NewzIntel.com

Category: Justice

  • MIL-OSI NGOs: “Inflicting harm and denying care” in the West Bank: MSF report on escalation of attacks and obstructions of healthcare

    Source: Médecins Sans Frontières –

    Jerusalem – Israeli forces and settlers have increased the use of extreme physical violence against Palestinians in the occupied West Bank since the all-out war on Gaza began in October 2023, according to a new report by Medecins Sans Frontieres (MSF). In total, at least 870 Palestinians have been killed and over 7,100 injured between October 2023 and January 2025. 

    According to the MSF report, “Inflicting harm and denying care”, the escalation of violence in the West Bank has severely hindered access to healthcare and is part of a pattern of systemic oppression by Israel which has been described by the International Court of Justice (ICJ) as amounting to racial segregation and apartheid.

    “Inflicting harm and denying care” in the West Bank pdf — 13.7 MB Download

    The report which covers a one-year period from October 2023 and 2024, provides in-depth interviews from 38 MSF patients and personnel, hospital staff paramedics and volunteers supported by MSF who report prolonged and violent Israeli military incursions and stricter movement restrictions, all of which have severely hindered access to essential services, particularly healthcare.  The situation has further deteriorated since the ceasefire in Gaza and has exacerbated dire living conditions for many Palestinians who are paying an immense physical and psychological toll.

    “Palestinian patients are dying because they simply cannot reach hospitals,” says Brice de le Vingne, MSF emergency coordinator. “We’re seeing ambulances blocked by Israeli forces at checkpoints while carrying critical patients, medical facilities surrounded and raided during active operations, and healthcare workers subjected to physical violence while trying to save lives.”

    Every volunteer paramedic risks their life to provide life-saving treatment to the people living in the camp. Palestine, September 2024.
    Alexandre Marcou/MSF

    An increased number of attacks on medical personnel and facilities have been reported to MSF teams, including attacks on hospitals, destruction of makeshift medical sites in refugee camps, as well as the harassment, detention, injury, and killing of first responders and medical workers by Israeli forces.

    Between October 2023 and December 2024, WHO has recorded 694 attacks on healthcare in the West Bank, with hospitals and healthcare structures often besieged by military force. Healthcare workers express a feeling of insecurity as they are frequently harassed, detained, injured and even killed.

    “Israeli forces surrounded the stabilisation point [in Tubas], closing both its entrances, even though it was very clear that this was a medical building,” says a medic from the Palestinian Red Crescent Society, supported by MSF. “They ordered all the paramedics to exit the stabilisation point. There were around 22 of us paramedics there. Israeli soldiers shot inside and outside the building, damaging our supplies and the stabilisation point.”

    In case of medical emergency, restrictions of movement can have deadly consequences. Access to healthcare in this context has been severely impeded by the obstruction and targeting of ambulance movements and the escalation of violent military raids resulting in injuries, fatalities and the destruction of vital civilian infrastructure, including roads, healthcare, water pipelines and electrical systems, particularly in Tulkarem and Jenin refugee camps. In remote areas and outskirts of cities like Jenin or Nablus, the situation is especially dire, as patients with chronic conditions, such as those who need regular dialysis treatment, are forced to stay home due to the untenable obstacles to reaching healthcare.

    On top of the frequent Israeli military incursions, settler violence and the ever-increasing expansion of settlements has left many Palestinians vulnerable to violence and afraid to move across the West Bank. In total, 1,500 attacks by Israeli settlers against Palestinians have been reported by OCHA between October 2023 and 2024.

    As the occupying power, Israel has legal obligations under international law to ensure access to healthcare and protect medical personnel. The healthcare system in the West Bank is under immense strain and forced into a state of perpetual emergency.

    MSF calls Israel to stop the violence against healthcare workers, patients and health facilities and to stop obstructing medical personnel from performing lifesaving duties.

    MIL OSI NGO –

  • MIL-OSI Security: Guam Man Sentenced to 10 Years in Federal Prison for Enticement of a Minor

    Source: Office of United States Attorneys

    Hagatña, Guam – SHAWN N. ANDERSON, United States Attorney for the Districts of Guam and the Northern Mariana Islands, announced that defendant Ricky Junior O. Quichocho, age 37, from Dededo, Guam, was sentenced by the U.S. District Court of Guam on February 4, 2025 to 10 years imprisonment for Attempted Enticement of a Minor, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2422(b).  The Court also ordered five years of supervised release following imprisonment and a mandatory $100.00 special assessment fee.  Quichocho was ordered to register with the Sex Offender Registry anywhere he resides, is employed, or is in school.

    In May of 2024, Air Force Office of Special Investigation and Homeland Security Investigations conducted a joint undercover operation to identify and target individuals who were seeking to contact and engage in sexual activity with minor children. Agents created multiple personas on several social networking applications and posted in online forums.

    On May 7, 2024, Ricky Junior O. Quichocho, a civilian employee of a military contractor, initiated contact with the undercover persona. Even though the undercover persona said she was 13 years old, Quichocho continued communication and stated he was interested in “sexual fun.” Throughout the month, Quichocho continued text messages of a sexual nature, indicating various sex acts he wanted to do with the undercover persona. On June 10, 2024, after an agreement to meet with the minor at the Anderson Air Force Base Visitor Control Center parking lot, Quichocho instead was met by Air Force Office of Special Investigations Special Agents. In a subsequent interview, Quichocho admitted to his conduct. A forensic analysis of Quichocho’s cellphone confirmed text messages and photographs sent to the undercover persona.

    “Interagency partnerships are the key to fighting child exploitation,” stated United States Attorney Anderson.  “This case is another reminder of the dangers faced by children during online activity.  We will continue to target offenders who prey on this vulnerable segment of our communities. I applaud HSI and AFOSI in bringing Quichocho to justice.”

    “HSI utilizes partnerships with agencies including AFOSI to protect our communities from child predators.  By working together, HSI ensures resources are utilized most effectively to seek out and apprehend those who intend to harm our most vulnerable community members,” said Special Agent in Charge Lucy Cabral-DeArmas.

    “AFOSI will continue to work alongside our law enforcement partners to root out criminal behavior that threatens the mission, equipment and people of the Department of the Air Force,” said Special Agent Eric Beebe, Commander of AFOSI Detachment 602. “We are dedicated to protecting our Airmen, their families, and the broader Guam community, as Operation Island Fever showcased.”

    The case was investigated by Homeland Security Investigations and Air Force Office of Special Investigations Detachment 602.

    Assistant United States Attorney Devarup Rastogi prosecuted the case in the District of Guam.

    This was a Project Safe Childhood (PSC) case, a nationwide initiative to combat the growing epidemic of child sexual exploitation and abuse launched in May 2006 by the Department of Justice.  Led by U.S. Attorneys’ Offices and CEOS, PSC marshals federal, state, and local resources to better locate, apprehend, and prosecute individuals who exploit children via the Internet, as well as to identify and rescue victims. For more information about PSC, please visit Justice.gov/PSC.

    MIL Security OSI –

  • MIL-OSI Asia-Pac: Policy on mediation implemented

    Source: Hong Kong Information Services

    A policy incorporating mediation clauses in government contracts came into effect today.

    The Department of Justice (DoJ) explained that the clauses outline that contract parties agree to use mediation to resolve disputes first before resorting to arbitration or litigation.

    In addition, the DoJ today promulgated “The Government of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region Mediation Rules (2025 Edition)”. It stressed that these shall not affect the operation of “The Government of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region Construction Mediation Rules (1999 Edition)”.

    The implementation of mediation clauses follows the issuance of a Policy Statement on the Incorporation of Mediation Clauses in Government Contracts on November 6 last year.

    The DoJ said it anticipates that private organisations will make reference to and adopt similar mediation clauses in their own contracts, thereby deepening a “mediate first” culture.

    MIL OSI Asia Pacific News –

  • MIL-OSI Australia: Address to OECD International Workshop on Rigorous Impact Evaluation Approaches including Randomised Controlled Trials

    Source: Australian Treasurer

    As is customary in Australia, I acknowledge the Ngunnawal people, on whose lands I am recording these remarks, and all First Nations people joining this international workshop.

    Thank you to our OECD Public Management and budgeting colleagues, Jon Blondal, Andrew Blazey and the team for helping to coordinate this event and offering me the opportunity to provide this opening address. This event is being run by the OECD in collaboration with the Australian Centre for Evaluation in the Department of the Treasury. The Australian Government is delighted to be contributing to global efforts to advocate for better evidence. And we are keen to connect with international endeavours that promote its generation, synthesis and sharing in public policy.

    Today, I want to discuss how countries can collaborate to better create and use evidence. This is a substantial reform. Indeed, I argue that randomised trials and better use of evidence isn’t just another worthy public policy tweak. It’s bigger than that. Much bigger. Effectively using evidence to make policy decisions is a public administration reform on par with the biggest changes in good government that humanity has put into place. It is the seventh phase of good government.

    Let’s take a quick moment to run through the major milestones in the history of public administration.

    Six big reforms in the history of public administration

    Throughout history, there have been 6 big reforms in public administration.

    The first was the rise of bureaucracy and professionalised governance. It was during the 18th and 19th centuries that public administration shifted from patronage and informal systems to emphasising impartiality, specialisation, and accountability. Democratic institutions and a robust civil society provided the conditions for an independent and accountable civil service.

    The second big reform occurred in the early 20th century. The efficiency revolution – scientific management of public administration that focused on efficiency and rational organisation – was inspired by industrial principles.

    In response to economic crises and post‑WWII recovery, we saw the rise of the third big reform – the welfare state and the expansion of government responsibilities in social welfare, healthcare and economic planning.

    The fourth big reform in public administration in the late 20th century was market‑oriented governance. We saw governments adopt private‑sector practices like outsourcing, performance metrics, and competition.

    Concerns about accountability also carried through to the fifth big historic reform – the era of digital transformation and e‑governance. The early 21st century saw technology revolutionise public administration. It enabled data‑driven decision‑making and citizen engagement.

    Building on the lessons learnt during the digital transformation, the past decade has seen the move towards adaptive governance – the sixth big reform in public administration. Top‑down processes were swapped out for more flexible, collaborative and cross‑sector approaches that embrace ‘long‑term systems thinking’ to address interconnected crises such as climate change (Brunner and Lynch 2017).

    Each of these 6 big reforms from the past 3 centuries has helped to reshape government and improve citizens’ lives.

    The seventh big reform in public administration: randomised trials

    Today I want to argue that we are on the cusp of a seventh big reform in public administration.

    It will involve the widespread adoption of randomised trials as a means of testing policies by providing a counterfactual.

    This reform should include the synthesis of quality evidence about what works, and what doesn’t, to provide public administrators with irrefutable knowledge that can improve people’s lives.

    Let’s consider a couple of examples to see how this might work in practice.

    Eye care is often a neglected field of public health in developing economies.

    In rural Bangladesh, a randomised trial of providing free reading glasses involved more than 800 adults with jobs requiring close attention to detail, such as tea pickers, weavers, and seamstresses (Jacobs 2024). The study found that when workers were given free reading glasses, they earned 33 per cent more than those who were not given glasses (Sehrin et al. 2024).

    Speaking to The New York Times, Dr Nathan Congdon, one of the authors of the study findings, said that ‘…what makes the results especially exciting is the potential to convince governments that vision care interventions are as inexpensive, cost‑effective and life‑changing as anything else that we can offer in healthcare’ (Jacobs 2024).

    As well as garnering evidence on what does work, the widespread adoption of randomised trials must also include quality evidence about what doesn’t work.

    In 2014, the US state of Massachusetts launched a 4‑year intervention program called the Juvenile Justice Pay for Success Initiative (Patrick DL 2014). The program aimed to reduce recidivism and improve employment outcomes in young men who were at high risk of re‑offending (Third Sector 2024).

    The initiative involved an experimental financial contract called ‘Pay For Success’ – also known as a social impact bond. Funders assumed the US$27 million up‑front financial risk. And the government would only refund the cost of the program if a third‑party evaluator and validator determined that the initiative achieved a reduction in the number of days the young men spent in jail, and improvements in their employment and job readiness (Patrick DL 2014).

    At the end of the 4‑year program, a randomised trial found no discernible effects on reincarceration or employment (Coalition for Evidence‑Based Policy 2025). Neither the recidivism nor employment outcomes were sizable enough to trigger the repayment under the pay‑for‑success contract (Roca et al. 2025).

    Why randomised trials should be prioritised over other forms of evaluation

    When the evaluation of a social program does not produce the hoped‑for results, it’s difficult to avoid feelings of disappointment.

    But this has been the reality for some time.

    We know from the history of large, well‑conducted randomised trial evaluations that only a small percentage find that the intervention being evaluated produces a meaningful improvement over the status quo.

    As Peter Rossi attested in his 1987 Iron Law of Evaluation, ‘The expected value of any net impact assessment of any large‑scale social program is zero’ (Arnold Ventures 2018a).

    But here’s the light on the hill.

    The ‘iron law’ applies to most fields of research. That includes medicine, where 50–80 per cent of positive results from initial clinical studies are overturned by a subsequent randomised trial (Arnold Ventures 2018a).

    In medicine, the move towards randomised trials continues to save lives and stop unnecessary interventions.

    For every new treatment such as AIDS drugs, the HPV vaccine and genetic testing – medicine has discarded old ones, like bloodletting, gastric freezing and tonsillectomy (Leigh 2018).

    The willingness to test cures against placebos, or the best available alternative, is how we make progress. In public policy, we can do the same. If it works, we use it; if not, it’s back to the lab.

    The central goal of evaluation: finding interventions that work

    The key is having a big, ambitious goal to strive towards.

    I propose the primary goal of government evaluation should be to find interventions that work.

    More specifically – to build a body of programs backed by strong, replicated randomised trial evidence of important, lasting improvements in people’s lives.

    In other words, evidence that provides policymakers with confidence that if another jurisdiction were to implement the program faithfully in a similar population, it would improve people’s lives in a meaningful way.

    Imagine being able to confidently draw from a codified body of social programs and interventions that your jurisdiction could test, deploy and regulate.

    In the United States, the Coalition for Evidence‑Based Policy points towards Saga Education, a high‑dosage mathematics tutoring program for year 9 and 10 students in low‑income US schools that underwent 3 rigorous randomised trials. This program produced sizable, statistically significant effects on students’ maths scores on the district tests at the end of the tutoring year (Arnold Ventures 2024a). I’ll come back to this program a bit later.

    Similarly, the Coalition for Evidence‑Based Policy points to 2 job‑training programs for low‑income adults that were both shown to increase long‑term earnings by 20 to 40 per cent. These programs focused on the fast‑growing IT and financial services sectors, where jobs are well paid, and employees are in high demand (Arnold Ventures 2022a and 2022b).

    Finding interventions that work should be evaluators’ central goal. It is the only plausible path by which rigorous evaluations will improve the human condition. If we don’t allocate spending based on rigorous evidence, it is hard to see how governments can make progress on critical social problems.

    Here in Australia, a think tank study examined a sample of 20 Australian Government programs conducted between 2015 and 2022 (Winzar et al. 2023).

    Their report concluded that 95 per cent of the programs, which had a total expenditure of over A$200 billion, were not properly evaluated. And its analysis of Australian state and territory government evaluations reported similar results.

    The researchers noted that the problems with evaluation started from the outset of program and policy design. They also estimated that fewer than 1.5 per cent of government evaluations use a randomised design (Winzar et al. 2023).

    This finding echoes the Australian Productivity Commission’s 2020 report into the evaluation of Indigenous programs (Productivity Commission 2020).

    This report concluded that ‘both the quality and usefulness of evaluations of policies and programs affecting Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people are lacking’, and that ‘Evaluation is often an afterthought rather than built into policy design’ (Productivity Commission 2020).

    Finding what works: using strong signals from prior research

    If we accept that the central goal of evaluation is to find interventions that work, there are important implications for researchers and research funders.

    It means that it makes sense to evaluate an intervention, using a large randomised trial, only if there is a strong signal in prior research.

    Examples of prior research could include a pilot randomised trial, a high‑quality quasi‑experiment, or a randomised trial of a related program.

    This is the approach that Arnold Ventures is taking in the US via the Coalition for Evidence‑Based Policy, the US nonprofit relaunched under the leadership of Jon Baron (Coalition for Evidence‑Based Policy n.d.).

    Rigorous testing enabled Arnold Ventures to create a growing body of proven interventions in education and training (Coalition for Evidence‑Based Policy n.d.). It’s an approach also being used by the US Department of Education in its Investing in Innovation Fund, which was recently renamed the Education Innovation and Research Program. It has yielded a much higher success rate in identifying interventions with true effectiveness. In 2019, robust evidence standards used by the Fund (as it was at the time) resulted in positive impacts for 40 to 50 per cent of its larger grants.

    Compare this to the US Department of Health and Human Services’ Teen Pregnancy Prevention Program, which had a much lower hit rate of success – just 17 per cent – for its larger grants (Arnold Ventures 2019).

    Arnold Ventures (2018b) proposes a strategy for policy and researchers that involves 3 tiers of evidence – top, middle and low.

    Expand the implementation of programs backed by strong (‘top tier’) evidence of sizable, sustained effects on important life outcomes.

    Fund and/or conduct rigorous evaluations of programs backed by highly promising (‘middle tier’) evidence, to hopefully move them into the top tier.

    Build the pipeline of promising programs through modest investments in the development and initial testing of many diverse approaches (as part of a ‘lower tier’).

    This is about systematising our use of evidence: a familiar approach in medicine, but one that has not been standard practice for all policymakers.

    It is about producing tangible proof that randomised policy trials improve lives, in that way that we already have tangible proof that randomised medical trials save lives.

    As a specific example of this kind of approach, in the US state of Maryland, a partnership between Arnold Ventures and the state government is already scaling‑up proven programs.

    In August last year, the high‑dosage maths tutoring program for 9th and 10th graders I mentioned earlier (Saga Education) and ASSISTments – an educational tool for mathematics – received scale‑up funding under the US$20 million Maryland Partnership for Proven Programs with Arnold Ventures (Arnold Ventures 2024b).

    In the UK, the development of the What Works Network is a world‑leading achievement which owes credit to the network of evidence‑based policymakers. That includes the extraordinary David Halpern, who will be speaking on the panel shortly (for an excellent snapshot of his recommendations for the coming decade, see Halpern 2023).

    Across health and housing, education and employment, hundreds of UK randomised trials have been conducted. For a practitioner, policymaker or curious member of the British public, it is now easier than ever to see what we know, and what we do not (Leigh 2024a).

    For example, the Education Endowment Foundation has run literally hundreds of randomised trials in the education sector. It uses these findings, alongside rigorous evaluations conducted outside the UK, to advocate for evidence‑based education policies (Education Endowment Foundation n.d.).

    The Education Endowment Foundation has commissioned 316 research projects (208 of which are randomised trials). Sixty per cent of schools in England have taken part in a randomised trial funded by the Foundation. Seventy per cent of school leaders use the Education Endowment Foundation’s teaching and learning toolkit when making their funding decisions on spending for pupils from disadvantaged backgrounds.

    Here in Australia, we are committed to taking a stronger approach towards evidence‑based policymaking.

    In July 2023 we established the Australian Centre for Evaluation in the Department of the Treasury.

    The main role of the centre is to collaborate with other Australian Government departments to conduct rigorous evaluations, including randomised trials. Such agreements have already been forged with federal agencies responsible for employment, health, education and social services.

    Led by Eleanor Williams, armed with a modest budget of A$2 million per year and just over a dozen staff, the Centre operates on smarts and gentle persuasion, not mandates or orders (Leigh 2024b).

    No agency is forced to use the services of the Australian Centre for Evaluation, but all are encouraged to do so. This reflects the reality that evaluation, unlike audit, isn’t something that can be done as an afterthought. A high‑quality impact evaluation needs to be built into the design of a program from the outset (Leigh 2024b).

    The centre takes an active role in considering aspects that are relevant to all evaluations, such as rigorous ethical review and access to administrative microdata. The Australian Bureau of Statistics is playing a pivotal role in brokering access to administrative data for policy experiments.

    Collaboration with evaluation researchers outside of government is critical, too. Thanks to a joint initiative by the Centre and the Australian Education Research Organisation, we now have the Impact Evaluation Practitioners Network, which is bringing together government and external impact evaluators.

    The centre has several randomised trials currently underway, and I await the results with interest.

    In the next month, the centre will release a Randomised Controlled Trial Showcase Report, featuring examples of public policy‑related trials in Australia.

    Another organisation doing extraordinarily thorough research across the whole of social policy and the social sciences is the nonprofit Campbell Collaboration.

    For example, the Campbell Countering Violent Extremism evidence synthesis program is a global research initiative that is attracting attention here in Australia. The program originated from a 5‑country partnership of Australia, Canada, New Zealand, the UK and the US (Campbell Collaboration n.d.). Professor Lorraine Mazerolle from the University of Queensland is one of the principal investigators on the program (Campbell Collaboration n.d.).

    Creating an experimenting society

    Bringing a ‘what works’ philosophy to social policy is vital to helping the most vulnerable.

    And it is by no means a new idea. It follows the path forged by the prominent social scientist Donald Campbell.

    He is of course, the ‘Campbell’ in the Campbell Collaboration, which was named after him to honour his substantial contributions to social science and methodology.

    Over 50 years ago, Dr Campbell wrote Methods for the Experimenting Society, outlining his vision for helping governments to produce better‑informed policies and social interventions via research and evaluation (Campbell 1991).[1]

    In this paper, Campbell forewarns policymakers of the ‘over‑advocacy trap’, where advocates of a new social program or policy make exaggerated claims about its effectiveness in order to get it adopted (Campbell 1991). He effectively highlights the tension between the need for strong advocacy to get social programs funded and adopted, and the need for rigorous evaluation to determine their true effectiveness (Campbell 1991).

    Thirty years after Dr Campbell wrote Methods for the Experimenting Society, the US Department of Education was allocating over a billion US dollars each year to an after‑school program called the 21st Century Community Learning Center initiative.

    The program, which was initiated in 1998, saw children attending the centres for up to 4 hours of after‑school programs, where they partook in everything from tutoring to drama to sports. It attracted high‑profile advocates, including the former Californian governor and Mr Universe, Arnold Schwarzenegger.

    It’s no wonder then, that a randomised trial by Mathematica in 2003 startled everyone with its findings (Haskins 2009). Attending the after‑school program raised a child’s likelihood of being suspended from school (Leigh 2018). And there was no evidence that the after‑school program improved academic outcomes.

    The program’s prominent advocates had fallen head‑first into the over‑advocacy trap.

    Overcoming denial with collaboration and momentum

    American political scientist Ron Haskins commented on how easy it was for Schwarzenegger to flex his celebrity muscle to overcome a negative evaluation. ‘The lesson here, yet again, is that good evidence does not speak for itself in the policy process and is only one – sometimes a rather puny – element in a policy debate’ (Haskins 2009).

    Overcoming denial in the face of irrefutable evidence requires continuous collaboration and sustained momentum. In 2025 and beyond, we will need both to reach the tipping point on the widespread use of rigorous impact evaluation across public policy. It will be harder to run roughshod over good evidence if OECD nations continue to collaborate – both internally with non‑profit researchers outside of government, and externally with other nations.

    Philanthropic foundations in the UK, US and other OECD nations have a strong track record in supporting randomised policy trials. Initiatives such as the Maryland Partnership for Proven Programs and Arnold Ventures, which I mentioned earlier, demonstrate that the ‘what works’ philosophy in social policy is gaining traction.

    Here in Australia, the Paul Ramsay Foundation launched a A$2.1 million open grant round in 2024. Its structure is similar to a successful model that the Laura and John Arnold Foundation has deployed in the United States over the past decade (Leigh 2024c).

    The grants, which last for 3 years and are valued at up to A$300,000 each, will support up to 7 experimental evaluations conducted by non‑profits with a social impact mission. For example, improving education outcomes for young people with disabilities, reducing domestic and family violence, or helping jobless people find work (Paul Ramsay Foundation 2024).

    The Australian Centre for Evaluation supported the open grant round, and is helping to connect grantees with administrative data relevant to the evaluation, and I am excited to see what we learn from these studies (Leigh 2024b).

    One of the most appealing advantages of well‑conducted randomised trials is that they resonate well with 3 democratic principles: non‑arbitrariness, revisability and public justification (Tanasoca and Leigh 2023).

    This gives us good democratic reasons to seek out such evidence for policymaking. Indeed, the more democratic a regime is, the more likely it is to conduct randomised trials (Tanasoca and Leigh 2023).

    Recall the first big public administration reform – the growth of a professionalised civil service – rested on the development of democratic institutions. Nobel laureates Daron Acemoglu and James Robinson call this the ‘red queen effect’, in which societies offering more public goods also need to offer more democratic social power (Acemoglu and Robinson 2019).

    The seventh reform – randomised trials and evidence‑based policymaking – takes us further along the corridor. Things are not true simply because politicians assert them. Policies must be backed by evidence, and citizens must be able to test and trust that evidence.

    Democracies are on this journey together, and international collaboration is vital to reaching the tipping point.

    This is not about the performative use of words like ‘evaluation’ and ‘evidence’. It is about raising the quality and quantity of evidence, which is one reason that I keep referring to randomised trials. I acknowledge the work of the OECD towards achieving the goal of institutionalising rigorous evaluation across public policy areas, as per the OECD Recommendation of the Council on Public Policy Evaluation (OECD 2022).

    The second annual update of the Global Commission on Evidence also confirms the many signs of momentum towards the Commission’s 3 implementation priorities to formalise and strengthen domestic evidence‑support systems, enhance and leverage the global evidence architecture, and put evidence at the centre of everyday life (Global Commission on Evidence 2024).

    Conclusion

    We’re here because we care about good government. And because we understand that evaluation and evidence science are not fields in their infancy.

    Just as we don’t put homeopathy on the same level as science‑based medicine, it is a mistake to think that evidence‑free policy is on a par with evidence‑based policy.

    OECD governments have decades of experience about how to identify evidence gaps, put policies to the test, and implement the most effective programs (Leigh 2024a).

    Policymaking by focus groups and gut‑feel alone is the modern‑day equivalent of bloodletting and lobotomies in medicine (Leigh 2024a). Which is why the seventh big reform to public administration must focus on finding interventions that work. And on building a body of programs backed by strong, replicated randomised trial evidence of important, lasting improvements in people’s lives.

    This goal requires OECD nations to get behind the momentum of the Global Commission on Evidence.

    This will have massive benefits. It will save lives. It will save dollars. And it will make government work better.

    So let’s make it happen.

    My thanks to officials in the Australian Centre for Evaluation for valuable drafting assistance, and to Jon Baron, President and CEO of the Coalition for Evidence‑Based Policy, and David Halpern CBE, President Emeritus at the Behavioural Insights Team, for valuable discussions that helped shape this speech.

    References

    Acemoglu D and Robinson JA (2019) The Narrow Corridor: States, Societies, and the Fate of Liberty, Penguin, New York.

    Arnold Ventures (21 March 2018a) ‘How to solve U.S. social problems when most rigorous program evaluations find disappointing effects (part one in a series)’, Straight Talk on Evidence, accessed 15 January 2025.

    Arnold Ventures (13 April 2018b) ‘How to solve U.S. social problems when most rigorous program evaluations find disappointing effects (part 2 – a proposed solution)’, Straight Talk on Evidence, accessed 15 January 2025.

    Arnold Ventures (18 June 2019) ‘Evidence‑Based Policy ‘Lite’ Won’t Solve U.S. Social Problems: The Case of HHS’s Teen Pregnancy Prevention Program’, Straight Talk on Evidence, accessed 15 January 2025.

    Arnold Ventures (26 October 2022a) ‘Year Up’, Social Programs That Work, accessed 15 January 2025.

    Arnold Ventures (21 March 2022b) ‘Per Scholas Employment/Training Program for Low-Income Workers’, Social Programs That Work, accessed 15 January 2025.

    Arnold Ventures (11 July 2024a) ‘Saga Math Tutoring’, Social Programs That Work, accessed 15 January 2025.

    Arnold Ventures (28 August 2024b) Governor Moore Announces $20 Million in Grants for Education Programs, First Awards Under Maryland Partnership for Proven Programs with Arnold Ventures [media release], Arnold Ventures, accessed 16 January 2025.

    Australian Education Research Organisation (n.d.), About us, Australian Education Research Organisation website, accessed 22 January 2025.

    Brunner R and Lynch A (2017) ‘Adaptive Governance’, Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Climate Science, doi:10.1093/acrefore/9780190228620.013.601.

    Campbell Collaboration (n.d.) Our work, Campbell Collaboration website, accessed 16 January 2025.

    Campbell Collaboration (n.d.) About the CVE programme, Campbell Collaboration website, accessed 21 January 2025.

    Campbell DT (1991) ‘Methods for the Experimenting Society’, Evaluation Practice, 12(3):223–260.

    Education Endowment Foundation (n.d.) How we work, Education Endowment Foundation website, accessed 22 January 2025.

    Global Commission on Evidence to Address Societal Challenges (2024), ‘Global Evidence Commission update 2024: Building momentum in strengthening domestic evidence‑support systems, enhancing the global evidence architecture, and putting evidence at the centre of everyday life’ [PDF 5MB], McMaster Health Forum, Hamilton, accessed 17 January 2025.

    Halpern D (2023) ‘Foreword’, in Sanders M and Breckon J (eds) The What Works Centres: Lessons and Insights from an Evidence Movement, Bristol University Press, Bristol.

    Haskins R (17–18  August 2009) ‘Chapter 3 With a scope so wide: using evidence to innovate, improve, manage, budget’ [roundtablee presentation] Strengthening Evidence‑based Policy in the Australian Federation, Session 1 Evidence‑based policy: Its principles and development Canberra, accessed 16 January 2025.

    Jacobs A (4 April 2024) ‘Glasses Improve Income, Not Just Eyesight’, The New York Times, accessed 15 January 2025.

    Leigh A (2018) Randomistas: How Radical Researchers Changed Our World, Black Inc, Melbourne.

    Leigh A (3 October 2024a) ‘Address to the UK Evaluation Task Force, 9 Downing Street, London’ [presentation], London, accessed 15 January 2025.

    Leigh A (17 June 2024) ‘Address to the Australian Evaluation Showcase, Canberra’ [presentation], Australian Evaluation Showcase, Canberra, accessed 15 January 2025.

    Leigh A (28 November 2024c) ‘Address to 10th Annual Social Impact Measurement Network Australia Awards’ [presentation], 10th Annual Social Impact Measurement Network Australia Awards, Virtual, accessed 17 January 2025.

    OECD (Organisation for Economic Co‑operation and Development) (2022) Recommendation of the Council on Public Policy Evaluation, Adopted on 06/07/2022, OECD Legal Instruments, OECD/LEGAL/0478, accessed 17 January 2025.

    Patrick DL (29 January 2014) Massachusetts Launches Landmark Initiative to Reduce Recidivism Among At‑Risk Youth [media release], Commonwealth of Massachusetts, accessed 14 January 2025.

    Paul Ramsay Foundation (17 June 2024) ‘Experimental evaluation open grant round’, Paul Ramsay Foundation, accessed 17 January 2025.

    Productivity Commission (2020) Indigenous Evaluation Strategy: Background Paper, Australian Government.

    Roca Inc., Commonwealth of Massachusetts, and Third Sector Capital Partners (30 August 2024) Final Report: the Massachusetts Juvenile Justice Pay for Success project, accessed 14 January 2025.

    Sehrin F, Jin L, Naher K, Chandra Das N, Chan VF, Li DF, Bergson S, Gudwin E, Clarke M, Stephan T and Congdon N (2024) ‘The effect on income of providing near vision correction to workers in Bangladesh: The THRIVE (Tradespeople and Hand‑workers Rural Initiative for a Vision‑enhanced Economy) randomized controlled trial’, PLOS ONE, 19(4):e0296115, doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0296115.

    Tanasoca A and Leigh A (2024) ‘The Democratic Virtues of Randomized Trials’, Moral Philosophy and Politics, 22(1):113–140, doi:10.1515/mopp‑2022–0039.

    Winzar C, Tofts‑Len S, Corpu E (2023) Disrupting disadvantage 3: Finding what works, Committee for Economic Development of Australia, Melbourne, accessed 16 January 2025.

    Footnotes

    [1] Campbell’s paper was written around 1971 and used in presentations to the Eastern Psychological Association and the American Psychological Association. It was revised and first published in 1988 (see Campbell 1991).

    MIL OSI News –

  • MIL-OSI New Zealand: Great South Road blocked following crash

    Source: New Zealand Police (District News)

    Great South Road is currently blocked near Mcannalley Street following a crash.

    The single-vehicle crash was reported just before 5pm.

    The vehicle has collided with a power pole, causing power lines to fall.

    No injuries have been reported.

    Motorists are advised to avoid the area and expect delays.

    ENDS

    Issued by Police Media Centre

    MIL OSI New Zealand News –

  • MIL-OSI New Zealand: Sun and celebration at Waitangi 2025

    Source: New Zealand Police (National News)

    Thousands of people descended onto the grounds at Waitangi today for one of the biggest events of the year.

    With no major issues and no arrests made, Police are pleased with the proceedings of Waitangi Day 2025.

    Northland District Prevention Manager, Inspector Dean Robinson, says there was a large turnout of attendees at this morning’s dawn service and other activities throughout the day.

    “It’s been a beautiful day, filled with people from near and far all coming together to commemorate this occasion.

    “We worked closely with iwi, the Waitangi National Trust and the community to ensure this was a safe and enjoyable day for the public.”

    Inspector Robinson says the atmosphere was relaxed and respectful.

    “It was great to see so many people celebrating with whānau and enjoying their time at Waitangi.”

    Waitangi Ltd Chief Executive, Ben Dalton, says the day was filled with people in good spirits.

    “It’s been yet another beautiful Waitangi Day and we are grateful to everyone who came to mark this moment with us.

    “Thank you to everyone who has supported and assisted in making this another successful day for everyone to enjoy.”

    ENDS

    Issued by Police Media Centre

    MIL OSI New Zealand News –

  • MIL-Evening Report: Mandatory minimum sentencing is proven to be bad policy. It won’t stop hate crimes

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Lorana Bartels, Professor of Criminology, Australian National University

    Shutterstock

    Weeks after Opposition Leader Peter Dutton announced his support for mandatory minimum jail terms for antisemitic offences, the government has legislated such laws. Minister for Home Affairs Tony Burke stated the federal parliament would now be “putting in place the toughest laws against hate speech that Australia has ever had”.

    It follows a concerning recent spate of antisemitic attacks in Australia, including on Jewish places of worship, schools, businesses and homes.

    Last week, a caravan was found on the outskirts of Sydney, filled with explosives and a list of Jewish targets.

    Understandably, there is fear in the Jewish community.

    The government’s decision to pursue mandatory minimum sentencing is contrary the 2023 ALP National Policy Platform stating:

    Labor opposes mandatory sentencing. This practice does not reduce crime but does undermine the independence of the judiciary, leads to unjust outcomes, and is often discriminatory in practice.

    The evidence shows that Labor’s official policy platform is correct. Mandatory minimum sentencing is unlikely to help solve this issue – or any other issue for that matter. It has a poor track record of reducing crime.

    What is mandatory sentencing?

    Australian criminal laws usually set a maximum penalty for an offence. It is then the role of the courts (a judge or magistrate) to set the sentence, up to the maximum penalty.

    This allows the judiciary to exercise discretion in sentencing. It means the courts can take into account a range of relevant factors when determining an appropriate sentence, guided by the sentencing laws in each jurisdiction.

    However, laws that demand a mandatory sentence set a minimum penalty for an offence, thereby significantly reducing the role of judicial discretion.

    Sentencing decisions are made by judges in Australian courts.
    Shutterstock

    Let’s imagine two people are appearing in court, to be sentenced for exactly the same offence.

    Defendant A (Kate) is 18 years old and has pleaded guilty. It is her first offence. She is Aboriginal, a victim of childhood domestic violence and lives on the streets. She has recently started to get help for her mental health problems.

    Defendant B (Jim) is 35. He has a long criminal history, including breaches of bail and parole. He has never been out of prison for more than six months at a time. He has pleaded not guilty and doesn’t think he has done anything wrong.

    The maximum penalty for this offence is five years. Under standard sentencing laws, a judge would usually give different sentences to Kate and Jim, based on their personal circumstances and future prospects. Jim would generally get a more severe sentence than Kate.

    Now, let’s imagine parliament decides to set a mandatory minimum sentence of two years in prison. This means the judge has to send both Kate and Jim to prison for at least two years, despite the differences between them, even if a community-based sentence might be more appropriate for Kate.

    So do mandatory minimum sentences work?

    The main arguments for mandatory sentences are that they:

    • reflect community standards

    • provide consistency

    • avoid judicial leniency, and

    • reduce crime.

    The evidence for each of these is weak.

    A study with members of the Victorian public who had served on juries found strong support for sentencing discretion.

    This is confirmed by recent research from the Queensland Law Reform Commission. It found general support from the public for individualised responses, not an inflexible approach to sentencing.

    Mandatory sentencing yields more consistent outcomes, but denies flexibility in cases where defendants should be treated differently.

    The argument that mandatory sentencing reduces crime is also contested.

    Study after study has shown that harsher penalties do not reduce crime.

    It is uncontested, however, that certainty of detection (whether you’ll get caught) is the primary deterrent factor, not the severity of the sentence (assuming that the perpetrator is aware of it).

    Mandatory sentencing also brings risks

    Let’s review the arguments against mandatory sentencing.

    Firstly, it undermines judicial independence, the separation of powers (between the courts and executive government) and the rule of law: a concept based on fairness in the judicial system.

    Mandatory sentencing also shifts discretion to other, less transparent, parts of the criminal justice system (for example, police and prosecution services), as they frame the charges that will bring defendants to court in the first place.

    Secondly, a guilty plea is a mitigating factor the court considers when sentencing. Mandatory sentencing means there is little incentive for defendants to plead guilty. This increases workloads, delays, costs, and has consequent negative effects for victims.

    In addition, juries may be reluctant to convict if they know the minimum sentence will insist upon a prison term. This can lead to inappropriate not guilty verdicts.

    Undermining the right to a fair trial

    Australia has previously come under fire from the United Nations for its mandatory sentencing laws.

    These requirements are found in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which entered into force for Australia in 1980.

    Indeed, the Law Council of Australia has suggested mandatory sentencing is inconsistent with the international prohibition against arbitrary detention, and undermines the right to a fair trial, given that such sentences have been somewhat predetermined.

    These laws can also lead to injustice. As the example above shows, mandatory sentencing can impact disproportionately on vulnerable people, such as Indigenous people, and women with disabilities.

    These cohorts are already far more vulnerable than non-Indigenous men (who account for most people who offend).

    Adverse effects on imprisonment rates

    The High Court recently stated that the mandatory minimum sentence will have the effect of lifting sentencing levels generally.

    But the research shows longer prison sentences are much more expensive and less effective than community-based sentencing options in reducing crime.

    Let’s leave the final word on this subject with the Law Council of Australia:

    achieving a just outcome in the particular circumstances of a case, while maintaining consistency across similar cases and with Australia’s human rights obligations, is […] paramount.

    We need effective responses to all forms of racial and religious hatred, including antisemitic hate crimes, but populist, knee-jerk reactions are highly unlikely to make the community safer. Clear-headed thinking will best stand the test of time, not policy developed in anger or fear.

    Lorana Bartels is a Director of the Justice Reform Initiative. She is a supporter of the Jewish Council of Australia. She has received research funding from the ACT, Commonwealth, Queensland, Tasmanian and Victorian governments. She recently undertook a project for the Queensland government, which examined the use of mandatory minimum sentences for murder. She is a member of the Tasmanian Sentencing Advisory Council, which recently completed a project on hate crimes.

    Rick Sarre 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. Mandatory minimum sentencing is proven to be bad policy. It won’t stop hate crimes – https://theconversation.com/mandatory-minimum-sentencing-is-proven-to-be-bad-policy-it-wont-stop-hate-crimes-249266

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-OSI Asia-Pac: Policy on incorporation of mediation clauses in government contracts takes effect today

    Source: Hong Kong Government special administrative region

    Policy on incorporation of mediation clauses in government contracts takes effect today
    Policy on incorporation of mediation clauses in government contracts takes effect today
    ***************************************************************************************

         The Department of Justice (DoJ) announced that the policy on the incorporation of mediation clauses in government contracts takes effect today (February 6). The mediation clause signifies the parties’ agreement to use mediation to resolve disputes first before resorting to arbitration or litigation.     The Government issued the Policy Statement on the Incorporation of Mediation Clauses in Government Contracts on November 6, 2024. By virtue of the policy statement, the Government will, as a matter of general policy, incorporate a mediation clause in government contracts.     To complement the implementation of the policy, the DoJ today also promulgated “The Government of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region Mediation Rules (2025 Edition)”, which may be referred to as the “HKSARG Mediation Rules (2025)”. These Rules provide for a set of procedural rules for the conduct of mediation proceedings and are intended to operate together with the mediation clause in government contracts. These Rules shall not affect the operation of “The Government of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region Construction Mediation Rules (1999 Edition)” promulgated by the then Works Bureau in 1999, as amended by the then Environment, Transport and Works Bureau in 2003.     Further information about the policy, including a sample mediation clause for incorporation in government contracts, is available on the webpage of the DoJ.      A spokesman for the DoJ said, “By taking the lead to incorporate mediation clauses in government contracts, it is hoped that private organisations would be encouraged to make reference to and adopt similar mediation clauses in their contracts, thereby deepening our ‘mediate first’ culture.”

     
    Ends/Thursday, February 6, 2025Issued at HKT 11:05

    NNNN

    MIL OSI Asia Pacific News –

  • MIL-OSI New Zealand: Australia – Mandatory sentencing is not the answer – Law Council

    Source: Law Council of Australia

    The Law Council of Australia is extremely disappointed in the Government’s proposal to impose mandatory sentencing in response to certain hate crimes and a broad range of terrorism offences.

    “The Law Council has been gravely concerned by the recent incidents and acts of antisemitism that have occurred across the country. At the same time, it is vitally important in challenging times to uphold rule of law principles and not adopt measures that risk serious injustice,” Law Council of Australia President, Juliana Warner said.

    “The Government’s amendments to the Criminal Code Amendment (Hate Crimes) Bill 2024 have introduced mandatory minimum sentences for certain hate crimes and terrorism offences. This would mean, for example, a person guilty of public display of prohibited symbols at a political protest would be subject to a mandatory minimum sentence of 12 months imprisonment.

    “Under mandatory sentencing, the personal circumstances of the offender are not taken into consideration. This has the potential to disproportionately impact vulnerable groups.”

    Other elements of the amendments would see minimum sentences of six years imposed in relation to a broad range of terrorism offences. This would include the offence of getting funds to, from or for a terrorist organisation. Financing terrorism offences would be subject to a mandatory minimum sentence of three years.

    “Mandatory sentencing laws are arbitrary and limit the individual’s right to a fair trial by preventing judges from imposing a just penalty based on the unique circumstances of each offence and offender,” Ms Warner said. “Judges are best placed to determine the appropriate and just penalty under these laws on an individual, case-by-case basis.

    “The decision to add mandatory sentencing as part of the Government’s response to hate crimes has come late in the day without proper consideration. Further, the Australian Labor Party has gone against its 2023 National Platform that states Labor opposes mandatory sentencing. To our knowledge, no security or law enforcement agency has asked for these extraordinary measures.

    “There has been no opportunity to scrutinise the rationale, necessity and proportionality of these changes, which comes as part of the Federal Government’s response to a rise in antisemitic incidents and deterioration in social cohesion.

    “Australia is a multicultural society and we must preserve our social cohesion and protect against the specific harms of hateful speech on vulnerable groups. In doing so, we acknowledge the importance of carefully framed criminal laws proscribing speech to prevent radicalisation, violence and activities that incite hatred.

    “However, expanding offences and strengthening penalties should not be seen as the default tool through which to prevent radicalism and extremism from propagating or to facilitate behavioural change of disaffected individuals. There should be greater resourcing for countering violent extremism through early intervention and diversionary programs with a specific focus on children and young people.

    “We are also concerned the new offences contained in the Hate Crimes Bill have the potential to worsen existing uncertainty and inconsistency by piecemeal expansion of Commonwealth criminal offences.

    “Complex and overlapping Commonwealth and state offences are more difficult to enforce and may lead to arbitrary differences in outcome. There is a risk that inconsistent penalties at Commonwealth level will have limited impact on the intended objectives and worsen complexity in this area. Further, overly broad offences may rely on discretion to enforce in circumstances which become politicised.

    “Before we pursue changes to our laws, we must ensure gaps do indeed exist that require a legislative response and consult on proposals to ensure they are the best solution.

    “As debate on the Bill moves through Parliament, the Law Council urges the Senate to ensure proper consideration by, and consultation with, our community before mandatory sentencing legislation is passed.”

    MIL OSI New Zealand News –

  • MIL-OSI New Zealand: Fatal crash: Helena Bay

    Source: New Zealand Police (National News)

    Police can confirm one person has died following a crash on Kaiikanui Road this morning.

    The crash involved a vehicle and a pedestrian and was reported at about 11:15am.

    Sadly, the pedestrian died at the scene.

    The road has since reopened.

    Enquiries to determine the circumstances of the crash are ongoing.

    ENDS

    Issued by Police Media Centre

    MIL OSI New Zealand News –

  • MIL-Evening Report: Unambitious and undermined: why NZ’s latest climate pledge lacks the crucial ‘good faith’ factor

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Nathan Cooper, Associate Professor of Law, University of Waikato

    New Zealand’s Climate Change Minister Simon Watts speaking during the the recent climate summit in Azerbaijan. Sean Gallup/Getty Images

    The announcement of New Zealand’s new climate pledge under the Paris Agreement was met with sharp criticism last week.

    The agreement commits nations to provide a new pledge, known as a Nationally Determined Contribution (NDC) every five years. But it also requires each pledge to be a “progression beyond” the previous one.

    Climate Change Minister Simon Watts announced New Zealand would commit to reducing emissions by 51-55% below 2005 levels by 2035, which is only 1-5% above the current NDC of a 50% cut by 2030.

    Technically, the new NDC represents a progression, albeit the smallest possible one. It was criticised as underwhelming and unambitious to combat climate change, raising the question whether the coalition government has done enough to comply with its international obligations.

    The commitments of each member nation should align with the Paris Agreement’s purpose to hold global average temperature rise well below 2°C above pre-industrial levels and to pursue efforts to keep it at 1.5°C.

    But the agreement also requires that each country’s NDC reflects its “highest possible ambition, reflecting its common but differentiated responsibilities and respective capabilities, in light of different national circumstances”.

    Does the government’s announcement to step up emissions cuts by as little as 1% really represent New Zealand’s highest possible ambition in present circumstances?

    In October last year, looking specifically at New Zealand’s potential domestic contribution to the new NDC, the Climate Change Commission advised that emissions cuts of 66% could be achieved without shrinking the economy.

    This excludes potential additional cuts achieved through offshore mitigation – paying for overseas carbon credits or funding other countries to reduce their greenhouse emissions.

    Clearly, deeper cuts are possible and there is room for significantly greater ambition.

    The goal of the Paris Agreement is to limit climate change impacts by holding temperature rise well below 2°C.
    Fiona Goodall/Getty Images

    Bare minimum commitment

    Even if the new NDC meets a minimal requirement for compliance, it is difficult to see how it adheres to the purpose of the Paris Agreement and the level of ambition required.

    New Zealand’s NDC falls short of the commitments offered by other comparable countries and even some developing nations, including the oil and gas producer Brazil, which pledged to cut its emissions by 59-67% by 2035.

    International law has long been guided by the principle of pacta sunt servanda, which translates to “agreements must be kept”. The principle reminds parties to any agreement or convention that all international obligations should be fulfilled in good faith.

    Viewing New Zealand’s new NDC in the context of other recent decisions, it seems the coalition government may be pursuing policies that could undermine climate action while pledging the bare minimum internationally. This would be difficult to characterise as a party acting in good faith.

    Immediately following the new NDC announcement, Resources Minister Shane Jones unveiled New Zealand’s national minerals strategy, along with a list of critical minerals.
    These documents support the government’s goal to double exports from the mineral sector by 2035.

    Despite reassurance in the strategy that minerals production will not come at the expense of our environment, it includes plans to scale up exports of metallurgical coal. But mining more of this coal, then burning it (usually in the process of steelmaking), will add to greenhouse gas emissions.

    Wider concerns about the likely environmental damage and biodiversity loss linked with fast-tracked mining operations continue to be raised.

    Meeting trade obligations

    Last year’s decision to postpone the entry of agriculture into New Zealand’s Emissions Trading Scheme without a robust alternative means that agricultural emissions continue to avoid effective regulation.

    Even recent measures to allow increased road speed limits have been criticised for increasing greenhouse gas emissions as well as worsening air quality and reducing road safety.

    Despite Prime Minister Christopher Luxon’s claim to be “all about yes” even on climate change, such decisions are difficult to square with a responsible party to the Paris Agreement acting in good faith.

    The Paris Agreement is clear that emissions pledges are not imposed but are to be determined nationally. The agreement itself lacks an enforcement mechanism, but recently agreed trade deals with the European Union and with the United Kingdom both contain binding and enforceable commitments to the agreement.

    This is a reminder that trading partners are already monitoring New Zealand’s climate actions. Consumer attitudes and trade obligations might become a more powerful lever for climate action in the future. No government should ignore this.

    As the US administration begins to withdraw from the Paris Agreement, now more than ever is the time for other countries to stay focused on its purpose and to match national commitments accordingly.

    Without an NDC in line with the Paris goal, New Zealand’s government is not sending the right message to New Zealanders or to our trading partners and neighbours. It is failing to show international and regional leadership at a time when many Pacific nations are on the frontline of climate-related risk and damage.

    Nathan Cooper 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. Unambitious and undermined: why NZ’s latest climate pledge lacks the crucial ‘good faith’ factor – https://theconversation.com/unambitious-and-undermined-why-nzs-latest-climate-pledge-lacks-the-crucial-good-faith-factor-248877

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-OSI Australia: Charges – Assault police – Casuarina

    Source: Northern Territory Police and Fire Services

    The Northern Territory Police Force have arrested a 25-year-old female in relation to a public disturbance at the Casuarina Bus Interchange yesterday.

    About 4:20pm, police received reports of the woman allegedly throwing objects at members of the public and threatening workers with an edged weapon.

    She was apprehended by security until police arrived and arrested her. During the arrest, she allegedly spat at an officer and kicked 2 other attending officers.

    She was charged with Going Armed in Public, Damage to Property, Assault Police, Assault a Worker, Resist Police in Execution of Duty and Disorderly in a Public Place and is to appear in Darwin Local Court on 6 Feb 2025.

    Superintendent Vicki Koum said, “We will not stand for our officers being assaulted while they are out serving and protecting the Territory”.

    “This is abhorrent behaviour that will not be tolerated.”

    Police urge anyone who witnesses crime or anti-social behaviour to contact police on 131 444 or in an emergency dial 000. Anonymous reports can be made through Crime Stoppers on 1800 333 000 or through https://crimestoppersnt.com.au/.

    MIL OSI News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Sens. Markey, Hirono, Duckworth, Rep. Fletcher Reintroduce Right to Contraception Act

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Massachusetts Ed Markey

    Bill Text (PDF) | Watch: Senator Markey’s Remarks

    Washington (February 5, 2025) – Senator Edward J. Markey (D-Mass.), Chair of the Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pension (HELP) Committee’s Subcommittee on Primary Health & Retirement Security, along with Senators Mazie Hirono (D-Hawaii) and Tammy Duckworth (D-Ill.), today reintroduced the Right to Contraception Act, legislation that would create a statutory right to obtain and use contraceptives and ensure health care providers have a right to provide contraceptives, contraception, and share information about this essential care. The legislation is led by Congresswoman Lizzie Fletcher (TX-07) in the House.

    In July 2022, the Right to Contraception Act passed the House (220-195). That same month, Republicans blocked an attempt in the U.S. Senate to pass the bill by unanimous consent. They did the same in June 2023. In June 2024, Republicans blocked Senate Democrats’ attempt to pass the bill on the floor.

    “The right to contraception is essential for people’s freedom to make decisions about their lives and their health without politicians getting in the way,” said Senator Markey. “Contraception is essential not only for sexual and reproductive health, but also to treat a wide array of medical conditions and decrease the risk of certain cancers. The Right to Contraception Act will protect the right for people to get contraception and for providers to give it in the face of President Trump and Republicans’ relentless attacks on reproductive justice.”

    “I am proud to introduce the Right to Contraception Act in the 119th Congress in response to the real threats to accessing birth control in Texas and across our country,” said Congresswoman Fletcher. “With 200 original co-sponsors in the House, the Right to Contraception Act reflects the position of the vast majority of Americans who rely on contraception of all kinds to plan their families and their lives. Efforts to restrict access to birth control are not about reflecting the will of the people, they are about taking away the freedom, dignity, and autonomy of all Americans. As a representative from a state intent on taking our reproductive rights away, I will continue to work with my colleagues in Congress and do everything I can to protect and restore the health, privacy, dignity, and autonomy of women and families across our country.  We will not give up.”

    “Contraception is essential health care that millions of people across the country rely on,” said Senator Hirono. “The Right to Contraception Act simply protects patients’ right to access contraception, as well as providers’ right to provide it. I’m proud to join Senator Markey and Representative Fletcher in reintroducing this important bill. The right to control your own body, free from government interference, is as fundamental as it gets, and we’ll continue doing everything we can to protect the reproductive rights of all Americans.”

    “Ever since the Supreme Court threw out Roe v. Wade, we’ve seen extreme MAGA Republicans across the country work to roll back health care and tear reproductive freedom away from Americans—which has cruelly threatened birth control, plan B, IUDs and other forms of contraception,” said Senator Duckworth. “I refuse to let my daughters grow up in a world with fewer rights than I had. As MAGA Republicans continue their anti-choice, anti-science crusade, it is as important as ever that the Senate acts to codify the right to contraception into law so that every American in every state—regardless of their skin color, zip code or income—has equal access to basic, necessary health care. I’m proud to join Senators Markey and Hirono in reintroducing our Right to Contraception Act to do just that.”

    “Nobody wants Donald Trump rifling through their medicine cabinet,” said Democratic Whip Katherine Clark (MA-05). “Democrats’ Right to Contraception Act is as clear-cut as it gets. This is about the health, freedom, and dignity. Republicans once again have a chance to show us where they stand: on the side of health care bans or on the side of the American people.”

    “Affordable, accessible contraception is one of the building blocks for people to be able to make ends meet and get what they want out of life. And now that the Supreme Court has eliminated the constitutional right to abortion, Republicans at every level of government are targeting contraception access – including by threatening to gut Medicaid, the country’s biggest payer of reproductive health care coverage like contraception. We will keep fighting to pass the Right to Contraception Act to keep the government out of our business and out of our exam rooms,” said Congresswoman Sara Jacobs (CA-51).

    “It feels like every day we wake up to someone trying to take away another fundamental right. We have an extremist president, a submissive Republican Congress, and a radical Supreme Court that wants to undo decades of progress. That means it is up to us to protect the rights we once believed were secure—including access to contraception,” said Congresswoman Nikema Williams (GA-05). “I am co-leading the Right to Contraception Act to protect the millions of people who use contraception every day to safeguard their health, the health of others, or manage medical conditions. We must continue to protect the freedom to make personal healthcare decisions.”

    “Access to birth control should be a given, but with extreme Republicans chipping away at women’s reproductive rights by the day, we have no choice but to enshrine this protection into law,” said Congresswoman Angie Craig (MN-02). “I will always stand up for our fundamental rights and freedoms, and that’s why I’m proud to be co-leading the Right to Contraception Act.”  

    “Everyone, no matter their ZIP code, should be able to get the birth control they need, when they need it. At a time when reproductive freedom is under attack across the country, this bill will help people make their own health care decisions and get birth control without government interference. We’re grateful to Sens. Markey, Hirono, and Duckworth and Reps. Fletcher, Jacobs, Craig, and Williams for reintroducing the Right to Contraception Act and for their continued leadership in the fight to make sexual and reproductive health care more accessible. Now is the time to safeguard birth control for our freedom and well-being,” said Alexis McGill Johnson, President and CEO of Planned Parenthood Action Fund.

    “Republicans promised on the campaign trail that they wanted to protect contraception, but there isn’t a single Congressional Republican who has signed on to the Right to Contraception Act. Actions speak louder than words and refusing to back this commonsense bill is a refusal to listen to what voters overwhelmingly support across party lines. No matter what they say, Republicans never had any intention of protecting the fundamental right to contraception. Thank you to Senators Markey, Duckworth, and Hirono and Representatives Fletcher, Craig, Williams, and Jacobs for introducing this essential legislation, and to all of our champions in Congress for reaffirming their commitment to protecting reproductive freedom,” said Mini Timmaraju, President and CEO of Reproductive Freedom for All.

    “The Right to Contraception Act is a vital safeguard for the fundamental freedom to make personal health decisions. As a physician, I see daily how contraception empowers patients to protect their health, plan their families, and shape their futures. Rep. Fletcher’s leadership in advancing this legislation is critical to securing this essential right for all Americans,” said Dr. Dara Kass, Emergency Medicine Physician and Board Member for Americans for Contraception.

    “As an OB-GYN, I’ve seen firsthand that the right to birth control is essential for the well-being of my patients, their families and their communities. For nearly six decades, birth control has allowed millions of people to manage health conditions, plan if and when to have children and achieve their career and educational aspirations. Not surprisingly, birth control is incredibly popular and those who attack it are spreading misinformation and disinformation in order to justify their attacks. If policymakers truly mean what they say regarding support for contraception, there is no clearer way to meaningfully demonstrate that support than by co-sponsoring and passing the Right to Contraception Act,” said Dr. Raegan McDonald-Mosley, MD, MPH, CEO of Power to Decide.

    “Threats to contraceptive access are on the rise—misinformation, distortion of science, funding cuts, restrictions on young peoples’ access, and more. Plus, the network of family planning providers who deliver reproductive health care to thousands is facing unprecedented attacks. Contraception helps people who want to have a baby have well-timed, healthier pregnancies, and more agency in their relationships, education, work life, and finances. That’s why Americans overwhelmingly support contraceptive access. Congress must meet the moment and enshrine the right to contraception into law,” said Clare Coleman, President and CEO of the National Family Planning & Reproductive Health Association.

    “The Right to Contraception Act is needed now more than ever as an essential safeguard to protect birth control rights and access. President Trump and extremist members of Congress, state legislators, and judges have all made it clear — they are intent on going after contraception. In just the last two weeks, President Trump unraveled efforts to expand access to birth control, and critical guidance on prescribing contraception has vanished from federal websites. And we are seeing more targeted efforts against birth control in state legislatures, the courts, and on social media. This legislation is critical to push back against these attacks and ensure everyone maintains the right to access the birth control they need, when they need it,” said Gretchen Borchelt, Vice President for Reproductive Rights and Health at the National Women’s Law Center (NWLC). 

    The Right to Contraception Act is endorsed by Power to Decide, National Family Planning & Reproductive Health Association, National Women’s Law Center, Guttmacher Institute, Reproductive Freedom for All (formerly NARAL Pro-Choice America), Population Connection Action Fund, Americans for Contraception, Advocates for Youth, National Partnership for Women & Families, American Public Health Association, American Humanist Association, National Association of Nurse Practitioners in Women’s Health , Center for Biological Diversity, Ibis Reproductive Health, Physicians for Reproductive Health, Upstream USA, Planned Parenthood Federation of America, National Health Law Program, SIECUS: Sex Ed for Social Change, National Latina Institute for Reproductive Justice, Reproductive Health Access Project, American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, Upstream USA, In Our Own Voice: National Black Women’s Reproductive Justice Agenda, Center for American Progress, National Asian Pacific American Women’s Forum, All* Above All, and Center for Reproductive Rights.

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI Security: U.S. Marshals Arrest Sexual Assault of a Child Suspect

    Source: US Marshals Service

    Dallas, TX – The U.S. Marshals Service – North Texas Fugitive Task Force apprehended in Roanoke Jan. 28 a man wanted by the Tarrant County Sheriff’s Office for sexual assault of a child and by the USMS for Unlawful Flight to Avoid Prosecution.

    Joe Tarin, 30, who had been on the run for three years, made his initial appearance at the Tarrant County Courthouse Jan. 29.

    The arrest was a result of the coordination between multiple agencies, including the Forth Worth Police Department, Tarrant County Sheriff’s Office, the Tarrant County District Attorney’s Office, the Grand Prairie Police Department, the Department of Public Safety, Texas Department of Criminal Justice – OIG, the Mansfield Police Department, the Dallas County Sheriffs Office, and the U.S. Marshals Service.

    The North Texas Fugitive Task Force is sponsored by the U.S. Marshals Service and is comprised of investigators from the U.S. Marshals Service, the Fort Worth Police Department, and other local law enforcement agencies. The task force’s primary mission is to locate, arrest and return to the justice system the most violent and egregious federal and state fugitives.

    MIL Security OSI –

  • MIL-OSI Security: Met seizes one thousand stolen phones in a week

    Source: United Kingdom London Metropolitan Police

    The Met’s intensifying clampdown on the £50million-a-year trade in stolen phones has seen 230 people arrested in the space of a week and more than one thousand handsets seized.

    Those responsible for the theft, handling, and onward criminal supply or exportation of smartphones were specifically targeted during a week of co-ordinated activity across London. It built on the work already being ramped up to tackle the scourge of phone thefts, and sets a new standard for how the Met will respond to the issue.

    This includes intensified efforts to tackle phone thefts by increasing patrols and plain-clothed operations in hotspot areas, including the West End and Westminster, where nearly 40 per cent of phone thefts occur. At the same time, officers are using phone-tracking data and intelligence to pursue those handling stolen devices.

    Such measures are proving successful and last year four members of a gang were sentenced to a combined 18 years after handling more than 5,000 stolen phones. They were tracked down by local Met officers after numerous victims reported their stolen phones being at the same location.

    Later today (Thursday, 6 February), the Home Secretary will chair a summit with law enforcement bodies and industry focused on tackling smartphone thefts. One of the items that will be raised by the Met’s Deputy Commissioner, Dame Lynne Owens, will be strengthening security on phones so stolen devices cannot be easily resold. The Met wants to work with industry to prevent stolen phones from being able to re-connect to cloud services and make IMEI numbers accessible from the lock screen of all smartphones.

    Commander Owain Richards, who is leading the Met’s response to phone thefts, said:

    “We are seeing phone thefts on an industrial scale, fuelled by criminals making millions by being able to easily sell on stolen devices either here or abroad.

    “By intensifying our efforts we’re catching more perpetrators and protecting people from having their phone stolen in the capital. But we need help from partners and industry to do more. That is why we’re working with other agencies and government to tackle the organised criminality driving this trade and calling on tech companies to make stolen phones unusable.”

    Kaya Comer-Schwartz, London’s Deputy Mayor for Policing and Crime, said:

    “The Met is spearheading targeted police work to prevent and tackle mobile phone theft in our communities. Thanks to the hard work of officers and intervention work led by London’s Violence Reduction Unit, personal robbery is down 13 per cent in the capital compared to the same period last year. We continue to support the Met from City Hall with additional funding for neighbourhood policing.

    “But there is more to do. As the criminal demand for high-value mobile phones continues to grow globally, the Mayor and I are clear that companies must go further and faster to make it harder for stolen phones to be sold on, repurposed and re-used illegally. We’ll continue to work with leading mobile phone companies, the Home Secretary and Met leaders to find innovative solutions to end the scourge of mobile phone crime.”

    Increased patrols in Westminster saw 17 arrests for robbery and theft, following 42 Stop and Searches linked to the Met’s intensive activity. In Hackney and Haringey, officers made 15 arrests linked to the operation, including a 15-year-old boy on an illegal electric bike who was found with £1,000 in cash and a large knife.

    The success in tackling phone thefts comes after the Met moved out of special measures last month, following major improvements in many areas of service to London. These include responding more quickly to emergencies and strengthening neighbourhood policing to better respond to communities’ concerns, including tackling theft and robberies.

    The Met is urging anyone who has lost or had stolen a phone to use the national mobile phone register so recovered handsets can be restored, via The Police National Mobile Property Register – NMPR.

    Phone users should take simple steps to further protect themselves from fraud, by ensuring they have a strong password, two-factor authentication and turning off message previews so thieves cannot see any messages about reset or log-in codes when phones are locked. They should also write down and safely store their IMEI number.

    Inspectorate recognises progress on Met’s mission to deliver for London

    Improvements made by the Met which were recognised by inspectors as it came out of special measures, include:

    We are responding more quickly to emergencies. Last year our dedicated staff and officers in MetCC responded to 4,660,891 contacts, of which 2,394,416 were 999 calls, 1,279,552 were 101 calls and 988,923 were digital contacts. The per cent of 999 calls answered within 10 seconds for 1 January 2024 to 31 December 2024 was 86.2 per cent compared to 77.6 per cent the previous calendar year – with January 2024 reaching 90.9 per cent.

    We have trained 8000 officers in the identification of child exploitation, launched a new Children’s Strategy and significantly increased the number of officers in our child exploitation teams.

    We have put hundreds more officers in our domestic assault and rape and sexual offence teams, doubled the number of charges for rape and sexual offences and tripled the numbers in our nationally recognised Stalking Threat Assessment Centre.

    Our new neighbourhood policing model has been bolstered by an additional 500 staff ranging from Superintendent to PCSO, working closer than ever with communities to understand their concerns.

    The full focus of the entire organisation remains on delivering the commitments made to London – More Trust, Less Crime and High Standards.

    MIL Security OSI –

  • MIL-OSI Security: Miami Murder Suspect Attempts to Flee, Captured in Colorado Springs

    Source: US Marshals Service

    Colorado Springs, CO – The U.S. Marshals Service’s Colorado Violent Offender Task Force (COVOTF) along with the Fountain Police Department, El Paso County Sheriff’s Office, and Colorado Springs Police Department located and arrested a Florida homicide suspect Tuesday evening in Colorado Springs.

    De Sean Phang, 28, is wanted by the Miramar (FL) Police Department on a felony arrest warrant for second degree murder with a firearm in connection with an incident in early 2023 in Miramar, Florida that left one man dead. A warrant for Phang’s arrest in that case was issued on Jan. 17. 

    Task Force Officers from the Miramar P.D. assigned to the U.S. Marshals Service’s Florida-Caribbean Regional Fugitive Task Force – Ft. Lauderdale division recently developed information indicating Phang had fled Florida and was possibly hiding in Colorado. On Feb. 3, that information was relayed to the U.S. Marshals Service’s Colorado Violent Offender Task Force in Colorado Springs who then picked up the investigation. COVOTF investigators learned Phang was moving between Colorado Springs and the south Denver metro to include the Englewood and Highlands Ranch areas. He was travelling in a rental car which was located by the COVOTF on Feb 4 near C-470 and S. Quebec St, before moving back south to Colorado Springs.

    COVOTF Deputy U.S. Marshals and Task Force Officers from the Fountain Police Department, Colorado Bureau of Investigation, and Colorado Dept. of Corrections then contacted both the Colorado Springs Police Department and El Paso County Sheriff’s Office for assistance. As CSPD officers approached to make contact, the vehicle Phang was traveling in fled the area at a high rate of speed. The vehicle was followed until it eventually stopped in the parking lot of the Big R store located at 165 Fontaine Blvd in Colorado Springs. All occupants of the vehicle, including Phang, attempted to flee on foot, but were quickly apprehended.

    Phang was transported to the El Paso County Criminal Justice Center where he was booked on the outstanding homicide warrant from Florida. He is currently awaiting extradition. Please direct any inquiries about the underlying case to the Miramar (FL) Police Department.

    The success of this arrest represents a culmination of extensive cooperative investigative efforts between the U.S. Marshals Florida-Caribbean Regional Fugitive Task Force – Ft. Lauderdale, U.S. Marshals Colorado Violent Offender Task Force, Miramar Police Department, Fountain Police Department, Colorado Bureau of Investigation, Colorado Springs Police Department, Colorado Department of Corrections, El Paso County Sheriff’s Office, Englewood Police Department, and Boulder County Sheriff’s Office. 

    The Colorado Violent Offender Task Force is a multi-jurisdictional fugitive task force that targets the most violent offenders to include those wanted for murder, assault, sex offenses, and other serious offenses throughout the state and country.  Nationally, the U.S. Marshals Service fugitive programs are carried out with local law enforcement in 94 district offices, 58 local fugitive task forces, eight regional task forces, as well as a growing network of offices in foreign countries. 

    Tips can be submitted to the U.S. Marshals Service directly and anonymously by using the USMS Tips app. You can also follow the latest news and updates about the U.S. Marshals Service on X (previously Twitter): @USMSDenver.

    MIL Security OSI –

  • MIL-OSI Security: Violent Felon Sentenced to 10 Years in Federal Prison for Firearm Possession

    Source: Office of United States Attorneys

    DEL RIO, Texas – An Eagle Pass man was sentenced in a federal court in Del Rio today to 120 months in prison and a $2,000 fine for one count of felon in possession of firearm ammunition.

    According to court documents, Mark Ivy, 38, was arrested by San Antonio Police officers in San Antonio Dec. 20, 2019 for an outstanding warrant. Ivy was sitting in the front passenger seat of a vehicle in retail parking lot with a loaded 9mm ghost gun. Ivy had been previously convicted in Del Rio on May 13, 2010 for conspiracy to interfere with commerce by threats or violence and interstate communications with intent to extort. He was then sentenced to 48 months imprisonment and therefore unable to lawfully possess firearms or ammunition.

    Following his 2019 arrest, Ivy was transferred into federal custody Oct. 9, 2020. He pleaded guilty to the charge in the indictment on Oct. 25, 2021.

    “My office takes felons in possession of firearms and ammunition very seriously, and when the felon has a violent criminal history like that of this defendant, we argue for a sentence which reflects the seriousness of the conduct,” said U.S. Attorney Jaime Esparza for the Western District of Texas. “I appreciate the investigative skill and expertise of our local, state and federal law enforcement partners, all of which provide immense value in these cases.”

    “The FBI is dedicated to ensuring our citizens are safe in their communities,” said Special Agent in Charge Aaron Tapp for the FBI’s San Antonio Field Office. “Ivy was aware that he was not allowed to own a firearm or ammunition due to his past actions, but he made the choice to keep a gun on his person while fleeing from the scene of a violent homicide. We want to thank our partners at San Antonio Police Department, who continue to work with us to make our community safer.”

    The FBI investigated the case with assistance from the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, along with the San Antonio Police Department, Maverick County Sheriff’s Office and Texas Department of Public Safety.

    Assistant U.S. Attorneys Holly Pavlinski and Rex Beasley prosecuted the case.

    ###

    MIL Security OSI –

  • MIL-OSI Security: Texas man arrested for possessing child pornography while working as school bus driver in Fairbanks

    Source: Office of United States Attorneys

    The FBI is seeking additional information.

    FAIRBANKS, Alaska – A Texas man was arrested early this week on criminal charges related to his alleged possession of child pornography while temporarily working in Fairbanks.

    According to court documents, in December 2024, the Fairbanks Police Department (FPD) received information that a USB drive found in the business center of a Fairbanks hotel allegedly contained child sexual abuse materials (CSAM).

    FPD provided the USB drive to the FBI Anchorage Field Office to process for forensic review. On Jan. 30, 2025, federal agents successfully imaged and extracted the USB drive and found information linking it to Scott O’Toole, 60, of Joshua, Texas. Agents also found images on the drive allegedly depicting child sexual abuse. Within 24 hours of the FBI’s review of the USB drive, law enforcement identified and located O’Toole in Texas, and arrested him shortly thereafter.

    Court documents further allege that federal agents learned O’Toole was on Temporary Duty Assignment (TDY) to Fairbanks as a school bus driver between November and December 2024, and that he stayed at the hotel where the USB drive was found. Shortly after the USB drive was discovered, O’Toole returned to Texas.

    O’Toole is currently charged with one count of possession of child pornography in the District of Alaska. If convicted, O’Toole faces up to 20 years in prison. A federal district court judge will determine any sentence after considering the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines and other statutory factors.

    First Assistant U.S. Attorney Kate Vogel of the District of Alaska and Special Agent in Charge Rebecca Day of the FBI Anchorage Field Office made the announcement.

    The FBI Anchorage Field Office is investigating the case, with assistance from FPD and the Texas State Troopers. If anyone has information concerning O’Toole’s alleged actions in Alaska, please contact the FBI Anchorage Field Office at (907) 276-4441 or anonymously at tips.fbi.gov.

    Assistant U.S. Attorney Adam Alexander is prosecuting the case. The United States Attorney’s Office for the District of Alaska thanks their colleagues in the Eastern District of Texas for their coordination on this case.

    This case was brought as part of Project Safe Childhood, a nationwide initiative launched in May 2006 by the Department of Justice to combat the growing epidemic of child sexual exploitation and abuse. Led by U.S. Attorneys’ Offices, Project Safe Childhood combines federal, state and local resources to better locate, apprehend and prosecute individuals who exploit children via the Internet, as well as to identify and rescue victims. For more information about Project Safe Childhood, please visit www.justice.gov/psc.

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

    ###

    MIL Security OSI –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Senator Murray Highlights Trump’s Illegal Spending Freeze on Billions via Day One Executive Orders, Putting Economies and Jobs at Risk

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Washington State Patty Murray
    ***VIDEO HERE*** 
    Trump Administration is still blocking hundreds of billions of dollars passed by Congress
    ICYMI: Murray Hold Press Call With WA State Orgs About Jobs at Risk Due to Funding Freeze
    Washington, D.C. — Today, U.S. Senator Patty Murray (D-WA), Vice Chair of the Senate Appropriations Committee, is helping lead Senate Democrats in holding the Senate floor for a full 30 hours ahead of a final confirmation vote on Russell Vought to serve as Director of the Office of Management and Budget. Senator Murray delivered an hour-long floor speech and her remarks below touch specifically on how the Trump Administration is still blocking hundreds of billions of dollars of approved funding under Trump’s executive orders, and what sort of pain this illegal funding freeze could mean for Washington state and the country:
    On infrastructure:
    “All of these projects, and many more have been thrown into complete uncertainty because of President Trump’s Executive Orders. It is just completely unclear when, or if these projects are going to get the funds they are counting on and owed—from the bills Congress passed.
    “And that is not just causing chaos, it is not just causing delays, it is causing harm and alarm—because it could mean construction grinds to a halt, and workers lose jobs. It could mean the work will go un-started—or perhaps in some cases—unfinished.
    “Plus, it will mean increasing costs for cities, counties, states, and Tribes for those projects that somehow make it through this. And while there are many more infrastructure projects in my state I still haven’t even touched on, not to mention the other projects across the country. There are so many other projects, organizations, and people who are being harmed right now by President Trump’s reckless funding freeze. “
    On foreign assistance:
    “When people are starving, you cannot just feed them money—you need to have already made the investments to grow food. When democracies are in crisis, you can’t just cut them a check—you need to have helped them build strong institutions. When a deadly disease outbreak strikes—you are going to learn very quickly that an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.”
    “Freezing foreign assistance is not putting America first—it is guaranteeing America comes in last. Because every funding gap we leave is an opportunity for our adversaries to step in, fill the gap, and play the hero while casting us as the villain.”
    […]
    “And let’s be clear—it is not just U.S. leadership on the line here. There are U.S. jobs at stake here. That reality is hitting home hard this week. Back in Washington state, there are some world class organizations that I know may have to lay people off this week—hundreds of people—all because of President Trump’s funding freeze.
    “International aid organizations may make a difference around the world—but they support American jobs too. People who have a paycheck and family. People who work incredibly hard—and who are incredibly proud of the work they do to make the world a better place and reaffirm U.S. global leadership…
    “But they are being sent packing—not because they’ve done anything wrong, not because this work isn’t important. But because President Trump and Elon Musk are listening to whacko conspiracists and ultra-isolationists—while ignoring the experts, ignoring the obvious realities, and again ignoring the law. We should all stand against this”
    The full text of Senator Murray’s remarks on the funding still being frozen by President Trump can be found below, and video can be found HERE.
    “And let me make one thing perfectly clear—even before this latest whirl of chaos, President Trump was already illegally blocking billions of dollars. And even after the OMB guidance was reversed, he is still holding back all of those funds through his illegal executive orders.
    “You don’t have to take it from me. You can take it directly from the White House Press Secretary, quote: ‘This is not a rescission of the federal funding freeze… The President’s [Executive Orders] on federal funding remain in full force and effect, and will be rigorously implemented’
    “So, now that was the chaos of last week, I want to talk about the chaos that remains—what we are still seeing this week, and what it means for folks back home, and across the country. Because there is still significant confusion, and the remaining freezes are still causing significant pain.
    “For example, I’ve heard from cities in my state, and from the Washington State Department of Transportation. Now, it is still hard to get a clear picture, given the chaotic roll out, roll back, and more. But they are telling me they are concerned about infrastructure projects all over my state that are already getting delayed now—and could get derailed entirely because President Trump is still illegally blocking funding we passed with his executive orders.
    “If this illegal freeze continues, people will lose jobs and communities will lose out on projects that have been in the works for years.
    “Trump is blocking money to repair electric chargers, to install heavy duty chargers for trucks, to make critical repairs to bridges in order to protect the safety of millions of drivers, and to install new chargers along major roads in my state like I-90, US-97, US-2, US-195, and US-395. Stopping these projects is just pointlessly hurting commuters and businesses, it is costing construction workers, it is killing jobs.
    “Trump is holding up road projects that make streets safer for pedestrians, bicyclists, and drivers, like a safer streets project in Richland, Washington, and critical safety barriers in Spokane—not to mention the Liberty Park Land Bridge in Spokane, which would reconnect communities, and provide more green space for families to enjoy.
    “Or funds for the city of Lakewood’s plans to revitalize its downtown and bring in more retail space, and restaurants, and health care services, and financial services, make upgrades to roads, and provide a new festival area, park areas, and more.
    “Trump’s freeze is also a concern for the Samish Indian Nation as it works to improve safety and access to their land at the Campbell Lake Road intersection—which has seen growing traffic in recent years—and for a project led by the Tulalip Tribe to improve the interchanges along I-5 exits. The congestion on these ramps can get so bad it backs up to the main highway!
    “We want to get these projects done, we want to get them done—and the last thing we need is uncertainty about these stalled funds.
    “There’s also a project underway to upgrade the technology at our border with Canada—replacing and improving the outdated wait time system to improve accuracy and help our inspection and transportation agencies. This will help travelers headed to Canada avoid long wait times at the border and help fans from around the world, by the way, who are travelling between Seattle and Vancouver for next year’s World Cup move quickly—but not if Trump’s executive orders stop all of this funding!
    “Same for the efforts to update our state-wide planning with a new electronic system that would make the process for planning, and specifications, and estimates more efficient.
    “And, of course, in Washington state—we can never forget about fish, which are crucial to our culture, and our economy, in many ways. Trump’s ongoing funding freeze is putting projects to improve fish habitats on ice—replacing the culvert at Thornton Creek, replacing the failing culvert at Wapato Creek, which is right underneath the Pierce County Terminal at the Port of Tacoma, or removing the fish barrier culverts at Johnson Creek which will open up nearly 3,000 meters of upstream habitat.
    “Not to mention other wildlife preservation work, like an undercrossing structure and wildlife barriers east of Winthrop. And work on our waterways. Funding from the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law is still not restored today for some projects on the Lower Columbia River, projects like stormwater infrastructure that will help keep toxins out of water and restore wetlands and protect the ecosystems.
    “Our ports, our ports—so critical for not only Washington state’s economy, but for the whole country—are caught up in this too. There are port projects now on hold across my state, including for electrical infrastructure and shore power for vessels. These impacts are being felt from Anacortes to Port Angeles to Vancouver. Frozen funding is hurting working families in Washington and across the country, and it is making our economy less competitive.
    “And, we cannot forget our ferries—which are so crucial to many commuters in my state. Washington state ferries are looking to improve their data with a better system for collecting, analyzing, and reporting wait times at all of our terminals. This would give them useful information to improve efficiency and make life better for the people they serve. Losing that funding means more people will miss ferries and long waits in line for Washington state commuters crossing the water to work, to school, to medical appointments.
    “We also have absolutely essential electric transmission and distribution projects that are on hold now and in jeopardy. These are projects that are necessary, helping reduce our wildfire risks, ensure grid reliability, improve resilience to natural disasters, and lower costs for ratepayers across my state of Washington.
    “And these are funded under the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law—that is a law that Republicans and Democrats worked together to pass–it’s a program that Republicans thought was important enough to provide $10.5 billion. After what we have seen in recent months and years, I don’t know how you can say with a straight face that modernizing our grid isn’t absolutely vital to the future of our country. You don’t have to listen to me—Secretary Burgum and Secretary Wright said as much in their confirmation hearings.
    “But this project—all of these projects, and many more have been thrown into complete uncertainty because of President Trump’s Executive Orders. It is completely unclear when, or if these projects are going to get the funds they were counting on and they were owed—from bills Congress passed and were signed into law.
    “And that is not just causing chaos, it is not just causing delays, it is causing harm and alarm—because it could mean construction grinds to a halt, and workers lose jobs. It means the work will go un-started—or perhaps in some cases—unfinished.
    “Plus, it will mean increasing costs for cities, counties, states, and Tribes for those projects that somehow make it through all of this. And while there are many more infrastructure projects in my state I still haven’t even touched on, not to mention the other projects across the country. There are so many other projects, and organizations, and people who are being harmed right now by President Trump’s reckless funding freeze.
    “I know there are medical researchers, still worried their work will be considered ‘woke’ when in reality, it is actually pretty darn important we understand the roots of health disparities—things like why the maternal death rate is so much higher for Black or Native American women.
    “Yet, researchers are being told that their research is at risk of being defunded if they are examining issues of ‘equity,’ or ‘barriers to care,’ or even if they are specifically studying ‘females.’
    “And, there are hospitals in my state, and across the country, worried that some of these programs—which are appropriately focused on someone’s gender or race—are in jeopardy.
    “For example, we know pulse oximeters are less accurate for people with darker skin tones—making sure these clinical measurements are accurate will save lives, and can have life and death consequences for patients. And we know women have much higher rates of autoimmune disorders than men—we need to take a look at why that is.
    “We also need to invest in training the next generation of scientists, including from diverse backgrounds. Studies show that diversity in the scientific workforce leads to greater innovation and productivity. But there is a serious concern that lifesaving work is going to get caught up in President Trump’s sweeping illegal executive orders.
    “Another impact of Trump’s actions? The National Park Service has rescinded all of its employment offers for summer seasonal staff. Now that doesn’t just mean people will be facing longer wait lines and dirtier bathrooms—though they will. It could mean park closures throughout this entire summer, and it will mean delayed responses to emergencies—making people less safe.
    “And outside our national parks, Trump is also freezing regional clean up efforts. Things like stopping illegal dumping and improving air quality in our communities.
    “And M. President, let’s talk about foreign assistance, because, for decades now—there has been widespread, bipartisan understanding that promoting stability abroad, promoting democracy, improving health, strengthening trade, and building partnerships is crucial to US leadership.
    “But Trump’s executive orders put all of that at risk by illegally freezing funds. I have heard from organizations that operate all over the world about how they were unable to deliver the life-saving aid that millions of people rely on due to these stop-work orders. That meant millions of doses of lifesaving drugs sat un-used on shelves. Time-sensitive prevention methods against diseases like malaria were not carried out, putting millions at risk. Training for more than 64,000 health care workers were put on hold. Hundreds of millions of metric tons of U.S.-grown commodities sitting—and at the risk of spoiling—in transport, instead of reaching their final destinations across the world to feed people in need.
    “And despite a so-called ‘waiver’ from the U.S. State Department to resume work, much of this life-saving aid is still today on hold. Without a start-work order, those organizations fear they are taking on significant risk in continuing operations. Put simply: this was already unacceptable.
    “And now, over the weekend—President Trump and Elon Musk have decided against all reason, against all evidence, and against the law, mind you, to completely dismantle USAID. And that is on top of the illegal funding freeze that has already been pushing U.S. businesses, nonprofits, and international aid groups to make tough choices, for truly pointless reasons.
    “It should be obvious that these cuts will hurt people across the world. These cuts will mean people starve. These cuts will mean people don’t get clean water. These cuts will mean more disease outbreaks with higher death counts. These cuts will mean less help for victims of violence, and higher death rates for pregnant women.
    “And anyone with an ounce of humanity can see this freeze will get devastating, fast. And—it is important to note—it will get devastating in ways you cannot just make up for with more money later once the damage is done. That is just not how it works.
    “When people are starving, you cannot just feed them money—you need to have already made the investments to grow food.
    “When democracies are in crisis, you can’t just cut them a check—you need to have helped them build strong institutions.
    “When a deadly disease outbreak strikes—you are going to learn very quickly that an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.
    “These are not lessons we need to learn the hard way—by letting people die. We know it all, painfully well, right now. And so, to freeze this funding, is asking for disaster—and not just for other countries across the world, but for us, for the U.S. and for our families here at home.
    “Freezing foreign assistance is not putting America first—it is guaranteeing America comes in last.
    “Because every funding gap we leave is an opportunity for our adversaries to step in, fill that gap, and play the hero while casting us as the villain. How are we supposed to lead the world if we are unwilling to invest in it?
    “I will tell you right now—China is not holding back. They are investing constantly—because they know they aren’t just building infrastructure across the world, they are building stronger partnerships. And we just counted ourselves out of that competition.
    “You want to end U.S. global dominance? You want to tell the world the U.S. is done being a leader? You want to tell other countries—we cannot be trusted to keep our word?
    “Because that is exactly what we are doing if we let Trump get away with illegally cutting off global aid—with the stroke of a pen—and letting the richest man in the world cut off help for some of the poorest people in the world.
    “And let’s be clear—it is not just U.S. leadership on the line here. There are U.S. jobs at stake here. That reality is hitting home hard this week. Back in Washington state, there are some world class organizations that I know may have to lay people off this week—hundreds of people—all because of President Trump’s funding freeze.
    “It is a scene that is not isolated to Washington state—I know it is playing out across the country as well, with thousands of layoffs across 38 states and counting. And I know, so long as President Trump’s lawless war on foreign aid continues—so will these layoffs. We will see hundreds, if not thousands more every week.
    “International aid organizations may make a difference around the world—but they support American jobs, too. People who have a paycheck and family. People who work incredibly hard—and who are incredibly proud of the work they do to make the world a better place and reaffirm U.S. global leadership.
    “But they are being sent packing—not because they have done anything wrong, not because this work is not important. But because President Trump and Elon Musk are listening to whacko conspiracists and ultra isolationists—while ignoring the experts, ignoring the obvious realities, and again ignoring the law. We should all stand against this.”

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: ICYMI: Grassley Joins Fox News to Discuss Bondi, Patel and the Need to End FBI Political Weaponization

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Iowa Chuck Grassley
    WASHINGTON – Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) today joined Fox News’ “America Reports” to discuss eliminating political weaponization at the FBI, expectations for Pam Bondi in her role as U.S. Attorney General and Kash Patel’s road to confirmation as FBI Director.
    Audio and excerpts of Grassley’s remarks follow.
    [embedded content]
    VIDEO
    On the Justice Department’s recent memo to FBI employees:
    “People that are at [a] lower level, not at the supervisory level, have to take orders from their bosses, and if they were told to work on a case, even if they disagreed with the case, they [had] to work on it. And I think that there ought to be some consideration to that.
    “…I’m not going to write to the White House now to get information, I’m going to wait until we get [Kash] Patel in place as head of the FBI and ask him the very same questions that we’re talking about here, because those that use the FBI for political weaponization…that’s not the role of the FBI.
    “…I’ve made very clear that the FBI shouldn’t be used for political weaponization. Their job is law enforcement, and anything beyond that has to be cleaned up. And I think Kash Patel is a person that can do that.”
    On the Grassley-Johnson release of FBI “Arctic Frost” emails:
    “My emails show – and also the regulations of the FBI show – that [FBI Assistant Special Agent in Charge] Thibault was not in a position to [open the investigation into Trump]…
    “But see…the culture on the seventh floor of the FBI building is that it’s okay for FBI agents to promote challenges and positions against a former President of the United States because he’s a political threat. Well, the voters of Iowa [and] the voters of the United States on November the fifth did away with that and proved that [Trump] was wrongly condemned. The voters didn’t buy it.”
    On Attorney General Pam Bondi:
    “[Bondi] is totally a prosecutor by profession and she’s going to be the chief prosecutor of our government. She made very clear that she’s going to follow the Constitution and follow the laws and follow the evidence…
    “…[O]n the second day of [her] hearing…we had people in who knew her and worked for her, and we even had somebody that has never voted for Trump testify in favor of her, that she was a person who left politics out of the prosecution.”
    On Kash Patel’s road to confirmation:
    “I’ve got the votes to get him out of Committee, and I think that there’s going to be the votes to get him approved in the United States Senate, but I’m going to take it a step at a time.
    “A week from tomorrow, [the Judiciary Committee] will have that vote, and he’ll be on the floor of the United States Senate.”
    -30-

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Grassley Releases Additional Records Demonstrating Success of Shuttered ATF Anti-Arms Trafficking Operation, Demands Explanation for its Closure

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Iowa Chuck Grassley

    WASHINGTON – Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) is probing a Biden-era decision to shut down Project Thor, a Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) led program, that identified and dismantled Mexican cartel arms trafficking networks.

    “The government must be fully transparent to the American people about why it eliminated Project Thor, even though, based on the records obtained to-date, the program protected U.S. national security interests and helped to disrupt and dismantle criminal cartel networks’ access to firearms,” Grassley wrote. 

    In his letter, Grassley highlights new internal government records provided by legally protected whistleblower disclosures detailing Project Thor’s “Operation Nordic Giant.” These records reveal the first Trump administration successfully used Project Thor’s unique capabilities to disrupt and dismantle cartel arms trafficking networks operating in the U.S.

    “In this case, Andrew Scott Pierson, an American fugitive hiding in Mexico, was identified and prosecuted for operating a sophisticated, firearms trafficking network for years for the Cartel del Noreste (CDN) cartel,” Grassley continued. “The information gathered, analyzed and disseminated through Project Thor, as well as its efforts to coordinate several investigations across multiple law enforcement agencies, played a critical role in dismantling Pierson’s trafficking network and substantially reducing the CDN’s ability to obtain firearms.” 

    Grassley sent letters and enclosed records to ATF, the Department of Justice and Drug Enforcement Administration, as well as the Department of Homeland Security, Homeland Security Investigations and Customs and Border Protection. 

    Background: 

    ATF’s Project Thor brought together over 16 executive branch agencies in a whole-of-government effort to stem the flow of firearms between the U.S. and cartels in Mexico. The operation received public and private accolades for its accomplishments, before being defunded by the Biden administration in 2022. 

    Grassley is continuing his extensive oversight of U.S. efforts to combat Mexican cartels on both sides of the border. Last Congress, he demanded the Biden administration’s ATF provide a full account of Project Thor’s work and the reasons for defunding the operation. He also pressed the previous administration on its lackluster policies to address the proliferation of cartel arms trafficking networks operating in the U.S.

    -30-

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: 02.05.2025 Cruz, Blackburn, Colleagues Introduce Bill to Protect Supreme Court Justices from Intimidation

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Texas Ted Cruz

    WASHINGTON, D.C. – U.S. Sens. Ted Cruz (R-Texas), Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.), Mike Lee (R-Utah), Cindy Hyde-Smith (R-Miss.), and Tom Cotton (R-Ark.) introduced the Protecting Our Supreme Court Justices Act. The bill increases the maximum term of imprisonment for those who attempt to intimidate and influence the decision-making process of a judge.
    Upon introduction, Sen. Cruz said, “The integrity of our judicial system is dependent on justices being able to interpret the law freely and impartially. I am proud to join my colleagues in re-introducing the Protecting Our Supreme Court Justices Act to ensure that those who attempt to coerce or intimidate Supreme Court justices face penalties for interfering in the administration of justice. No member of the Court should fear for their or their family’s safety while carrying out their constitutional duty.”
    Sen. Blackburn said, “Supreme Court Justices must be able to do their jobs without fear of intimidation, harm, or violence against them or their families. The Protecting Our Supreme Court Justices Act will deter intimidation of our Justices and send a clear message that anyone who attempts to harm them will be punished to the fullest extent of the law.”
    Sen. Lee said, “Supreme Court Justices have faced a disturbing number of threats seeking to change the outcomes of cases for political ends. This assault on the rule of law and an independent judiciary cannot stand. Congress must be crystal clear: attempting to intimidate justices and their families will land you in prison for a long time.”
    Sen. Hyde-Smith said, “It is essential that the judicial branch be able to perform its duties free from threats, fear, intimidation, or coercion. Threats and protests against Supreme Court justices and federal judges are blatant attempts to undermine their independence. I’m proud to once again support this legislation that sends a crystal clear message that these actions will not be tolerated and those responsible will face serious legal consequences.”
    Sen. Cotton said, “Supreme Court Justices continue to be a target of politically motivated violence and threats of violence. This bill makes clear that anyone who engages in this unlawful activity will face the full extent of the law.”
    Read the bill text here.
    BACKGROUND
    Introduction of this bill follows a recent report detailing new and concerning information about a suspect who hatched a plan to kill Justice Brett Kavanaugh. Prior to the Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization decision, then-Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) attempted to intimidate Justices Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh by name on the steps of the U.S. Supreme Court.
    In the aftermath of the unprecedented May 2022 leak of the draft opinion in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, far-left protesters immediately began demonstrating outside of the private residences of Supreme Court Justices. Subsequently, a map with the home addresses of five Republican-appointed Justices—Justices Thomas, Alito, Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, and Barrett—was posted online.
    Federal law explicitly prohibits attempts at influencing the decision-making process of a judge. Specifically, 18 U.S.C. § 1507 states that any individual who, “with the intent of influencing any judge . . . in the discharge of his duty, pickets or parades . . . in or near a building or residence occupied or used by such judge” is subject to criminal monetary penalties or a maximum of one year of imprisonment, or both. Section 1507 was intended to enable our judges to carry out their duty to uphold the rule of law, without fear of intimidation or retribution for doing so.
    Under President Biden and Attorney General Garland, following the Dobbs leak, zero protesters outside of Supreme Court Justices’ homes were arrested for violating Section 1507. Just as troubling, the Biden Department of Justice did not issue any guidance on enforcing this statute. The Supreme Court Marshal, as well as Virginia Governor Youngkin and then-Maryland Governor Hogan, implored Attorney General Garland to enforce Section 1507.
    With President Trump back at the helm, the Justice Department will finally return to focusing on law and order and enforcing our criminal laws. Nevertheless, it’s still critical that Congress act to deter this intimidation of our federal judiciary.

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: ICYMI: On Senate Floor, Warren Underscores Danger of Budget Director Nominee Russ Vought

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Massachusetts – Elizabeth Warren

    February 05, 2025

    Russ Vought is the architect of Project 2025 and responsible for last week’s government shutdown

    Video of Remarks (YouTube)

    Washington, D.C. – U.S. Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) took to the Senate floor as part of a 30-hour hold by Senate Democrats to delay the confirmation of Mr. Russell Vought, nominee to be Director of the Office of Management and Budget. Senator Warren called out the serious consequences of Mr. Vought’s leadership, including the impacts of a government shutdown last week, on Massachusetts communities and families. Senator Warren also underscored the dangers of hundreds of executive orders President Trump has signed in his first few weeks. 

    Transcript: Senator Warren’s Floor Speech on the Nomination of Russ Vought
    U.S. Senate Floor
    February 5, 2025
    As Delivered

    Senator Elizabeth Warren: Thank you, Mr. President. I’d like to thank Senator Murray for her extraordinary leadership. She’s been a stalwart in the Senate for many, many years, and now is the ranking member of the Appropriations Committee, and knows firsthand the importance of the process by which we make a law in the United States, and that includes that we pass those laws in Congress, we fund them in Congress, it’s signed by the president of the United States, and people across this nation can know, through that process those are what the laws are. And if you don’t like those laws, then elect different people who will come up with different versions of the law. But everyone, Democrat or Republican, sticks to the same version, and that is: a law is a law. 

    The President of the United States, or his Co-President Elon Musk, do not have the right, simply, to go back on the laws and say, “Oh, we pick that one, that one, and that one to enforce, and that one, no, that one, no, and maybe that one half-time.” That is not how the process works. And Senator Murray has been a leading voice in fighting back against this and I just want to say how much I appreciate all that she has done.

    So, I want to talk for just a minute about Project 2025. During the 2024 election, the American people became familiar with this Republican document called Project 2025. The document laid out Republican plans to reshape our country, if they gained control. Now, Americans, a little at a time, got a chance to see the plan. People started to read it, and they were shocked. In no time, people from across the political spectrum, not just Democrats – Democrats, Republicans, independents, made clear how much they hated Project 2025, and that they wanted no part of it. So, what was in Project 2025 that made it so widely hated across the political spectrum? A few things – firing civil servants, weaponizing the Department of Justice and the Federal Bureau of Investigation, unleashing force onto protestors, and targeting political opponents, restricting abortion nationwide, ripping retirement and health care benefits from seniors, dismantling public education, and, biggest and best, funding tax cuts for the rich by raising taxes on America’s middle class. And, I want to be clear – it’s a big document. Those are just the top lines. 

    So Donald Trump’s response was to swear over and over and over again that he had nothing to do with those plans. Didn’t know about them, didn’t endorse them, didn’t want anything to do with them. Here are some of the things that Donald Trump said about Project 2025 back in 2024: “I know nothing about Project 2025. I have nothing to do with Project 2025. I disagree with some of the things they’re saying, and some of the things they’re saying are absolutely ridiculous and abysmal.” And, my personal favorite, “They’ve been told, officially, legally, in every way, that we have nothing to do with Project 2025.” 

    So, think about that. During the 2024 election, Donald Trump claimed he didn’t know anything about Project 2025, but he lied. Shortly after the election, he nominated one of the chief architects of Project 2025 in a key role with the government. Now, Donald Trump has named the lead architect of Project 2025, Russ Vought, to oversee the federal government’s entire budget office. That’s right, listen to this one, he is putting the head writer of the plans that you had only read about in nightmares in a key government position. Russ Vought wrote Project 2025, and now Donald Trump is rewarding him by inviting him into the government in order to carry out the Republican blueprint to make our government force people to live in the image that Russ Vought and other extremist Republicans approve of. And he plans to rework our economy to benefit the wealthiest among us and make everybody else pay for it. 

    Here are just a few of the things that Russ Vought has called for –- Russ Vought has called on Congress to outlaw medication abortion nationwide, restricting women’s reproductive rights even in states that protect abortion. Russ Vought has encouraged discrimination against transgender people in the workplace and in health care. In his first stint as OMB Director, Russ Vought decried the use of federal funding for diversity and equity training in a letter to federal agencies. The Project 2025 playbook calls for eliminating almost every civil rights office in the federal government. And Russ Vought has said he intends to put federal workers “in trauma” and destroy the merit-based system for civil servants so that he can fill the government with right wing extremists. 

    I’m going to pause here for a minute to see if Senator Gillibrand wants to speak. 

    Senator Kirsten Gillibrand: Thank you, Senator Warren, for your unbelievable tenacity and clear-eyed and thoughtful remarks. I yield the balance of my post-cloture debate time on the vote nomination to Senator Schumer. 

    Presiding Officer: Duly noted. 

    Senator Gillibrand: Thank you again, Senator Warren. 

    Senator Warren: Let’s keep in mind, Russ Vought has called for outlawing abortion, medication abortion nationwide. Doesn’t matter whether or not you live in the state that says, “No, we’re going to protect abortion,” Russ Vought wants to find a way to make sure it’s shut down everywhere. He wants to encourage discrimination against transgender people. He thinks getting rid of civil rights is the way to go for the American government. And he says he wants to put federal workers “in trauma” and destroy the merit-based system for civil servants so he can fill up our government with right wing extremists. 

    Now, we are already seeing firsthand the devastating effects of Russ Vought’s plan for America. Russ Vought was the puppet master behind the funding shutdown that threw this country into chaos last week. I saw this in Massachusetts. Parents didn’t know if their toddlers’ day care would be open. Seniors didn’t know if the hot meal that they were expecting from Meals on Wheels would grind to a halt. No one knew if the nursing homes funded by Medicaid would be able to pay their workers. And that was just the tip of the iceberg for Russ Vought. 

    If he is confirmed, you can absolutely bet on Russ Vought pulling out the rug from working people over and over and over again. And, quite frankly, we don’t know where he will stop. This is where they started – three weeks in and this is where they’ve started. 

    So will Russ Vought, Elon Musk, and Donald Trump stop when they’ve ripped abortion rights away from every single woman in America? Will he stop when he’s abolished the Department of Education and fired 180,000 teachers from their jobs? Will he stop when he has privatized Medicare and when seniors can’t afford to go see the doctor? Will he stop when he’s done stealing from middle-class families in order to fund tax breaks for the wealthiest households? Yep, by the way, that is in his blueprint, too. Tax hikes for the middle class, tax breaks for the rich. Or will he stop when he crashes the economy? And take it from me, with these kinds of plans, crashing the economy is no longer a stretch. 

    Russ Vought’s Project 2025 proposals will lead to higher inflation, higher interest rates, and weaker economic growth. Project 2025 would seriously threaten another recession. Look, already families all across this country are feeling the pressure from high grocery prices while Donald Trump and his administration just turn their backs on working families. American families cannot afford for Russ Vought to be in charge. We don’t know how far Russ Vought’s extremism will go, but we can’t afford to wait and find out. 

    Americans voted for each and every one of us right here in the United States Senate to fight for them, and they do not expect us to roll over and play dead. It is our sworn duty to stop dangerous people like Russ Vought before he destroys our freedom, our economy, and the stability of every working family in this nation. And so I urge every senator to vote no on his nomination. 

    Video of Senator Warren’s full remarks can be found here. 

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI United Kingdom: Deadline approaches for School Age Payment applications

    Source: Scottish Government

    Parents and carers urged not to miss out on support worth over £300

    Parents and carers, with a child born between 1 March 2019 and 29 February 2020, risk missing out on hundreds of pounds worth of help if they don’t apply for School Age Payment in time.

    The deadline is midnight on 28 February 2025.

    School Age Payment is worth £314.45 per child. It is one of Social Security Scotland’s Best Start Grant payments. It is only available in Scotland.

    The money can be spent on anything the child needs at this stage including; books, bags, clothes and equipment for school. School Age Payment is paid around the time a child is first old enough to start primary school. There is no requirement to take up a place at school.

    This is important as parents and carers could miss out on the payment if they defer when their child starts school and don’t apply until then.

    The payment is available for multiple children from the same household, as long as each child is the right age.

    Social Security Scotland automatically pays School Age Payment to eligible people who get Scottish Child Payment. But those who do not receive Scottish Child Payment or who have opted out of automatic payments must apply before the deadline.

    Some families who are not eligible for Scottish Child Payment might still be eligible for the School Age Payment. This includes parents and carers who: receive housing benefit, are under 18 and do not receive any other benefits or are 18 or 19 and dependent on someone else who receives benefits for them.

    Social Justice Secretary Shirley-Anne Somerville said:

    “If you have a child in the family aged five, or who turns five this month, then you could be eligible for School Age Payment.

    “We are urging everyone who is eligible to make sure that they don’t miss the deadline for applications, especially as all the children in the household who are the right age can get the payment.

    “Best Start Grant is made up of a series of payments designed to ensure that children in Scotland get exactly that – the best start possible in life. This money is an important contribution to families at a key stage in their child’s development when they may be facing additional costs.”

    MIL OSI United Kingdom –

  • MIL-OSI Security: U.S. Marshals Arrest Milwaukee Rape Suspect

    Source: US Marshals Service

    Nashville, TN – A U.S. Marshals task force in Tennessee, working a collateral lead from the U.S. Marshals Service in Wisconsin, today arrested in Nashville a man wanted in Milwaukee for sex crimes against children.

    Yi Leon Harris, 40, was charged with two counts of repeated sexual assault of a child, and a warrant for his arrest was issued in Milwaukee Circuit Court on Jan. 29.

    On Jan. 31, the Milwaukee Police Department requested the assistance of the U. S. Marshals Service Eastern Wisconsin Violent Offender Task Force with locating and apprehending Harris.

    Upon developing information that Harris was residing in the Nashville area, the Eastern Wisconsin Task Force requested the assistance of the U.S. Marshals Service Middle Tennessee Fugitive Task Force.

    The Middle Tennessee Task Force located Harris at a residence on Brooksboro Terrace in Nashville. Harris was arrested without incident and taken to the Davidson County Detention Center where he was booked as a fugitive from justice and will await extradition to Wisconsin.

    The U.S. Marshals Service is committed to protecting communities by apprehending dangerous fugitives.

    The U.S. Marshals Middle Tennessee Task Force is a multi-agency task force that serves the Middle District of Tennessee. Its membership is comprised of Deputy U.S. Marshals, Putnam, Rutherford, and Sumner County Sheriff’s Deputies, Metro Nashville Police Officers, Tennessee Bureau of Investigation and Tennessee Department of Correction Special Agents, and the Tennessee Highway Patrol.

    MIL Security OSI –

  • MIL-OSI Australia: Taskforce Raven seizes stolen property during targeted Newnham search

    Source: Tasmania Police

    Taskforce Raven seizes stolen property during targeted Newnham search

    Thursday, 6 February 2025 – 10:49 am.

    A man has been charged with multiple burglary and stealing offences after police seized $3000 worth of stolen property during a targeted search at Newnham.
    Members of Taskforce Raven arrested the man on Wednesday 5 February in relation to an investigation into an aggravated burglary.
    During a subsequent search of a Newnham residence, taskforce members seized a quantity of power tools believed to have been stolen during recent burglaries. 
    The man has been charged with aggravated burglary, stealing, attempted stealing, burglary, computer-related fraud, possession of stolen property.
    He will appear in the Launceston Magistrates Court at a later date.
    Sergeant Ivan Radosavijevic said Taskforce Raven commenced on Monday 3 February and had already seen strong results.
    “The taskforce will focus on crime reduction, by targeting recidivist offenders,” he said.
    “Anyone with information about recidivist offending or anti-social behaviour in the Northern District should contact police on 131 444 or Crime Stoppers anonymously on 1800 333 000”.

    MIL OSI News –

  • MIL-OSI: LNG Energy Group Announces New Director Appointments

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    TORONTO, Feb. 05, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — LNG Energy Group Corp. (TSXV: LNGE) (TSXV: LNGE.WT) (OTCQB: LNGNF) (FRA: E26) (the “Company” or “LNG Energy Group”) is pleased to announce the appointment of Mr. Chad McGuffin and Mr. Matt Molak to its Board of Directors of the Company, effective immediately.

    Mr. McGuffin is the President of Lewis Energy Group, L.P. (“LEG”) and Mr. Molak is the Chief Financial Officer of LEG. Effective immediately, Mr. Lawler and Mr. Jumper have resigned from the Board of Directors of the Company. The appointments are subject to the approval of the TSX Venture Exchange.

    About LNG Energy Group

    The Company is focused on the acquisition and development of oil and gas exploration and production assets in Latin America.

    For more information, please see below:

    Website:
    www.lngenergygroup.com

    Investor Relations:
    Angel Roa, Chief Financial Officer
    Email: investor.relations@lngenergygroup.com
    Telephone: +57-321-943-9396

    Find us on social media:
    LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/lng-energy-group-inc/
    Instagram: @lngenergygroup
    X: @LNGEnergyCorp

    The MIL Network –

  • MIL-OSI New Zealand: Serious crash, Helena Bay

    Source: New Zealand Police (District News)

    Emergency services are responding to a serious crash involving a car and a pedestrian on Kaiikanui Rd, Helena Bay.

    Police were called about 11.15pm.

    The road will be closed while emergency services work at the scene.

    Please avoid the area, if possible.

    ENDS 

    Issued by Police Media Centre

    MIL OSI New Zealand News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: California Department of Justice Investigating Richmond Police Department Officer-Involved Shooting Under AB 1506

    Source: US State of California

    Wednesday, February 5, 2025

    Contact: (916) 210-6000, agpressoffice@doj.ca.gov

    **The information provided below is based on preliminary details regarding an ongoing investigation, which may continue to evolve**

    OAKLAND – California Attorney General Rob Bonta today announced that the California Department of Justice (DOJ), pursuant to Assembly Bill 1506 (AB 1506), is investigating and will independently review an officer-involved shooting (OIS) that occurred in Richmond, California on Tuesday, February 4, 2025 at approximately 8:45 p.m. The OIS incident resulted in the death of one individual and involved personnel from the Richmond Police Department. 

    Following notification by local authorities, DOJ’s California Police Shooting Investigation Team initiated an investigation in accordance with AB 1506 mandates. Upon completion of the investigation, it will be turned over to DOJ’s Special Prosecutions Section within the Criminal Law Division for independent review.

    More information on the California Department of Justice’s role and responsibilities under AB 1506 is available here: https://oag.ca.gov/ois-incidents.

    # # #

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI Australia: Tougher laws against antisemitism and hatred in NSW

    Source: New South Wales Premiere

    Published: 6 February 2025

    Released by: The Premier, Attorney General, Minister for Local Government, Minister for Multiculturalism, Minister for Police and Counter-terrorism

    The Minns Labor Government is announcing a series of tough new measures to crack down on a recent escalation of troubling graffiti, racial hatred and antisemitism in the community.

    The package of reforms will help give police and the community additional powers and resources to respond to disgusting acts of racial violence and hatred.

    It sends a clear message to people who commit these crimes or intend to commit them that these acts have no place in NSW, and they will face severe and harsh penalties if they do.

    In response to recent appalling attacks, the NSW Government will:

    • Introduce a new criminal offence for intentionally inciting racial hatred, with a proposed maximum penalty of 2 years’ imprisonment.
    • Introduce a new offence in section 93ZA of the Crimes Act 1900 directed at the display of a Nazi symbol on or near a synagogue, with an increased maximum penalty to 2 years’ imprisonment, and clarify that that graffiti is a ‘public act’.
    • Expand the aggravating circumstance that applies on sentence when an offence is motivated by hatred or prejudice to ensure that it applies whether a crime is partially or wholly motivated by hatred or prejudice.
    • Amend the Graffiti Control Act 2008 to create an aggravated offence for graffiti on a place of worship.
    • Introduce a new offence in the Crimes Act 1900 to stop people in or near a place of worship from intentionally blocking access to the place of worship without reasonable excuse, or from harassing, intimidating or threatening people accessing places of worship, and provide police with associated move on powers. This new offence is proposed to have a maximum penalty of 2 years’ imprisonment.

    In addition to these strengthened laws, the Minns Labor Government is also announcing:

    • Increased funding to support the crucial work of the NSW Police Force Engagement and Hate Crime Unit by $525,000.  This will allow for boosted engagement and communications with the community, including additional synagogue and school visits.
    • An increase to the NSW Local Government Social Cohesion Grants Program by $500,000.
    • Training to support local governments address rising prevalence of hate crimes.

    These reforms build on the significant work of the police over the summer:

    • The NSW Police Force launched Operation Shelter on 11 October 2023 to respond to public safety in relation to the current conflict in the Middle East.
    • More than 300 proactive patrols are conducted under Operation Shelter every day. These centre around significant sites such as places of worship.
    • Resources from Traffic and Highway Patrol, the Regional Enforcement Squad, dog unit and Pol Air have also been brought in to help local police on the ground.
    • Strike Force Pearl has been established to investigates these hate crimes – and doubled its fulltime dedicated detectives from 20 to 40.

    The reforms send a strong message about the seriousness of committing acts of racial hatred and antisemitism, and the NSW Government’s commitment to send a clear message to perpetrators that they will be held responsible for these acts.

    Premier Chris Minns said:

    “We have seen disgusting acts of racial hatred and antisemitism.

    “These are strong new laws, and they need to be because these attacks have to stop.

    “NSW is a multicultural state, and these acts designed to intimidate and divide will not work.

    “These laws have been drafted in response to the horrifying antisemitic violence in our community but it’s important to note that they will apply to anyone, preying on any person, of any religion.

    “If you commit these acts, you will face severe penalties, and we make no apologies for that.”

    Attorney General Michael Daley said:

    “Blocking access to places of worship, graffitiing sacred sites, or inciting hatred are wholly unacceptable behaviours that have no place in our society. These proposed changes strengthen penalties and expand police powers to maintain order across the community.

    “The Minns Government is expanding the criminal law to send a clear message that inciting hatred is not just unacceptable, it will soon be criminal.

    “The entire community will be safer as a direct result of these changes. The proposed changes will mean that divisive and hateful behaviours will not succeed in dividing our community.”

    Minister for the Police and Counter-terrorism Yasmin Catley said:

    “Police are doing everything they can to disrupt and investigate these vile crimes. Today’s announcement will further strengthen their capability to continue this critical work.

    “Our community thrives on diversity and mutual respect. We refuse to let those driven by hate divide us.”

    Minister for Multiculturalism Steve Kamper said:

    “Our multicultural society is one of our greatest achievements, but it is not something we can afford to take for granted. It requires our constant attention.

    “The Minns Government will continue to proactively address bad faith actors and explore every avenue to ensure social harmony and that our multicultural society is protected.”

    Minister for Local Government Ron Hoenig said:

    “It’s vital that all tiers of government are united in the effort to stop antisemitism.

    “I welcome the additional support and training for councils so that they can expand their work promoting unity and harmony within local communities.”

    MIL OSI News –