Category: housing

  • MIL-OSI: Federal Home Loan Bank of Des Moines awards $20 million to support Minnesota communities through the Member Impact Fund

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    Des Moines, Iowa, June 04, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — The Federal Home Loan Bank of Des Moines (FHLB Des Moines) has awarded $20 million to 174 financial institution members to be distributed alongside their own grant contributions to hundreds of eligible not-for-profit and government organizations in Minnesota.

    Funding was made possible through the Member Impact Fund, a matching grant program designed to amplify FHLB Des Moines member financial institutions’ donations that provide critical financial support for affordable housing and community development initiatives in targeted areas of the FHLB Des Moines district.

    With 798 applications awarded, FHLB Des Moines matched $3 for every $1 contributed by a member institution. These combined grants range from $10,000 to $1,000,000.

    Since its launch in 2023, the Member Impact Fund has supported affordable housing and community development with more than $70 million in grants from FHLB Des Moines, resulting in combined grants of over $95 million. Every eligible grant application has been awarded funds.

    “The Member Impact Fund enables our members to directly support local organizations who matter to them, creating value and a profound impact in their own communities,” said Kris Williams, president and CEO of FHLB Des Moines. “The commitment of our members to champion their local organizations inspires us all.” 

    FHLB Des Moines provides funding solutions to more than 1,200 members to support mortgage lending, economic development and affordable housing in the communities they serve. Member Impact Fund awards are given in partnership with FHLB Des Moines member financial institutions to strengthen the ability of not-for-profits or government entities to serve the affordable housing or community development needs of their communities.

    ###

    About Federal Home Loan Bank of Des Moines

    The Federal Home Loan Bank of Des Moines (FHLB Des Moines) is deeply committed to strengthening communities, serving 13 states and three U.S Pacific territories as a member-owned cooperative. We work together with over 1,200 member financial institutions to support affordable housing, economic development and community improvement.

    FHLB Des Moines is one of 11 regional Banks that make up the Federal Home Loan Bank System. Members include community and commercial banks, credit unions, insurance companies, thrifts and community development financial institutions. FHLB Des Moines is wholly owned by its members and receives no taxpayer funding. For additional information about FHLB Des Moines, please visit www.fhlbdm.com.

    The MIL Network

  • MIL-OSI USA: Managing Uncertainty in Ecosystems through Scenario Planning

    Source: US Geological Survey

    Iconic giant sequoia trees in California, once thought to be nearly invincible, are now facing unprecedented threats from climate change. Drought, wildfire, and pests, all intensified by rising temperatures, have damaged or killed thousands of these ancient trees in recent years. In just the past decade, sequoias have suffered major foliage dieback in 2014, insect-related deaths in 2017, and catastrophic fires in 2020-2021.  

    Ecosystems are complex. Plants, animals, fungi, and microbes interact with one another and their surroundings (e.g., soil, air, water) in complicated ways. Traditionally, land managers tried to maintain ecosystems as they had existed in the past, but as ecosystems experience new and extreme conditions, their many inter-connected parts are responding in new ways. For example, forests are turning into grasslands or shrublands after wildfires and woody plants are moving into wetlands. How can park and forest managers deal with this type of unprecedented change?  

    One powerful tool for dealing with uncertainty is scenario planning. This approach helps managers map out a range of possible futures, including the extreme and/or unlikely ones, so that they can prepare for as much as possible. At Sequoia and Kings Canyon National Parks – home of many of the largest sequoias – early scenario planning has already been helpful, with proactive prescribed burns helping reduce the severity of recent wildfires. 

    North Central CASC supported researchers summarize some management considerations from a recent publication into the following three elements: 

    1. Embrace multiple possibilities, not just the most likely 
    1. Consider how ecological changes may unfold over time, not just the final outcome 
    1. Prepare for sudden or surprising disruptions 

    While climate forecasts are widely available, ecological forecasts are limited. Uncertainty won’t go away, but developing ecological forecasting tools through scenario planning can help managers navigate uncertainty to make smart investments and decisions that protect the natural benefits these ecosystems provide for recreation, clean water, and more.  

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-Evening Report: Australian kids BYO lunches to school. There is a healthier way to feed students

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Liesel Spencer, Associate Professor, School of Law, Western Sydney University

    Getty Images/ courtneyk

    Australian parents will be familiar with this school morning routine: hastily making sandwiches or squeezing leftovers into containers, grabbing a snack from the cupboard and a piece of fruit from the counter.

    This would be unheard of in many other countries, including Finland, Sweden, Scotland, Wales, Brazil and India, which provide free daily school meals to every child.

    Australia is one of the few high-income countries that does not provide children with a daily nutritious meal at school.

    As families increasingly face food insecurity and a cost-of-living crisis, here’s how school lunches could help.

    School lunches are important

    During the week, children get a third of their daily food intake at school. What they eat during school hours has a significant impact on their health.

    Australian children have much higher rates of obesity than children in countries with healthy lunch programs.

    As children’s diets affect physical and cognitive development, and mental health, poor diet can also affect academic performance.

    International research shows universal school meal programs – where all children are provided with a healthy meal at school each day – can improve both health and educational outcomes for students.

    The problem with BYO lunchboxes

    In Australia, children either bring a packed lunch or buy food at the school canteen. But the vast majority of these lunches don’t meet kids’ dietary needs.

    As a 2022 Flinders University report notes, more than 80% of Australian primary school lunches are of poor nutritional quality. Half of students’ school-day food intake comes from junk food and fewer than one in ten students eat enough vegetables.

    While these figures are based on 2011–2012 data, subsequent national survey data does not show significant improvements in children’s healthy diet indicators, including fruit and vegetable consumption. Time pressures on carers mean pre-packaged food can be a default lunchbox choice.

    At the same time, many families with school students are not able to provide their children with healthy lunches. Food insecurity — not having regular access to enough safe, healthy and affordable food — affects an estimated 58% of Australian households with children, and 69% of single-parent households.

    Hot weather also raises food safety concerns, as it’s hard to keep fresh food cool in schoolbags.

    School meals programs in Australia

    There are some historical examples of providing food to children at school in Australia. This includes the school milk program which ran from 1950s to 1970s. There were also wartime experiments in the 1940s. For example, the Oslo lunch (a cheese and salad sandwich on wholemeal bread, with milk and fruit) was provided at school to improve the health of children.

    Today, there is a patchwork of school food programs run by not-for-profit organisations providing breakfast and/or lunch, and various schemes, including kitchen garden and school greenhouse programs.

    There are also pilot schemes providing hot meals. For example, in Tasmania, the current pilot school lunch program feeds children in participating schools a hot lunch on some days of the week with state government support. Evaluation of the program showed strong benefits: healthier eating, calmer classrooms, better social connections from eating lunch together, and less food waste.

    The 2023 parliamentary inquiry into food security recommended the federal government work with states and territories to consider the feasibility of a school meals program.

    In May, the South Australian parliament opened an inquiry into programs in preschools and schools to ensure children and young people don’t go hungry during the day.

    What would it take to introduce school meals?

    Rolling out universal school meal programs across Australian schools would require cooperation between government and private sectors.

    It could build on what already exists – including canteens, school gardens, food relief and breakfast clubs – to create a more consistent and inclusive system.

    There’s a strong evidence base to guide this, both from Australian pilot programs and international examples.

    Decisions would have to be made about regulation and funding – whether to opt for a federally-funded and regulated scheme with federal and state cooperation, or a state-by-state scheme.

    Funding mechanisms from international models include fully government-funded, caregiver-paid (but with subsidies for disadvantaged families) and cost-sharing arrangements between government and families.

    Costs per child per day are around A$10, factoring in economies of scale. Some pilot programs report lower costs of around $5, but involve volunteer labour.

    More research is needed to determine parent and community attitudes and model these funding options, including preventative health benefits.

    Delivery models may also vary depending on each school’s size, location and infrastructure. This could include onsite food preparation, central kitchens delivering pre-prepared meals, or partnerships with not-for-profit providers.

    Ultimately, providing food at school could save parents valuable time and stress, and ensure all Australian students can access the health and education benefits of a nutritious school meal.

    Liesel Spencer has undertaken volunteer work for the Federation of Canteens in Schools (Australia).

    Miriam Williams has undertaken volunteer work for the Federation of Canteens in Schools (Australia).

    Katherine Kent 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. Australian kids BYO lunches to school. There is a healthier way to feed students – https://theconversation.com/australian-kids-byo-lunches-to-school-there-is-a-healthier-way-to-feed-students-257465

    MIL OSI AnalysisEveningReport.nz

  • MIL-Evening Report: Unprecedented heat in the North Atlantic Ocean kickstarted Europe’s hellish 2023 summer. Now we know what caused it

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Matthew England, Scientia Professor and Deputy Director of the ARC Australian Centre for Excellence in Antarctic Science, UNSW Sydney

    Westend61/Getty Images

    In June 2023, a record-breaking marine heatwave swept across the North Atlantic Ocean, smashing previous temperature records.

    Soon after, deadly heatwaves broke out across large areas of Europe, and torrential rains and flash flooding devastated parts of Spain and Eastern Europe. That year Switzerland lost more than 4% of its total glacier volume, and severe bushfires broke out around the Mediterranean.

    It wasn’t just Europe that was impacted. The coral reefs of the Caribbean were bleaching under severe heat stress. And hurricanes, fuelled by ocean heat, intensified into disasters. For example, Hurricane Idalia hit Florida in August 2023 – causing 12 deaths and an estimated US$3.6 billion in damages.

    Today, in a paper published in Nature, we uncover what drove this unprecedented marine heatwave.

    A strange discovery

    In a strange twist to the global warming story, there is a region of the North Atlantic Ocean to the southeast of Greenland that has been cooling over the last 50 to 100 years.

    This so-called “cold blob” or “warming hole” has been linked to the weakening of what’s known as the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation – a system of ocean currents that conveys warm water from the equator towards the poles.

    During July 2023 we met as a team to analyse this cold blob – how deep it reaches and how robust it is as a measure of the strength of the Atlantic overturning circulation – when it became clear there was a strong reversal of the historical cooling trend. The cold blob had warmed to 2°C above average.

    But was that a sign the overturning circulation had been reinvigorated? Or was something else going on?

    A layered story

    It soon became clear the anomalous warm temperatures southeast of Greenland were part of an unprecedented marine heatwave that had developed across much of the North Atlantic Ocean. By July, basin-averaged warming in the North Atlantic reached 1.4°C above normal, almost double the previous record set in 2010.

    To uncover what was behind these record breaking temperatures, we combined estimates of the atmospheric conditions that prevailed during the heatwave, such as winds and cloud cover, with ocean observations and model simulations.

    We were especially interested in understanding what was happening in the mixed upper layer of water of the ocean, which is strongly affected by the atmosphere.

    Distinct from the deeper layer of cold water, the ocean’s surface mixed layer warms as it’s exposed to more sunlight during spring and summer. But the rate at which this warming happens depends on its thickness. If it’s thick, it will warm more gradually; if it’s thin, rapid warming can ensue.

    During summer the thickness of this surface mixed layer is largely set by winds. Winds churn up the surface ocean and the stronger they are the deeper the mixing penetrates, so strong winds create a think upper layer and weak winds generate a shallower layer.

    Sea surface temperature anomaly (°C) for the month of June 2023, relative to the 1991–2020 reference period.
    Copernicus Climate Change Service/ECMWF

    Thinning at the surface

    Our new research indicates that the primary driver of the marine heatwave was record-breaking weak winds across much of the basin. The winds were at their weakest measured levels during June and July, possibly linked to a developing El Niño in the east Pacific Ocean.

    This led to by far the shallowest upper layer on record. Data from the Argo Program – a global array of nearly 4,000 robotic floats that measure the temperature and salinity in the upper 2,000 metres of the ocean – showed in some areas this layer was only ten metres deep, compared to the usual 20 to 40 metres deep.

    This caused the sun to heat the thin surface layer far more rapidly than usual.

    In addition to these short term changes in 2023, previous research has shown long-term warming associated with anthropogenic climate change is reducing the ability of winds to mix the upper ocean, causing it to gradually thin.

    We also identified a possible secondary driver of more localised warming during the 2023 marine heatwave: above-average solar radiation hitting the ocean. This could be linked in part with the introduction of new international rules in 2020 to reduce sulfate emissions from ships.

    The aim of these rules was to reduce air pollution from ship’s exhaust systems. But sulfate aerosols also reflect solar radiation and can lead to cloud formation. The resultant clearer skies can then lead to more ocean warming.

    Early warning signs

    The extreme 2023 heatwave provides a preview of the future. Marine heatwaves are expected to worsen as Earth continues to warm due to greenhouse gas emissions, with devastating impacts on marine ecosystems such as coral reefs and fisheries. This also means more intense hurricanes – and more intense land-based heatwaves.

    Right now, although the “cold blob” to the southeast of Greenland has returned, parts of the North Atlantic remain significantly warmer than the average. There is a particularly warm patch of water off the coast of the United Kingdom, with temperatures up to 4°C above normal. And this is likely priming Europe for extreme land-based heatwaves this summer.

    Global ocean temperatures on June 2 2025. A patch of abnormally warm water is visible off the southern coast of the United Kingdom.
    National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

    To better understand, forecast and plan for the impacts of marine heatwaves, long-term ocean and atmospheric data and models, including those provided by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) in the United States, are crucial. In fact, without these data and models, our new study would not have been possible.

    Despite this, NOAA faces an uncertain future. A proposed budget for the 2026 fiscal year released by the White House last month could mean devastating funding cuts of more than US$1.5 billion – mostly targeting climate-based research and data collection.

    This would be a disaster for monitoring our oceans and climate system, right at a time when change is severe, unprecedented, and proving very costly.

    Matthew England receives funding from the Australian Research Council.

    Alex Sen Gupta receives funding from the Australian Research Council.

    Andrew Kiss receives funding from the Australian Research Council.

    Zhi Li receives funding from the Australian Research Council.

    ref. Unprecedented heat in the North Atlantic Ocean kickstarted Europe’s hellish 2023 summer. Now we know what caused it – https://theconversation.com/unprecedented-heat-in-the-north-atlantic-ocean-kickstarted-europes-hellish-2023-summer-now-we-know-what-caused-it-258061

    MIL OSI AnalysisEveningReport.nz

  • MIL-OSI USA: SASC Chairman Roger Wicker Releases Defense Reconciliation Bill

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Mississippi Roger Wicker
    WASHINGTON – U.S. Senator Roger Wicker, R-Miss., Chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, today unveiled legislative text of the reconciliation bill’s defense portion. The House and Senate Armed Services Committees developed this legislation in close coordination with the White House and Department of Defense to modernize America’s military, secure the border, and strengthen national security.
    Chairman Wicker released the following statement after the release of the bill text:
    “This bill is a landmark down payment toward the modernization of our military and our defense capabilities. It represents a generational upgrade for our national security with historic funding for Golden Dome, American manufacturing, innovative unmanned technology, and new shipbuilding efforts,” Chairman Wicker said. “It would not have been possible without the peace-through-strength leadership of President Trump, Chairman Rogers, and Secretary Hegseth. This is about building the future of American defense, and ultimately deterring war. In combination with significant legislative reforms through the NDAA process, this bill will fundamentally change the Pentagon and help us maintain peace and prosperity for Americans.” 
    House Armed Services Committee Chairman Mike Rogers (R-AL.) released the following statement alongside Chairman Wicker:
    “The House and Senate Armed Services Committees are committed to implementing President Trump’s Peace through Strength agenda with a generational investment in our national defense. Chairman Wicker and I have worked closely together to identify how we can best modernize our military, regrow our defense industrial base, and build a ready, capable, and lethal fighting force. Now that the Senate will soon take up the One Big, Beautiful Bill, I’m eager to continue our forward momentum and get this to the President’s desk as soon as possible.”
    The full text is available here. 
    A legislative overview is available here.
    Legislation Highlights:
    $9B to improve servicemember quality of life, including housing modernization, childcare and education improvements, and health care.
    $29B for shipbuilding to expand the maritime industrial base, build 13 Battle Force ships, and rapidly grow an unmanned fleet.
    $25B for Golden Dome to maintain space superiority, develop space-based missile intercept, and accelerate existing missile defense efforts.
    $23B to re-stock crucial munitions, rebuid U.S. supply chains for critical minerals, and expand advanced manufacturing capacity.
    $16B to scale production of innovative low-cost and next-gen weapons like drones, counter-drone tech, cheap munitions, and artificial intelligence.
    $400M to accelerate the DOD audit through artificial intelligence and improve cybersecurity.
    $9B to expand the fighter fleet and accelerate next-gen air superiority programs.
    $15B to accelerate nuclear modernization programs and fix infrastructure.
    $12B to equip INDOPACOM commander with necesary capabilities and rebuild our Pacific infrastructure.
    $16B to improve readiness, including through modernization of depots, additional spare parts for aircraft, and expanded naval maintenance.
    $3.3B to expand military border support mission through Trump term.
    Background:
    In December 2024, Chairman Wicker introduced the FORGED Act, a comprehensive legislative proposal to reform Pentagon efficiency. The bill is designed to fundamentally change the way the Pentagon does business by getting better weapons to our troops faster and maximizing taxpayer dollars.
    Since taking the gavel as Chairman, Senator Wicker has laid out a significant defense investment plan aimed at rebuilding our military for generations to come. The plan encompasses several critical areas including rebuilding the arsenal of democracy, proliferating integrated air and missile defense, modernizing infrastructure, and more.

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI Russia: Asia-Pacific countries do not welcome NATO participation in regional affairs – Chinese Foreign Ministry

    Translation. Region: Russian Federal

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

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

    BEIJING, June 4 (Xinhua) — Asia-Pacific countries do not welcome the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO)’s involvement in the region, which certainly does not need an Asia-Pacific NATO, Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Lin Jian said at a regular briefing for journalists on Wednesday.

    Lin Jian made the remarks in response to remarks made by a European leader at the recent Shangri-La Dialogue, who linked the Taiwan issue to Ukraine, mentioned the so-called “Chinese threat” in the South China Sea, and hinted that NATO had reason to “be involved” in the Asia-Pacific region.

    A Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman said China firmly opposes the remarks, noting that Taiwan is an inalienable part of Chinese territory and that the Taiwan question is entirely China’s internal affairs.

    He said that the Taiwan question and the Ukrainian crisis are incomparable, and that China firmly opposes any remarks or actions aimed at confusing or distorting the essence of the Taiwan question. He called on relevant parties to firmly adhere to the one-China principle through practical actions and respect the sovereignty and territorial integrity of the PRC.

    “The current situation in the South China Sea is generally stable. There is no problem with the freedom of navigation and overflight that countries enjoy in accordance with the law,” Lin Jian said.

    He stressed that China has always advocated the proper resolution of maritime disputes and differences through negotiations and consultations with the countries directly concerned and on the basis of respect for historical facts.

    “Countries outside the region should respect the efforts made by regional countries to maintain peace and stability in the South China Sea, instead of inciting differences and provoking conflicts,” Lin Jian added.

    He recalled that NATO, as a regional defense organization, has no right to go beyond the geographical boundaries and mandate defined by its founding treaty. China firmly opposes NATO’s attempts to “move east” into the Asia-Pacific region, escalate tensions and create confrontation in it, and undermine peace and stability in the region and the world.

    Stressing that Asia is the common home of China and other Asian countries, Lin Jian said it has maintained rapid growth in recent years and, through the joint efforts of countries in the region, has become an outpost of global growth and an oasis of peaceful development.

    China has always been committed to the principles of goodwill, sincerity, mutual benefit and inclusiveness in its diplomacy towards neighboring countries, resolutely opposes bloc confrontation and has never sought the so-called “sphere of influence,” the Chinese diplomat said.

    “Relevant parties should not make malicious guesses or sow discord among Asia-Pacific countries based on the Cold War mentality. Instead, they should do more to promote peace, stability and prosperity in the Asia-Pacific region,” the Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman concluded. -0-

    MIL OSI Russia News

  • MIL-OSI USA: Pelosi Statement on the California High-Speed Rail FRA Report

    Source: United States House of Representatives – Congresswoman Nancy Pelosi Representing the 12th District of California

    Washington, D.C. – Speaker Emerita Nancy Pelosi released the following statement on the Secretary of Transportation’s announcement of a report from the Federal Railroad Administration on California High-Speed Rail:
     
    “This announcement is a rejection of the future. California has been a leader in realizing the vision of high-speed rail to meet the needs of working families with respect for consumers, labor and the environment.

    “It is unfortunate that the Secretary has misrepresented the facts and lacks understanding of how California High-Speed Rail promotes commerce, improves quality of life for Californians and creates good-paying jobs — while also lowering the cost of housing by shortening the distance to commute from home to work.

    “With his statement, the Secretary is either looking to mislead or has been misled on this issue.”

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI USA: Pressley Joins Warren, MA Delegation in Sounding Alarm on Trump Admin Attacks on International Students at Harvard and Nationwide

    Source: United States House of Representatives – Congresswoman Ayanna Pressley (MA-07)

    Letter follows recent DHS attempts to terminate Harvard’s ability to enroll international students on F-1 and J-1 visas

    Massachusetts hosts over 80,000 international students, who contribute almost $4 billion to state economy and support over 35,000 jobs in the state

    “The Administration’s apparent hostility to international students contributes to an overall climate of fear on campuses. This trend creates a chilling effect that discourages the best and brightest students from around the world from coming to study in the United States…” 

    Text of Letter

    WASHINGTON – Congresswoman Ayanna Pressley (MA-07) joined U.S. Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) and the Massachusetts’ Congressional delegation in pressing Secretary of Homeland Security Kristi Noem, Secretary of State Marco Rubio, and U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) Acting Director Todd Lyons on the Trump Administration’s attacks on international students, particularly last week’s attempt to terminate Harvard University’s ability to enroll international students on F-1 and J-1 visas. 

    The letter was also signed by U.S. Senator Ed Markey (D-MA), along with Representatives Richard Neal (MA-01), Jim McGovern (MA-02), Stephen Lynch (MA-08), Bill Keating (MA-09), Katherine Clark (MA-05), Seth Moulton (MA-06), Lori Trahan (MA-03), and Jake Auchincloss (MA-04). 

    “As members of the Massachusetts congressional delegation, we are gravely concerned about the Trump Administration’s attacks on international students,” wrote the lawmakers. “This trend has been particularly damaging for Massachusetts, which is home to one of largest concentrations of higher education institutions and hosts over 80,000 international students, who contribute almost $4 billion to the state’s economy and support over 35,000 jobs in the state.”

    Last week, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) revoked Harvard’s certification in the Student and Exchange Visitor Program (SEVP), the system that allows the university to admit international students — not only blocking Harvard’s ability to enroll new international students, but also interfering with current international students’ ability to legally remain. In effect, this action would allow DHS to arrest, detain, and deport international students who remain at Harvard. Shortly thereafter, a federal judge temporarily enjoined DHS from enforcing the revocation.

    “This attack on Harvard and its international students appears to be an attempt to punish the university for not agreeing to the Trump Administration’s April 2025 demands,” wrote the lawmakers.

    This is the latest in the Trump Administration’s long pattern of attacks on international students nationwide. Starting in March, the Administration effectively terminated the legal status of over 4,700 international students across at least 48 states and 160 colleges. Often without notice to students or their universities, ICE terminated students’ records in the Student and Exchange Visitor Information System (SEVIS) — records that are “functionally equivalent to having lawful student status” — which exposed students to the “risk of arrest, detention, or removal.” The State Department also revoked many visas, adding to widespread confusion about students’ legal status.

    “While DHS and the State Department claimed to target those with a criminal history or history of engaging in campus protests,  some of the impacted students had neither, and in many cases, there was ‘no obvious cause for the revocations,’” wrote the lawmakers.

    International students in Massachusetts and nationwide continue to face serious threats, even beyond Harvard’s campus, including: ICE expanding its authority for terminating SEVIS records; not restoring — or re-terminating — students’ legal status; and leaving problematic gaps in records of students’ legal status. Some students who left the country after their visas or records were suspended face significant hurdles to returning. This week, the State Department reportedly ordered its overseas embassies and consulates to stop scheduling any international student visa interviews, causing serious delays.

    “The Administration’s apparent hostility to international students contributes to an overall climate of fear on campuses. This trend creates a chilling effect that discourages the best and brightest students from around the world from coming to study in the United States — which harms not only current and prospective international students, but also American universities, U.S. citizen students on campuses, and, in the long term, the nation’s prosperity and economic growth,” concluded the lawmakers.

    Text of the letter can be found here.

    Rep. Pressley has been a vocal advocate for students attacked by Trump and his unlawful, anti-immigrant, and anti-free speech agenda – including her constituent, Tufts PhD student Rümeysa Öztürk, who was unlawfully abducted and detained by ICE in March. She has also repeatedly spoken out against Trump’s attacks on Harvard.

    • On May 11, 2025, Rep. Pressley, Senator Markey, and the Massachusetts community welcomed Rümeysa Öztürk back to Massachusetts following her release from ICE detention in Louisiana.
    • On May 8, 2025, Rep. Pressley and her colleagues sent a letter to U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) seeking more information on the detention conditions of immigrants held at the Central Louisiana ICE Processing Center (CLIPC) and the South Louisiana ICE Processing Center (SLIPC) after an oversight trip to the facilities.
    • On May 7, 2025, Pressley, Sen. Markey, and Rep. McGovern applauded the Second Circuit for ordering Rümeysa’s transfer from ICE custody in Louisiana to Vermont and rejecting the Trump administration’s attempt to delay complying with a lower court order to do so.
    • On April 25, 2025, Rep. Pressley issued a statement on the Trump Administration’s abrupt reinstatement of international student visas. 
    • On April 25, 2025, Rep. Pressley, Sen. Markey, and Rep. McGovern published a New York Times op-ed on their meeting with Rümeysa Öztürk in detention and warned the American people of the dangers posed by the Trump administration’s unlawful attacks on our constitutional rights to freedom of speech and due process.
    • On April 23, 2025, Rep. Pressley and her colleagues visited Rümeysa Öztürk and Mahmoud Khalil and conducted oversight at the ICE facilities in Louisiana in which they were detained.
    • On April 18, 2025, Rep. Pressley and Sens. Warren and Markey demanded Secretary of State Rubio released any documents related to her arrest after a recent report indicated that an internal State Department memo concluded that the key premise underlying Tufts graduate student Rümeysa Öztürk’s arrest and detention was false. 
    • On April 3, 2025, Rep. Pressley, along with Sens. Warren and Markey, sounded the alarm on Öztürk’s medical neglect in DHS custody and renewed urgent calls for her release.
    • On March 28, 2025, Rep. Pressley, along with Sens. Warren and Markey, led over 30 lawmakers in writing to Secretary of Homeland Security Kristi Noem, Secretary of State Marco Rubio, and Acting Director for U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) Todd Lyons, demanding information about Öztürk’s arrest and detention as well as similar incidents across the country.
    • On March 26, 2025, Rep. Pressley issued a statement condemning reports that ICE arrested and detained Rümeysa Öztürk.
    • On March 25, 2025, Rep. Pressley issued a statement following reports of ICE activity in Boston and other municipalities in Massachusetts

    ###

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-Evening Report: Woodside’s North West Shelf approval is by no means a one-off. Here are 6 other giant gas projects to watch

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Samantha Hepburn, Professor, Deakin Law School, Deakin University

    GREG WOOD/AFP via Getty Images

    The federal government’s decision to extend the life of Woodside’s North West Shelf gas plant in Western Australia has been condemned as a climate disaster.

    The gas lobby claims more gas is needed to secure energy supplies, pointing to predicted gas shortages in parts of Australia in the short term. But given most proposed gas projects are directed at the export market, the problem is likely to persist.

    And the science is clear: no fossil fuel projects can be opened if the world is to avoid catastrophic climate change.

    Despite this, a slew of polluting gas projects are either poised to begin operating in Australia, or lie firmly in the sights of industry.

    How Australia’s gas contributes to climate change

    Gas production in Australia harms the climate in two ways.

    The first is via “fugitive” emissions – leaks and unintentional releases that occur when gas is being extracted, processed and transported. These emissions are typically methane, which traps more heat in the atmosphere per molecule than carbon dioxide.

    Fugitive emissions count towards Australia’s greenhouse gas accounts, comprising about 6% of our total emissions.

    So, government approval for new gas projects undermines Australia’s commitment to reaching net-zero emissions. Labor enshrined this goal in legislation in its previous term of government, and all states and territories have also adopted it.

    The second climate harm occurs when Australia’s gas is burned for energy overseas. Those emissions do not count towards our national emissions accounts, but they substantially contribute to global warming.

    Under national environment law, the federal government is not required to consider the potential harm a project might cause to the global climate. This loophole means fossil fuel developments can continue to win government backing.

    Below, I outline six of the biggest gas projects Australia has in the pipeline.

    1. Barossa Gas Project

    This A$5.6 billion project by energy giant Santos is located in the Timor Sea, about 300km north of Darwin. The Australian government’s offshore energy regulator approved it in April this year.

    The project will extract gas from the Barossa field and transport it to a liquified natural gas (LNG) facility in Darwin for processing and export.

    The venture would reportedly be among the worst polluting oil and gas projects in the world. On one estimate, it would release about 380 million tonnes of climate pollution over its 25-year life.

    2. Scarborough Pluto Train 2

    Pluto Train 2 is an extension of Woodside’s existing Scarborough project, centred around a gas field about 375km off WA’s Pilbara coast. A 430-kilometre pipeline would connect that gas to a second LNG train at a facility near Karratha. “Train” refers to the unit in a plant that turns natural gas into liquid.

    The project has federal and state approval. It is about 80% complete and scheduled to begin operating by next year. According to Climate Analytics, the expansion would create about 9.2 million tonnes of carbon-dioxide equivalent each year.

    3. Surat Phase 2

    This coal seam gas project in Gladstone, Queensland, would be operated by Arrow energy – a joint venture between Shell and PetroChina.

    It involves substantially expanding existing gas fields by building up to 450 new production wells. The project is expected to supply 130 million cubic feet of gas each day at its peak, and has been opposed by environment groups.

    4. Narrabri Gas Project

    This $3.6 billion Santos project in northwest New South Wales involves drilling up to 850 coal seam gas wells over 95,000 hectares. The National Native Title Tribunal last month ruled leases for the project could be granted, leaving Santos only a few regulatory barriers to clear.

    Environmental groups and Traditional Owners say the project threatens water resources, biodiversity and Indigenous sites. However, the tribunal found the project’s benefits to energy reliability outweighed those concerns.

    5. Beetaloo Basin

    The Beetaloo Basin is located 500km southeast of Darwin. It covers 28,000 kilometres and is estimated to contain up to 500 trillion cubic feet of gas. A number of companies are vying for the right to develop the huge resource.

    It is predicted to emit up to 1.2 billion tonnes over 25 years. A CSIRO report says Beetaloo could be tapped without adding to Australia’s net emissions. However, experts say the report was too optimistic and relies far too heavily on carbon offsets.

    6. Browse Basin

    Browse Basin, 425 kilometres north of Broome off WA, is considered Australia’s biggest reserve of untapped conventional gas.

    Woodside plans to develop the Browse gas fields, but the area is remote and difficult to access. According to the ABC, Woodside’s North West Shelf project is considered the last hope for extracting the valuable resource.

    Environmental groups say the project, if approved, would emit 1.6 billion tonnes of climate pollution – three times Australia’s current annual emissions.

    The basin is also located near the pristine Scott Reef, a significant coral reef ecosystem.

    A major disconnect

    The projects listed above, if they proceed, weaken Australia’s efforts to reach its emission reduction goals. And their overall climate impact is truly frightening.

    The re-elected Labor government has pledged to revisit attempts to reform national environment laws. This presents a prime opportunity to ensure the climate harms of fossil fuel projects are key to environmental decision making.

    Samantha Hepburn 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. Woodside’s North West Shelf approval is by no means a one-off. Here are 6 other giant gas projects to watch – https://theconversation.com/woodsides-north-west-shelf-approval-is-by-no-means-a-one-off-here-are-6-other-giant-gas-projects-to-watch-257899

    MIL OSI AnalysisEveningReport.nz

  • MIL-OSI USA: Presidential Message on the 83rd Anniversary of the Battle of Midway

    US Senate News:

    Source: US Whitehouse
    class=”has-text-align-left”>Today marks the 83rd anniversary of America’s seminal victory at the Battle of Midway—a watershed moment in World War II that set the Allied Forces on the path to ultimate triumph over forces of evil.
    After the shocking attack on Pearl Harbor in December 1941, Imperial Japan surged across the Pacific—dealing Allied forces a series of defeats from the fall of the Philippines, to the capture of Hong Kong and Singapore, to devastating air raids over Australia.  With the U.S. Navy still reeling from the surprise attack, Japan’s ruthless push for regional dominance seemed unstoppable. 
    By the summer of 1942, Japan set its sights on Midway Island—a tiny American outpost with massive strategic value, just over 1,000 miles from Hawaii.  The Japanese plan was clear: lure what remained of the battered U.S. Pacific Fleet out of Pearl Harbor, destroy it, and capture Midway, from where they would launch further offensives across the Pacific.
    President Franklin D. Roosevelt knew our Armed Forces had to act decisively.  He tasked Admiral Chester Nimitz, a submariner and newly appointed Commander-in-Chief of the Pacific Fleet, with launching a full-scale effort to restore the Navy’s remaining ships to fighting condition.  With vital intelligence from American codebreakers, the Allies stayed one step ahead, anticipating the major elements of Japan’s strategy.
    At dawn on June 4, 1942, the U.S. Navy struck back.  Despite facing a larger enemy force and suffering heavy losses, the U.S. fleet under the command of Admirals Jack Fletcher and Raymond Spruance fought with unmatched resolve.  In the course of twenty-four hours, they sank four Japanese aircraft carriers, destroyed a heavy cruiser, and crushed Japanese hopes of advancing deeper into the eastern Pacific—paving the way for our Nation’s acceptance of Japan’s unconditional surrender and the end of World War II in 1945.
    Today, former enemies stand united as allies.  The United States and Japan have forged an enduring partnership built on the shared values of freedom, sovereignty, and an abiding commitment to peace across the Indo-Pacific.  Together, we are advancing the causes of safety, security, prosperity, and liberty—all while confronting threats from China and North Korea.
    The epic Battle of Midway stands to this day as a glorious reminder that, even in the face of long odds, perilous danger, and tremendous uncertainty, no challenge is too great for the strength of the American spirit.  As our Nation commemorates this legendary battle, we honor the grit of our servicemen, we pay tribute to the sacrifice of our veterans, and we vow to carry forward the legacy of the fallen heroes who secured victory over tyranny in the Pacific 80 years ago.

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI USA: ICYMI | Fox News — SEN BILL HAGERTY: Nashville is not a sanctuary city. I won’t let that happen

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Tennessee Bill Hagerty

    ‘Illegal aliens are facing justice. They are being sent home. And violent criminals, who are here illegally, will no longer plague our communities…The American people, the people of Tennessee and the brave men and women of ICE deserve much better. I look forward to seeing this commitment upheld.’

    SEN BILL HAGERTY: Nashville is not a sanctuary city. I won’t let that happen
    By: Senator Bill Hagerty
    June 4, 2025
    Link here.

    Nashville mayor condemns arrests of illegal immigrants. Now, ICE agents are targets of doxxing.

    Nashville is not, nor is any other city in Tennessee, a sanctuary city. I intend to make certain that remains the case.  

    In May in Nashville, ICE conducted a successful operation with Tennessee Highway Patrol to arrest 196 criminal illegal aliens, including a convicted rapist and a suspected murderer. 

    While I have received every assurance that Nashville and every other city in Tennessee will work in a cooperative manner with law enforcement, make no mistake: I will make certain those commitments are not just lip service. 

    After the operation, Nashville Mayor Freddie O’Connell condemned ICE’s good work, promoted a fund to provide support dollars for illegal immigrants and their families in Nashville, and even updated an executive order to fast-track the collection of all Nashville government employees’ interactions with ICE. 

    The mayor’s executive order has – unsurprisingly – led to the doxxing of ICE agents, who have faced a 413% increase in assaults against them while on the job. In Nashville, we know that activists are monitoring ICE activity in the city and alerting each other of ICE’s movements using encrypted group chats. 

    Did these groups see the doxxed ICE agents’ personal information? How will they use it? How does the mayor ensure these lists of ICE agents do not end up in the wrong hands? These are all questions we shouldn’t have to ask, but now we do. 

    The cloud of confusion that has arisen from this misstep is unfortunate, and the facts need to be made clear: the state of Tennessee is a state that stands for law enforcement and the protection of its citizens. 

    The leftwing media is adding fuel to the fire. For example, New York Times opinion writer Margaret Renkl explicitly compares ICE raids in Nashville to the Jim Crow South and the Trail of Tears. Her article – littered with cherry-picked stories from immigrant activists – uses such ridiculous words as “hunt” to suggest that what is happening in my state is not legal. Let me be clear: the only illegality is from those who chose to cross the border illegally. 

    We know where this all leads: In 2019, an Antifa activist attempted to firebomb an ICE facility in Tacoma, Washington. Thankfully, he was stopped before he could succeed. But his intentions and motivation were clear. In his manifesto, he slandered ICE as “the forces of evil,” and compared their detention facilities to “concentration camp[s].” 

    Even when such rhetoric from the media and mismanagement on the part of local officials does not inspire acts of domestic terrorism, it still leads to harassment and threats against ICE and other federal law enforcement officers. 

    In the first Trump presidency, the left shamelessly engaged in doxxing of ICE agents, sharing their personal information in an effort to intimidate them out of their jobs, or even cause direct harm to them. Such private information was even shared by college professors, published by WikiLeaks, and disseminated by the far-left domestic terrorist organization Antifa.

    Now that President Donald Trump is back in office, activists have resumed this dangerous tactic. Even state lawmakers have joined in on efforts to expose ICE officers’ identities, with Tennessee Democrat state Representative Aftyn Behn filming herself gleefully stalking ICE agents. 

    Trump’s historic re-election made it clear: the American people support his immigration agenda, including the removal and deportation of criminal illegal aliens from our communities. Yet some, like Nashville Mayor O’Connell, whether intentional or not, are inhibiting the president’s mission. This will not stand. 

    The Trump administration and the men and women of ICE have a Herculean task before them in cleaning up what former President Joe Biden facilitated: the largest invasion of our Southern border in history. 

    For four years, we watched Biden sacrifice our national sovereignty to allow millions to illegally flood our country. Unsurprisingly, this illegal tsunami included murderers, rapists, human traffickers, drug smugglers, people on terrorist watch lists, and more. Today, ICE is working overtime to remove these criminals and make our communities safer. 

    Here’s the reality: Illegal aliens are facing justice. They are being sent home. And violent criminals, who are here illegally, will no longer plague our communities. 

    O’Connell should take care to empower ICE and local law enforcement to remove illegal aliens from our communities, not endanger them. The American people, the people of Tennessee and the brave men and women of ICE deserve much better. I look forward to seeing this commitment upheld. 

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI Russia: Alexey Overchuk opened the renovated Russian House in Dushanbe.

    Translation. Region: Russian Federal

    Source: Government of the Russian Federation – An important disclaimer is at the bottom of this article.

    As part of the visit of the Russian delegation to the Republic of Tajikistan, Deputy Prime Minister Alexey Overchuk took part in the opening ceremony of the renovated Russian Center for Science and Culture (Russian House) in the capital of Tajikistan, Dushanbe.

    Alexey Overchuk emphasized that the Russian House has been operating in Dushanbe since 2011 and during this time many useful and creative projects have already been implemented that contribute to the development of humanitarian ties between Russia and Tajikistan. There are educational courses to prepare for admission to Russian universities, including under the quota of the Government of the Russian Federation, events are held to improve the qualifications of teachers, clubs and sections for talented youth operate, educational exhibitions are held, literature and textbooks are distributed – in 2024 alone, more than 19.5 thousand copies of educational, methodological and fiction literature in Russian were donated.

    “We are very grateful to see such a good response among the residents of Dushanbe. Today we saw a large number of children and young people here who come and learn something new,” the Deputy Prime Minister noted.

    The new building of the Russian Center for Science and Culture in Dushanbe with an area of 1.3 thousand square meters is located in the very center of the city and has the necessary infrastructure for conducting full-fledged educational and cultural-educational activities. On two floors there are modern classrooms and public spaces for education and creative workshops.

    The Russian House hosts preparatory courses for high school students who dream of entering Russian universities, and for those who want to study Russian, Russian language courses are taught mainly by participants in the Russian Teacher Abroad project. There is a consultation center for applicants on career guidance and admission to universities, and Olympiads and entrance examinations are held. The additional education center “Russia is with you” has been opened to popularize the Russian language and culture, science and engineering education.

    “We live in the era of the fourth industrial revolution and the data economy, when knowledge and culture are not only a key resource for national development, but also the most reliable bridge connecting peoples. The Russian Center for Science and Culture is called upon to serve as such a bridge to support cultural and humanitarian interaction between Russia and Tajikistan. We hope that this house will be strengthened as a platform where new projects and initiatives will be born that contribute to the development of science and culture in our common civilizational space,” Alexey Overchuk emphasized.

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

    MIL OSI Russia News

  • MIL-OSI USA: Governor Lamont Thanks General Assembly for Approving Climate Mitigation Legislation

    Source: US State of Connecticut

    (HARTFORD, CT) – Governor Ned Lamont today is thanking both chambers of the Connecticut General Assembly for approving legislation containing a package of initiatives aimed at protecting the environment, including by taking steps to mitigate the impacts of climate change through the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions and also to encourage the growth of the clean energy economy and green jobs.

    The legislation is House Bill 5004, An Act Concerning the Protection of the Environment and the Development of Renewable Energy Sources and Associated Job Sectors.

    “Connecticut is proud to be a climate leader and this legislation helps keep our state on track to improve our air quality and meet our climate goals,” Governor Lamont said. “Notably, it increases the tools available in our state that will attract business growth in the clean energy sector and the associated jobs that they support. I applaud the legislature for approving this bill and I look forward to signing it when it is transmitted to my desk.”

    As required under legislative rules, now that the bill has been approved by both chambers of the General Assembly it will be transmitted to the nonpartisan Legislative Commissioners’ Office for engrossing and supervision of printing in its final form. Once engrossed, it is required to go through an approval process by the Office of the House Clerk, the Office of the Senate Clerk, and the Office of the Secretary of the State before it can finally be transmitted to the governor for his signature. This engrossing and approval process usually takes several days to complete.

    Upon receiving the bill, the Office of the Governor will make an announcement when a date has been selected for it to be signed by the governor.

     

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI Security: Washington State Man Arrested on Federal Charges Alleging He Provided Material Support to Palm Springs Fertility Clinic Bomber

    Source: United States Attorneys General

    A Washington state man was arrested on a federal criminal complaint alleging he provided material support to the Palm Springs fertility clinic bomber by shipping and paying for significant quantities of ammonium nitrate – an explosive precursor – prior to the suicidal terror attack last month.

    Daniel Jongyon Park, 32, of Kent, was arrested last night shortly after his flight from Poland arrived at John F. Kennedy International Airport in New York. Park is charged with providing and attempting to provide material support to terrorists and made his initial court appearance today in the Eastern District of New York.

    “This defendant is charged with facilitating the horrific attack on a fertility center in California. Bringing chaos and violence to a facility that exists to help women and mothers is a particularly cruel, disgusting crime that strikes at the very heart of our shared humanity,” said Attorney General Pamela Bondi. “We are grateful to our partners in Poland who helped get this man back to America and we will prosecute him to the fullest extent of the law.”

    “Park allegedly sent large amounts of explosive precursors to the man who drove a car bomb to a fertility clinic in Palm Springs, an attack that potentially could have killed innocent people,”  said FBI Director Kash Patel. “The FBI and our partners work together to find and hold accountable those who engage in domestic terrorism and other illegal activity. I also want to express my thanks to authorities in Poland for their vital assistance in this case.”

    “This defendant is charged with shipping large quantities of explosive precursors to the man whose suicide bombing last month destroyed a fertility clinic in Palm Springs,” said U.S. Attorney Bill Essayli for the Central District of California. “Domestic terrorism is evil and unacceptable. Those who aid terrorists can expect to feel the cold wrath of justice.”

    According to an affidavit filed with the complaint, Guy Edward Bartkus, 25, of Twentynine Palms, California, drove a car containing a bomb to a fertility clinic in Palm Springs on May 17. Bartkus detonated the bomb, killing himself, injuring numerous victims, destroying the fertility clinic’s building, and damaging surrounding buildings and areas. Bartkus’s attack was motivated by his pro-mortalism, anti-natalism, and anti-pro-life ideology, which is the belief that individuals should not be born without their consent and that non-existence is best.

    Park – who shares Bartkus’s extremist views – shipped large quantities of explosive precursor materials to Bartkus, including approximately 180 pounds of ammonium nitrate. Days before the Palm Springs bombing, Park paid for an additional 90 pounds (40.8 kilograms) of ammonium nitrate that was shipped to Bartkus.

    Park sent the first shipments of approximately 180 pounds (81.7 kilograms) of ammonium nitrate to Bartkus shortly before traveling to Bartkus’s residence, where he stayed with Bartkus from Jan. 25 to Feb. 8. Three days before Park arrived at Bartkus’s house, records from an AI chat application show that Bartkus researched how to make powerful explosions using ammonium nitrate and fuel.

    During his stay at Bartkus’s residence, Park and Bartkus spent time in Bartkus’s room as well as in a detached garage “running experiments,” according to the affidavit. This was the same garage where law enforcement, during a search after the May 17 bombing, located significant amounts of chemicals commonly used in the construction of homemade bombs.

    Four days after Bartkus conducted the suicide bombing, Park flew to Europe. On May 30, Park was detained in Poland and later was ordered deported to the United States. 

    If convicted, Park would face a statutory maximum penalty of 15 years in federal prison. A federal district court judge will determine any sentence after considering the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines and other statutory factors.

    The FBI’s Inland Empire Joint Terrorism Task Force is investigating this matter. Considerable assistance was provided by the Palm Springs Police Department, the San Bernardino County Sheriff’s Department; the FBI’s legal attaché in Warsaw, Polish authorities, and FBI field offices in Seattle, New York, San Diego, Las Vegas, and Portland.  

    Assistant U.S. Attorneys Sarah E. Gerdes and Anna P. Boylan for the Central District of California, and Trial Attorney Patrick J. Cashman of the National Security Division’s Counterterrorism Section are prosecuting the case.

    A criminal complaint is merely an allegation. All defendants are presumed innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of law.

    MIL Security OSI

  • MIL-OSI NGOs: Skipping straws, biking to work: do our small actions still matter for the planet?

    Source: Greenpeace Statement –

    Soon after I first joined Greenpeace in the 2010s, I realized I had a steep learning curve ahead of me. I just didn’t expect that learning eco-conscious living (weighing the environmental impact of everyday choices such as what to eat, bring, do, or throw away) would feel like such a crash course. Back then it was about walking the talk, as is expected of everyone in environmental campaigning. It felt mandatory, and I often felt obliged to be performative.

    I still remember where the unease came from. I’d known quite a bit about how massive the climate crisis was and how deeply it’s tied to systems that were already failing us in the Global South. Basically, we’re just trying to survive the climate crisis and all other symptoms of unjust, oppressive systems, in an economy that limits our choices (do you know how insufferable it is to commute in Metro Manila, how dangerous it could be to bike, or how largely inaccessible and expensive plant-based meals are?) And yet somehow, we are the ones expected to go the extra mile to save the planet? That didn’t sit right with me. 

    This conflictedness only deepened as I learned more about the “grand narrative of guilt” pushed by corporations. These are tropes that are, when placed alongside reality, paradoxical at best (think recycling and carbon footprints when only 9% of plastic waste has ever been recycled, and just 57 companies were responsible for 80% of global fossil fuel and cement-related CO₂ emissions from 2016 to 2022). 

    There should be no doubt that these narratives were designed to deflect responsibility for corporations’ massive environmental, social, cultural, and economic impacts and shift the attention onto us instead. After years of exposure, this messaging sticks in one’s head like the voice of a controlling, gaslighting ex: How much plastic packaging is in that bag of groceries? Was that vacation really worth the environmental cost of flying? You say you care about the planet, so why are you still eating meat?

    Surely we wouldn’t want to play into the corporate guilt-tripping narrative. At one point, I wondered if the best act of defiance might be to live our most convenient lives unapologetically and focus all our energy on actions that more directly contribute to driving system change. By this, I mean civic and public engagement efforts such as signing petitions, joining protests, or voting for environmentally conscious leaders.

    Yet one of our constant reminders at Greenpeace is this: every action counts. And each time I am reminded, I don’t doubt it. Perhaps because even though I know the narrative of individual responsibility is marred by greedy intentions, it still wouldn’t feel right to dismiss personal action completely. I’ve seen small actions spark change in people again and again, from a community leader forming a flood response group, to a youth activist organizing artivism workshops or meetups for exchanging climate stories. 

    Over time, I realized personal actions are not meant to carry the weight of the world, just as they’re not the end goal. Even so, when done consistently and taken as part of something larger, they are powerful and can push the needle toward systemic change, in more ways than one. Here are some little epiphanies on my end:

    Habits can start or hasten culture shifts. Everyday habits like refusing single-use plastic, choosing to bike to work, or eating less meat can shift culture. Culture shifts don’t always have to start in boardrooms or policy halls. In fact, they usually begin in communities, where an individual or a group quietly leads by example, and challenges what’s normal. 

    A gateway to deeper engagement. Lifestyle shifts can lead to deeper involvement in the advocacy, especially as people seek like-minded friends and learn more about the issues. And the more they know about the campaigns, the more confident they become and the more willing to share their time and energy to the cause.

    Walking the talk as a strategy. For many of us in environmental campaigning, walking the talk is not just a moral stance. It is a strategic choice that strengthens our credibility and demonstrates integrity. It shows that our demands for change are reflected in the way we live and act. This kind of alignment matters, and is also why we call on the national government to turn their climate pronouncements on the international stage into consistent and concrete action at home.

    Igniting creative resistance. The saying “necessity is the mother of invention” holds true in movement building as well. When faced with challenges, including environmental ones, people find ways to be resourceful. They collaborate, adapt, and respond. And whether intentionally or not, many end up contributing through the skills, talents, and tools they have in support of collective action.

    Reclaiming identity through agency. Realizing one’s agency often begins at a personal level. Along the way, individual actions can become a means to reconnect with culture and history, to affirm one’s values, and to commit to the kind of person one aspires to be. It also becomes a way of unlearning environmentally harmful practices promoted by corporations. For example, sari-sari store (small neighborhood store) owners who joined Greenpeace’s Kuha Sa Tingi project reconnected with the original Filipino “tingi” culture (the practice of buying goods in small, affordable, quantities) through reuse and refill systems.

    Making power listen. Collective personal actions can create pressure for decision-makers, institutions, and even corporations to act. They may not replace structural change, but they send clear signals, if not outright communicate, public demand for solutions which in due course can unlock systemic change. 


    You might want to check out Greenpeace Philippines’ petition called Courage for Climate, a drive in support of real policy and legal solutions in the pursuit of climate justice.

    Courage for Climate

    The climate crisis may seem hopeless, but now is the time for courage, not despair. Join Filipino communities taking bold action for our planet.

    Make an Act of Courage Today!

    MIL OSI NGO

  • MIL-OSI USA: ICYMI: Secretary Chavez-DeRemer highlights skilled workforce training on America at Work tour

    Source: US Department of Labor

    EDISON, NJ – U.S. Department of Labor Secretary Lori Chavez-DeRemer continued her America at Work listening tour this week with visits to Long Island, New York, and Edison, New Jersey, where she met with apprentices and observed hands-on training in welding, framing, and acoustical work.

    “Our nation’s skilled workforce is thriving under President Trump’s leadership, with thousands of new jobs created on Long Island and in New Jersey since he took office,” said Secretary Chavez-DeRemer. “This week, I’ve seen firsthand the impact of investments in top-notch training programs that drive local economic growth. When we invest in skills and opportunity, we empower men and women to build better lives for themselves and their families. I appreciate Congressmen Garbarino, LaLota, and Kean hosting me on my America at Work tour and will continue working with them to Make America Skilled Again.”

    “Long Island has long been a leader in workforce innovation, and today’s visit showcased the strong partnerships between labor, education, and government that are building pathways to good-paying jobs for local workers,” said Rep. Andrew Garbarino. “From apprentices learning the trades at Local 290 to advanced technical training programs at Suffolk County Community College, these initiatives are not only equipping our workforce with the skills they need – they’re also strengthening Long Island’s economic future. I thank Secretary Chavez-DeRemer for making the trip and recognizing the importance of continued investment in our skilled workforce.”

    “Labor Secretary Chavez-DeRemer’s visit to Suffolk County and her engagement with Long Island’s blue-collar labor leaders highlight the new Republican Party’s commitment to supporting both business growth and hardworking Americans through fair wages, safe working conditions, and expanded opportunities,” said Rep. Nick LaLota. “To keep our region competitive, we must continue investing in workforce development and modern infrastructure. In Congress, I’ll keep fighting for commonsense solutions that strengthen job training, connect workers to good-paying careers, and grow Long Island’s economy from the ground up.”

    New York

    Joined by Reps. Garbarino and LaLota, Secretary Chavez-DeRemer visited the Northeast Regional Council of Carpenters Local 290 Training Center in Hauppauge, where she observed hands-on technical instruction in welding, framing, and acoustical work. She also engaged with apprentices to discuss the importance of developing practical skills. 

    Later, they toured Suffolk County Community College’s National Offshore Wind Training Center in Brentwood, a state-of-the-art program preparing local workers for careers in the emerging offshore wind industry. The group also toured specialized training facilities focused on fire awareness, sea survival, and working-at-heights safety – critical for ensuring safe and effective operations in offshore environments.

    The Secretary concluded her Long Island stop with a roundtable discussion hosted by the Society for Human Resource Management to discuss strategies for building workplaces that help both people and businesses thrive.

    New Jersey

    In Edison, the Secretary visited the Northeast Carpenters Training Center in Edison with Rep. Kean. This state-of-the-art, union-owned facility, part of the Eastern Atlantic States Carpenters Technical Centers, provides hands-on training in carpentry, millwright work, cabinetmaking, and floor laying. Secretary Chavez-DeRemer emphasized the importance of developing pathways to success through high-quality workforce development programs that equip apprentices with the resources they need to excel.

    “From construction and manufacturing to transportation infrastructure, everything built in New Jersey is built by the hands of dedicated tradesmen and women,” said Rep. Tom Kean Jr. “Today’s visit to the Northeast Carpenters Training Center, alongside Secretary of Labor Lori Chavez-DeRemer, was an incredible opportunity to see the next generation of skilled laborers in action. The center’s workforce development programs show how strong partnerships between labor, industry, and educators equip students with the skills, leadership, and safety training they need to succeed on the job and return home safely to their families each night. As we invest in infrastructure, innovation, and nationwide projects, New Jersey will continue to lead the way due to its strong and skilled workforce. I want to thank Secretary Chavez-DeRemer for her continued leadership and for visiting the great Garden State.”

    Secretary Chavez-DeRemer launched her America at Work listening tour in early April to bring real-world feedback from American workers to policymakers in Washington. Recent stops have included visits to Colorado and Arizona, highlighting best practices and successful workforce development initiatives across the country.

    Learn more about Secretary Chavez-DeRemer’s efforts to strengthen America’s skilled workforce.

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI USA: US Department of Labor and Adidas America reach settlement for $235K in penalties resolving fall hazard and unsafe ladder violations

    Source: US Department of Labor

    ALBANY, NY – The U.S. Department of Labor has entered into a settlement agreement with Adidas America Inc. that requires the company to pay $235,000 in fines and implement enhanced safety measures at multiple facilities.

    The agreement comes after the department’s Occupational Safety and Health Administration conducted a 2024 follow-up inspection at an Adidas warehouse in upstate New York. OSHA initially cited for hazards in 2021 during an inspection that found missing guardrails and an unsafe ladder.

    Inspectors returned in 2024 to find that Adidas had not corrected the hazards cited in 2021 and found an additional unsafe ladder violation. 

    The May 30, 2025, settlement requires Adidas to implement enhanced abatement measures at its facilities in New York, New Jersey, and Puerto Rico, including adopting a comprehensive Safety and Health Management program, retraining employees on fall hazards, assessing and auditing potential fall hazards at each facility, and discontinuing use of overhead storage in the facilities. 

    Adidas also agreed to pay $235,000 in penalties. 

    Adidas America Inc. is a subsidiary of Adidas AG, an athletic apparel and footwear corporation headquartered in Herzogenaurach, Bavaria, Germany.

    OSHA’s Warehousing page provides solutions to prevent injuries from hazards including forklifts, slips, trips and falls and materials handling. The agency’s stop falls website offers safety information and video presentations in English and Spanish to teach workers about fall hazards and proper safety procedures.

    Learn more about OSHA.

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI: “The AI Mothership Has Landed”: Legendary Tech Investor Reveals Musk’s Most Powerful Project Yet

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    NEW YORK, June 04, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — In a new briefing from bestselling author and tech entrepreneur James Altucher, startling revelations are emerging about Musk’s most ambitious AI undertaking yet — a project known as “Project Colossus.”

    According to Altucher, this facility — now operational in Memphis — will soon power what he calls Artificial Superintelligence, ushering in a second wave of AI unlike anything we’ve seen before. And it’s happening alongside the return of Donald Trump, who Altucher says has already “cleared the path” for AI developers like Musk to move forward at full speed.

    Musk’s “AI Mothership” Quietly Built in Memphis

    Altucher opens his briefing with a bold claim: Elon Musk has already surpassed all major tech competitors — including OpenAI, Meta, and Microsoft — with a covert project few have even heard of.

    “Elon Musk has created the AI mothership… an innovation of such enormous proportion… that he has already surpassed all the leading AI developers.”

    “Right here, inside this warehouse in Memphis, Tennessee… lies a massive supercomputer Musk calls ‘Project Colossus.’”

    According to Altucher, this isn’t speculation — it’s already functional and has been acknowledged by Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang, who reportedly called it:

    “The fastest supercomputer on the planet.” — Jensen Huang

    AI 2.0: The Rise of Artificial Superintelligence

    Altucher claims the world is on the verge of an entirely new technological era — one that goes beyond ChatGPT and the public’s current understanding of AI.

    “This will lead to the rise of AI 2.0… Or what I call ‘Artificial Superintelligence.’

    “AI 1.0 gives us all the world’s knowledge at our fingertips. AI 2.0… gives that knowledge to intelligent machines that I believe will solve our problems for us.”

    A Presidential Greenlight

    In the same briefing, Altucher highlights Donald Trump’s early move to eliminate restrictions that were previously in place under President Biden.

    “In one of his FIRST acts as President… Donald Trump overturned Executive Order #14110.”

    “That’s why Donald Trump REPEALED Biden’s AI executive safety order on Day 1… Clearing the path for leading AI developers like Musk.”

    Trump has also unveiled a $500 billion AI infrastructure plan, which Altucher says reflects the seriousness of the new administration’s approach.

    “Trump also announced the LARGEST AI investment in history… Stargate… a massive, AI data center and infrastructure project with an estimated $500 billion price tag.”

    What Comes Next: A 10X Expansion?

    Altucher warns that the biggest developments are yet to come — and soon.

    “In a matter of weeks, Elon plans to unveil a critical new update to Project Colossus that is expected to increase its power by 10-fold.”

    “That’s when I predict Elon could announce a major update to this new AI project. One that some say will essentially 10X its power – overnight.”

    He adds, “This second wave of ARTIFICIAL SUPERINTELLIGENCE… Will rival all of the great innovations of the past. Electricity… the wheel… even the discovery of fire.”

    A Life’s Work Converging

    Altucher isn’t just reporting from the sidelines — he claims to have been immersed in AI for more than 40 years.

    “I’ve been working in the artificial intelligence field for the better part of the last four decades.”

    “I helped pioneer AI trading on Wall Street.”

    “At one point, I was recruited by IBM to help them develop their Deep Blue AI supercomputer… the one that beat the world chess champion, Gary Kasprov, in 1997.”

    What’s at Stake

    Altucher closes his report by pointing to a quote from Russian President Vladimir Putin as a sobering reminder of what this technology represents on the world stage.

    “Whoever becomes the leader in this sphere will become the ruler of the world.” — Vladimir Putin

    With Trump clearing regulatory barriers and Musk ramping up development, Altucher believes the United States is poised to enter a defining moment in global technology leadership.

    About James Altucher

    James Altucher is a former hedge fund manager, computer scientist, and the author of over 20 books on finance, technology, and personal growth. A longtime pioneer in digital innovation, Altucher has advised startups, traded for top funds, and interviewed some of the most influential figures in business and tech. His latest work focuses on exposing the hidden infrastructure behind emerging AI technologies and preparing readers for the changes ahead.

    Media Contact:
    Derek Warren
    Public Relations Manager
    Paradigm Press Group
    Email: dwarren@paradigmpressgroup.com

    The MIL Network

  • MIL-OSI NGOs: SAUDI ARABIA/UN: Labour agreement must lead to comprehensive reforms to be a game-changer for migrant workers

    Source: Amnesty International –

    Responding to the announcement of a third phase of cooperation between thepartnership agreement made earlier today between the Government of Saudi Arabia and the International Labour Organization (ILO) to advance decent work reforms, Iain Byrne, Amnesty International’s Head of Economic and Social Justice, said:

    “While today’s announcement recognizes the need for labour reforms for migrant workers in Saudi Arabia, it remains unclear how comprehensive this programme will be and what impact it will have on the rights, health and livelihoods of millions of workers who depend on this being much more than a façade.

    “Human rights groups and unions have long been demanding for a serious and far-reaching labour reform process that would put an end to the severe exploitation of migrant workers in Saudi Arabia. The fact that global unions filed a formal complaint against the country at the ILO on the very same day as this agreement was signed, speaks volumes of just how far Saudi Arabia still has to go to protect the rights of migrant workers in the country.

    If this programme is to be truly transformative for migrant workers, it must among other things fully tackle the core features of the abusive kafala system that leave workers wholly dependent on
    their employers.

    Iain Byrne, Amnesty International’s Head of Economic and Social Justice

    “If this programme is to be truly transformative for migrant workers, it must among other things fully tackle the core features of the abusive kafala system that leave workers wholly dependent on their employers. It must also address the severe limits on the freedoms of expression and association in the country, together with the lack of access for NGOs and trade unions which make it impossible to independently monitor the implementation of any labour agreement, further undermining its credibility and effectiveness.

    “We urge the Saudi authorities and the ILO to make all aspects of this cooperation public and allow independent monitoring of its implementation. To sufficiently safeguard the rights of the country’s 13.4 million migrant workers, this agreement must lead to a complete overhaul of the current labour system and end the prevalent culture of impunity.”

    Background

    On 4 June 2025, the ITUC lodged a landmark complaint against Saudi Arabia at the ILO, alleging widespread violations of migrant workers’ rights in the country that’s set to host the 2034 FIFA World Cup. The ILO governing body is already considering a complaint submitted a year prior by another global trade union, BWI, accusing Saudi Arabia of breaches of the ILO forced labour convention.

    In May, Amnesty International published a report documenting the experiences of more than 70 Kenyan women recruited to work in private homes in Saudi Arabia, only to find themselves trapped in conditions that often amounted to forced labour.

    MIL OSI NGO

  • MIL-OSI Canada: Strengthening Alberta’s courts

    Source: Government of Canada regional news (2)

    MIL OSI Canada News

  • MIL-OSI USA: Washington State Man Arrested on Federal Charges Alleging He Provided Material Support to Palm Springs Fertility Clinic Bomber

    Source: US State of California

    A Washington state man was arrested on a federal criminal complaint alleging he provided material support to the Palm Springs fertility clinic bomber by shipping and paying for significant quantities of ammonium nitrate – an explosive precursor – prior to the suicidal terror attack last month.

    Daniel Jongyon Park, 32, of Kent, was arrested last night shortly after his flight from Poland arrived at John F. Kennedy International Airport in New York. Park is charged with providing and attempting to provide material support to terrorists and made his initial court appearance today in the Eastern District of New York.

    “This defendant is charged with facilitating the horrific attack on a fertility center in California. Bringing chaos and violence to a facility that exists to help women and mothers is a particularly cruel, disgusting crime that strikes at the very heart of our shared humanity,” said Attorney General Pamela Bondi. “We are grateful to our partners in Poland who helped get this man back to America and we will prosecute him to the fullest extent of the law.”

    “Park allegedly sent large amounts of explosive precursors to the man who drove a car bomb to a fertility clinic in Palm Springs, an attack that potentially could have killed innocent people,”  said FBI Director Kash Patel. “The FBI and our partners work together to find and hold accountable those who engage in domestic terrorism and other illegal activity. I also want to express my thanks to authorities in Poland for their vital assistance in this case.”

    “This defendant is charged with shipping large quantities of explosive precursors to the man whose suicide bombing last month destroyed a fertility clinic in Palm Springs,” said U.S. Attorney Bill Essayli for the Central District of California. “Domestic terrorism is evil and unacceptable. Those who aid terrorists can expect to feel the cold wrath of justice.”

    According to an affidavit filed with the complaint, Guy Edward Bartkus, 25, of Twentynine Palms, California, drove a car containing a bomb to a fertility clinic in Palm Springs on May 17. Bartkus detonated the bomb, killing himself, injuring numerous victims, destroying the fertility clinic’s building, and damaging surrounding buildings and areas. Bartkus’s attack was motivated by his pro-mortalism, anti-natalism, and anti-pro-life ideology, which is the belief that individuals should not be born without their consent and that non-existence is best.

    Park – who shares Bartkus’s extremist views – shipped large quantities of explosive precursor materials to Bartkus, including approximately 180 pounds of ammonium nitrate. Days before the Palm Springs bombing, Park paid for an additional 90 pounds (40.8 kilograms) of ammonium nitrate that was shipped to Bartkus.

    Park sent the first shipments of approximately 180 pounds (81.7 kilograms) of ammonium nitrate to Bartkus shortly before traveling to Bartkus’s residence, where he stayed with Bartkus from Jan. 25 to Feb. 8. Three days before Park arrived at Bartkus’s house, records from an AI chat application show that Bartkus researched how to make powerful explosions using ammonium nitrate and fuel.

    During his stay at Bartkus’s residence, Park and Bartkus spent time in Bartkus’s room as well as in a detached garage “running experiments,” according to the affidavit. This was the same garage where law enforcement, during a search after the May 17 bombing, located significant amounts of chemicals commonly used in the construction of homemade bombs.

    Four days after Bartkus conducted the suicide bombing, Park flew to Europe. On May 30, Park was detained in Poland and later was ordered deported to the United States. 

    If convicted, Park would face a statutory maximum penalty of 15 years in federal prison. A federal district court judge will determine any sentence after considering the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines and other statutory factors.

    The FBI’s Inland Empire Joint Terrorism Task Force is investigating this matter. Considerable assistance was provided by the Palm Springs Police Department, the San Bernardino County Sheriff’s Department; the FBI’s legal attaché in Warsaw, Polish authorities, and FBI field offices in Seattle, New York, San Diego, Las Vegas, and Portland.  

    Assistant U.S. Attorneys Sarah E. Gerdes and Anna P. Boylan for the Central District of California, and Trial Attorney Patrick J. Cashman of the National Security Division’s Counterterrorism Section are prosecuting the case.

    A criminal complaint is merely an allegation. All defendants are presumed innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of law.

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI USA: Bringing High-Tech Manufacturing Jobs to New York

    Source: US State of New York

    overnor Kathy Hochul today announced that Orbic Electronics Manufacturing, LLC, a specialized global manufacturer of telecommunications and consumer electronics devices, has broken ground on its new $110 million manufacturing global hub at 555 Wireless Boulevard in Hauppauge, Suffolk County. This project is expected to create more than 1,000 new high-tech and skilled manufacturing jobs, retain 66 existing positions currently based in Suffolk County, and will bring Orbic’s complete manufacturing and production operations from overseas facilities in India and China to its New York-based Headquarters. Empire State Development is supporting this landmark reshoring initiative with up to $10 million in performance-based Excelsior Jobs Tax Credits, recommended by the Long Island Regional Economic Development Council. The groundbreaking marks a pivotal moment in Long Island’s manufacturing sector and establishes New York as a national leader in rebuilding America’s critical technology supply chains.

    “Today’s groundbreaking at Orbic Electronics represents the future we’re building across New York State — one where companies choose to invest, innovate, and create good-paying jobs right here at home,” Governor Hochul said. “This $110 million investment proves that when businesses want to lead in advanced manufacturing, they turn to New York. From Long Island to the North Country, we’re seeing companies recognize that our state offers the perfect combination of skilled workers, world-class infrastructure, and strategic support that makes success inevitable. With projects like this, we are proving that New York doesn’t just compete — we lead.”

    Empire State Development President, CEO and Commissioner Hope Knight said, “Orbic’s investment is a bold step forward for high-tech manufacturing in New York State. By choosing to grow in Hauppauge, Orbic is deepening its roots in a region known for its talent, infrastructure, and innovation potential. At Empire State Development, we are proud to support this strategic reshoring initiative, which will bring over a thousand jobs to the region while fortifying our state’s position in the global technology economy. Projects like this reflect our core mission — supporting smart, inclusive economic growth that creates lasting opportunity for New Yorkers in every corner of the state.”

    Empire State Development Board Chairman Kevin Law said, “This groundbreaking represents a major milestone for Long Island and a turning point for advanced manufacturing in the region. Orbic’s expansion is proof that Long Island has everything companies need to thrive — from a highly skilled workforce and strong transportation networks to a vibrant ecosystem of research institutions and community partners. The company’s decision to invest more than $100 million here is not only a testament to our regional strengths, but a signal to the broader industry that Long Island is ready to lead in 21st-century manufacturing.”

    Orbic CEO Mike Narula said, “This project marks an exciting milestone for Orbic and a powerful step forward for high-tech manufacturing on Long Island and New York State. This effort underscores our commitment to producing high-quality, American-made technology while supporting local vendors and strengthening the regional economy by bringing more than 1,000 new manufacturing jobs to the region from overseas. We are proud to grow in New York and to contribute to the state’s innovation economy, and we thank Governor Hochul and Empire State Development for their leadership, vision and invaluable support. Their dedication to building a prosperous New York has made a lasting impact on our company’s future, and we are deeply grateful for their partnership.”

    State Senator Mario Mattera said, “The past few years have clearly shown the importance of our region becoming more self-sufficient. This significant project will help advance that goal while strengthening our economy and creating valuable opportunities for the local workforce. Long Island is home to some of the most hardworking and skilled men and women and the addition of over 1,000 jobs will enable them to work and stay on right here in our community. I commend Orbic for their commitment to Long Island and look forward to their continued success at this new facility.”

    Assemblymember Michael Fitzpatrick said, “The arrival of Orbic’s $110 million manufacturing hub marks a significant step forward for Long Island’s economy. Creating over 1,000 skilled jobs and bringing production back to the U.S. strengthens our local workforce, benefits families across the region and will breathe new life into Long Island’s manufacturing sector. I am thankful to Governor Hochul and Empire State Development for making this transformative investment possible.”

    Suffolk County Executive Ed Romaine said, “We are grateful for Orbic’s decision to build their business in Suffolk County. This important project creates jobs and opportunities, helping Suffolk grow, and we look forward to seeing Orbic flourish.”

    Smithtown Supervisor Ed Wehrheim said, “We are incredibly proud to see Orbic choose Smithtown as the home for this transformative investment. This is more than just bringing high-tech manufacturing jobs back to the U.S. — it’s about bringing them back to our community. Orbic’s expansion supports the Governor and the State’s goal of targeted investment, positioning New York as the premier East Coast destination for next-generation tech companies by leveraging our skilled workforce and innovation ecosystem. This move not only strengthens our regional economy and supports local families — it also puts Smithtown on the map as a hub for smart growth, forward-thinking development, and long-term opportunity. I commend the Governor and Orbic’s leadership for making this vision a reality.”

    Orbic, established in 2016 and headquartered in Hauppauge, Long Island, offers a comprehensive portfolio of technology 4G and 5G connected devices and related products, including smartphones, tablets, laptops, smartwatches, mobile hotspots, routers and accessories, catering to both consumer and enterprise customers and markets. In response to global supply chain challenges and increasing demand for domestically produced technology, Orbic launched a strategic initiative to relocate its manufacturing operations to the United States. As part of this effort, Orbic is investing approximately $110 million to renovate and retrofit a 69,500-square-foot existing facility and add an additional 75,000 square-feet, totaling 144,500 square feet. Once complete, the advanced manufacturing center will feature state-of-the-art surface mount technology (SMT) lines, automated testing stations, precision assembly lines, and cleanroom environments to support high-volume, high-quality production. Completion of construction and start of manufacturing is expected in early 2026.

    The newly renovated production facility will be designed to manufacture up to five million devices annually — including smartphones, tablets, wearables, and networking equipment — meeting the needs of both consumer and enterprise customers. The new jobs being created will range from manufacturing technicians and quality assurance specialists to logistics personnel, engineers and support staff. Its location within the Hauppauge Industrial Park, one of the largest industrial parks in the Northeast, offers proximity to skilled labor, major transportation networks, and Orbic’s existing corporate offices, further enhancing operational efficiency and workforce integration.

    A key component of Orbic Electronics’ investment is its focus on workforce development to ensure a robust pipeline of skilled talent for its operations. Orbic will collaborate with Suffolk County Community College and Queensborough Community College to create specialized training programs focused on advanced electronics manufacturing, including circuit board assembly, quality control, testing procedures, and advanced manufacturing processes. The partnership will not only support Orbic’s operational needs but also create a pipeline of skilled workers for Long Island’s growing advanced manufacturing industry. By integrating education and industry, these initiatives strengthen Long Island’s workforce, enhance its economic resilience, and position the region as a hub for advanced manufacturing innovation.

    LIREDC Co-Chairs Linda Armyn, President and CEO at Bethpage Federal Credit Union, and Dr. Kimberly R. Cline, President of Long Island University, said, “Orbic’s decision to locate and grow its advanced manufacturing operations on Long Island is a direct result of thoughtful regional collaboration, strategic workforce partnerships, and a shared commitment to economic growth. By working with local colleges to train the next generation of high-tech talent, this project is helping ensure that the benefits of investment reach deep into our communities. The LIREDC is proud to support projects like this — ones that create sustainable jobs, foster innovation, and position our region as a long-term leader in advanced electronics and connected technologies.”

    Orbic’s reshoring of its manufacturing operations to New York State exemplifies Governor Hochul’s comprehensive strategy to revitalize New York’s manufacturing sector and establish the state as a national leader in advanced production. Under her administration, New York has secured transformative manufacturing investments including Chobani’s $100 million expansion in the Mohawk Valley, IBM’s multi-billion dollar semiconductor research initiatives, Micron Technology’s historic $100 billion semiconductor facility in Central New York — the largest private investment in state history — and numerous other reshoring projects that have created thousands of jobs statewide. The Governor’s focus on workforce development, supply chain resilience, and robust support for minority and women-owned businesses has positioned New York as the premier destination for companies seeking to bring critical manufacturing operations back to America. This latest investment in Long Island’s advanced manufacturing ecosystem demonstrates how strategic state partnerships can catalyze transformative economic development that strengthens communities, secures supply chains, and advances America’s technological competitiveness on the global stage.

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI USA: Completion of Affordable Housing Development in Albany

    Source: US State of New York

    overnor Kathy Hochul today announced the completion of 35 Broadway, a 67-unit affordable housing development in the village of Menands, Albany County. More than half of the apartments at the $26 million development are reserved for veterans experiencing homelessness and in need of support services. Under Governor Hochul’s leadership, New York State Homes and Community Renewal has financed more than 4,700 affordable homes in the Capital Region, including nearly 1,000 in Albany County. 35 Broadway continues this effort and complements Governor Hochul’s $25 billion five-year housing plan, which is on track to create or preserve 100,000 affordable homes statewide.

    “Our investments are creating more homes across the state and ensuring our most vulnerable populations, especially those who have served our country, have the opportunity to find an affordable, secure place to live,” Governor Hochul said. “The new 35 Broadway development is a perfect example of our comprehensive approach to addressing the housing crisis in New York. We are bringing new homes to the Capital Region and providing veterans experiencing homelessness access to the services needed to stabilize their lives.”

    Apartments at 35 Broadway are available to households earning up to 60 percent of the Area Median Income. There are 35 supportive apartments reserved for veterans experiencing homelessness eligible for services. Support services provided on-site include case management, medical care coordination, mental health and addiction service coordination, legal services, workforce placement, and financial education.

    The fully-electric building features electric heat pumps for heating and cooling, energy recovery ventilation for improved indoor air quality, energy-efficient appliances, and electric vehicle charging stations. There are landscaped seating areas, a community gardening area, a contemplation garden, and an on-site columbarium to honorably house the remains of resident veterans who pass on without family.

    Beacon Communities and Soldier On are co-developers, and Soldier On is providing the support services.

    35 Broadway is supported by HCR’s Federal and State Low-Income Housing Tax Credits programs that generated $15 million in equity, $5 million from its Supportive Housing Opportunity Program, and $368,500 from its Clean Energy Initiative program, created partnership with the New York State Energy Research and Development Authority (NYSERDA). The Community Preservation Corporation is providing $3.7 million in permanent financing. The project is also supported by the federal 45L New Energy Efficient Home Credit program which generated $61,600 in equity. Additional funding includes $55,000 from NYSERDA’s Clean Heat Rebate program and $36,000 from its EV Make-Ready Rebate program. Operating funding for the supportive apartments is provided by the Empire State Supportive Housing Initiative administered by the New York State Office of Temporary and Disability Assistance.

    New York State Homes and Community Renewal Commissioner RuthAnne Visnauskas said, “With the opening of 35 Broadway, we are delivering much-needed affordable, modern, and energy-efficient homes to Albany County. Not only is our $26 million investment creating 67 new apartments, but this development will give veterans experiencing homelessness access to on-site services that can keep them securely housed and living independently. We thank Governor Hochul for her commitment to building more affordable housing across the state, and appreciate the work of our development partners at Beacon Communities and Soldier On for making this project a reality.”

    New York State Energy Research and Development Authority President and CEO Doreen M. Harris said, “New York’s commitment to creating a clean and modern built environment improves the quality of life for residents and future generations, while helping us progress toward a clean energy economy. The completion of 35 Broadway demonstrates how the adoption of low-emission building solutions and energy efficient features, such as electric heat pumps and electric vehicle charging stations, can benefit our diverse neighborhoods and populations, including New York’s veteran community.”

    New York State Office of Temporary and Disability Assistance Commissioner Barbara C. Guinn said, “We are grateful to Governor Hochul for her continued support of the Empire State Supportive Housing Initiative and her unwavering commitment to supporting the well-being of New York’s veterans. 35 Broadway will provide veterans who have experienced homelessness with safe, affordable apartments they can call home, as well as onsite access to the essential services they need to live stable, independent lives in the community. Thank you to Beacon Communities Services, Soldier On, and all the state and local partners who supported the development of this much-needed project.”

    New York State Department of Veterans’ Services Commissioner Viviana M. DeCohen said, “A safe, stable home is the foundation for healing, dignity, and hope. This development at 35 Broadway is more than housing — it is a promise kept to Veterans who have served with honor and deserve nothing less in return. We are grateful to Governor Hochul for her continued focus on ensuring that access to affordable housing remains an integral part of our state’s commitment to Veterans and their families.”

    Senator Charles Schumer said, “Our veterans who have sacrificed so much for us in service to this country should never experience homelessness. Every veteran and every family in the Capital Region deserves a safe and affordable place to call home. I’m proud that the federal Low-Income Housing Tax Credit that I worked hard to protect and expand has delivered millions to help build 67 new homes in the village of Menands. These brand new homes, some of which are reserved for veterans experiencing homelessness, will be all-electric and offer the community support services and new outdoor spaces, including a gardening area. High housing costs are a key driver of inflation so we must build more housing for working people to bring down those high prices. I applaud Governor Hochul’s work increasing access to affordable housing in the Capital Region and across New York, and I will continue working to deliver federal resources to ensure that every New Yorker has a roof over their heads.”

    Albany County Executive Daniel P. McCoy said, “I would like to thank Governor Hochul and New York State Homes and Community Renewal for their continued dedication to our Veterans in Albany County. Providing stable, affordable housing is one of the most meaningful ways we can honor their service. Today marks an important step in ensuring that every Veteran has a safe place to call home.”

    Albany County Sheriff Craig Apple said, “The combination of deeply affordable housing and services like addiction and mental health counseling is a proven formula for ending chronic homelessness, and that’s something we need more of – locally, as well as across our state and nation – in the face of a mounting homelessness crisis. I am proud to have the opportunity to work with Soldier On to help those who served our country but have fallen on hard times. Veterans have more than earned the kind of support and security this important project will provide.”

    Menands Mayor Brian Marsh said, “This building represents more than walls, windows, and doors—it symbolizes community, stability, and new beginnings. Menands stands proud as a partner with this organization to create spaces where individuals can thrive, find purpose, and feel supported. Welcome to Menands, Welcome Home.”

    Beacon Communities CEO Dara Kovel said, “We are thrilled to celebrate the completion of this significant affordable housing community in the Capital Region alongside our partners at Soldier On and the state and local officials and funders who made it a reality. Supportive housing is a proven way to end chronic homelessness. Now these veterans who so bravely served our country, as well as other low-income households, will have a safe, stable place to call home with services they need to rebuild their lives.”

    Solider On CEO Bruce Buckley said, “Soldier On is thrilled to have completed and occupied 35 units of supportive housing for formerly homeless veterans at 35 Broadway in Menands. This 67-unit affordable housing property, developed with our partner, Beacon Communities, illustrates how government, nonprofit, and for-profit entities can better combine their strengths to end homelessness. I extend my heartful thanks to the state of New York, HCR, ESSHI, Albany County, the Village of Menands, and Beacon Communities for their support and dedication in making this possible. Thirty-five formerly homeless veterans now have a place they can call home – a home they not only deserve but have earned through their sacrifices. Most importantly, they are now surrounded by a family of support that will ensure they have the care, community, and resources they need to thrive.”

    The Community Preservation Corporation Senior Vice President Jaime Tuozzolo said, “The completion of 35 Broadway is a powerful reminder of what can be accomplished when public, private, and nonprofit partners come together with a shared commitment to housing and human dignity. This development not only brings much-needed affordable homes to Menands—it also creates a stable and supportive environment for our veterans who deserve the strongest possible foundation for the next chapter of their lives. We’re proud to have played a role in helping to finance this important development, and we thank our friends at Beacon Communities, HCR, NYSERDA, and SoldierOn for their partnership and dedication.”

    Governor Hochul’s Housing Agenda

    Governor Hochul is committed to addressing New York’s housing crisis and making the State more affordable and more livable for all New Yorkers. As part of the FY 2025 Enacted Budget, the Governor secured a landmark agreement to increase New York’s housing supply through new tax incentives, capital funding, and new protections for renters and homeowners. Building on this commitment, the FY 2026 Enacted Budget included more than $1.5 billion in new state funding for housing, a Housing Access Voucher pilot program, and new policies to improve affordability for tenants and homebuyers. In addition, as part of the FY 2023 Enacted Budget, the Governor announced a five-year, $25 billion Housing Plan to create or preserve 100,000 affordable homes statewide, including 10,000 with support services for vulnerable populations, plus the electrification of an additional 50,000 homes. Nearly 60,000 homes have been created or preserved to date.

    The FY 2025 Enacted Budget also strengthened the Pro-Housing Community Program which the Governor launched in 2023. Pro-Housing certification is now a requirement for localities to access up to $750 million in discretionary funding. Currently, more than 300 communities have been certified.

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI USA: New data shows California is adding more clean energy capacity to the grid faster than ever before

    Source: US State of California 2

    Jun 4, 2025

    What you need to know: California added a record of nearly 7,000 megawatts of new clean energy capacity in 2024, marking the largest single-year increase in state history and the third consecutive year of unprecedented growth.

    SACRAMENTO – California has achieved a major clean energy milestone: more than 25,000 megawatts (MW) of new resources have been added to the state’s electric grid over the past five years — an amount equivalent to roughly half of the state’s record peak demand in 2022 and in addition to existing capacity.

    This unprecedented growth marks a transformative chapter in the state’s clean energy transition, as California continues to strengthen the reliability of the grid while advancing its ambitious climate and clean air goals.

    Last year, California added a record amount of clean energy – bringing our total new capacity to over 25,000 megawatts in just five years. We’ve never added so much capacity to our grid in such a short amount of time, transforming our power grid to be cleaner and more reliable and resilient than ever before.

    Governor Gavin Newsom

    California has installed a record amount of clean energy – faster

    In 2024 alone, California added approximately 7,000 megawatts (MW) of new clean energy nameplate capacity —representing the largest single-year increase in clean energy capacity added to the grid in state history. This new figure broke the previous records set in both 2022 and 2023, marking a third consecutive year of unprecedented clean energy growth.

    “California has set ambitious clean energy goals, and utilities and community choice aggregators have stepped up to deliver clean resources to communities up and down the state,” said California Public Utilities Commission President Alice Reynolds. “We are bringing renewable energy online at an unprecedented scale and pace never seen before.”

    This rapid expansion of clean energy capacity is the result of procurement orders from the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) aimed at bolstering grid reliability while advancing the state’s clean energy targets and meeting Renewables Portfolio Standard (RPS) requirements.

    Building energy infrastructure is a key part of the Governor’s build more, faster agenda delivering infrastructure upgrades and thousands of jobs across the state.

    On track for further clean energy expansion

    More than 75,000 MW of new clean energy capacity is expected to come online by 2040. To make this vision a reality, California’s electric grid will continue to evolve to unlock access to  new clean energy capacity and power. At the same time, utilities and community choice aggregators are actively contracting with projects that can be built using existing electric  infrastructure, helping accelerate the pace of development, at least cost to customers.

    Currently, more than 20,000 MW of clean energy projects are already under contract and in development to serve California customers by 2030. 

    California’s climate leadership

    Pollution is down and the economy is up. Greenhouse gas emissions in California are down 20% since 2000 – even as the state’s GDP increased 78% in that same time period.

    The state continues to set clean energy records. Last year, California ran on 100% clean electricity for the equivalent of 51 days – with the grid running on 100% clean energy for some period three out of every five days. Since the beginning of the Newsom Administration, battery storage is up to over 15,000 megawatts – a 1,944% increase.

    Press releases, Recent news

    Recent news

    News What you need to know: California leads the nation in strong gun safety laws, correlating with thousands of lives saved. Sacramento, California – Year after year, California is ranked as the #1 state in the country for its strong gun safety laws — along with some…

    News SACRAMENTO – For the second year in a row, California ranks highest on Fortune 500’s list as the state with the most corporations generating the largest revenues. As host to 58 Fortune 500 companies, California leads the nation – followed by Texas with 54 and New…

    News What you need to know: Today, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services rescinded previous guidance reaffirming protections for emergency abortion care when medically necessary, creating serious risk for women in states with near and total  bans on…

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI USA: California’s strong gun safety laws continue to save lives

    Source: US State of California 2

    Jun 4, 2025

    What you need to know: California leads the nation in strong gun safety laws, correlating with thousands of lives saved.

    Sacramento, CaliforniaYear after year, California is ranked as the #1 state in the country for its strong gun safety laws — along with some of the lowest rates of gun deaths — by Giffords Law Center and Everytown for Gun Safety. In states where officials have passed gun safety laws, fewer people die by gun violence. Texas and Florida, which ranked 32nd and 21st, respectively in gun law strength, had firearm mortality rates more than 50% higher than California.

    Gun safety laws save lives 

    Strong gun laws save lives. California has reduced its gun violence rate because of its leading gun safety laws. If the gun death rate in the rest of the U.S. matched California’s over the past decade, there would have been nearly 140,000 lives saved and potentially hundreds of thousands fewer gunshot injuries, according to the California Department of Justice’s Office of Gun Violence Prevention.

    Protection orders reduce gun violence 

    California was the first state in the nation to adopt a “red flag law” in 2016. This law builds off a bedrock of available protection orders – 9 in total – that prohibit firearm possession for people subject to orders ranging from domestic violence and workplace harassment. In the first three years of their existence, these protection orders were used to prevent 58 cases of threatened mass shootings. There have been significant increases in utilization of GVROs – increasing by 118% – from 2020 to 2023.

    California’s youth gun violence rate down, U.S. rate up 

    Nationwide, firearms are the leading cause of death for children and adolescents. Compared to the rest of the nation, California has made substantial long-term progress in reducing per capita rates of youth firearm homicide. CDC data showed that in 2022, California’s firearm homicide rate for youth under 25 was about 50% below the rate recorded for the rest of the U.S. By contrast, nationwide youth gun homicides increased over 46% from 2019-2021.

    Criminals take advantage of neighboring soft gun safety laws 

    California’s gun laws stop at our borders, meaning guns that are illegal in our state can still be used in criminal activity here if sourced in other states. In 2021, just over half (50.4%) of the firearms recovered by law enforcement during criminal investigations in California and successfully traced to a final dealer of record were traced to dealers located in other states.

    California’s gun safety laws at-a-glance

    • Assault weapons ban: California law strictly prohibits assault weapons. This includes possessing, distributing, selling and manufacturing assault weapons. 
    • Red flag law: California became one of the first states in the nation to enact a red flag law in 2016. California law allows law enforcement, family members, employers, coworkers and school employees to seek a Gun Violence Restraining Order (GVRO) against an individual suspected of being a danger to themselves and others. If approved by a judge, the GVRO temporarily prohibits a person from possessing firearms.
    • Private right of action: California enacted the nation’s first law allowing individuals to sue those making, selling, transporting or distributing illegal assault weapons and ghost guns – guns made at home to avoid tracing – for damages of at least $10,000 per weapon involved.
    • Waiting period: California has a waiting period of 10 days for all gun purchases. The state is one of nine states and the District of Columbia that have waiting periods and California’s waiting period is among the strictest. 
    • Universal background checks: California requires background checks on all gun purchases and transfers, including private transfers and sales at gun shows. It is one of 14 states and the District of Columbia that require universal background checks.
    • Mental health reporting: California has some of the nation’s strongest laws preventing those with serious mental illness from acquiring firearms. California law requires the immediate reporting of involuntary inpatient and outpatient treatment, as well as those under guardianship. Mental health treatment facilities and psychotherapists are also required to report under certain circumstances.
    • Age restrictions: In California, you must be at least 21 years of age to purchase a handgun and at least 18 years of age to purchase a long gun.

    Last year, Governor Newsom signed a bipartisan legislative package to further reinforce California’s nation-leading gun laws and prevent traumatic incidents of mass violence.

    Click here to download this fact sheet.

    Press releases, Public safety

    Recent news

    News SACRAMENTO – For the second year in a row, California ranks highest on Fortune 500’s list as the state with the most corporations generating the largest revenues. As host to 58 Fortune 500 companies, California leads the nation – followed by Texas with 54 and New…

    News What you need to know: Today, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services rescinded previous guidance reaffirming protections for emergency abortion care when medically necessary, creating serious risk for women in states with near and total  bans on…

    News SACRAMENTO – Governor Gavin Newsom today announced the following appointments:Alana Mathews, of Elk Grove, has been appointed Deputy Secretary of Enforcement and General Counsel at the California Environmental Protection Agency. Mathews has been Assistant…

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI USA: California leads the nation — again — with most Fortune 500 companies

    Source: US State of California 2

    Jun 4, 2025

    SACRAMENTO – For the second year in a row, California ranks highest on Fortune 500’s list as the state with the most corporations generating the largest revenues. As host to 58 Fortune 500 companies, California leads the nation – followed by Texas with 54 and New York with 53.

    The new rankings, based on fiscal year 2024 revenue, were compiled before the implementation of President Trump’s tariff slump, which is estimated to cost the state $16 billion in lost revenue. 

    “There’s nowhere better for innovation and growth than the 4th largest economy in the world that attracts and retains world-class dreamers and doers – as illustrated by the 58 Fortune 500 companies that call California home.”

    Governor Gavin Newsom

    California’s economic dominance

    Last month, Governor Newsom announced that California is now the 4th largest economy in the world, with a nominal GDP of nearly $4.1 trillion. California’s per capita GDP is the second largest among large economies.

    California is home to 33 of the world’s 50 leading AI companies, high-impact research and education institutions, and a quarter of the technology’s patents and conference papers. With an increasing state population and recent record-high tourism spending, California is the nation’s top state for new business starts, access to venture capital funding, and manufacturing, high-tech, and agriculture.

    But even as a tentpole of the nation’s economy, California has not been immune to the economic damage created by President Trump’s chaotic tariff policies. The state is estimated to have lost a resulting $16 billion in revenue, and in April, Governor Newsom announced a lawsuit challenging President Trump’s authority to unilaterally enact tariffs.

    Recent news

    News What you need to know: Today, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services rescinded previous guidance reaffirming protections for emergency abortion care when medically necessary, creating serious risk for women in states with near and total  bans on…

    News SACRAMENTO – Governor Gavin Newsom today announced the following appointments:Alana Mathews, of Elk Grove, has been appointed Deputy Secretary of Enforcement and General Counsel at the California Environmental Protection Agency. Mathews has been Assistant…

    News What you need to know: The state will use specially equipped vehicles to collect block-by-block air quality data in 64 communities heavily burdened by pollution. The results will help create local solutions to improve air quality and public health.  SACRAMENTO –…

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI Europe: REPORT on strengthening rural areas in the EU through cohesion policy – A10-0092/2025

    Source: European Parliament

    MOTION FOR A EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT RESOLUTION

    on strengthening rural areas in the EU through cohesion policy

    (2024/2105(INI))

    The European Parliament,

     having regard to the Commission report of 27 March 2024 entitled ‘The long-term vision for the EU’s rural areas: key achievements and ways forward’ (COM(2024)0450),

     having regard to its resolution of 15 September 2022 on EU border regions: living labs of European integration[1],

     having regard to its resolution of 8 May 2025 on the ninth report on economic and social cohesion[2],

     having regard to the opinion of the European Committee of the Regions of 15 March 2023 on targets and tools for a smart rural Europe[3],

     having regard to the opinion of the European Committee of the Regions of 1 December 2022 on enhancing Cohesion Policy support for regions with geographic and demographic handicaps  (Article 174 TFEU)[4],

     having regard to Articles 39, 174, 175 and 349 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU),

     having regard to Council Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2020/2093 of 17 December 2020 laying down the multiannual financial framework for the years 2021 to 2027[5],

     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’)[6],

     having regard to Regulation (EU) 2021/2115 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 2 December 2021 establishing rules on support for strategic plans to be drawn up by Member States under the common agricultural policy (CAP Strategic Plans) and financed by the European Agricultural Guarantee Fund (EAGF) and by the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD) and repealing Regulations (EU) No 1305/2013 and (EU) No 1307/2013[7],

     having regard to Regulation (EU) 2021/2116 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 2 December 2021 on the financing, management and monitoring of the common agricultural policy and repealing Regulation (EU) No 1306/2013[8],

     having regard to Regulation (EU) 2021/1060 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 June 2021 laying down common provisions on the European Regional Development Fund, the European Social Fund Plus, the Cohesion Fund, the Just Transition Fund and the European Maritime, Fisheries and Aquaculture Fund and financial rules for those and for the Asylum, Migration and Integration Fund, the Internal Security Fund and the Instrument for Financial Support for Border Management and Visa Policy[9],

     having regard to Regulation (EU) 2021/694 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2021 establishing the Digital Europe Programme and repealing Decision (EU) 2015/2240[10],

     having regard to the Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) No 240/2014 of 7 January 2014 on the European code of conduct on partnership in the framework of the European Structural and Investment Funds[11],

     having regard to Principle 20 of the European Pillar of Social Rights on access to essential services,

     having regard to its resolution of 4 April 2017 on women and their roles in rural areas[12],

     having regard to its resolution of 8 March 2022 on the role of cohesion policy in promoting innovative and smart transformation and regional ICT connectivity[13],

     having regard to its resolution of 13 December 2022 on a long-term vision for the EU’s rural areas – towards stronger, connected, resilient and prosperous rural areas by 2040[14],

     having regard to its resolution of 23 November 2023 on harnessing talent in Europe’s regions[15],

     having regard to the Commission communication of 27 March 2024 on the 9th Cohesion Report (COM(2024)0149),

     having regard to the Commission communication of 30 June 2021 entitled ‘A long-term Vision for the EU’s Rural Areas – Towards stronger, connected, resilient and prosperous rural areas by 2040’ (COM(2021)0345),

     having regard to the Commission communication of 19 February 2025 entitled ‘A Vision for Agriculture and Food – Shaping together an attractive farming and agri-food sector for future generations (COM(2025)0075),

     having regard to the Commission communication of 3 May 2022 entitled ‘Putting people first, securing sustainable and inclusive growth, unlocking the potential of the EU’s outermost regions’ (COM(2022)0198),

     having regard to the Commission communication of 25 March 2021 on an action plan for the development of organic production (COM(2021)0141),

     having regard to the Commission report of 17 June 2020 on the impact of demographic change (COM(2020)0241),

     having regard to the Commission green paper of 27 January 2021 on ageing – fostering solidarity and responsibility between generations (COM(2021)0050),

     having regard to the Commission communication of 20 May 2020 entitled ‘A Farm to Fork Strategy for a fair, healthy and environmentally-friendly food system’ (COM(2020)0381),

     having regard to the Commission communication of 20 May 2020 entitled ‘EU Biodiversity Strategy for 2030 – Bringing nature back into our lives’ (COM(2020)0380),

     having regard to the Commission communication of 17 November 2021 entitled ‘EU Soil Strategy for 2030 – Reaping the benefits of healthy soils for people, food, nature and climate’ (COM(2021)0699),

     having regard to the UN Declaration on the Rights of Peasants and Other People Working in Rural Areas, adopted by the Human Rights Council on 28 September 2018,

     having regard to general recommendation No 34 (2016) of the UN Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women on the rights of rural women, adopted on 7 March 2016,

     having regard to its resolution of 3 May 2022 on the EU action plan for organic agriculture[16],

     having regard to the study commissioned by Parliament’s Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development entitled ‘The future of the European Farming Model: Socio-economic and territorial implications of the decline in the number of farms and farmers in the EU’, published by the Policy Department for Structural and Cohesion Policies in April 2022,

     having regard to its resolution of 24 March 2022 on the need for an urgent EU action plan to ensure food security inside and outside the EU in light of the Russian invasion of Ukraine[17],

     having regard to its resolution of 3 October 2018 on addressing the specific needs of rural, mountainous and remote areas[18],

     having regard to its resolution of 9 June 2021 on the EU Biodiversity Strategy for 2030: Bringing nature back into our lives[19],

     having regard to the Commission report of August 2019 entitled ‘Evaluation of the impact of the CAP on generational renewal, local development and jobs in rural areas’[20],

     having regard to the opinion of the European Committee of the Regions of 26 January 2022 entitled ‘A long-term vision for the EU’s rural areas’[21],

     having regard to the opinion of the Committee of the Regions of 19 February 2025 entitled ‘How post-27 LEADER and CLLD programming could contribute to better implementation of the long-term vision for the EU’s rural areas’[22],

     having regard to the opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee of 23 March 2022 entitled ‘Long-term Vision for the EU’s Rural Areas’[23],

     having regard to its resolution of 19 October 2023 on generational renewal in the EU farms of the future[24],

     having regard to Enrico Letta’s report on the future of the single market, published in April 2024,

     having regard to the study requested by Parliament’s Committee on Regional Development, entitled ‘EU Cohesion Policy in non-urban areas’, published by the Policy Department for Structural and Cohesion Policies in September 2020,

     having regard to the declaration on the future of rural areas and rural development policy in the European Union, adopted by the Rural Pact Coordination Group on 12 December 2024,

     having regard to Rule 55 of its Rules of Procedure,

     having regard to the opinion of the Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development,

     having regard to the report of the Committee on Regional Development (A10-0092/2025),

    A. whereas, currently, 137 million European citizens – nearly one in three – live in rural areas, which account for approximately 83 % of the EU’s territory; whereas one third of the population of rural areas lives in a border region; whereas 77 % of land used for farming (134 million hectares) and 79 % of forest (148 million hectares) are located in rural areas;

    B. whereas according to Eurostat, average income in rural areas is 87.5 % of average income in urban areas;

    C. whereas there are still disparities in cohesion policy funding between urban and rural areas, with urban areas receiving three times more cohesion funding than rural areas[25];

    D. whereas since 1991, in rural areas, the LEADER method, subsequently covered by the community-led local development policy instrument (CLLD) through local action groups (LAGs), has demonstrated that it can mobilise and empower local actors around innovative and tailored strategies;

    E. whereas rural areas are a cornerstone of the European economy, home to many ‘hidden European Champions’, and are integral to Europe’s cultural diversity; whereas they are essential for food production and security, serving as guardians of our landscapes, living rural heritage, social and cultural traditions; whereas they play a key role in promoting the strategic autonomy of the EU through the agricultural sector, which remains a strategic priority of the EU; whereas rural areas symbolise many of the aspects that make Europe attractive and liveable;

    F. whereas the promotion of minority languages can enhance awareness of local specificities, increasing the attractiveness of tourism and fostering economic activities linked to culture, education, craftsmanship and traditional products;

    G. whereas the COVID-19 pandemic highlighted a shift in perception among the public, who have recognised the potential of rural areas as a solution to the challenges arising from crises by providing a safer, more sustainable and reliable living environment;

    H. whereas cohesion policy funds alone cannot answer the increasing needs and challenges faced by rural areas in the EU; whereas greater synergies and complementarities with other EU policies, in particular with the common agricultural policy (CAP), must be ensured in order to maximise the impact of investments in rural areas, advancing the modernisation of agriculture and the development of essential services and infrastructure;

    I. whereas over 40 % of land in rural areas is used for agriculture yet sadly the contribution of agriculture, forestry and fisheries to rural regions has decreased, both in economic and employment terms, to 12 % of all jobs and 4 % of gross value added;

    J. whereas Parliament’s study on the future of the European farming model notes that the EU could lose 6.4 million farms by 2040, falling from 10.3 million in 2016 to 3.9 million;

    K. whereas, in accordance with Articles 174, 175 and 349 TFEU, the EU aims to reduce development gaps between the different regions and coordinate its policies, including using the European Structural and Investment Funds to achieve the objectives of economic, social and territorial cohesion, with a particular focus on rural areas;

    L. whereas all regions must remain eligible for funding in future cohesion policy, even strong regions facing significant transformation challenges;

    M. whereas regional actors have a deeper understanding of which projects should be prioritised for support through cohesion funds, ensuring that resources are allocated in a way that best meets the specific needs of their territories;

    N. whereas cohesion policy funds to rural areas should be further simplified with the objective of reducing administrative burdens, not only for the final beneficiaries but also for the relevant authorities, thereby also contributing to increased absorption rates;

    O. whereas rural areas in particular are facing demographic and structural challenges, such as ageing, population decline, brain drain, growing inequalities between men and women, disparities with urban areas, structural changes in the agricultural and forestry sectors, the consequences of natural disasters, the increase of energy and transport prices, a lack of services and infrastructure, in particular for vulnerable people and persons with disabilities, the impact of these challenges on income level and on the labour market, with a consequent higher unemployment rate, and a persistently large digital gap;

    P. whereas demographic challenges are particularly acute in the EU farming population, with the majority of farmers being over 50 years old;

    Q. whereas strengthening cohesion in rural areas requires the adoption of measures and initiatives aimed at supporting families, also by helping young people and parents in balancing family and professional life, thereby contributing to the sustainable development of those communities;

    R. whereas Europe’s rural areas and European farmers already play a crucial role in the climate transition, as they are the most affected by climate change both economically and socially, and whereas thanks to their efforts, some of the adverse impact of agriculture on the environment has been significantly reduced over the years; whereas the EU agricultural sector significantly reduced its greenhouse gas emissions by 24 % between 1990 and 2021 and it is responsible for 72 % of renewable energy production and holds 78 % of the untapped potential;

    S. whereas demographic changes do not affect all countries and regions equally, but have a greater impact on less developed regions, as they exacerbate existing territorial and social imbalances; whereas solutions must be found for regional imbalances and for the uneven pace of convergence between regions, some of which remain stuck in a development trap; whereas less developed regions require particular attention and support, as is the case with the EU’s rural areas and the outermost regions, due to their specific characteristics;

    T. whereas the overall percentage of the population living in rural areas has fallen significantly across the EU over the past 50 years, particularly as a result of ageing and emigration; whereas the highest percentage of people over the age of 65 is found in rural areas[26]; whereas estimates suggest that by 2033 the population of Europe’s rural areas will have shrunk by 30 million people compared with 1993;

    U. whereas the lack of or poor access to healthcare, water services, affordable housing, transport, digital infrastructure, education, financial services and recreational and cultural activities worsen the reputation of regions, and particularly rural, borderland, inland, cross-border, mountainous, insular and outermost regions, as places to live and work, especially for women, young people, ageing populations and minorities; whereas cross-border areas are particularly affected by the lack of regional connectivity in terms of transport and digital infrastructure; whereas rural areas are strongly affected by the lack of stable employment opportunities, which forces young people, in particular women, to migrate;

    V. whereas the availability and quality of water play a critical role in ensuring equitable, sustainable and productive rural livelihoods;

    W. whereas greater emphasis should be placed on preventive measures to strengthen the resilience of Europe’s rural areas to natural disasters; whereas an integrated approach to water resources management is essential both to prevent floods and to cope with droughts, in particular through a coherent use of EU funds;

    X. whereas rural areas, especially in eastern, southern and Mediterranean Europe, are the most directly affected by energy poverty and face specific challenges related to desertification, forest fires, climate change and its associated asymmetrical risks, water resource scarcity and weak infrastructure, which require a targeted approach within cohesion policy;

    Y. whereas rural areas are home to the majority of the EU’s biodiversity, yet protected habitats and species remain in poor conservation status and continue to decline due to climate change and the degradation of soil and water quality, with a negative impact on natural resources; whereas biodiversity loss has severe economic consequences for the agricultural sector and negatively affects the attractiveness of rural tourism;

    Z. whereas the clean energy transition, the diversification of the economy and the expansion of renewable energy sources present significant opportunities for rural and less developed regions, allowing them to leverage their natural resources and geographic advantages and to exploit their full potential for the future production of renewable energy;

    AA. whereas these areas bear the brunt of depopulation, and whereas it is mainly young people leaving them as a result of job shortages and dim career prospects, and this fuels the rural exodus, resulting in an increased share of older residents and a greater risk of social isolation;

    AB. whereas rural areas have the highest share (12.6 %) of young people aged 15-29[27] not in employment, education or training (NEETs);

    AC. whereas generational renewal is one of the nine key objectives of the CAP;

    AD. whereas farms, dairy farms, wine-growers and olive oil producers across Europe go out of business every day, and few farms like these are managed by farmers below the age of 35; whereas the ambitious goals of the green transition entail opportunities and also risks for economic, social and territorial cohesion, as well as for European agriculture;

    AE. whereas the way we produce food has shaped the landscapes that define Europe; whereas dynamic rural areas foster quality food production which in turn supports their economy; whereas reinvigorating these connections between food and territory and revitalising rural areas will be essential for the future of farming in Europe;

    AF. whereas a robust cohesion policy is essential to guaranteeing the effective application of the ‘right to stay’ principle in rural areas, which requires action on many levels, including by fostering economic stability and preventing depopulation; stresses that ensuring access to a basic set of public goods and services for all citizens, especially young people, regardless of where they live, is crucial; whereas it is necessary, to this end, to promote targeted investment in infrastructure, services, education, and innovation;

    1. Welcomes the Commission report of 27 March 2024 entitled ‘The long-term vision for the EU’s rural areas: key achievements and ways forward’ and agrees with its overarching objectives;

    2. Takes note of the four areas of action underpinning the rural vision and the 30 actions making up the EU rural action plan; calls on the Commission and the Member States to place its implementation at the top of the agenda;

    3. Stresses the key role rural areas have to play in shaping the economic models and the social and territorial organisation of the various Member States, particularly as the cradle of agricultural and food production, but also as custodians of an irreplaceable cultural and landscape heritage; notes, however, that their significance remains under-appreciated and inadequately funded; believes that the EU has a duty to push for a true revival and regeneration of these areas, going to extra lengths to endow our rural areas with the right tools to overcome the considerable long-term challenges they are facing and which are having an ever greater impact on regional competitiveness and social cohesion, in order to preserve European diversity and ensure that the Union’s progress does not come at the expense of rural areas and their populations;

    4. Considers it important to develop short supply chains and to promoting the use of labelling schemes to acknowledge the quality and variety of traditional products from rural areas; stresses that public canteens, such as school and hospital canteens, can play a significant role in the development of short agrifood supply chains;

    5. Recognises the key role of small and medium-sized towns as development centres in rural regions and calls on the Commission and the Member States to specifically strengthen their economic, social and infrastructural functions, revitalise city centres, better utilise synergies between rural areas and large metropolitan regions, and ensure more balanced territorial development;

    6. Stresses the urgent need for measures to combat poverty in rural areas by developing targeted strategies to improve social security, create economic opportunities, and support particularly vulnerable populations, in order to break the cycle of poverty;

    7. Stresses that rural areas are key players in mitigating the effects of climate change; emphasises the need for increased investment in research and innovation for rural areas, particularly in the fields of sustainable agriculture, renewable energy, digital transformation and innovative mobility solutions, to enhance the competitiveness and resilience of rural regions and create energy self-sufficiency and new employment opportunities; encourages the sustainable management of forests and the prevention of forest fires, also by promoting the use of biomass which is gathered without harm to forest ecosystems;

    8. Calls for the expansion of renewable energy in rural areas based on their potential to reduce energy costs with the involvement of civil society and local communities; emphasises the need for financial incentives, measures such as renewable energy communities and simplified administrative processes to boost regional energy independence and sustainability while avoiding negative impacts on food production, land availability and prices, as well as on social cohesion; calls for a dedicated financing mechanism for the installation of photovoltaic, wind and other renewable energy sources;

    9. Calls for increased support for the preservation, restoration and conversion of older buildings, including historical buildings, churches and other places of worship, sports halls and schools in rural areas to improve energy efficiency, sustainability and safety; urges investments in the modernisation of public infrastructure while preserving historical structures where possible; calls on the Commission and the Member States to promote targeted policies that support the renovation and energy-efficient retrofitting of rural housing, financial incentives for first-time rural homebuyers, in particular for young people and families, and the development of sustainable and affordable housing projects adapted to the needs of local communities that contribute to the attractiveness and revitalisation of these regions;

    10. Asks the Commission to assess and to implement Article 174, 175 and 349 TFEU in full to close the development gap among regions, including in relation to infrastructure, and to see to it that all EU policies not only apply the ‘do no harm to cohesion’ principle, but also that they follow a more assertive ‘promote cohesion’ approach wherever possible, particularly in rural areas and in areas particularly affected by industrial transition, demographic challenges and depopulation, and those at risk of depopulation, such as outermost regions, islands, border, cross-border and mountain regions;

    11. Calls on the Commission to devise a rural strategy for the post-2027 programming period; urges the Commission and the Member States to ensure the incorporation of a rural dimension in relevant policies and to make sure that the strategy promotes the economic and social development of rural areas and to allocate specific resources to the modernisation of agriculture, supporting rural small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) and start-up and promoting short supply chains in order to make rural areas more connected, competitive, resilient and attractive to young people and investors, thereby ensuring balanced and sustainable development in the long term and enhancing the quality of life; stresses, in this regard, the importance of having a truly effective rural proofing mechanism at EU level so to assess the potential of all relevant policies and to mitigate any possible negative impacts they may have on rural areas;

    12. Stresses that in order to ensure the long-term prosperity of rural areas and support a strong agricultural sector to maintain this prosperity in rural areas, it is essential to strengthen the synergies between EU Structural and Investment Funds and Horizon Europe, the EU’s flagship research and innovation programme, and the CAP in the next multiannual financial framework (MFF);

    13. Calls on the Commission to present, by 2027, a report on the application of the rural proofing mechanism to policies and interventions at EU level, as well as the results obtained;

    14. Calls on the Commission to prioritise focused investments and policy measures to support the transition to a new generation of farmers in order to modernise EU agriculture and create more opportunities in rural areas;

    15. Highlights the crucial role of cohesion policy for the development of rural areas as a decentralised, powerful tool for economic and social development, allowing all regions to tackle these specific challenges of the Union; underlines in this regard that cohesion policy should continue to be a key pillar of the MFF post-2027, with an allocation that is maintained at a minimum threshold equivalent to the current MFF 2021-2027 levels, ensuring its fundamental role in reducing regional disparities and shaping a more resilient and competitive Europe that leaves no one behind; calls for the option of providing adequate resources for rural and mountainous areas to be explored in the next cohesion policy framework and complementing GDP at regional level with other indicators; recalls that the fundamental principles of cohesion policy, such as partnership, multi-level-governance, a place-based approach and shared management, must be respected in order to foster development and to meet the specific needs and challenges of rural areas with a particular focus on tools supporting sustainable growth and development and youth and female employment, including among victims of violence against women, and improving services and infrastructure;

    16. Believes that smart specialisation and economic diversification strategies could promote more opportunities in rural areas; emphasises, in particular, the key importance of integrating the concept of smart villages into cohesion policy and of explicitly supporting the development of smart villages, with flexible funding and an integrated approach, as an innovative tool for enhancing the quality of life and revitalising rural areas and services through digital and social innovation and initiatives such as the promotion of working spaces in order to attract workers, including remote workers, and to contribute to revitalising local economies;

    17. Encourages initiatives that promote economic and social sustainability, including support for rural entrepreneurship, rural tourism and new business models based on innovation and digitalisation;

    18. Calls on the Commission to ensure a strong and holistic focus on the development of rural areas in the future cohesion policy, in such a way that all policy initiatives are consistent with the goal of reducing territorial disparities; believes it is essential to devise long-term strategies to support rural areas, centred on the principles of cohesion and sustainability and providing the necessary tools to address demographic, social and economic challenges, in order to ensure that these areas do not become forgotten places, but rather key players in Europe’s future without needing to continually depend on extraordinary measures; calls, in this regard, on the Commission to support the significant development of rural areas in the future cohesion policy, and to commit to setting up local info points and offering a platform and financial support to enable Member States to exchange information and best practice on funding possibilities, with a view to providing local authorities with effective support and assisting with resource management and the implementation of development initiatives; emphasises, furthermore, that the effective participation of regional, local and rural authorities and a strong administrative capacity are crucial for the reduction of the excessive administrative burden and complex requirements for recipients and for the effective execution of cohesion policy funds; highlights that multi-funding still appears difficult in some countries and calls on the Commission to enhance complementarities between the EAFRD and cohesion policy funds;

    19. Stresses the need for an integrated European strategy for the revitalisation of rural areas, including through the development of bio-districts, recognising their potential to diversify the rural economy by targeting fiscal, economic and social measures to maintain the active population; also highlights the value of introducing incentives for the relocation of health, education and public administration professionals, as well as the importance of partnerships between local authorities and the private sector for the creation of new jobs;

    20. Underlines that expanding integrated territorial investment (ITI) plans and unlocking their full potential could establish them as a cornerstone for integrated regional, local, and rural development; emphasises that strengthening ITIs’ role in rural areas is essential to foster territorial cohesion, enhance connectivity and drive inclusive economic growth by supporting key sectors such as agriculture, rural SMEs, tourism and renewable energy; calls, furthermore, for greater flexibility in ITI implementation, increased financial allocations and reinforced synergies with other EU funding mechanisms, including LEADER and CLLD, key instruments for fostering bottom-up participatory rural development and for keeping and restoring living and thriving local rural economies, to maximise impact and actively involve regional and local authorities and civil society in line with the partnership principle;

    21. Suggests that all relevant Directorates-General of the Commission conduct a territorial impact assessment of their respective policies at least twice per programming period; believes that these evaluations would establish a more precise baseline and identify ways to integrate the characteristics of rural areas into EU policies more effectively;

    22. Calls on the Member States to make full use of all measures supporting rural, inland, mountainous, insular and outermost regions, as well as cross-border regions and regions at the EU’s external borders, including those bordering Russia, Belarus and Ukraine which are most affected by the war, to mitigate economic disruption and to secure their future and prosperity; welcomes the new BRIDGEforEU Regulation and asks the Member States to implement it, enhancing the cooperation between cross-border regions to enable economies of scale when providing basic services and infrastructure in the rural areas affected;

    23. Stresses the diversity of the EU’s rural areas, for which the long-term vision calls for solutions that are tailored to the needs and resources of rural areas while reinforcing long-term strategies for sustainable growth; underlines in this regard the need to fully involve local and regional authorities, which are best placed to identify current challenges and needs at the regional and local levels; highlights the importance of maintaining a decentralised model for the programming and implementation of cohesion policy based on the principle of partnership and multi-level governance and a place-based bottom-up approach; calls, therefore, for the strong involvement of regional and local authorities to ensure more direct access for local and regional authorities to cohesion policy funds, reducing bureaucratic complexity and shortening disbursement times, through more streamlined procedures, intuitive digital platforms and increased technical support for local beneficiaries; proposes encouraging the use of pre-financing and advance payment schemes for small projects in rural areas;

    24. Stresses that centralisation may lead to bureaucratic inefficiencies and delays in fund absorption, ultimately reducing the effectiveness of EU investments in rural development;

    25. Highlights that the management approach to rural areas’ development policies needs to be coordinated, integrated and multi-sectoral in its implementation and that reinforcing a multi-level approach in line with the subsidiarity principle is essential to ensure its success;

    26. Highlights that resilience is essential to enable authorities at local and regional levels to mitigate, adapt to and recover from sudden challenges, ensuring community well-being, security and long-term sustainability;

    27. Calls for an adequate share of cohesion policy funding to be allocated to the border regions and calls in this regard for the European Groupings of Territorial Cooperation (EGTCs) to be granted a higher degree of autonomy in selecting projects and using funds, in particular by designating EGTCs as managing authorities for Interreg programmes, strengthening their institutional and financial capacity; recommends furthermore that EGTCs be granted a more significant role in achieving policy objective 5, namely bringing Europe closer to its citizens;

    28. Underlines the need to strengthen democratic and political participation in rural areas by promoting active civic engagement and digital tools; calls on the Commission to support initiatives that foster local democratic processes to improve cohesion between urban and rural regions;

    29. Highlights the need for rural areas to be able to provide essential high-quality services of general interest to the public to improve their livelihood and to harness their strengths to achieve sustainable development, for which they should receive sufficient financial support; underlines, to that end, the need to provide equal access, in particular to vulnerable people and people with disabilities, to all healthcare services, transport and connectivity services, including innovative mobility solutions, specific plans for affordable housing, water services, education and training services, digital infrastructure, and other basic services such as postal and banking services, ensuring their accessibility and affordability in order to guarantee proper living conditions; calls, therefore, on the Commission and the Member States to facilitate access to funding and tailored support measures for social economy initiatives that address local needs and contribute to regional development and, at the same time, to reinforce the financial support offered to rural SMEs, in particular through easing access to financial resources, cooperatives and local value chains that foster economic diversification;

    30. Stresses the strategic importance of water resources for rural areas and highlights the need to provide sufficient resources, under the cohesion policy and in rural development programmes, for maintaining and upgrading the water network; recommends, in particular, the inclusion of measures to combat leakage, improve the efficiency of supply systems and promote the sustainable use of water resources in rural areas;

    31. Regards it as essential to place greater emphasis on preventive measures to enhance the resilience of Europe’s rural areas in the face of natural disasters; believes that an integrated approach to managing water resources is paramount in order to simultaneously prevent floods and tackle drought – two growing threats in many rural regions – within both agriculture and the food sector; acknowledges that depending on the context, building dams and reservoirs or upgrading existing facilities is a priority, while striking a balance between built infrastructure and relatively low cost soft measures, not least because they can be a clean source of energy; notes that although cohesion policy already supports initiatives in this area, additional projects and increased investment are needed, in line with national and regional risk management strategies, to ensure that rural areas are better prepared for, and able to withstand, climate-related extreme weather events;

    32. Stresses the growing threat of climate risks such as natural disasters, desertification and water scarcity for many rural areas in Europe, particularly in southern Europe and in the Mediterranean basin; calls on the Commission to promote forward looking adaptation strategies at national, regional and local levels, including water management, resilient infrastructure and disaster preparedness, and calls for investments in innovative water infrastructure, such as the reuse of treated wastewater and smart irrigation systems, and the construction of reservoirs for rainwater harvesting;

    33. Notes that rural areas suffer from limited access to essential healthcare services, with a shortage of facilities and medical personnel, and therefore calls for improved access to quality healthcare, including mental health services;

    34. Calls on the Member States and local authorities to safeguard essential services that are vital to the development of rural areas by refraining from imposing economic constraints on healthcare in rural areas, as this would lead to the closure, or a fall in the number of, first-aid facilities and basic hospital structures, which should be strengthened;

    35. Calls on the Commission and Member States to develop a plan for mobile medical units and for telemedicine, the strengthening of medical services including medical spa services, community health nurses and digital health solutions and incentives for doctors working in rural and remote areas;

    36. Calls on the Commission to incorporate specific measures targeting areas identified as rural into its eHealth strategy, in order to provide local healthcare units with practical support for technological upgrades, and to promote the services such units offer; stresses that Member States should also be offered a screening programme targeting rural areas and that administrative support should also be put in place to assist with the drawing up of plans and prevention registers; calls on the Member States to take into account the particular characteristics of these areas and to encourage rural pharmacies to be set up, in order to specifically adapt pharmacy networks to a rural area, with coordination arrangements for medicines and medical devices supply, with the aim of streamlining and adapting the needs of healthcare units to the individual area; calls on the Member States to improve the provision of primary care and support services among these pharmacies termed ‘rural’;

    37. Highlights the key role that infrastructure development has to play in the economic and social growth of rural areas, given the need for transport systems, particularly public ones, with the capacity to improve connectivity and access to essential services, for energy networks, including renewables, and for suitable digital connectivity infrastructure; notes, in particular, that the quality of transport and digital connectivity should be improved so that people have easy access to labour, schools, hospitals, public services and job opportunities; underlines that road, rail and maritime transport links need to be developed or upgraded through EU co-funded programmes to reduce the isolation of rural areas, in particular from urban centres, narrowing the existing gap, and to facilitate sustainable mobility of people and goods; calls for a comprehensive strategy to improve mobility in rural areas, with a strong focus on sustainability, the expansion of charging infrastructure and the promotion of e-mobility; emphasises the need for targeted investments in public transport, shared mobility solutions and alternative transport models to ensure accessibility and connectivity for rural populations;

    38. Stresses that the digital divide between rural and urban areas remains significant, hindering equal opportunities for all residents; calls on the Commission and the Member States to accelerate investments in broadband connectivity, including 5G, better mobile coverage, high-speed internet networks, digital farming solutions and rural innovation hubs, ensuring that digital transformation benefits rural communities, while paying special attention to the regions less prepared for this transformation, including remote areas and outermost regions; stresses that these investments are crucial to enhancing productivity, supporting small farms’ entrepreneurship, facilitating remote working, accessing e-services and online teaching and ensuring that rural areas remain competitive in the digital age; stresses the need for digital literacy and vocational training initiatives to support the integration of digital technologies into the rural economy and to bridge the existing technological and economic divides;

    39. Stresses the importance and interconnectedness of military mobility, rural infrastructure development and regional security; underlines the overlap between the EU military mobility network and the Trans-European Transport Network;

    40. Calls for strategies to address vacant buildings and promote alternative housing concepts in rural areas, including affordable housing, renovation projects and intergenerational living; emphasises the need for incentives to repurpose empty properties, support community-driven housing initiatives and ensure sustainable, inclusive living spaces;

    41. Stresses the importance of promoting priority policies that support young people, as the main actors of the rural exodus, and calls on the Commission to ensure them an effective application of the ‘right to stay’ through targeted measures, designed to stem the demographic decline in rural areas and to encourage talented people to remain there; believes that individuals who wish to contribute to the development of their local communities should be provided with ample opportunities, and that it is therefore urgent to eliminate barriers and the significant disparities between young people in urban and rural areas in terms of access to high quality education, economic independence, social and political engagement, and intergenerational social interaction; calls for concrete measures and targeted funding programmes, including a brain drain action plan from the Commission, to support young people and young entrepreneurs, providing them with all the tools and resources they need to help them to access agricultural lands, jobs and business opportunities; notes that such measures should include improved access to public services, educational and cultural facilities, access to housing, low-interest loans and, with due regard to the principle of subsidiarity in fiscal matters, tax-related incentives to help young people build a stable future in line with their aspirations, without needing to abandon their place of origin, and creating incentives to settle down in or return to rural areas; considers it necessary, therefore, to promote measures to diversify the rural economy by harnessing local potential, including in areas outside agriculture and tourism, and to create quality jobs;

    42. Highlights the importance of boosting vocational education and training while also fostering youth-led initiatives and non-formal learning for young people to develop specific skills related to the economy of rural areas, as a tool for social cohesion and quality employment, with a view to combating depopulation in those areas;

    43. Highlights the key role of awareness raising and knowledge-sharing campaigns in advancing various education campaigns and programmes, and the importance of making them an integral part of school curricula; stresses the increasingly worrying data on early school leaving and to that end, calls on national and local authorities to reorganise their school systems to guarantee the right to education in their territories, bearing in mind the serious and objective difficulties they may face; calls on the Member States and local authorities, therefore, not to merge existing schools management structures in those areas;

    44. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to provide for new subsidised credit facilities that can support young entrepreneurs and women in their activities, including alternative forms of guarantees for access to credit; calls for financial support to empower young farmers, ensuring growth in rural economies;

    45. Welcomes the new EUR 3 billion loan financing package from the European Investment Bank (EIB) Group for agriculture, forestry and fisheries across Europe as a tangible initiative to close the funding gaps for SMEs in agriculture and the bio-economy and facilitate financing for young farmers and women; calls on the EIB Group to explore new forms of support to provide liquidity for actors along agricultural and rural value chains;

    46. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to promote local start-ups and incentive programmes for the return of young people and for the purchase and renovation of housing by young people in rural areas;

    47. Calls on the Commission to establish a European fund for youth entrepreneurship in rural areas, with a special focus on regions affected by high youth unemployment and brain drain; notes that this fund should support rural start-ups, innovative agriculture, sustainable tourism and digitalisation through dedicated financial instruments and tax incentives;

    48. Draws attention to the need for universal equal access to measures enabling everyone to develop the high-quality skills they need to achieve their professional goals, and to vocational and educational training; laments the fact that in rural areas, in many fields, the work of women is currently not rewarded with equal opportunities and conditions, as they often face extra challenges, including limited access to job opportunities, a lack of adequate measures to help them juggle work and family, and a shortage of childcare facilities; emphasises the need to foster an environment conducive to female employment, with support for all families, ensuring high quality early childhood education and care systems and parental support;

    49. Calls for increased support for women in rural areas, particularly through measures to improve access to employment, education, healthcare and social infrastructure, as well as protection from violence and violence prevention, to promote their economic and social participation; emphasises that targeted programmes should be created to support female entrepreneurs in rural regions in order to strengthen their economic independence;

    50. Stresses that support for women in rural areas is imperative for a variety of reasons, including promoting gender equality, fostering economic growth, advancing community development, reducing poverty and ensuring environmental sustainability; highlights that women play a multilevel role in rural development, as workers, farmers and business owners, and stresses that their importance in rural areas and local economies is often overlooked; stresses that special attention should be paid to women in rural areas when designing structural social support and regional development programmes; highlights that addressing these barriers is crucial for empowering women and unlocking their full potential in rural communities;

    51. Calls on the Member States and the Commission to boost awareness regarding existing and future EU funding possibilities for women entrepreneurs in rural areas and to make it easier for them to access financial support; encourages the Member States and regional and local authorities to make use of the existing EU structural and investment funds to promote women entrepreneurs;

    52. Calls for gender-equality employment policies and targeted measures to promote a better work-life balance in rural areas, including flexible working models, digital work opportunities, improved leisure and education offerings, and the promotion of community-based care and support structures for families;

    53. Urges the Commission to adopt measures to protect the family farming model that underpins the rural territory, is more environmentally friendly and guarantees food security in the EU; stresses the need for a EU system of incentives to limit the accumulation of agricultural land in private investment funds and the consequent increase in land prices; insists on the protection of small and medium-sized farms by strengthening the role of cooperatives and professional farmers in EU policies; furthermore, encourages the Member States to implement concrete measures to support these farms by simplifying access to credit, modernising rural infrastructure and giving impetus to agricultural cooperatives;

    54. Stresses the key role played by agriculture and the agri-food sector in food production, ensuring food security in the EU and job creation – a role worth championing since as it constitutes a mainstay of the local economy and is a key factor in ensuring sustainable land management, and also drives the growth and development of inland and rural areas, which often enjoy international recognition for their outstanding typical products; notes that it is necessary to help farmers innovate and diversify, while at the same time fostering farm competitiveness; believes that the transition to a more sustainable model requires a balanced approach, mindful of local specificities and the economic needs of rural communities, without imposing changes liable to hinder their long-term development; calls, in this regard, on the Commission and the Member States to take strong and targeted action by reducing excessive regulatory burdens and ensuring fair market conditions, to mitigate the decline in the number of farms and encourage generational renewal; calls for adequate support to promote food self-sufficiency and crop diversification; highlights in particular the specific structural challenges of the outermost regions and their rural areas;

    55. Urges the Commission and the Member States, in order to strengthen food security and ensure that European farmers do not face unfair competition from products that do not meet the same environmental, animal welfare and food security standards, to enforce strict equivalence of production standards for agricultural products imported into the EU and calls  on the Commission, in this regard, to ensure that trade agreements uphold European agricultural standards and ensure a level playing field for EU farmers;

    56. Acknowledges that the ambitious goals of the green transition entail opportunities as well as risks for EU agriculture; emphasises that the number of farms in the EU decreased between 2005 and 2020 by about 37 % and calls on the Commission and the Member States, in this regard, to take action to mitigate the decline in the number of farms and support their revenues and competitiveness, in order to stem the desertion of these areas and encourage generational renewal;

    57. Points to the need to simplify administrative procedures for accessing EU funds by reducing red tape for farmers and small rural businesses and improving coordination between the institutional levels involved in the management of funds in order to ensure that resources are provided more efficiently and in a more timely manner;

    58. Points also to the need to provide these areas, as well as businesses and farm and forest holders, with sufficient financial support, including support for the purchase and maintenance of equipment, with a view to increasing European competitiveness;

    59. Is fully aware that rural areas play a key role in the green and digital transitions; underlines that the transitions have to be implemented gradually, along the lines of achievable goals; calls in this regard for EU funding to be better linked with environmental sustainability and biodiversity protection;

    60. Highlights the need to support rural communities in European regions that have been most adversely affected by the trade in or export of Ukrainian agricultural products;

    61. Points to the importance of compensatory measures for farmers and rural businesses to ensure that the ecological transition is fair and practical and does not lead to new socio-economic disparities; highlight that for this transition to be successful, the full involvement and collaboration of all stakeholders, in particular farmers and foresters, will be key;

    62. Highlights that promoting agriculture is a necessary component of any strategy for rural development, but that on its own it is not sufficient, as not all people in rural areas are employed in the agricultural sector or live in agricultural structures;

    63. Recognises that tourism is frequently a major source of income for rural, mountainous, insular and outermost regions, as well as in the Mediterranean region, with the potential to encourage job creation and entrepreneurship and to draw in growing numbers of visitors curious to discover their nature, traditions and cultural heritage through the unique experiences on offer; believes, for that reason, that tourism should be supported through investment in the rural economy, in synergy with the agricultural, fishing, food and cultural sectors, and that the EU should promote the co-existence and further development of these sectors;

    64. Highlights that rural and agro-tourism can be a complementary activity to agriculture, offering opportunities for diversifying farm incomes and benefiting the development of rural areas, and that resources should therefore be allocated to the development of tourism and HoReCa activities;

    65. Underlines the need to promote rural tourism in a way that is sustainable; highlights the importance of optimising the economic benefits of tourism for rural areas, while minimising the potential negative impacts on local communities and ecosystems;

    66. Emphasises the importance of protecting and promoting linguistic minorities in the rural areas of the EU, recognising them as an integral part of Europe’s cultural heritage and as a driver of regional development; therefore calls on the Commission and the Member States to allocate cohesion policy resources to support projects for linguistic promotion, training, cultural tourism and local entrepreneurship connected to the linguistic and cultural traditions of the regions;

    67. Urges the Commission and the Member States to boost tourism in rural and depopulated areas or areas at risk of depopulation, by financing initiatives that enhance historic villages and traditional local products and establishing new green paths and other nature trails, as well as a label recognising outstanding environments in rural and nature tourism along similar lines to the ‘blue flag’ awarded to beaches;

    68. Notes that in some Member States, municipalities play a crucial role as drivers of regional economic development, benefiting from substantial tax revenues generated by their local economies; highlights that these revenues can motivate municipalities to invest EU cohesion funds in increasing their future tax base, promoting long-term local economic growth and securing long-term tax revenues; to this end, calls on the Commission, with due regard for the principle of subsidiarity in fiscal matters, to initiate a dialogue on the potential benefits of sharing taxes on economic activities with municipalities;

    69. Insists that excessive bureaucracy should not prevent farmers from focusing on sustainable food production and rural economic development; calls on the Commission and the Member States to include a strong rural dimension in the future cohesion policy regulations and to promote better regulation as a matter of priority, in order to reduce administrative burdens and to take steps to ensure the competitiveness of rural businesses, particularly SMEs, cooperatives and citizen-led communities, and to promote easier and more efficient access to funds, cost reductions and simplified application and evaluation processes for EU funding, especially for small beneficiaries; reaffirms that optimising procedures, cutting red tape and enhancing transparency are vital to improving access to the available resources; calls on the Commission, therefore, to provide adequate advisory services and technical assistance to managing authorities, thereby also contributing to increased absorption rates;

    70. Calls for a more integrated approach between EU industrial and cohesion policies, ensuring that regional development strategies are aligned with industrial transition efforts, particularly in northern, sparsely populated areas;

    71. Emphasises the importance of SMEs in technological sectors for rural digitalisation and economic resilience; calls on the Commission to ensure that public measures support local businesses and foster proximity-based economies, avoiding criteria that may disadvantage smaller enterprises;

    72. Stresses the need for better alignment between existing territorial development instruments and Structural Funds, including initiatives such as Harnessing Talent and the Covenant of Mayors;

    73. Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council and the Commission.

    MIL OSI Europe News

  • MIL-OSI Europe: REPORT on the implementation of the Recovery and Resilience Facility – A10-0098/2025

    Source: European Parliament

    MOTION FOR A EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT RESOLUTION

    on the implementation of the Recovery and Resilience Facility

    (2024/2085(INI))

    The European Parliament,

     

     having regard to Article 175 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

     having regard to Regulation (EU) 2021/241 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 February 2021 establishing the Recovery and Resilience Facility[1] (RRF Regulation),

     having regard to Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2023/435 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 February 2023 amending Regulation (EU) 2021/241 as regards REPowerEU chapters in recovery and resilience plans and amending Regulations (EU) No 1303/2013, (EU) 2021/1060 and (EU) 2021/1755, and Directive 2003/87/EC[2] (REPowerEU Regulation),

     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[3] (Rule of Law Conditionality Regulation),

     having regard to Council Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2024/765 of 29 February 2024 amending Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2020/2093 laying down the multiannual financial framework for the years 2021 to 2027[4] (MFF Regulation),

     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[5] (the IIA),

     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[6] (Financial Regulation),

     having regard to Regulation (EU) 2024/795 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 February 2024 establishing the Strategic Technologies for Europe Platform (STEP), and amending Directive 2003/87/EC and Regulations (EU) 2021/1058, (EU) 2021/1056, (EU) 2021/1057, (EU) No 1303/2013, (EU) No 223/2014, (EU) 2021/1060, (EU) 2021/523, (EU) 2021/695, (EU) 2021/697 and (EU) 2021/241[7],

     having regard to Regulation (EU) 2024/1263 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2024 on the effective coordination of economic policies and on multilateral budgetary surveillance and repealing Council Regulation (EC) No 1466/97[8],

     having regard to its resolution of 23 June 2022 on the implementation of the Recovery and Resilience Facility[9],

     having regard to the Commission notice of 22 July 2024 entitled ‘Guidance on recovery and resilience plans’[10],

     having regard to the Commission communication of 21 February 2024 on strengthening the EU through ambitious reforms and investments (COM(2024)0082),

     having regard to the Commission’s third annual report of 10 October 2024 on the implementation of the Recovery and Resilience Facility (COM(2024)0474),

     having regard to the Court of Auditors’ (ECA) annual report of 10 October 2024 on the implementation of the budget for the 2023 financial year, together with the institutions’ replies,

     having regard to special report 13/2024 of the ECA of 2 September 2024 entitled ‘Absorption of funds from the Recovery and Resilience Facility – Progressing with delays and risks remain regarding the completion of measures and therefore the achievement of RRF objectives’, special report 14/2024 of the ECA of 11 September 2024 entitled ‘Green transition – Unclear contribution from the Recovery and Resilience Facility’, and special report 22/2024 of the ECA of 21 October 2024 entitled ‘Double funding from the EU budget – Control systems lack essential elements to mitigate the increased risk resulting from the RRF model of financing not linked to costs’,

     having regard to the study of December 2023 supporting the mid-term Evaluation of the Recovery and Resilience Facility,

     having regard to the European Public Prosecutor’s Office (EPPO) 2024 annual report published on 3 March 2025,

     having regard to the report of September 2024 by Mario Draghi entitled ‘The future of European competitiveness’ (Draghi report),

     having regard to the opinion of the Committee of the Regions of 8 October 2024 entitled ‘Mid-term review of the post-COVID European recovery plan (Recovery and Resilience Facility)’[11],

     having regard to the information published on the Recovery and Resilience Scoreboard (RRF Scoreboard),

     having regard to the Commission staff working document of 20 November 2024 entitled ‘NGEU Green Bonds Allocation and Impact report 2024’ (SWD(2024)0275),

     having regard to its in-house research, in-depth analysis and briefings related to the implementation of the RRF[12],

     having regard to its resolution of 18 January 2024 on the situation in Hungary and frozen EU funds[13],

     having regard to Rule 55 of its Rules of Procedure, as well as Article 1(1)(e) of, and Annex 3 to, the decision of the Conference of Presidents of 12 December 2002 on the procedure for granting authorisation to draw up own-initiative reports,

     having regard to the opinions of the Committee on Budgetary Control, the Committee on Employment and Social Affairs, the Committee on the Environment, Climate and Food Safety and the Committee on Transport and Tourism,

     having regard to the joint deliberations of the Committee on Budgets and the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs under Rule 59 of the Rules of Procedure,

     having regard to the report of the Committee on Budgets and the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs (A10-0098/2025),

     

    A. whereas the Recovery and Resilience Facility (RRF) was created to make European economies and societies more sustainable, resilient and better prepared in the light of unprecedented crises in 2019 and 2022, by supporting Member States in financing strategic investments and in implementing reforms;

    B. whereas reforms and investments under the RRF help to make the EU more resilient and less dependent by diversifying key supply chains and thereby strengthening the strategic autonomy of the EU; whereas reforms and investments under the RRF also generate European added value;

    C. whereas the RRF, as well as other EU funds, such as the European instrument for temporary support to mitigate unemployment risks in an emergency, has helped to protect labour markets from the risk of long-term damage caused by the double economic shock of the pandemic and the energy crisis;

    D. whereas RRF expenditure falls outside the ceilings of the multiannual financial framework (MFF) and borrowing proceeds constitute external assigned revenue; whereas Parliament regrets that they do not form part of the budgetary procedure; whereas based on the Financial Regulation’s principle of transparency, citizens should know how and for what purpose funds are spent by the EU;

    E. whereas, due to the lack of progress in introducing new own resources in the EU and the need to ensure the sustainability of the EU’s repayment plan, a clear and reliable long-term funding strategy is essential to meet repayment obligations without forcing difficult trade-offs in the EU budget that could undermine future investments and policy priorities; whereas further discussions and concrete financial solutions will be necessary to secure the long-term viability of the EU’s debt repayment plan;

    F. whereas the borrowing costs for NextGenerationEU (NGEU) have to be borne by the EU budget and the actual costs exceed the 2020 projections by far as a result of the high interest rates; whereas the total costs for NGEU capital interest repayments are projected to be around EUR 25 to 30 billion per year from 2028, equivalent to 15-20 % of the 2025 annual budget; whereas Parliament has insisted that the refinancing costs be placed over and above the MFF ceilings; whereas a three-step ‘cascade mechanism’ including a new special EURI instrument was introduced during the 2024 MFF revision to cover the significant cost overruns resulting from NGEU borrowing linked to major changes in the market conditions; whereas an agreement was reached during the 2025 budgetary procedure to follow an annual 50/50 benchmark, namely to finance the overrun costs in equal shares by the special EURI instrument de-commitment compartment and the Flexibility Instrument;

    G. whereas the bonds issued to finance the RRF are to be repaid in a manner that ensures the steady and predictable reduction of liabilities, by 2058 at the latest; whereas the Council has yet to adopt the adjusted basket of new own resources proposed by the Commission, which raises concerns about the viability of the repayment of the debt undertaken under NGEU;

    H. whereas the social dimension is a key aspect of the RRF, contributing to upward economic and social convergence, restoring and promoting sustainable growth and fostering the creation of high-quality employment;

    I. whereas the RRF should contribute to financing measures to strengthen the Member States’ resilience to climate disasters, among other things, and enhance climate adaptation; whereas the Member States should conduct proper impact assessments for measures and should share best practice on the implementation of the ‘do no significant harm’ (DNSH) principle;

    J. whereas the RRF plays an important role in supporting investments and reforms in sustainable mobility, smart transport infrastructure, alternative fuels and digital mobility solutions, thus enhancing connectivity and efficiency across the EU; whereas it is regrettable that only a few Member States chose to use the RRF to support investments, particularly in high-speed railway and waterway infrastructure, aimed at developing European corridors, despite the encouragement of cross-border and multi-country projects; whereas it is crucial to increase investments in transport infrastructure, particularly in underserved regions, to improve connectivity, support regional cohesion and contribute to the green transition;

    K. whereas by 31 December 2024, Member States had submitted 95 payment requests and the level of RRF disbursements including pre-financing stood at EUR 197.46 billion in grants (55 % of the total grants envelope) and EUR 108.68 billion in loans (37 % of the total loans envelope); whereas three Member States have already received their fifth payment, while one Member State has not received any RRF funding; whereas all Member States have revised their national recovery and resilience plans (NRRP) at least once; whereas 28 % of milestones and targets have been satisfactorily fulfilled and the Commission has made use of the possibility to partially suspend payments where some milestones and targets linked to a payment request were not found to be satisfactorily fulfilled; whereas delays in the execution of planned reforms and investments, particularly in social infrastructure and public services, could lead to the underutilisation of available resources, thereby reducing the expected impact on economic growth, employment and social cohesion;

    L. whereas the ECA has revealed various shortcomings of the RRF, in particular in relation to its design, its transparency and reporting, the risk of double funding and the implementation of twin transition measures;

    M. whereas robust audit and control systems are crucial to protect the financial interests of the EU throughout the life cycle of the RRF; whereas the milestones commonly known as ‘super milestones’, in particular related to the rule of law, had to be fulfilled prior to any RRF disbursements;

    N. whereas the RRF Regulation refers to the RRF’s ‘performance-based nature’ but does not define ‘performance’; whereas RRF performance should be linked to sound financial management principles and should measure how well an EU-funded action, project or programme has met its objectives and provided value for money;

    O. whereas effective democratic control and parliamentary scrutiny over the implementation of the RRF require the full involvement of Parliament and the consideration of all its recommendations at all stages;

    P. whereas the Commission has to provide an independent ex post evaluation report on the implementation of the RRF by 31 December 2028, consisting of an assessment of the extent to which the objectives have been achieved, of the efficiency of the use of resources and of the European added value, as well as a global assessment of the RRF, and containing information on its impact in the long term;

    Q. whereas the purpose of this report is to monitor the implementation of the RRF, in accordance with Parliament’s role as laid down in the RRF Regulation, by pointing to the benefits and shortcomings of the RRF, while drawing on the lessons learnt during its implementation;

    Strengthening Europe’s social and economic resilience

     

    1. Highlights the fact that the RRF is an unprecedented instrument of solidarity in the light of two unprecedented crises and a cornerstone of the NGEU instrument, ending in 2026; emphasises the importance of drawing lessons from its implementation for the upcoming MFF, including as regards transparency, reporting and coherent measurement of deliverables; highlights the stabilising effect of the RRF for Member States at a time of great economic uncertainty, as it mitigates negative economic and social consequences and supports governments by contributing to the implementation of the European Pillar of Social Rights, by promoting economic recovery and competitiveness, boosting resilience and innovation, and by supporting the green and digital transitions;

    2. Highlights the important role of the RRF in preventing the fragmentation of the internal market and the further deepening of macroeconomic divergence, in fostering social and territorial cohesion by providing macroeconomic stabilisation, and in offering assurance to the financial markets by improving investor confidence in turbulent times, thereby lowering yield spreads;

    3. Welcomes the fact that the RRF is a one-off instrument providing additional fiscal space that has contributed to the prevention of considerable economic and social divergences between Member States with diverse fiscal space; highlights the Commission finding that the RRF has led to a sustained increase in investments across the EU and that the Commission expects the RRF to have a lasting impact across the EU beyond 2026, given its synergies with other EU funds; is, however, concerned that the RRF expiration in 2026 poses a significant risk of a substantial decline in public investment in common European priorities;

    4. Recalls that the MFF and RRF combined amount to almost EUR 2 trillion for the 2021-2027 programming period, but points to the fact that the high inflation rates and the associated increases in the cost of goods and services have decreased the current value of European spending agreed in nominal terms;

    5. Takes note of the Commission’s projection in 2024 concerning the potential of NGEU’s impact on the EU’s real gross domestic product (GDP) by 2026, which is significantly lower than its simulation in 2020 (1.4 % compared with 2.3 %), due in part to adverse economic and geopolitical conditions, and of the estimation that NGEU could lead to a sizeable, short-run increase in EU employment by up to 0.8 %; notes that the  long-term benefits of the RRF on GDP will likely exceed the budgetary commitments undertaken by up to three to six times , depending on the productivity effects of RRF investment and the diligent implementation of reforms and investments;

    6. Highlights the difficulty of quantifying the precise social and economic impact of the RRF, as it takes time for the impact of reforms and investments to become clear; stresses the need for further independent evaluations to assess the effective impact of reforms and investments and for further improvements of the underlying methodology; notes the Commission’s finding that approximately half of the expected increase in public investment between 2019 and 2025 is related to investment financed by the EU budget, particularly by the RRF, but notes that some investments have not yet delivered measurable impact;

    7. Notes that the RRF has incentivised the implementation of some reforms included in the country-specific recommendations made in the context of the European Semester through the inclusion of such reforms in the NRRPs; underlines that there has been a qualitative leap forward in terms of monitoring RRF implementation; recalls that the RRF Scoreboard is used to monitor the progress made towards achieving milestones and targets, as well as compliance with horizontal principles, and in particular the six pillars, namely the green transition, the digital transformation, smart, sustainable and inclusive growth (including economic cohesion, jobs, productivity, competitiveness, research, development and innovation, and a well-functioning internal market with strong small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs)), social and territorial cohesion, health, economic, social and institutional resilience with the aim of, inter alia, increasing crisis preparedness and crisis response capacity, and policies for the next generation, children and young people, such as education and skills; highlights that the overall uptake of country-specific recommendations made in the context of the European Semester remains low and has even dropped;

    8. Highlights that in the context of the new economic governance framework, the set of reforms and investments underpinning an extension of the adjustment period should be consistent with the commitments included in the approved NRRPs during the period of operation of the RRF and the Partnership Agreement under the Common Provisions Regulation[14]; observes that the five Member States that requested an extension of the adjustment period by 31 December 2024 relied partly on the reforms and investments already approved under the RRF to justify the extension; takes note of the fact that most Member States have included information on whether the reforms and investments listed in the medium-term fiscal-structural plans are linked to the RRF;

    9. Welcomes the fact that the RRF provides support for both reforms and investments in the Member States, but notes with concern that the short timeframe for the remaining RRF implementation poses challenges to the completion of key reforms and large-scale investments that are to be finalised towards the end of the RRF and to the timely fulfilment of the 70 % of milestones and targets that are still pending;

    10. Recalls that RRF expenditure should not substitute recurring national budgetary expenditure, unless duly justified, and should respect the principle of additionality of EU funding; insists that the firm, sustainable and verifiable implementation of non-recurrence, together with the targeting of clearly defined European objectives of reforms and investments, is key to ensure additionality and the long-lasting effect of additional European funds; recalls the need to uphold this principle and appeals against the crowding out or replacement of cohesion policy by the RRF or other temporary instruments, as cohesion policy remains essential for long-term sustainable territorial cohesion and convergence;

    11. Highlights that prioritising RRF implementation, the lack of administrative capacity in many Member States and challenges posed by global supply chains have contributed to the delayed implementation of cohesion policy; calls on the Commission, in this context, to provide a comprehensive assessment of the RRF’s impact on other financial instruments and public investments, technical support, and the administrative and absorption capacities of the Member States;

    12. Recalls that, in reaction to Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine, the REPowerEU revision contributes to Europe’s energy security by reducing its dependence on fossil fuels, diversifying its energy supplies, investing in European resources and infrastructure, tackling energy poverty and investing in energy savings and efficiency in all sectors, including transport; emphasises that through REPowerEU, an additional EUR 20 billion in grants was made available in 2023, including EUR 8 billion generated from the front-loading of Emissions Trading System allowances and EUR 12 billion from the Innovation Fund; highlights Parliament’s successes in negotiations, in particular on the provisions on replenishing the Innovation Fund, the 30 % funding target for cross-border projects, the focus of investments on tackling energy poverty for vulnerable households, SMEs and micro-enterprises, and the flexible use of unspent cohesion funds from the 2014-2020 MFF and of up to 7.5 % of national allocations under the 2021-2027 MFF;

    13. Recalls its call to focus RRF interventions on measures with European added value and therefore regrets the shortage of viable cross-border or multi-country measures, including high-speed railway and sustainable mobility infrastructure projects for dual use that are essential for completing the TEN-T network, and the related risk of re-nationalising funding; notes that the broad scope of the RRF objectives has contributed to this by allowing a wide variety of nationally focused projects to fall within its remit;

    14. Highlights the modification of Article 27 of the RRF Regulation through REPowerEU, which significantly strengthened the cross-border and multi-country dimensions of the RRF by encouraging the Member States to amend their NRRPs to add RepowerEU chapters, including a spending target of at least 30 % for such measures in order to guarantee the EU’s energy autonomy; is concerned by the broad interpretation adopted by the Commission, which allows any reduction in (national) energy demand to make a case for a cross-border and multi-country dimension;

    15. Welcomes the possibility of using RRF funding to contribute to the objectives of the Strategic Technologies for Europe Platform (STEP) by supporting investments in critical technologies in the EU in order to boost its industrial competitiveness; notes that no Member State has made use of the possibility to include in its NRRP an additional cash contribution to STEP objectives via the Member State compartment of InvestEU; recalls that Member States can still amend their national plans in that regard; expects the revision processes to be efficient, streamlined and simple, especially considering the final deadline of 2026, the current geopolitical context and the need to invest in European defence capabilities;

    16. Recalls the application of the DNSH principle for all reforms and investments supported by the RRF, with a targeted derogation under REPowerEU for energy infrastructure and facilities needed to meet immediate security of supply needs; encourages the Commission to assess the feasibility of a more uniform interpretation of the DNSH principle between the RRF and the EU taxonomy for sustainable activities, while taking into account the specificities of the RRF as a public expenditure programme;

    Financial aspects of the RRF

     

    17. Stresses that the RRF is the first major performance-based instrument at EU level which is exclusively based on financing not linked to costs (FNLC); recalls that Article 8 of the RRF Regulation stipulates that the RRF must be implemented by the Commission in direct management in accordance with the relevant rules adopted pursuant to Article 322 TFEU, in particular the Financial Regulation and the Rule of Law Conditionality Regulation; regrets that the Council did not agree to insert specific rules in the Financial Regulation to address the risks of this delivery model, such as double funding; considers that the rules of the Financial Regulation should be fully applicable to future instruments based on FNLC, including as regards fines, penalties and sanctions;

    18. Notes that only 13 Member States have requested loans and that EUR 92 billion of the EUR 385.8 billion available will remain unused since this amount was not committed by the deadline of 31 December 2023; takes note of the fact that loans were attractive for Member States that faced higher borrowing costs on the financial markets or that sought to compensate for a reduction in RRF grants; points out that some Member States have made limited use of RRF loans, either due to strong fiscal positions or administrative considerations; calls on the Commission to analyse the reasons for the low uptake in some Member States and to consider these findings when designing future EU financial instruments; notes with concern that national financial instruments to implement the NRRPs have not been sufficiently publicised, leading to limited awareness and uptake by potential beneficiaries; considers that a political discussion is needed on the use of unspent funds in the light of tight public budgets and urgent EU strategic priorities; calls for an assessment of how and under which conditions unused RRF funds could be redirected to boost Europe’s competitiveness, resilience, defence, and social, economic and territorial cohesion, particularly through investments in digital and green technologies aligned with the RRF’s original purpose;

    19. Recalls the legal obligation to ensure full repayment of NGEU expenditure by 31 December 2058 at the latest; reminds the Council and the Commission of their legal commitment under the interinstitutional agreement concluded in 2020 to ensure a viable path to refinancing NGEU debt, including through sufficient proceeds from new own resources introduced after 2021 without any undue reduction in programme expenditure or investment instruments under the MFF; deplores the lack of progress made in this regard, which raises concerns regarding the viability of the repayment of the debt undertaken under NGEU, and urges the Council to adopt new own resources without delay and as a matter of urgency; urges the Commission, furthermore, to continue efforts to identify additional genuine new own resources beyond the IIA and linked to EU policies, in order to cover the high spending needs associated with the funding of new priorities and the repayment of NGEU debt;

    20. Notes with concern the Commission’s estimation that the total cost for NGEU capital interest repayments are projected to be around EUR 25 to 30 billion per year from 2028, equivalent to 15-20 % of the 2025 annual budget ; recalls that recourse to special instruments had to be made in the last three budgetary procedures to cover EURI instrument costs; highlights that the significant increase in financing costs puts pressure on the future EU budget and limits the capacity to respond to future challenges;

    21. Takes note of the Commission’s target to fund up to 30 % of NGEU costs by issuing greens bonds; notes that by 31 December 2024 the Commission had issued European green bonds amounting to EUR 68.2 billion;

    Design and implementation of NRRPs

     

    22. Notes that 47 % of the available RRF funds had been disbursed by 31 December 2024, with grants reaching 55 % and loans 37 %, which has resulted in a high proportion of measures still to be completed in 2025 and 2026; is concerned, however, about the ECA’s finding that only 50 % of disbursed funds had reached final beneficiaries in 15 out of 22 Member States by October 2023; calls on the Commission to take the recommendations of the ECA duly into account in order to improve the functioning of any future performance-based instruments similar to the RRF, in particular in the context of a more targeted MFF;

    23. Welcomes the fact that all Member States have surpassed the targets for the green (37 %) and the digital transitions (20 %), with average expenditure towards climate and digital objectives of the RRF as a whole standing at 42 % and 26 % respectively; notes that the ECA has cast doubt on how the implementation of RRF measures has contributed to the green transition and has recommended improvements to the methodologies used to estimate the impact of climate-related measures; highlights the fact that the same methodological deficiencies exist across all pillars of the RRF;

    24. Notes the tangible impact that the RRF could have on social objectives, with Member States planning to spend around EUR 163 billion; underlines that such spending must be result-oriented, ensuring measurable economic and/or social benefits; stresses the need to accelerate investments in the development of rural, peripheral and outermost, isolated and remote areas, and in the fields of affordable housing, social protection and the integration of vulnerable groups, and youth employment, where expenditure is lagging behind; calls for an in-depth evaluation by the Commission, under the RRF Scoreboard, of the projects and reforms related to education and young people implemented by Member States under the RRF; regrets the delayed implementation of health objectives observed in certain Member States, given that the instrument should also improve the accessibility and capacity of health systems, and of key social infrastructure investments, including early childhood education and care facilities; stresses that these delays, in some cases linked to shifting budgetary priorities and revised national implementation timelines, risk undermining the achievement of the RRF’s social cohesion objectives;

    25. Reiterates its negotiating position to include targets for education (10 %) and for cultural activities (2 %); encourages the Commission’s effort to evaluate these targets as a benchmark in its assessment of education policy in NRRPs, through the RRF Scoreboard;

    26. Observes that a large majority of NRRPs include a specific section explaining how the plan addresses gender-related concerns and challenges; is concerned, however, that some NRRPs do not include an explanation of how the measures in the NRRP are expected to contribute to gender equality and equal opportunities for all and calls on the Member States concerned to add such explanations without delay;

    27. Stresses the importance of reforms focusing on labour market fragmentation, fostering quality working conditions, addressing wage level inequalities, ensuring decent living conditions, and strengthening social dialogue, social protection and the social economy;

    28. Notes the tangible impact that the RRF could have on the digital transformation objective, with EUR 166 billion allocated to corresponding plans; welcomes the contributions made under the smart, sustainable and inclusive growth pillar, in particular to competitiveness and support for SMEs; notes the need for an acceleration of investments in transnational cooperation, support for competitive enterprises leading innovation projects, and regulatory changes for smart, sustainable and inclusive growth, which are lagging behind;

    29. Stresses that the success of EU investments depends on well-functioning capital markets; calls on the Member States to ensure a more effective and timely disbursement of funds, particularly for SMEs and young entrepreneurs, to streamline application procedures with a view to enhancing accessibility and to implement specific measures to provide targeted support to help them play a more prominent role in the process of smart and inclusive growth;

    30. Is concerned that the achievement of milestones and targets lags behind the indicative timetable provided in the NRRPs, and that the pace of progress is uneven across Member States; regrets the time lag between the fulfilment of milestones and targets and the implementation of projects; highlights that the RRF will only achieve its long-term and short-term potential if the reform and investment components, respectively, are properly implemented; welcomes the fact that, following a slow start, RRF implementation has picked up since the second half of 2023 but significant delays affecting key reforms and investments still persist and have been attributed to various factors, including the revisions linked to the inclusion of REPowerEU, mounting inflation, the insufficient administrative capacity of Member States, in particular the smaller Member States, uncertainties regarding specific RRF implementation rules, high energy costs, supply shortages and an underestimation of the time needed to implement measures; notes that the postponement of key implementation deadlines by some governments to 2026 raises concerns about the capacity of some Member States to fully absorb the allocated funds within the set timeframe of the RRF; stresses the importance of maintaining a realistic and effective implementation schedule to prevent the risk of incomplete projects and missed opportunities for structural improvements; calls on the Commission to ensure that administrative bottlenecks are urgently addressed;

    31. Recalls the modification of the RRF Regulation through the inclusion of the REPowerEU chapter; stresses the importance of the REPowerEU chapters in NRRPs and calls on the Member States to prioritise mature projects and implement their NRRPs more quickly, both in terms of reforms and investments, and, where necessary, to adjust NRRPs in line with the RRF’s objectives, without undermining the overall balance and level of ambition of the NRRPs, in order to respond to challenges stemming from geopolitical events and to tackle current realities on the ground;

    32. Highlights the fact that the RRF could have helped to mitigate the effects of the current EU-wide housing crisis; regrets that some Member States did not make use of this opportunity and stresses the importance for the Member States to accelerate investments in availability and affordability of housing;

    33. Highlights the role of ‘super milestones’ in protecting the EU’s financial interests against rule of law deficiencies and in ensuring the full implementation of the requirements under Article 22 of the RRF Regulation; welcomes the fact that all but one Member State have satisfactorily fulfilled their ‘super milestones’; recalls that the Commission must recover any pre-financing that has not been netted against regular payment requests by the end of the RRF;

    34. Notes the high administrative burden and complexity brought by the RRF; stresses the considerable efforts required at national level to implement the RRF in parallel with structural funds; notes that between 2021 and 2024 the demand-driven Technical Support Instrument supported more than 500 RRF-related reforms in the Member States, directly or indirectly related to the preparation, amendment, revision and implementation of the NRRPs; takes note of the Commission guidance of July 2024 with simplifications and clarifications to streamline RRF implementation but expects the Commission to act swiftly on its promise to cut the administrative burden by 25 %; urges the Commission to give clear and targeted technical support to the Member States, allowing them to develop efficient administrative capacity to implement the milestones and targets; calls on the Commission to decrease the level of complexity of EU public procurement rules which apply to higher-value contracts;

    35. Expresses concern over the complexity of application procedures for RRF funding, particularly for SMEs and non-governmental organisations, which require external consultancy services even for small grants; emphasises that such bureaucratic obstacles contradict the original objectives of the RRF, which aimed to provide rapid and direct financial support; calls for an urgent simplification of application and reporting requirements, particularly for smaller beneficiaries, to maximise the absorption and impact of funds and to assist with their contribution to the green and digital transitions;

    36. Believes that implementation delays underscore the risk that measures for which RRF funding has been paid will not be completed by the 2026 payment deadline; welcomes the Commission’s statement at the Recovery and Resilience Dialogue (RRD) of 16 September 2024 that it will not reimburse non-implemented projects; considers it a shortcoming that RRF funds paid for milestones and targets assessed as fulfilled cannot be recovered if related measures are not eventually completed; encourages the Commission to take into account the ECA’s recommendations related to this and to assess, in cooperation with the Member States, the measures most at risk of not being completed by 31 August 2026; stresses the importance of monitoring these measures, facilitating timely follow-up and working towards solutions to overcome delays;

    37. Notes with concern that the remaining implementation timeframe of the RRF is too short for the implementation of many innovative projects; further notes that innovative projects, by definition, are more difficult to plan and more likely to encounter obstacles during implementation, making them unsuited to the RRF’s strict deadlines; urges the Commission to create future programmes that are flexible enough to give proper answers in changing circumstances and that at the same time guarantee a certain degree of predictability;

    38. Notes that some milestones and targets may be no longer achievable because of objective circumstances; stresses that any NRRP revisions should be made in accordance with the RRF Regulation, including the applicable deadlines, and should not entail backtracking on reforms, commitments or lower quality projects but should maintain the overall ambition and the efficiency of public spending;

    39. Is concerned about the Commission’s uneven assessment of NRRPs, which has led to double standards in the application of the Regulation; is further concerned about the uneven and different definition of milestones and targets from one NRRP to the other, as consistently reported by the ECA;

    40. Highlights that the duration of the Commission’s assessment of payment requests by Member States differs considerably among the Member States and stresses the need for more transparency from the Commission; urges the Commission to accelerate its assessments and to ensure the equal treatment of the Member States; highlights the need to ensure a level playing field across the EU for measures and indicators that are used to assess all RRF projects;

    41. Urges the Member States to increase their efforts to address administrative bottlenecks and provide sufficient administrative capacity to accelerate RRF implementation in view of the 2026 deadline and to avoid concentrating RRF projects in more developed regions and capitals by enabling RRF funds to flow into projects in the most vulnerable regions, thereby serving the RRF’s objective to enhance the EU’s social, territorial and economic cohesion; emphasises the importance of fair regional distribution within the NRRPs while ensuring that RRF funds are allocated based on economic and social impact, feasibility and long-term benefits;

    42. Calls for an 18-month extension of mature RRF projects through an amendment of the RRF Regulation by co-decision, if needed; emphasises that the envisaged extension of projects will be conducted by the Commission based on objective, clear and fair benchmarks; welcomes the possibility of establishing a targeted and performance-based prioritisation and transfer system after the 2026 deadline in order to allow for the finalisation of ongoing projects through other funding schemes, including the European Investment Fund and a possible new European competitiveness fund; urges the Commission to present a strategy to address the huge demand for public investment beyond 2026 without compromising budgetary resources in other critical areas;

    43. Calls for an evaluation of how this framework could enable targeted investments in EU defence supply chains, strategic stockpiles and defence innovation, ensuring alignment with broader European security objectives;

    44. Is concerned that some Member States might choose to forego parts of the amounts or entire amounts associated with their last payment request, thus avoiding the fulfilment of the last milestones and targets;

    Transparency, monitoring and control

     

    45. Takes note of the fact that the Commission had planned to conduct 112 RRF audits in all Member States in 2024; reminds the Commission of its obligation, in accordance with Article 24(3) of the RRF Regulation, to recover funding in case of incorrect disbursements or reversals of measures;

    46. Notes that the Commission relies on its own methodologies when calculating partial payments and suspensions of funds; regrets that these methodologies were only developed two years after the start of the RRF implementation and without the consultation of Parliament;

    47. Welcomes the extensive work of the ECA in relation to the RRF and deems it important to thoroughly assess its findings, in particular its findings that milestones and targets are often rather vague and output-oriented and are therefore not fit to measure results and impacts, and its findings regarding the risks of double funding resulting from overlaps with other policies; notes that the Commission has accepted many but not all of the ECA’s recommendations; stresses that weaknesses in financial controls, as highlighted by the ECA, must be urgently addressed to prevent double funding, cost inefficiencies, and mismanagement of EU funds; calls for enhanced transparency and for the full consideration of the ECA’s recommendations without adding unnecessary administrative burden;

    48. Notes that the ECA’s audits revealed several cases in which funding had been disbursed but the requirements related to the fulfilment of corresponding milestones and targets had not been adequately met; further notes that the Commission framework for assessing the ‘satisfactory fulfilment’ of the relevant milestones and targets contains discretionary elements, such as ‘minimal deviation from a requirement’ or ‘proportional delays’, and that the methodology for the determination of partial payments does not provide an explanation for the values chosen as coefficients, thereby leaving room for interpretation; asks the Commission to provide Parliament with further clarification;

    49. Insists that, as a rule, measures already included in other national plans benefiting from EU funding (e.g. cohesion, agriculture, etc.) should not be included in NRRPs, even if they do not incur any costs; urges the Commission to remain vigilant and proactive in identifying any potential situation of double funding in particular in regard to the different implementation models of the RRF and other EU funding instruments;

    50. Regrets the lack of a proper RRF audit trail and the persistent lack of transparency despite the bi-annual reporting requirement for Member States on the 100 largest final recipients, which was introduced into REPowerEU upon Parliament’s request; regrets the delays in reporting by some Member States and the limited informative value of the information provided, which ultimately prevents compliance checks by the Commission or the ECA; reiterates its call for the lists of the largest final recipients for each Member State to be regularly updated and published on the RRF Scoreboard and to include information on the economic operators involved, including contractors and sub-contractors, and their beneficial owners, and not simply ministries or other government bodies or state companies; further regrets that the current definition of ‘final recipient’ leaves room for interpretation, resulting in different final beneficiaries for similar measures among Member States; calls on the Commission, in this context, to ensure a common understanding of what constitutes a ‘final recipient’ so that this can be applied consistently;

    51. Is concerned about persistent weaknesses in national reporting and control mechanisms, due in part to absorption pressure affecting the capacity to detect ineligible expenditure and due to the complexity of the audit and control procedures, which created uncertainty in the Member States and an overload of administrative procedures; calls on the Commission to provide assurance on whether Member States’ control systems function adequately and to check the compliance of RRF-funded investment projects with EU and national rules; calls for payments to be reduced and, where appropriate, amounts to be recovered in accordance with Article 22 of the RRF Regulation, should weaknesses persist in the national control systems; regrets the reliance on manual cross-checks and self-declarations by recipients of EU funds in the absence of interoperable IT tools and harmonised standards, despite the existence of tools such as the Early Detection and Exclusion System and ARACHNE, whose use is currently not mandatory, thereby risking that expenditure is declared twice; recalls, in this regard, the reluctance of the Member States to make progress in developing the relevant IT tools in a timely manner;

    52. Shares the view of the ECA that the FNLC model does not preclude reporting on actual costs; notes that having clear insights on costs also facilitates the work of control and oversight bodies, as well as the EPPO and the European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF), and enables enhanced public scrutiny;

    53. Reiterates the role of the RRF Scoreboard in providing information for citizens on the overall progress in the implementation of NRRPs; underlines the importance of the Scoreboard in strengthening transparency and calls on the Commission to increase the level of transparency and data visualisation in the Scoreboard;

    54. Recalls that the reporting on the progress of implementation in the RRF Scoreboard is based on information provided by the Member States on a bi-annual basis;

    55. Highlights the important role of the EPPO and OLAF in protecting the EU’s financial interests; welcomes the fact that EPPO investigations into RRF-related fraud and corruption cases have led to several arrests, indictments and seizures of RRF funds; recalls that the EPPO was handling 307 active cases related to the RRF in 2024, corresponding to about 17 % of all expenditure fraud investigations and causing an estimated damage to the EU’s financial interests of EUR 2.8 billion; expects the number of investigations to grow as RRF implementation advances; calls on the Commission to look into the management declarations of the Member States in terms of their reporting of detected fraud and the remedial measures taken;

    Role of the European Parliament

     

    56. Reiterates the importance of Parliament’s role in scrutinising and monitoring the implementation of the RRF and in holding the Commission accountable; highlights Parliament’s input provided through various channels, in particular through various plenary debates, parliamentary resolutions, bi-monthly RRD meetings with the responsible Commissioners, over 30 meetings of the standing working group on the scrutiny of the RRF, numerous parliamentary questions, the annual discharge procedure of the Commission and the regular flow of information and ad hoc requests for information from the Commission; regrets that the model of using milestones and targets to trigger disbursement was not accompanied by adequate budgetary control mechanisms, resulting in a diminished role for Parliament compared to its scrutiny of MFF spending;

    57. Recalls Parliament’s rights as laid down in Article 25 of the RRF Regulation, in particular the right to simultaneously receive from the Commission information that it transmits to the Council or any of its preparatory bodies in the context of the RRF Regulation or its implementation, as well as an overview of its preliminary findings concerning the satisfactory fulfilment of the relevant milestones and targets included in the NRRPs; encourages the sharing of relevant outcomes of discussions held in Council preparatory bodies with the competent parliamentary committees;

    58. Recalls further the right of Parliament’s competent committees to invite the Commission to provide information on the state of play of the assessment of the NRRPs in the context of the RRD meetings;

    59. Regrets the fact that Parliament has no role in the design of NRRPs and is not consulted on payment requests; criticises furthermore the fact that Parliament has not been provided with a clear and traceable overview of the implementation status of projects and payments; expects to be informed about the context of NRRP revisions in order to make its own assessment of the revisions and to have an enhanced role in possible future instruments based on the RRF experience;

    Stakeholder involvement

    60. Regrets the insufficient involvement of local and regional authorities (LRAs), civil society organisations, social partners, national parliaments and other relevant stakeholders in the design, revision or implementation of NRRPs leading to worse policy outcomes, as well as limited ownership; regrets that in the design and implementation of the NRRPs, some Member States have clearly favoured some LRAs or stakeholders to the detriment of others; recalls that the participation of LRAs, national authorities and those responsible for developing these policies is crucial for the success of the RRF, as stated in Article 28 of the RRF Regulation; recalls that Parliament supported a binding provision in the RRF to establish a multilevel dialogue to engage relevant stakeholders and discuss the preparation and implementation of NRRPs with them, with a clear consultation period; calls, therefore, for the maximum possible stakeholder involvement in the implementation of NRRPs, in accordance with the national legal framework and based on clear and transparent principles;

    61. Reiterates the need for regular interaction between national coordinating authorities and national stakeholders involved in the monitoring of the implementation of the NRRPs, in line with the principle of transparency and accountability; stresses that more regular and public communication from the national coordinating authorities is needed to ensure that updated information about the progress of the implementation of NRRPs is made available;

    62. Stresses that decisions should be made at the level that is most appropriate; is convinced that the application of the partnership principle and a stronger involvement of LRAs could make project implementation more efficient, reduce disparities within Member States and result in more and better quality measures with a cross-border and multi-country dimension;

    63. Believes that valuable lessons can be drawn from the RRF to be reflected in the design of performance-based instruments in the next MFF, in particular in the light of the EU’s competitiveness and simplification agendas;

    Lessons for the future

    64. Believes that the combination of reforms and investments has proved successful but that a clearer link is needed between the two; highlights the importance of aligning any funding with the objectives of the instrument and disbursing it in line with the progress made towards them; insists that the level of ambition of NRRPs should not be lowered but should be commensurate with the RRF timeline to ensure their successful implementation;

    65. Is convinced, as highlighted by the Draghi report, that boosting EU competitiveness, decarbonising the EU’s economy and making it more circular and resource-efficient, as well as closing the skills gap, creating quality jobs and enhancing the EU’s innovation capacity, will be central priorities beyond 2026; is concerned that a sizeable funding gap will arise after the RRF ceases to operate at the end of 2026, notably for public investment in common European priorities, since financial resources from national budgets vary significantly among Member States; highlights the need to use the lessons learned from the RRF to better leverage public and private investments with a view to addressing the financing gap in European objectives and transitions, which the Draghi report estimates at over EUR 800 billion annually, while ensuring seamless continuity of investments in common European goods;

    66. Welcomes the enhanced use of financial instruments made possible by the option to channel RRF funds towards the Member States’ compartment of InvestEU;

    67. Urges the Commission to apply the lessons learned and the ECA’s observations, and to ensure that future performance-based instruments are well-targeted, aligned with the aim of financing European public goods and prioritising the addressing of clearly defined strategic challenges, economic sustainability and competitiveness; calls for it to be ensured that all future instruments are designed to measure not only inputs or short-term outputs and progress but also results in terms of long-term impacts backed by outcomes;

    68. Calls on the Commission to conduct an independent evaluation and to report on the RRF impact on private investments at aggregate EU level, in particular on its potential crowding-out effect on private investments and its determinants; calls further for objective and clear analyses from the Commission on how the implementation of reforms and investments within the NRRPs affects the economies of the individual Member States, with special regard to smart, sustainable and inclusive growth; urges the Commission to take the lessons learned from these analyses and from the ECA’s observations on the RRF implementation into account when drawing up its proposals for the next programming period;

    69. Underlines that all EU-funded investments and reforms should be coordinated and coherent with strategic planning at national level and should focus on projects with a clear European added value; underlines the need for a spending target for cross-border and multi-country investments; calls on the Commission to develop a credible methodology to assess the cross-border and multi-country dimensions of EU funded projects;

    70. Highlights that meaningful social and territorial dialogues with a high level of involvement of LRAs, social partners, civil society organisations and national parliaments within the national legal framework are essential for national ownership, successful implementation and democratic accountability; expresses concern over the insufficient involvement of all relevant stakeholders in the implementation and oversight of RRF-funded initiatives; stresses in particular that regions and city councils cannot be mere recipients of decisions, without being given the opportunity to have a say on reforms and investments that truly transform their territories;

    71. Believes that it is essential to adopt differentiated strategies that recognise the cultural diversity of the various regions and enhance their economic and social cohesion instead of applying a homogeneous or one-size-fits-all approach that could be to the detriment of the less developed regions; calls, therefore, for dialogues with stakeholders to be strengthened and more diligently employed as they could inspire future initiatives and mechanisms in the EU and its Member States;

    72. Underlines the requirement of the RRF Regulation to publicly display information about the origin of funding for projects funded by the EU to ensure buy-in from European citizens;

    73. Highlights that the RRD meetings have been an important tool in enhancing transparency and accountability, which are crucial for the optimal implementation of the RRF;

    74. Reiterates that further efforts are required to improve the transparency and traceability of the use of EU funds; stresses the need to ensure that data that is relevant for performance measurement is available and that information on performance is presented in a better and more transparent manner; stresses that the feedback mechanism between performance information and programme design or adjustment should be enhanced;

    75. Considers that better training and capacity-building across all regions and authorities involved, in particular at national level, could have accelerated the RRF’s implementation and enabled the implementing authorities to better adapt to the performance-based nature of the RRF; considers that the Commission could have assisted Member States more at the planning stage and provided earlier implementation guidance, in particular with a view to strengthening their audit and control systems and the cross-border dimension of the RRF;

    76. Highlights the importance of mitigating the risk of double funding; suggests the deployment of an integrated and interoperable IT and data mining system and the development of clear standards for datasets to be applied across Member States, with a view to allowing comprehensive and automated expenditure tracking; calls for improved coordination mechanisms that define clear responsibilities among the bodies involved in the implementation of the various EU and national programmes, while avoiding unnecessary bureaucratic complexity and ensuring an efficient allocation of funds; encourages the integration of advanced data analytics and AI tools to enhance performance tracking, evaluation and reporting to alleviate manual workload and to streamline reporting processes; underlines that such progress can only happen if there is also operational support to digitalise administrations;

    77. Strongly urges the Commission and the Member States to ensure that any type of EU FNLC or EU funding that is performance based complies with EU and national rules, ultimately protecting the financial interests of the EU; reiterates the accountability and responsibility of the Commission and the Member States to ensure the legality and the regularity of EU funding, as well as the respect of sound financial management principles;

    78. Considers that the role of Parliament in the monitoring of the RRF should be further enhanced;

    79. Calls for future performance-based instruments to have a single audit trail to trace budget contributions to the projects funded; underlines the need for project-level auditing to mitigate reputational risks in the eyes of the general public and to facilitate the recovery of funds in case measures are reversed; underlines the need to reduce administrative bottlenecks and burden;

    80. Demands that any possible future performance-based programmes make clearer links between the milestones and targets and the actual projects being implemented; stresses that there should be less of a delay between the fulfilment of milestones and the implementation of projects;

    81. Reiterates its call for an open platform which contains data on all projects, final recipients and the regional distribution of funding, thereby facilitating auditing and democratic oversight;

    82. Stresses that any possible future budgetary decisions on EU borrowing should respect the unity of the budget and Parliament’s role as part of the budgetary authority; highlights the risks of cost overruns for the repayment of debt, resulting inter alia from volatile interest rates; deems it important to ensure from the outset that sufficient funding is available to cover these costs without presenting a detriment to other programmes or political priorities;

    83. Invites the Commission and the Member States to closely assess and learn from instruments and tools such as the RRF, in order to maximise the efficiency and impact of EU funding, investments and reforms, streamline policy objectives, improve the collaboration of the institutions and stakeholders at national and European level, and increase national ownership;

    84. Notes the declared intention of the Commission to draw on the RRF experience when designing its proposals for the post-2027 EU funding programmes, due later this year; acknowledges that the independent ex post evaluation will come too late to feed into the process leading up to the next programming period, but expects the Commission and the co-legislators to take due account of the lessons learned from the RRF and of the recommendations of relevant stakeholders, in particular LRA, civil society organisations and social partners; believes that, as the EU plans for future economic resilience, there is also a need to further mobilise private investment, strengthen capital markets and ensure that public spending remains fiscally responsible and strategically targeted to make the EU more resilient and sovereign in an ever more conflictual geopolitical context;

    85. Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council, the Commission, and to the governments and parliaments of the Member States.

    MIL OSI Europe News

  • MIL-OSI: FIREDISC Cookers® – The Leader in Outdoor Portable Cooking – Appoints Rockcliffe Capital as Exclusive Advisor to Lead Strategic Equity Raise and Accelerate North American Expansion

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    HOUSTON, June 04, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — In a grill market filled with disposable imports and overhyped gadgets, FIREDISC Cookers stands apart. Today, the Texas-based outdoor cooking innovator announced the appointment of Rockcliffe Capital as its exclusive advisor to lead a strategic equity raise that will fuel growth in retail distribution, product development, and brand expansion across North America.

    FIREDISC Cookers, founded in 2010 by brothers Griff Jaggard and Hunter Jaggard, was born out of frustration with underbuilt barbeque grills that couldn’t keep up with rugged outdoor adventures. Drawing from the South Texas discada, they engineered a modern propane cooker: durable, powerful, portable, and built for the outdoors.

    The result is a full line of outdoor gas grills, portable griddles, disk cookers, and disco-style systems powered by high- output gas burners and designed for flavor, function, and freedom. The flagship FIREDISC 380 features a 15,000-BTU propane burner and a 380-square-inch cooking surface, perfect for camp, tailgate, or backyard BBQ.

    “This started with a simple goal: cook great food anywhere,” said Griff Jaggard, co-founder and CEO of FIREDISC Cookers. “What began in a barn became a brand embraced by overlanders, RVers, college fans, and chefs who care about quality gear. This raise helps us build that community and scale even faster.”

    With demand surging at retailers like Ace Hardware and online, FIREDISC is expanding its U.S.-based manufacturing and launching new SKUs, including foldable cookers, overland-ready editions, and bundled grill accessories. The brand’s rugged systems are backed by an accessory ecosystem of propane regulators, hard lids, wind guards, spatulas, fuel, and cleaning kits, driving strong repeat business across the retail distribution and DTC channels.

    Rockcliffe Capital, known for advising premium consumer and lifestyle brands, will lead the equity raise, already attracting interest from outdoor-focused investors and strategic funds.

    “What FIREDISC has built is rare: premium performance, authentic roots, and a loyal tribe,” said Campbell Ohrlis, President of Revenue Operations at Rockcliffe Capital. “This isn’t just a BBQ grill. It’s a lifestyle. It’s a movement. It’s a cooker people talk about, share recipes on, and take from tailgate to elk camp.”

    What Makes FIREDISC Different? 

    • Outdoor cooking built tough: high-output gas burners, zero moving parts, and collapsible legs  
    • From trails to tailgates: fits every adventure, from backyard BBQs to overlanding expeditions  
    • Deep retail traction: DTC and retail distribution success at Ace Hardware and beyond
    • Passionate community: thousands of 5-star reviews, viral user recipes, and influencer-driven content
    • Complete gear lineup: from grill accessories and propane regulators to branded disco and griddle gear

    Fueling the Next Phase of Growth

    Funds will support:

    • National retail distribution and channel expansion
    • Scaled U.S. production of new FIREDISC cookers and accessories   Strategic co-branded outdoor partnerships
    • Content partnerships featuring FIREDISC recipes and real-world outdoor cooking

    Whether it’s fajitas on the ranch, tacos on the portable griddle, or fish at the lake, FIREDISC Cookers is the only barbeque grill people bring everywhere and brag about.

    About FIREDISC® Cookers

    Headquartered in Katy, Texas, FIREDISC® Cookers is a leading national brand specializing in the design, manufacturing, distribution, and retail of innovative outdoor cooking products. Founded by Texas brothers, including co-founder Griff Jaggard, FIREDISC Cookers has redefined how America cooks outdoors. From portable propane cookers, rugged griddles, and disco-style cookers to high-performance grills and durable grill accessories, FIREDISC delivers unmatched performance and portability for adventurers, tailgaters, and backyard chefs alike.

    Whether you’re cooking fajitas on a griddle, deep-frying in a disco cooker, or searing steaks on one of FIREDISC’s iconic propane grills, FIREDISC Cookers makes outdoor cooking accessible, effortless, and memorable. Engineered with precision and built for the outdoors, every FIREDISC® product—from cookers to accessories—is designed to turn good food into great memories.

    Created for those who value freedom, flavor, and function, FIREDISC Cookers are as at home in elk camp as they are on a patio. Whether you’re firing up a quick dinner in the backyard or preparing a feast in the wild, FIREDISC is the trusted tool of choice.

    With a loyal and growing nationwide fanbase, FIREDISC Cookers is more than just gear. It’s a movement fueled by innovation, quality, and the vision of Griff Jaggard and his team. Since its launch in 2017, the family-owned, Texas- based company has earned its place as a category leader in outdoor cooking. Their commitment to quality, durability, and superior customer service has made FIREDISC Cookers a household name among outdoor enthusiasts, weekend warriors, and grill masters.

    As FIREDISC looks ahead, the brand remains committed to raising the bar in propane-powered outdoor cooking with new innovations in cookers, griddles, grills, and disco-style solutions built to go wherever flavor leads. Fire it Up and Gather ‘Round. Learn more at www.firedisccookers.com

    About Rockcliffe Capital

    Rockcliffe Capital is a boutique investment bank focused on advising high-growth companies in consumer, lifestyle, and specialty manufacturing sectors. With a founder-first mindset and a deep network of capital partners, Rockcliffe helps visionary brands raise, scale, and exit with intention.

    The MIL Network

  • MIL-OSI Video: Haiti: hunger & gender-based violence ahead of Hurricane Season – Press Conference | United Nations

    Source: United Nations (Video News)

    The Regional Director for the World Food Program (WFP) in Latin America and the Caribbean, Lola Castro, today (3 Jun) said WFP in Haiti is facing the start of the hurricane season “with an empty warehouse where we have no stocks for assisting any emergency.”

    Castro, talking to reporters in New York via Video Teleconference, said, “at this moment half of the population of Haiti are facing hunger or some kind of emergency levels of hunger. And this is 5.7 million people. And Haiti also is one of the five countries on the world that we have catastrophic levels of hunger. In fact, in the displaced camps of port au Prince, we have around 8,500 people who are really suffering without food, water, sanitation, and it is really traumatic to have this in this Western hemisphere.”

    She said, “around 14,000 people that have been recently displaced from Kenscoff,” a commune where “people used to come and sell their food into the city.”

    The humanitarian official said, “now they are basically receiving food assistance because their houses have been burned, their livelihoods are being destroyed,” adding that “the conflict is really disrupting the food systems and the supply chains that we have in Port au Prince and Haiti itself.”

    She noted that “6,000 women and girls have reported some type of gender-based violence, which is really not acceptable,” stressing that Port-au-Prince “is probably one of the most dangerous places in the world to be a woman or girl now.”

    Castro said, WFP, “despite all the violence, displacement and collapse” is still working in Haiti, reaching “over 1.3 million people this year until March.”

    She said, “the situation that we’re facing now is quite dramatic, because when we are looking at our stocks dwindling and disappearing and we have only stocks to assist any emergency, or any new displacement, or anybody facing IPC 4 up to July.”

    As the hurricane season approaches, she said, “we have no cash neither to go and buy locally if it was possible in some areas, or to do a rapid humanitarian response. We are very concerned that a single storm can put hundreds of thousands of people in Haiti again into humanitarian catastrophe and hunger.”

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T0nmXgLQY0o

    MIL OSI Video