fair Day in Court for Kids Act:
    Requires that the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) provide counsel to noncitizen unaccompanied children appearing before the U.S. Department of Justice, U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) or a state court, unless the child has obtained counsel at their own expense;
    Extends the government’s duty to ensure counsel for unaccompanied children to the end of the immigration proceedings, even if the child turns 18 during proceedings;
    Ensures that children are informed of their right to representation within 72 hours and creates infrastructure to identify, recruit, and train pro bono lawyers to provide representation;
    Allows unaccompanied children to reopen their case if HHS fails to provide counsel;
    Requires the government and stakeholders to create guidelines and duties for counsel representing unaccompanied children, largely based on American Bar Association recommendations;
    Clarifies that the government may, at its choosing, also provide counsel to other individuals in immigration court;
    Requires noncitizens, and their attorneys, to receive a complete copy of the noncitizen’s immigration file at least 10 days before the removal proceedings;
    Guarantees access to counsel for all noncitizens detained in DHS facilities; and
    Requires a report on children’s access to counsel.
    The bill is cosponsored by Senators Michael Bennet (D-Colo.), Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), Cory Booker (D-N.J.), Chris Coons (D-Del.), Catherine Cortez Masto (D-Nev.), Tammy Duckworth (D-Ill.), Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), John Fetterman (D-Pa.), Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.), John Hickenlooper (D-Colo.), Andy Kim (D-N.J.), Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.), Ed Markey (D-Mass.), Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), Jon Ossoff (D-Ga.), Alex Padilla (D-Calif.), Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii), Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), Tina Smith (D-Minn.), Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.), and Ron Wyden (D-Ore.). 
    The Fair Day in Court for Kids Act is endorsed by Kids in Need of Defense (KIND); Acacia Center for Justice; Young Center for Immigrant Children’s Rights; and National Center for Youth Law.
    The full text of the legislation is available here.

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI USA: Rep. Carbajal, House Democrats Demand Answers from HHS on Head Start Regional Office Closures

    Source: United States House of Representatives – Representative Salud Carbajal (CA-24)

    U.S. Representative Salud Carbajal (D-CA-24) joined a group of 33 House Democrats in pressing Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. for answers after the sudden shutdown of five regional Head Start Offices, including the San Francisco regional office that serves families in the Central Coast. 

    The closures come on the heels of a major agency reorganization and reduction in force that led to 10,000 layoffs on Monday. In the letter, the lawmakers raise concerns about the lack of warning or transition plan and the potential impact on children and families who rely on the program.

    “The abrupt closures—without a clearly communicated transition plan—puts services and education for our nation’s most vulnerable children and families at risk,” the lawmakers wrote.

    Head Start is a federal program that provides early childhood education, health care, and family services at no cost to low-income children across the country. In the last 60 years, Head Start has positively impacted more than 40 million children and their parents across the nation, including more than 55,000 in Santa Barbara County.

    The letter stresses the essential role regional offices play in helping local Head Start centers access federal support and navigate complex regulations and that the closures will jeopardize vital services.

    “Removing these support structures without an alternative plan or clear communication on the impact jeopardizes the reliability and quality of services that so many families depend on,” the lawmakers continued.

    The group is asking Secretary Kennedy to respond by April 7 with answers to the following:

    “All children deserve quality education and services to support their early development during the most crucial years of childhood,” the lawmakers wrote. “An investment in Head Start and the regional offices that support them should remain a top priority.”

    For a full copy of the letter, click here.

    Rep. Carbajal, who formerly worked with Head Start as a Parent Involvement Coordinator and Family Services Advocate, is a leader in fighting for childhood education programs. In Congress, he’s worked to prioritize funding for Head Start to ensure this important program has the necessary resources to be successful in our communities.

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI USA: Governor Kehoe Announces Appointment to 21st Judicial Circuit

    Source: US State of Missouri

    APRIL 4, 2025

     — Today, Governor Kehoe announced a judicial appointment to the 21st Judicial Circuit.

    Jeffery McPherson, of Webster Groves, was appointed as Circuit Judge in the 21st Judicial Circuit.

    Mr. McPherson is a partner at Armstrong Teasdale LLP. He earned his Juris Doctor from St. Louis University School of Law and holds a Bachelor of Arts in English from Southern Illinois University. In addition to his practice, McPherson currently serves on the Appellate Missouri Bar Association. McPherson will fill the vacancy created by the appointment of Judge Virginia W. Lay to the Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District.

    ###

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI USA: Reps. Carter, Mace Introduce Bill to Require Healthy Milk Alternatives in Schools and Reduce Waste

    Source: United States House of Representatives – Congressman Troy A. Carter Sr. (LA-02)

    WASHINGTON, D.C. – Today, Congressman Troy A. Carter, Sr. (D-LA) and Congresswoman Nancy Mace (R-SC) introduced the bipartisan Freedom in School Cafeterias and Lunches (FISCAL) Act which requires schools to provide fluid milk substitutes in school cafeterias. This takes the onus off schoolchildren to request plant-based milk and instead places it on schools to give kids a real-time choice while they are in line to pick up food.

     

    This bill will require schools to place plant-based milk alternatives that meet the Dietary Guidelines for Americans alongside cow’s milk options in the cafeteria, allowing kids to select the nutritious beverage of their choice. That broader set of product offerings will perform like the marketplace, where plant-based milk options are readily available and a routine choice for consumers, our students, resulting in less waste.

     

    In Congressman Carter’s home state, a 6-year-old lactose intolerant Black girl from Zachary, LA, was recently forced to consume dairy milk at school breakfast, became sick from it, and had to clean up her accident in class. The girl, despite documented medical records of lactose intolerance and perhaps dairy allergies, was still served cow’s milk. She soon became ill and requested bathroom breaks but was told by her teacher to stay in class. The child then defecated in her clothing and was forced to clean up the mess herself.

     

    “It is abundantly clear that the current milk substitute system that USDA employs is delivering detrimental impacts on students,” said Rep. Carter. “Too many children who cannot safely or comfortably consume dairy are being forced to accept containers of cow’s milk on their lunch trays. My wife and children are all lactose intolerant, so I know just how uncomfortable consuming dairy milk can be for someone who cannot process it. The recent incident at Rollins Place Elementary School in Zachary is unacceptable and a glaring example of why we need immediate reforms in our schools to ensure all children have safe and appropriate dietary options. My bill ensures the health and nutritional needs of all our nation’s students are met. America needs to embrace its diversity at the lunch counter.”

     

    There is a lack of understanding that cow’s milk makes many children ill, especially minority children. Studies show that a large percentage of Black, Latino, Native American, and Asian Americans have a degree of lactose intolerance, including roughly three-quarters of Black people. These children experience adverse health effects simply because, in practice, dairy is the only type of milk currently offered in schools.

     

    Many children forgo drinking dairy milk they are served due to the adverse health symptoms they incur after consuming it. This has led to massive waste in our school systems.

     

    “The federal government is wasting $400 million of our tax dollars a year by mandating that every school kid getting nutrition assistance has a carton of cow’s milk on the tray even though millions of them don’t want it and get sick from it,” said Rep. Mace. “Thirty percent of kids throw the milk away in the carton, and hundreds of millions of tax dollars wasted is not spilled milk. Kids should have a healthy choice in lunchrooms.”

     

    “Upwards of 40 percent of kids participating in the National School Lunch Program are lactose intolerant, yet federal law requires that kids are served cow’s milk even if it makes them sick,” said Wayne Pacelle, president of Animal Wellness Action and the Center for a Humane Economy.  “There should be nothing controversial about Congressman Troy Carter’s bipartisan bill to give kids a healthy beverage option and to unwind a program that makes kids sick and causes a third of kids to throw unopened milk cartons in the trash.”

     

    Background

     

    The National School Lunch Program (NSLP) requires public schools to serve cow’s milk with breakfast or lunch meals to kids who qualify for food assistance. The school must serve this milk, or reimbursement for the cost of the entire meal will be denied. The annual outlay for U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) reimbursements to local school districts is roughly $1 billion yearly just for the milk.

     

    Although the NSLP allows milk substitutes, the law’s substitution requirements are burdensome, and delivering the substitute to kids is now unworkable and impractical. Unlike the policy for cow’s milk, USDA doesn’t reimburse schools for the substitute.

     

    Based on the ethnic and racial backgrounds of the participants, perhaps half of the 30 million kids in the NSLP are lactose intolerant. The lack of availability of a milk substitute and the burdensome requirement for a substitute produce adverse outcomes. Millions of lactose-intolerant kids and others with an aversion to milk throw away the beverage, squandering $400 million (40% of milk is discarded), or they consume a product that makes them sick, making real-time learning in the classroom more difficult.

     

    The FISCAL Act:

     

    • Requires schools to offer kids cow’s milk and plant-based milk for breakfast and lunch. There will be no doctor’s note or other special request requirements.
    • Ensures that any plant-based offering that is provided to children meets or exceeds nutritional standards contained in the Dietary Guidelines for Americans or as established by the Secretary of Agriculture.
    • Reimburses schools for plant-based milks, just as it reimburses schools for cow’s milk.
    • Only requires schools to stock enough plant-based milk to meet demand for it.

     

    The FISCAL Act is endorsed by Animal Wellness Action, National Urban League, the National Rural Education Association, Asthma and Allergy Foundation of America, International Foundation for Gastrointestinal Disorders, Food Allergy and Anaphylaxis Connection Team, and the Coalition for Healthy School Food.

     

    Full bill text can be found here.

     

    ###

     

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI USA: Stronger Together: UConn Health and UConn join Community in Advancing Wellness

    Source: US State of Connecticut

    At UConn Health, community isn’t just a word, it’s the foundation of everything we do. Whether it’s the connections between our patients and providers, the collaboration among our teams, or our commitment to serving those beyond our walls, community defines who we are. This month, we’re highlighting the ways in which our staff and departments comes together to support, uplift, and strengthen one another. From innovative partnerships to everyday moments of kindness, we celebrate the power of community in shaping a healthier future for all.

    Janel Simpson:, UConn Health Chief Administrative Officer, Jini Korcz, Adriana Lopez de Victoria, Farmington Links Board Member

    On Saturday, March 15, UConn Health and UConn faculty, staff, students and researchers, came together with community partners at the Black Family Wellness Expo, a vibrant annual event dedicated to promoting health and wellness in the Greater Hartford community hosted by the Artists Collective in Hartford. The expo, organized by the Farmington Valley and Greater Hartford Chapters of The Links Incorporated was co-sponsored by UConn Health’s Health Disparities Institute (HDI), the UConn School of Social Work, the Department of Public Health Sciences, and UConn’s Institute for Collaboration on Health, Intervention, and Policy (InCHIP),

    Now in its second year of participation, HDI played a central role in the expo, not only through sponsorship but also in deepening institutional partnerships and collaboration with UConn Health and UConn that included the Office of Diversity and Inclusion (ODI), the Center on Aging, the Carole and Ray Neag Comprehensive Cancer Center, Public Health Sciences, Area Education Centers (AHEC), and InCHIP, among others.

    “Instead of having UConn and UConn Health departments scattered throughout the expo, we intentionally grouped UConn Health and UConn tables, allowing the community to see the multiple ways in which we engage and serve Connecticut residents, beyond health care delivery and education,” said Dr. Linda Sprague Martinez, HDI director and professor in the department of medicine.

    HDI also created an interactive engagement opportunity for attendees. This year at the expo, HDI engaged attendees by asking what makes for a great health care experience, and we heard overwhelmingly about the importance of the interpersonal aspects of care and engagement. Providers who take the time to really listen, are empathetic, and show compassion were common responses,” said Dr. Sprague Martinez. “Events like this are important opportunities for UConn Health to connect with community residents and our patients in a meaningful way.”

    “Events like the Black Family Wellness Expo create a space not only for direct engagement with community members but also for fostering connections with organizations that share HDI’s commitment to health equity and exploring ways to deepen collaboration through collective efforts that drive lasting impact,” said Trisha Pitter from the Health Disparities Institute who initiated the partnership with the Farmington Valley Links, Inc. to promote this year’s event as well as the 2025’s expo.

    JDH Diversity Council’s Role and Impact

    Community Wishing Tree

    As part of its mission to advance diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI), the JDH Diversity Council played a key role in engaging attendees through interactive initiatives. Their presence included two tables: one focused on Human Resources, providing information about UConn Health career opportunities and workplace culture, and another featuring the “Community Wishing Tree,” an idea proposed by Elizabeth Haskell, sepsis nurse, were invited to share personal barriers to health care and their wishes for improvements in their community. The activity proved to be a meaningful way to amplify community voices and gather valuable insights that will be reviewed at an upcoming Diversity Council meeting.

    “For me, joining the Diversity Council was about helping to create a more inclusive and equitable health care environment, not just for patients, but for our faculty and staff as well,” said Cassandra Keola, administrative program coordinator. “It’s inspiring to see our work extend beyond the walls of our hospital and into the communities we serve.”

    “As a newer member of the Diversity Council, I was drawn to the opportunity to collaborate with a team dedicated to fostering growth in diversity, equity, and inclusion, both at an organizational level and as individuals. With 17 years of experience as a nurse, I have had the privilege of caring for patients from diverse backgrounds, which has reinforced the vital role that cultural awareness and inclusivity play in delivering equitable and effective health care. Being part of this council allows me to contribute to meaningful change and advocate for a more inclusive environment for both patients and staff,” said Eliza Rivera, population health manager.

    Collaboration Across UConn and UConn Health Departments

    Dr. Linda Barry, associate director of Health Disparities Institute, led the Alzheimer’s discussion and CT AHEC brought a team of Urban Health/AHEC Scholars and preceptors to provide health promotion education as well as screenings (oral health, blood pressure, blood glucose).  The CT AHEC team worked closely with partners from Charter Oak Community Health Center for community member handoffs for vaccinations, mental health, muscular skeletal and A1C screenings. In total more than 35 community members were seen by this interprofessional team.

    James “JJ” Odom, University Director of Buildings and Grounds at UConn Health, far left plays the drums during a musical performance

    Leslie Bell, administrative director in nursing administration and diversity council member, shared her experience: “The room was filled with people providing essential services and education. I had the opportunity to attend a UConn Health panel discussion on Alzheimer’s, which was both informative and impactful. There was such a strong presence of organizations committed to health and wellness; it was truly inspiring.”

    The event also facilitated networking opportunities among health care professionals. Bell was able to help connect a physician from Saint Francis Hospital with UConn Health’s ALS program to ensure continuity of care for a patient facing insurance challenges. This kind of real-time problem-solving exemplifies the council’s broader mission to bridge gaps in health care access and equity.

    Looking Ahead

    HDI’s ongoing partnership with the Farmington Valley Links will continue to shape future wellness initiatives, including the 2025 expo. HDI is co-sponsoring an upcoming Women’s Health event with the Farmington Valley Links, the Commission on Women, Children, Seniors, Equity and Opportunity, Aurora Foundation for Women and Girls, and InCHIP focused on intergenerational dialogues on menopause. Community events like the Black Family Wellness Expo create spaces for HDI to engage with residents, learn about priorities, and to build collaborations across UConn and with communities to promote health.

    In addition to participating in the Black Family Wellness Expo, the Diversity Council continues to lead and support various initiatives, such as ODI’s monthly “coffee break” discussions, cultural awareness events, and employee appreciation activities. Their ongoing efforts reinforce UConn Health’s dedication to an inclusive workplace and community engagement.

    Reflecting on the event’s success, Diversity Council members expressed enthusiasm for future collaborations and deeper community connections. “The sheer volume of interest in wellness and information was encouraging,” said one attendee. “Seeing so many people engaged and eager to learn reaffirms why events like this matter,” said Keola.

    By fostering dialogue, sharing resources, and strengthening partnerships, the Diversity Council continues to make a meaningful impact—both within UConn Health and throughout the communities it serves.

    The Black Family Wellness Expo was a powerful example of UConn and UConn Health’s institutional commitment to community engagement, health equity, and partnership. Through shared leadership, HDI and its collaborators are ensuring that UConn’s presence in the community is both impactful and enduring.

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI USA: PSI Chairman Johnson Requests COVID-19 Vaccine Records and Communications from Moderna, Pfizer, BioNTech, and Johnson & Johnson

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Wisconsin Ron Johnson

    WASHINGTON – On Wednesday, Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations (PSI) Chairman Ron Johnson (R-Wis.) sent letters to Moderna, Inc., Pfizer Inc., BioNTech US Inc., and Johnson & Johnson seeking records and communications about the development and safety of the COVID-19 vaccines. 

    In the letters, Chairman Johnson cited the many billions of taxpayer dollars these companies received to manufacture and deliver COVID-19 vaccines. These federally-funded vaccines have since been associated with reports of myocarditis, pericarditis, thrombosis with thrombocytopenia syndrome, and Guillain-Barré syndrome.

    Chairman Johnson also referenced past attempts by the Department of Health and Human Services to conceal records related to the safety and efficacy of COVID-19 vaccines, warning vaccine manufacturers, “Any attempt to obstruct or delay responses to this request will result in compulsory process.”

    The chairman’s requests included internal and external communications related to reports of adverse events, clinical trials, and testing of the vaccines against variants of SARS-CoV-2. These requests encompass communications between vaccine manufacturers, the federal government, and social media platforms.

    Read more about the letters in The Federalist

    Chairman Johnson’s letters are linked below:

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI USA: Bipartisan Senate Leaders Urge Reversal of Course on LIHEAP Staffing Cuts

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Alaska Lisa Murkowski

    04.04.25

    Washington, D.C. – Today, U.S. Senators Lisa Murkowski (R-AK), Jack Reed (D-RI), Susan Collins (R-ME), and ten of their Senate colleagues who are LIHEAP champions sent a letter urging the Trump Administration to reverse course on the recent reported elimination of the Low-Income Home Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP) staff at HHS.

    The letter comes in response to the reduction of about 10,000 employees from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). These cuts reportedly include the entire staff running the $4.1 billion LIHEAP program, which helps millions of American households afford their heating and cooling bills.

    The thirteen Senators sent a bipartisan letter to HHS Secretary Robert Kennedy, Jr., writing:

    “We are concerned that the reported staff terminations will undermine the HHS’s ability to deliver this critical funding to low-income seniors and families. We are also concerned that the local community action agencies that help enroll qualified beneficiaries could be weakened by other actions and funding cuts being undertaken by HHS and the ‘Department of Government Efficiency’ (DOGE).”

    Full text of the letter follows:

    The Honorable Robert Kennedy, Jr.

    Secretary of Health and Human Services

    200 Independence Avenue SW

    Washington, DC 20201

    Dear Secretary Kennedy:

    We write regarding reports that you have terminated staff responsible for administering the Low-Income Home Energy Program (LIHEAP). If true, these terminations threaten to devastate a critical program dedicated to helping Americans afford their home energy bills.

    For over 40 years, LIHEAP has been the main federal program that helps low-income households and seniors pay their energy bills, providing vital assistance during both the cold winter and hot summer months. Each year, more than six million households across the country rely on LIHEAP to afford their energy bills. It is an indispensable lifeline, helping to ensure that recipients do not have to choose between paying their energy bills and affording other necessities like food and medicine.

    We are concerned that the reported staff terminations will undermine the HHS’s ability to deliver this critical funding to low-income seniors and families. We are also concerned that the local community action agencies that help enroll qualified beneficiaries could be weakened by other actions and funding cuts being undertaken by HHS and the “Department of Government Efficiency” (DOGE). As you know, our states are expecting HHS to release nearly $400 million in FY25 funding later this month. Any delay in providing this funding will set back efforts to provide summer cooling grants, weatherize low-income homes, and plan for the next winter heating season.

    Access to affordable home energy is a matter of health and safety for many low-income households, children, and seniors. To that end, we urge you to reverse course on any staffing or funding cuts that would jeopardize the distribution of these funds to our constituents.

    Thank you for your attention to this important matter. We look forward to your prompt response.

    Background

    The federally funded LIHEAP program is a crucial lifeline that helps over 6 million low-income households and seniors on fixed incomes afford their energy bills, including those who use natural gas, propane, electricity, and home heating oil.  Without this assistance, many Americans may not be able to afford their utility bills and could end up falling victim to extreme weather.

    Senators Murkowski, Collins, and Reed led the successful effort to provide a total of $4.1 billion for LIHEAP this fiscal year, with $4 billion through appropriations and $100 million in Bipartisan Infrastructure Law funds. In Fiscal Year 2024, Alaskans got $21.3 million from LIHEAP.

    HHS has already released 90 percent of those federal funds to state partners.  The remaining 10 percent, almost $400 million, used by states to pay for summer cooling, and emergency funding for households that need additional assistance and weatherization, cannot be released until HHS determines the state-by-state allocation. Now, it’s unclear how the remaining funds could be disbursed to the states.

    In addition to Murkowski, Reed, and Collins, the letter was signed by U.S. Senators Angus S. King, Jr. (I-ME), Tina Smith (D-MN), Cory Booker (D-NJ), Christopher Coons (D-DE), Richard Durbin (D-IL), Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH), Edward J. Markey (D-MA) Jeff Merkley (D-OR), Mark Warner (D-VA), and Ben Ray Luján (D-NM).

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI USA: Markey Leads Governor Healey, Massachusetts Delegation in Denouncing Trump’s Cuts to K-12 Education Funding

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Massachusetts Ed Markey

    Trump cut $106 million to Massachusetts schools, imperiling literacy programs, air quality updates, math tutoring, and more.

    Letter Text (PDF)

    Washington (April 4, 2025) – Senator Edward J. Markey (D-Mass.), a member of the Health Education, Labor, and Pensions (HELP) Committee, Massachusetts Governor Maura Healey, and the entire Massachusetts Congressional delegation – Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) and Representatives Richard Neal (MA-01), Jim McGovern (MA-02), Lori Trahan (MA-03), Jake Auchincloss (MA-04), Katherine Clark (MA-05), Seth Moulton (MA-06), Ayanna Pressley (MA-07), Stephen Lynch (MA-08), and Bill Keating (MA-09) – today wrote to Secretary of Education Linda McMahon after the U.S. Department of Education notified the Commonwealth of Massachusetts that the Department would rescind $106 million in funding already disbursed to school districts across the state for K-12 education. This clawback is part of a nationwide Trump administration effort to wrest from 41 states more than $2 billion in funding intended to support students and educators.

    In the letter the lawmakers write, “Congress authorized this funding as part of the American Rescue Plan Act, and Massachusetts has continuously distributed it to local school districts. The Trump administration advised Massachusetts that American Rescue Plan Act funding would remain available until March 2026. As of last week, school districts across the Commonwealth expected to receive it, to the tune of $106 million. Relying on the expectation set by the Trump administration, school districts and schools developed their budgets and made spending decisions. For example, the New Bedford school district allocated funds for a school-based health center. Some school districts were anticipating using the funding for mental health supports, security, air quality improvement, and math tutoring.”

    The lawmakers continue, “Instead, many school districts will now lose millions of dollars. New Bedford faces more than $15 million in losses. Springfield could lose more than $47 million. Although the Department represented that it would instead consider making funding available to states on an ‘individual project-specific basis,’ that pathway would create red tape by requiring school districts to invest time and resources to request funding that the Trump administration promised would remain available. The Administration’s reneging on its funding promise is both harmful and incredibly frustrating to students, families, educators, and school district leaders, especially considering that the funding the Administration is now pulling back may be used to fuel billionaire tax cuts at the expense of students.”

    The lawmakers conclude, “The about-face on the continued availability of this essential funding is an insult to the hardworking educators, school staff, and public officials who are dedicated to providing students the best possible opportunities. Massachusetts gives students the best education in the country. We urge you to reverse course and allow leaders in the Commonwealth to deliver for students and communities without continued chaos and disruption.”

    Impacted school districts in Massachusetts:

    • Springfield ($47,357,654)
    • New Bedford ($15,603,433)
    • Fitchburg ($6,578,468)
    • Everett ($4,897,300)
    • Revere ($4,613,327)
    • Boston ($3,468,659)
    • Leominster ($1,868,215)
    • Stoughton ($1,512,470)
    • Worcester ($1,454,350)
    • Chelsea ($1,448,715)
    • Lawrence ($1,307,307)
    • Dracut ($648,702)
    • Holyoke ($395,863)
    • West Springfield ($354,868)
    • Lynn ($339,357)
    • Fairhaven ($250,802)
    • Greater Fall River Regional Vocational Technical ($115,465)
    • Ludlow ($83,334)
    • Blue Hills Regional Vocational Technical ($21,461)
    • Mashpee ($2,481)
    • Mater Dolorosa Catholic School in Holyoke ($118,894)
    • Saint Stanislaus School in Chicopee ($172,692)

    Senator Markey has continuously fought back against the Trump administration’s attacks on education and standing up for students, educators, and their families. On March 20, Senator Markey slammed Trump’s Executive Order to dismantle the Department of Education. On March 11, Senator Markey delivered remarks on the Senate Floor to spotlight Trump’s plan to gut the Department. On February 27, Senator Markey introduced the No Cuts to Public Schools Act, which would prevent any cuts to federal education formula funding during the Trump administration. On February 10, Senator Markey held a press conference in Boston with Massachusetts educators and teachers’ unions on Trump’s vow to dismantle the Department, and the impact on Massachusetts students, educators, and communities.

    On February 6, Senator Markey, members of the Massachusetts congressional delegation, along with the Massachusetts Teachers Association, American Federation of Teachers Massachusetts, Massachusetts Association of School Committees, and Massachusetts Association of School Superintendents, released a joint statement after President Trump vowed to dismantle the Department of Education.

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI USA: Warren Unveils Budget Bill Amendments to Protect Funding for Medical Research, Education in Massachusetts

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Massachusetts – Elizabeth Warren

    April 04, 2025

    Senate to vote on Republican tax plan paving way for $7 trillion in tax handouts for billionaires and billionaire corporations

    “…Are we going to hand our country over to co-presidents Donald Trump and Elon Musk and a handful of other billionaires and make everyone else pay for it?…That is the fight in front of us, and that’s the fight I’m fighting every single day for families in Massachusetts and all across this country.”

    Video of Speech (YouTube)

    Washington, D.C. – Today, U.S. Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) delivered a speech on the Senate Floor, slamming President Trump and Elon Musk’s chaotic cuts to programs and charting the path forward to fight back on behalf of Massachusetts. Senator Warren announced she is filing amendments to the Republican budget bill to protect federal funding for Massachusetts medical research institutions and health care providers; undo cuts to the National Institutes of Health; and protect education funding in Massachusetts, including for Head Start.  

    Transcript: Floor Speech on Fighting Back for Massachusetts Against Trump and Musk Chaos
    U.S. Senate Floor 
    April 4, 2025

    As Delivered

    Senator Elizabeth Warren: Now, Republicans in Congress are putting forward a proposal to deliver these tax cuts for the wealthy and well-connected, and they’re asking us to vote on it tonight. 

    This bill — and Trump and Musk’s cruel agenda — isn’t good for Massachusetts and isn’t good for our country. I’m hearing from families at home in Massachusetts who are feeling the pain right now.

    Start with medical research. Medical research powers the economy in Massachusetts and is the reason we’ve had incredible breakthroughs like vaccines and cancer drugs that save lives. So, how did Donald Trump and Elon Musk thank the doctors and researchers who are doing this work? By canceling tens of millions of dollars in federal funds that support medical research at Massachusetts hospitals, universities, and health care providers on everything from clinical trials to pandemic readiness. And they did it just weeks after Trump tried to cut the funding that keeps the lights on at our community health centers.

    So, to anyone who believes in science and believes in investing in cures for horrible diseases, now is the time to fight back. That’s why I’m filing amendments to the Republican bill to keep up federal support for Massachusetts’ medical research institutions and health care providers — including our community health centers. And it’s why I’m filing another amendment to fight back against Trump and Musk’s National Institute of Health funding cuts — because we are a country that believes that we should invest in finding a cure for Alzheimer’s, for diabetes, for cancer, and other diseases.

    And on education. Education levels the playing field. It gives every kid a fighting chance in this country. Doesn’t matter to Trump and Musk. This week, they slashed millions in funding for K-12 education in the Commonwealth. Shut down a regional office in Boston that helps administer Head Start. Canceled millions of dollars in funding that was helping to pay for kids’ school lunches. To them, that was the cherry on top of Trump’s executive order to, quote, “abolish” the entire Department of Education, throwing schools across the country into crisis.

    So, to students, parents, and teachers, now is the time to fight back. We are fighting for an America where it’s not just the kids of billionaires who get a good education but every kid in every community all across our Commonwealth. It’s why I’ve got an amendment to the Republican bill to protect education funding in Massachusetts and protect services like Head Start that lift up our kids and make sure we’re not leaving families hanging out to dry.

    And I’m fighting for our workers. Last week, Donald Trump signed an illegal executive order attacking federal unions and stripping workers of their rights. It’s the definition of union-busting — and it is an attack on the workers who make sure our food is safe to eat, who make sure it’s safe for us to fly in airplanes, who make sure that we take care of our veterans, who try to help us and protect us from viruses and disease, and so much more.

    So, to workers in Massachusetts and across America, now is the time to fight back. We need to amend this Republican tax cut bill to affirm federal workers’ right to unionize and collectively bargain because the labor movement is bigger than Donald Trump and his unelected billionaire co-president. And we believe that every worker deserves the freedom to join a union and negotiate for a fair contract.

    Donald Trump and Elon Musk are sawing through the programs that help working families breathe a little easier every day. And they’re doing it so that their billionaire buddies and giant corporations get trillions of dollars in tax giveaways, paid for on the backs of everybody else.

    So here’s the big question: are we going to hand our country over to co-presidents Donald Trump and Elon Musk and a handful of other billionaires and make everyone else pay for it? Or are we going to be a country that says, “No, we want to make these investments so that everyone in this country gets an opportunity.” Everybody’s at least got a chance to build something for themselves. That is the fight in front of us, and that’s the fight I’m fighting every single day for families in Massachusetts and all across this country.

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI USA: MEDIA ADVISORY: Sanders, Scott, Colleagues, Workers to Introduce Bill to Raise Minimum Wage to $17 by 2030

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Vermont – Bernie Sanders

    WASHINGTON, April 4 – Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), Ranking Member of the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions (HELP), and Rep. Robert C. “Bobby” Scott (D-Va.), Ranking Member of the House Committee on Education and Workforce, alongside food service and airport workers, today announced that they will hold a press conference on Tuesday, April 8, to introduce the Raise the Wage Act. This bicameral legislation will ensure American workers make a living wage, drive economic growth, and reduce income inequality by raising the minimum wage to $17 over five years for all workers and gradually eliminating subminimum wages for tipped workers, workers with disabilities, and youth workers.

    Details 

    What: Press conference to reintroduce the Raise the Wage Act

    When: Tuesday, April 8, 3:00 p.m. ET

    Where: Senate Swamp. The press conference will also be livestreamed on Sanders’ social media. 

    Who: 

    • Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), Ranking Member of the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions
    • Rep. Robert C. “Bobby” Scott (D-Va.), Ranking Member of the House Committee on Education and Workforce
    • Rep. Jahana Hayes (D-Conn.)
    • Rep. Greg Casar (D-Texas)
    • April Verrett, Service Employees International Union (SEIU) President
    • Food service and airport workers

    Press RSVP: Press interested in attending should RSVP with press@sanders.senate.gov. 

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI: Alex and Shelby Nowak Strengthen ROTH’s Healthcare Investment Banking Division

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    NEWPORT BEACH, Calif., April 04, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — via IBN – Roth Capital Partners (“ROTH”), www.roth.com, is pleased to announce the strategic appointment of Alex Nowak, CFA, as Managing Director, Healthcare Investment Banking, and Shelby Nowak, Vice President, Healthcare Investment Banking. Both will focus on the medical devices, diagnostics, and life science tools industry. This dynamic addition reinforces ROTH’s commitment to delivering world-class investment banking services in the healthcare sector by coupling industry experience with capital market expertise.

    Alex Nowak, CFA brings over a decade of proficiency in healthcare capital markets, specializing in Medtech, Diagnostics, and Life Science Tools. His role at ROTH will build upon his proven ability to identify growth opportunities, foster strong investor-client relationships, and drive strategic company building. Previously, Alex was a Partner & Director of Healthcare Research at Craig-Hallum Capital Group, where he played a key role in growing the healthcare brand and identifying high-growth opportunities within the sector.

    Shelby Nowak joins ROTH with a diverse background in the medical device industry, where she managed FDA-regulated products from concept through commercialization. Her experience with companies such as Shockwave Medical, Medtronic, Reprise Biomedical, Vascular Solutions, and Bank of America Merrill Lynch positions her as a valuable asset to ROTH’s clients. Shelby will provide a unique industry-first perspective by actively engaging companies on strategy, company building, and client partnership.

    “Alex’s deep industry knowledge and strategic vision make him an excellent fit for ROTH. Additionally, Shelby’s comprehensive industry insight will be instrumental in enhancing our investment banking capabilities. We are confident that his leadership will enhance our healthcare practice, and her approach to client engagement and helping companies build their businesses aligns with our objectives, and we are excited to have both on board,” said Aaron Gurewitz, President and Head of Investment Banking at ROTH.

    Together, Alex and Shelby Nowak are poised to bolster ROTH’s healthcare investment banking division, ensuring continued success in helping clients navigate and excel in the ever-evolving healthcare landscape.

    About ROTH

    ROTH is a relationship-driven investment bank focused on serving growth companies and their investors. Our full-service platform provides capital raising, high-impact equity research, macroeconomics, sales and trading, technical insights, derivatives strategies, M&A advisory, and corporate access. Headquartered in Newport Beach, California, ROTH is a privately held, employee-owned organization and maintains offices throughout the U.S. For more information, please visit www.roth.com.

    Investor Contact:

    ROTH
    Isabel Mattson-Pain
    Managing Director, Chief Marketing Officer
    949.720.7117, imattson-pain@roth.com
    ROTH – Member FINRA/SIPC – www.roth.com

    Media Contact:

    IBN
    Los Angeles, California
    www.InvestorBrandNetwork.com
    310.299.1717 Office
    Editor@InvestorBrandNetwork.com

    The MIL Network

  • MIL-OSI USA: AG Brown co-leads multistate lawsuit against Trump administration for illegal funding cuts and delays to medical and public health research

    Source: Washington State News

    OLYMPIA — Attorney General Nick Brown co-led today a multistate lawsuit filed against the Trump Administration for its unlawful attempt to disrupt grant funding issued by the National Institutes of Health (NIH). It is the second lawsuit filed by state attorneys general against NIH for cancelled funding.

    The lawsuit, filed in U.S. District Court for Massachusetts by attorneys general from 16 states, challenges the administration’s unreasonable and intentional delays in reviewing NIH grant applications, as well as its termination of hundreds of grants issued already. The lawsuit asserts that NIH recently terminated large swaths of grants for projects that are currently underway based on the federal government disfavoring them — like projects the Trump administration deems as related to diversity, equity and inclusion initiatives or fears about vaccines.

    As a result of the administration’s delays and terminations, the states argue their public research institutions have experienced significant harm. For instance:

    • The University of Washington receives more federal research dollars than any other public university in the nation. In fiscal year 2024, the university received more than 1,220 NIH grants, totaling over $648 million.
    • The university has had millions of dollars in grants terminated, which supported innovative work in trauma research for victims of sexual assault, prevention of chlamydia infections, and the impact of air pollution on Alzheimer’s disease and related dementias, among other topics.
    • The NIH’s delays have impacted even more projects across the university, including cancer research and Alzheimer’s research.
    • The funding disruptions have forced the university to furlough and potentially lay off research staff and faculty and cut admissions to graduate programs.

    “The Trump administration’s illegal withholding of funding stops life-saving advances in medical, agricultural, and public health research,” Brown said. “The harm is not only to the advances in science, but also to the jobs of researchers doing this vital work. We are asking the court to allow funds that have already been allocated to flow to Washington’s centers of research.”

    The attorneys general ask a federal judge to compel the administration to promptly review and issue decisions on delayed grant applications. Currently, the states bringing the lawsuit are awaiting decisions on billions of dollars in requested research funding. 

    Joining Attorney General Brown in filing today’s lawsuit, which he co-led with the attorneys general of Massachusetts, California, and Maryland, were the attorneys general of Arizona, Colorado, Delaware, Hawai‘i, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island and Wisconsin.

    The lawsuit can be found here.

    In February, Brown joined a coalition of 22 attorneys general in filing a separate lawsuit against the Trump administration for its attempts to unilaterally cut “indirect cost” reimbursements for NIH grants at nearly every research institution in the country. On March 5, a federal judge issued a preliminary injunction that prevented the administration from cutting the funding as the case proceeds.

    -30-

    Washington’s Attorney General serves the people and the state of Washington. As the state’s largest law firm, the Attorney General’s Office provides legal representation to every state agency, board, and commission in Washington. Additionally, the Office serves the people directly by enforcing consumer protection, civil rights, and environmental protection laws. The Office also prosecutes elder abuse, Medicaid fraud, and handles sexually violent predator cases in 38 of Washington’s 39 counties. Visit www.atg.wa.gov to learn more.

    Media Contact:

    Email: press@atg.wa.gov

    Phone: (360) 753-2727

    General contacts: Click here

    Media Resource Guide & Attorney General’s Office FAQ

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI USA: Barr, AI, Fintechs, and Banks

    Source: US State of New York Federal Reserve

    Good morning and thank you to the conference organizers for having me here today.1 It’s great to see such a diverse audience of fintech innovators, bankers, fellow regulators, and students. We all play a part in fostering responsible innovation. Responsible innovation requires a few things—having the optimism and curiosity to understand the potential benefits, the rigor and realism to identify the attendant risks, and the collective intent to find solutions to advance a safe and fair financial system.
    Today, I’d like to speak about responsible innovation in the context of generative artificial intelligence (Gen AI) in banking and how bank–fintech partnerships may accelerate the integration of the technology and banking. Earlier this year, I laid out two scenarios for Gen AI adoption—an incremental scenario where the technology primarily augments what humans do today, and a transformative scenario where we extend human capabilities with far-reaching consequences.2 Of course, these are hypotheticals, and elements of both scenarios will likely come to pass. But in either scenario, we should anticipate widespread productivity gains, particularly for banking.3
    Today, banks appear to be moving cautiously with their Gen AI use, which reflects the current state of the technology, as well as banks’ internal organizational structure and the highly regulated environment in which they operate. At the same time, Gen-AI offers enormous potential to significantly alter the business of banking, provided that the risks are managed appropriately. Given rapid advances in Gen AI every quarter, in the not-too-distant future, we may approach a point at which Gen AI becomes an imperative—a competitive necessity—in banking. To prepare for that point, it is useful for regulators and banks to think about the channels through which this competitive necessity may arise. Today, I want to focus on one of those channels, and that’s the bank–fintech relationship. Fintechs are well positioned to integrate Gen AI into their products and services, and banks have valuable data on customer behavior on which the Gen AI models can be optimized. Given these synergies, competition and cooperation between banks and fintechs will likely spur innovation and accelerate the integration of Gen AI into banking.
    Gen AI may have benefits for consumers and businesses through better, cheaper, and faster financial services; however, to harness the upsides of Gen AI, banks, fintechs, and regulators all have a role to play in helping to ensure that the risks are managed.
    Gen AI and BankingLet me begin with why Gen AI has such potential for the banking industry. The business of banking is data-driven—data underpin the decisions to set yields on deposits, underwrite and price credit products, and manage the attendant risks. While traditional forms of artificial intelligence have become essential in areas like fraud detection, Gen AI offers new possibilities for data analysis, taking into account a broader and more diverse set of data. Gen AI has benefits for document analysis, which could be applied to improve credit underwriting.
    Beyond data processing and analytics, Gen AI-powered chatbots are already helping assist in customer service. While we still breathe a sigh of relief when we connect to a real customer service representative, this paradigm may change—Gen AI has the potential to enable such high-quality and efficient customer engagement and correct answers that customers may come to prefer Gen AI agents to people. Gen AI chatbots can break down complex tasks into component parts, split up tasks between several AI agents, and help customers make informed decisions. They can also replicate the human touch—adapting to the level of sophistication of their customers, anticipating the customer’s needs, and being empathetic to the customer’s experience—perhaps better than some humans.4
    And moving to trading and capital markets, Gen AI-based analytic tools can build on existing algorithmic trading capabilities by harnessing an enormous knowledge base in both the public and private domains. These enhancements have the potential to enable decisions that are faster and more informed—although with some attendant risks as I’ve discussed previously.5
    Why Not Yet?Given the potential for Gen AI to enhance banking, why do we not see widespread integration of Gen AI enhanced products and services in banking to date? There are several factors contributing to our current state. Let me highlight some key reasons.
    Of course, one reason is that banks are being appropriately cautious in the highly regulated environment in which they operate. Beyond that, for some of these applications, the technology is not fully mature. For instance, Gen AI systems may still hallucinate, generating plausible sounding but inaccurate information. Relatedly, because Gen AI usually involves stochastic processes, answers can differ in response to the same query asked at different times or to similar queries. This is tough to square with the requirements of banking, where decisions must be well-controlled, numerically and legally precise, explainable, and replicable.
    Information security is another key concern. To the extent that a Gen AI-powered agent is accessing sensitive customer data and authorizing transactions, it becomes an attractive target for malicious actors.6 Further, as Gen AI models process vast amounts of data, there’s a risk that proprietary or customer information could be inadvertently included in the model’s outputs or responses, leading to legal violations and privacy breaches.
    Moreover, business processes at banks have not evolved to optimize Gen AI usage. Gen AI requires data and infrastructure to be effective. Many banks have existing tech debt, and their data storage is siloed and not optimized for firmwide analysis. Furthermore, there may be organizational practices that may make it hard to evolve existing processes to ones optimized by AI.
    The technological and organizational limitations are real. Nevertheless, I think it may be only a matter of time before the technology advances so that these are engineering, product design, and risk management challenges—rather than insurmountable problems. And with regard to the business process issues, I think fintechs have a real role to play in helping to accelerate responsible innovation by banks in this space.
    Features of Fintechs and BanksAs Gen AI technology continues to develop, there’s a good chance that fintechs will help drive widespread Gen AI adoption in financial services. There are a few reasons why this may be the case. First, fintechs are generally young companies with a clean tech stack and don’t have to integrate new technology into old infrastructure. This allows them to make the most of their data and continuously integrate the latest AI capabilities. Second, these firms have financial and time constraints. Early funding rounds provide limited time and resources to demonstrate outcomes and drive fintechs to find effective, quick solutions, which often involve creative uses of cutting-edge technology. Third, because fintechs usually start as a simple business idea and focus on moving one product to production, they can optimize their tech stack for a single outcome instead of balancing the interests of competing business lines.
    These attributes of fintechs can make them symbiotic with banks. Banks have deep customer data, and data are a key input to effective application of machine learning models, including large language models. Banks are also able to look across a range of business lines and use Gen AI to customize integrated sales strategies, and they have the scale to adopt global Gen AI solutions for compliance and risk management. And banks have existing customer relationships and mature control frameworks that form the basis of their credibility and trust.
    Another way to consider the relationship of fintechs and banks is as a race between speed and scale. Fintechs have the ability to operate at speed but start with no scale. Banks, on the other hand, move more slowly but have scale in terms of investment, consumer reach, and risk management. This creates the dynamic where fintechs must attempt to scale their market share quickly enough to overcome the scale and incumbent advantage of the banks.7
    Bank–Fintech Relationship as an Accelerant for AI AdoptionAnd this leads me to my next point—I believe that the bank–fintech relationship has the potential to accelerate adoption of Gen AI in financial services. This may come in the form of direct competition, with fintechs taking market share from banks for certain products, or banks crowding out fintechs by introducing better technology into their existing or new product lines. Such competition usually benefits consumers by providing more choice and better and cheaper products, provided that the risks are appropriately managed. It may also create competitive pressure and consumer demand that pushes banks to adopt Gen AI products and solutions more quickly.
    Alternatively, fintechs and banks may enter into a symbiotic relationship, forming collaborative partnerships where fintechs and banks merge their strengths. Examples of these partnerships may include banks purchasing or investing capital in fintechs with Gen AI products, or banks and fintechs entering into traditional vendor–client relationships.
    Responsibility for AI Risk ManagementThere’s one common theme in these scenarios: technology advances outside of the bank perimeter and rapidly enters the regulated sector. To get prepared for this moment, bank risk managers and regulators should become familiar with Gen AI trends and monitor developments outside the bank perimeter so that they are not caught off guard as this technology quickly enters the banking system.
    We have a shared role in creating the incentive structure to appropriately manage risks. To the extent banks are using Gen AI or offering Gen AI products and services, they have the responsibility to manage their risk, and should use their relationships to incentivize good risk management practices for fintechs.8 This means choosing fintech partners that provide transparency and clarity regarding the development of AI tools and have demonstrated appropriate control in deployment. There’s necessary tension here, as banks must understand the tools offered by their fintech partners for their own risk management, while fintechs may not want to share details they hold close—their secret sauce. With respect to Gen AI, it is important for fintechs and banks to tackle questions like who owns the customer data, and potential conflicts that may arise if a bank’s customer data are fed back into a fintech’s Gen AI model.
    Fintechs also have an important role to play in laying the groundwork for good risk management of Gen AI.9 As I’ve mentioned before, data quality and model training are critical to safe, sound, and fair use of these tools.10 Fintech developers should, for example, prioritize identifying biases in training data sets and monitoring outputs in order to prevent those biases from amplifying inequalities or mispricing risks. Moreover, fintechs should be aware of how banks manage risk, so that the fintech can adapt Gen AI solutions to be compatible with sound risk management approaches.
    And what should regulators do? As I’ve mentioned, regulators need to stay educated and informed on the technology, so that they understand the business case for deploying the technology and the attendant risks. They should review and update existing standards on model risk management, as appropriate, and engage in public–private forums where there are opportunities to work together. And they need to explore how and when to deploy the technology themselves, to remain in touch in the changing world and make reasoned judgments about how to supervise the use of Gen AI in the banking sector.
    These changes will require broad-based curiosity from regulators, fintechs, and banks—combined with education and investment—to create a culture of awareness on the opportunity and risks of the technology. Equally as important is leadership, to establish appropriate governance over AI and provide appropriate direction on priorities.
    ConclusionIn closing, successful integration of Gen AI into banking will require both creativity in adoption as well as getting the guardrails right. That’s not a zero-sum game. It’s an opportunity for all stakeholders—banks, fintechs, regulators, and consumers—to help to set the foundation for the benefits of the technology to be achieved and the risks to be effectively managed. In this way, we can help to be part of the sound and resilient financial system for all. Thank you.

    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. Michael S. Barr, “Artificial Intelligence: Hypothetical Scenarios for the Future,” speech at the Council on Foreign Relations, New York, February 18, 2025. Return to text
    3. See the SAS web page, Cashing In: Study Shows Banks Investing Big in GenAI, and It’s Paying Off, https://www.sas.com/en_us/news/press-releases/2024/october/generativeai-banking.html. Return to text
    4. J.W. Ayers, A. Poliak, M. Dredze, et al., “Comparing Physician and Artificial Intelligence Chatbot Responses to Patient Questions Posted to a Public Social Media Forum,” JAMA Internal Medicine, April 28, 2023;183(6):589–96, https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamainternalmedicine/fullarticle/2804309. Return to text
    5. Michael S. Barr, “Artificial Intelligence: Hypothetical Scenarios for the Future,” speech at the Council on Foreign Relations, New York, February 18, 2025. Return to text
    6. For instance, see NIST blog, “Technical Blog: Strengthening AI Agent Hijacking Evaluations,” January 17, 2025. Return to text
    7. And many fintechs have success, achieving significant scale in a relatively short period. Return to text
    8. See Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, SR letter 23-4, “Interagency Guidance on Third-Party Relationships: Risk Management” (June 7, 2023). Return to text
    9. See Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, SR letter 11-77, “Guidance on Model Risk Management.” Return to text
    10. Michael S. Barr, “Artificial Intelligence: Hypothetical Scenarios for the Future,” speech. Return to text

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI Canada: Saskatchewan Delivers Strongest Labour Market in Canada with Highest Job Creation and Lowest Unemployment Rate

    Source: Government of Canada regional news

    Released on April 4, 2025

    Statistics Canada’s latest labour force numbers show continued growth in Saskatchewan with 19,800 jobs added year-over-year in March, leading the nation with a 3.4 per cent job growth rate. Saskatchewan also had the lowest unemployment rate among provinces at 4.9 per cent, well below the national average of 6.7 per cent. 

    “Saskatchewan continues to have one of the strongest labour markets in Canada,” Deputy Premier and Minister of Immigration and Career Training Jim Reiter said. “Our government has made Saskatchewan the first carbon tax free province in Canada which will ensure that we remain the most attractive jurisdiction in the nation for businesses looking to create jobs and opportunities for our residents.”

    Year-over-year, full-time employment increased by 5,400 an increase of 1.1 per cent. There are more women working in Saskatchewan than ever before with female employment reaching an all-time high of 287,000. Female employment is up 11,300 which is an increase of 4.1 per cent and male employment is up 8,400 an increase of 2.7 per cent. 

    Saskatchewan’s two biggest cities also saw year-over-year growth. Compared to March 2024, Saskatoon’s employment was up 4,800, an increase of 2.5 per cent, and Regina’s employment was up 3,500, an increase of 2.5 per cent.

    Major year-over-year gains were reported for construction up 8,700, an increase of 24.2 per cent. Health care and social assistance is up 8,100 an increase of 8.8 per cent and educational services is up 4,900 an increase of 8.7 per cent. 

    The province continues to see economic growth in other areas. In January 2025, Saskatchewan ranked first year-over-year amongst provinces for growth in new motor vehicle sales (17.3 per cent) and second for growth in retail sales (11.5 per cent). Year to date Saskatchewan also had the second highest growth rate amongst provinces for urban housing starts (51.5 per cent).

    This economic growth is backed by the Government of Saskatchewan’s recently released Building the Workforce for a Growing Economy: The Saskatchewan Labour Market Strategy, a roadmap to build the workforce needed to support Saskatchewan’s strong and growing economy, and Securing the Next Decade of Growth: Saskatchewan’s Investment Attraction Strategy, a plan to increase investment in the province and to furth advancing Saskatchewan’s Growth plan goal of $16 billion in private capital investment annually.

    -30-

    For more information, contact:

    MIL OSI Canada News