NewzIntel.com

Category: Pandemic

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Isabel Schnabel: Keeping a steady hand in an unsteady world

    Source: European Central Bank

    Speech by Isabel Schnabel, Member of the Executive Board of the ECB, at Hoover Monetary Policy Conference “Finishing the Job and New Challenges”, Stanford University

    Stanford, 10 May 2025

    Standard theory of monetary policy rests on a simple premise: a stable relationship between inflation and the output gap. This is the logic behind the Phillips curve, which, in its most common form, relates inflation to a measure of economic slack, expected inflation and supply shocks.[1]

    The relationship between output and inflation was already under scrutiny well before the pandemic.

    After the global financial crisis of 2008, inflation didn’t fall nearly as much as had been implied by conventional Phillips curve estimates. And once economies around the world recovered and unemployment fell, the bounce-back in inflation fell short of model predictions.

    This is why that episode is known as the period of “missing deflation” and “missing inflation”.[2]

    The situation changed fundamentally in the aftermath of the pandemic, when the relationship between inflation and the output gap proved to be much stronger than what would have been expected based on historical estimates. We observed a noticeably steeper Phillips curve across advanced economies, including the euro area (Slide 2).[3]

    In my remarks today, I would like to draw lessons from the instability of the Phillips curve over the past 20 years for the optimal conduct of monetary policy. I will argue that the evidence of a re-flattening of the Phillips curve after the long period of high inflation suggests that, in the euro area, the most appropriate policy response to the potential risks to price stability arising from fiscal expansion and protectionism is to keep a steady hand and maintain rates close to where they are today – that is, firmly in neutral territory.

    Monetary policy and the slope of the Phillips curve

    The slope of the Phillips curve has first-order implications for the conduct of monetary policy.

    If the curve is steep, as it appeared to be in recent years, monetary policy is highly effective in reducing inflation, with only a limited impact on growth and employment. The smaller “sacrifice ratio” suggests that central banks should react more forcefully to deviations of inflation from target, even when the economy is hit by a supply shock that pushes inflation up and output down.[4]

    A steep Phillips curve hence improves the trade-off facing central banks, weakening the case for “looking through”, as forceful policy action minimises the risks of inflation expectations unanchoring and of inflation becoming entrenched.[5]

    Policy prescriptions differ fundamentally if the Phillips curve is flat.

    In this case, a large policy impulse is required to move output sufficiently to generate aggregate price effects. It can then be optimal for policy to tolerate moderate deviations of inflation from target, as the cost of closing a small inflation gap relative to the target may exceed the benefits.

    This prescription holds in both directions.

    When inflation is above the target, a flat Phillips curve would require a sharp rise in policy rates to bring medium-term inflation down from, say, 2.3% to 2%. Such a course of action may imply a substantial rise in unemployment and may thus not be welfare-improving for society at large – a trade-off central banks may face during the last mile of disinflation.[6]

    The experience of the 2010s, when inflation was persistently below the target, demonstrates that the argument also holds in the opposite direction.

    If bringing inflation up from 1.7% to 2%, for example, requires purchasing a large fraction of outstanding government bonds and making potentially time-inconsistent promises about the future path of interest rates, then the central bank must consider carefully whether the benefits outweigh the costs, such as making losses in the future, market dysfunction, rising wealth inequality, financial instability and threats to its reputation.[7]

    The role of inflation expectations

    However, the ability to tolerate moderate deviations of inflation from target critically hinges on a firm anchoring of inflation expectations – that is, a low sensitivity of inflation expectations to realised inflation.

    If inflation expectations are well-anchored, policymakers can tolerate moderate deviations from target, as fluctuations in inflation tend to fade away. If, however, inflation expectations are at risk of unanchoring, central banks should act forcefully.[8]

    There are two challenges to this strategy.

    One is that the anchoring of inflation expectations is endogenous. Central banks themselves can cause an unanchoring if inaction in the face of price shocks is perceived as weakening its commitment to securing price stability.[9]

    History shows that it can be costly to reestablish the credibility of the nominal anchor once it has been lost. This is also because inflation expectations are path-dependent. Research shows that the experience of high inflation may raise the sensitivity of inflation expectations to new inflation surprises.[10]

    The other challenge is that different measures of inflation expectations often yield different results (Slide 3). As such, robust trends cannot easily be identified in real time, much like the slope of the Phillips curve.[11]

    Measures of inflation expectations can even point in opposite directions. Research from the early days of the pandemic showed that most consumers expected the pandemic to raise prices, contrary to the views held by professional forecasters at the time.[12]

    State-dependent pricing and tight labour markets can explain steeper Phillips curve and post-pandemic inflation surge

    The recent period of high inflation illustrates how sensitive policy conclusions can be to the assessment of the slope of the Phillips curve and to measures of inflation expectations that central banks use in their analysis.

    Two key theories have been proposed to explain the post-pandemic inflation surge.[13]

    The first relates to firms’ price-setting behaviour.

    Standard New Keynesian models assume that the probability of firms resetting their prices is constant over time. This is a fair description of aggregate price movements when inflation is low and aggregate shocks are small (Slide 4).

    However, the past few years have demonstrated that this “linear” relationship breaks down in the face of large shocks.[14] When marginal costs increase rapidly and threaten to erode profit margins, firms tend to raise their prices more frequently. As a result, the Phillips curve steepens.

    This feedback loop is strongly asymmetric.[15] It acts as an inflation accelerator when firms face positive demand or adverse cost-push shocks.[16] But it does little to firms’ pricing strategies in the face of disinflationary shocks due to downward price rigidities.

    This helps explain why inflation did not fall much when the pandemic broke out but increased sharply after the reopening of our economies (Slide 5).[17]

    The second theory relates to the tightness of the labour market.

    Downward nominal wage rigidity has been a key factor explaining the “missing deflation” in the aftermath of the global financial crisis.[18] If nominal wages do not fall, or fall only very slowly, firms’ marginal costs change only moderately, and hence disinflationary pressures face a natural lower bound, even if slack is large.

    But when the labour market is tight, wages are more flexible as firms outbid each other in securing their desired workforce.

    Benigno and Eggertsson show that this channel led to a non-linear inflation surge in the United States whenever the number of job vacancies exceeded the number of unemployed workers (Slide 6).[19] In the euro area, the threshold was lower, but the curve still exhibited strong signs of non-linearity.

    Rising near-term inflation expectations may have shifted the Phillips curve up

    New research for the United States, however, suggests that the evidence in favour of the second theory is not very robust.

    Specifically, the finding of non-linearity depends critically on which measure is used to control for inflation expectations: non-linearity holds when controlling for expectations of professional forecasters, but it disappears once inflation expectations of households and firms are considered.[20]

    In other words, it is conceivable that the Phillips curve did not become steeper but rather shifted upwards as inflation expectations rose.[21] Non-linearity has also been rejected recently using a similar approach based on regional data for the euro area.[22]

    Moreover, the expectations that are relevant for such an upward shift are not necessarily the longer-term expectations that central banks typically pay most attention to.

    These have remained remarkably stable over the past few years (Slide 7).

    Rather, inflation expectations over the near term, such as the next 12 months, may be more important in driving macroeconomic outcomes.

    Bernanke and Blanchard, for example, show that one-year-ahead inflation expectations explain a significant share of the recent marked rise in nominal wages, and hence inflation, in the United States.[23] Similar evidence has been found for the euro area and other advanced economies.[24]

    Again, there appears to be an asymmetry: the risks that the Phillips curve shifts downwards are substantially lower. Research shows that consumers tend to respond more to inflationary than disinflationary news, as households value increases in their purchasing power and as they pay less attention to inflation when it is low.[25]

    The impact of tariffs on inflation in the euro area

    Understanding the reasons behind the recent inflation surge is not only important from a conceptual perspective. It also matters for setting monetary policy today, as we are once again confronted with historically large shocks.

    For central banks, this is a difficult environment to navigate.

    Memories of high inflation are still fresh after a long period of sharply rising prices. And just as during the pandemic, there is considerable uncertainty about how firms and households are going to respond to shocks that are largely outside the historical empirical range.

    Ultimately, the impact of current shocks on prices and wages, and hence the appropriate monetary policy response, will depend on the shape and location of the Phillips curve.

    Monetary policy should focus on the medium term and underlying inflation

    Let me illustrate this by looking at the euro area.

    Given the lags in policy transmission, the relevant horizon for monetary policy is the medium term. The past few years, however, demonstrated that inflation forecasting at times of large structural shocks is inherently difficult and plagued by large uncertainty.

    For this reason, the ECB and other central banks have increasingly turned to a data-dependent approach to monetary policy, where the observed dynamics of underlying inflation and the strength of monetary transmission are used to cross-check the inflation projections.[26]

    This approach remains valid today.[27] But data dependence is not in contrast to being forward-looking.

    In the current situation, the high level of economic uncertainty, together with the sharp fall in energy prices and a stronger euro exchange rate, will likely dampen headline inflation in the short run, potentially pushing it below our 2% target.

    The question is whether these developments provide meaningful signals about the net impact of current shocks on medium-term inflation.

    During the pandemic, for example, a strong appreciation of the euro against the US dollar, by nearly 14% over seven months, and a marked decline in energy prices were followed by a historical inflation surge.

    Data dependency hence requires examining the potential channels through which current shocks could affect underlying inflation over the medium term.

    In the euro area, there are two main forces that could have the size and persistence to pull underlying inflation sustainably away from our 2% medium-term target.

    One is fiscal policy, which is set to expand on a scale unseen outside periods of deep economic contraction.

    Germany has eased its constitutional debt brake for defence-related spending, and has committed to spending €500 billion, or more than 10% of GDP, on infrastructure and the green transition over the next 12 years. In addition, the European Commission has invited Member States to activate the national escape clause to accommodate increased defence expenditure across the EU.

    The impact of these measures on inflation will depend on how they are implemented, especially their impact on the supply side of the economy. But on balance, the fiscal impulse is likely to put upward pressure on underlying inflation over the medium term.

    Global fragmentation is the second force that could have a lasting impact on prices and wages.

    As we speak, the scale and scope of tariffs, the extent of retaliation as well as how financial markets respond to these developments all remain highly uncertain.

    Ongoing negotiations are a sign that mutually beneficial agreements may still be reached. An ideal outcome – the “zero-for-zero” tariff agreement advocated by the European Commission – could even boost growth and employment on both sides of the Atlantic.

    However, should these negotiations fail, the euro area will simultaneously face adverse supply and demand shocks, as the EU has announced that it will retaliate against higher tariffs.

    Similar to the pandemic, assessing the relative strength of these forces is inherently difficult. Overall, however, there are risks that a lasting and meaningful increase in tariffs will reinforce the upward pressure on underlying inflation arising from higher fiscal spending over the medium term.

    To see this, it is useful to look at the factors driving the macroeconomic propagation of tariffs.

    Euro area foreign demand may prove resilient, with limited effects on inflation

    The severity of the negative demand shock will depend on two factors.

    One is the hit to economic activity in the United States and to global demand from raising tariffs across the board. Under the 2 April tariff rates, the United States will face a supply shock of historic proportions. Inflation is poised to rise, real incomes to fall and unemployment to increase. Retaliatory tariffs would weaken the economy further.

    So even in the absence of demand reallocation, foreign demand can be expected to decline if there is a broad increase in tariffs. The depth and persistence of this decline will also depend on other policies, such as tax and spending cuts and deregulation.

    And it will crucially depend on the final outcome of tariff negotiations, which is likely to be far less severe than the 2 April announcement.

    The second factor affecting the severity of the demand shock relates to the degree of demand reallocation – that is, the elasticity of substitution between foreign and domestic products. This elasticity is highly uncertain and varies across industries, products and countries.[28]

    However, a robust finding in the literature is that products that are more differentiated tend to be relatively price-inelastic, as they are more difficult to substitute.

    This has great relevance for the euro area, where the bulk of exports to the United States comprise pharmaceuticals, machinery, vehicles and chemicals. These goods are typically highly differentiated (Slide 8, left-hand side).

    For instance, the supply of machines for producing semiconductors is basically monopolised by one Dutch company. Similarly, banknotes in the United States are overwhelmingly printed using machinery from a single German manufacturer.

    These and other machines are not easy to replace in the short run, giving euro area exporters leverage to pass higher costs on to foreign importers and limiting the hit to foreign demand.

    In addition, trade diversion may benefit euro area exports.

    Should prohibitive tariffs on Chinese imports remain in place, they will measurably raise the euro area’s price competitiveness in the US market. This can be expected to stimulate demand for euro area goods if there are no alternatives in the United States itself, especially as the number of industries in which both Chinese and euro area firms have comparative advantages has increased measurably over the past two decades (Slide 8, right-hand side).[29]

    New research corroborates this view.[30] It finds that the euro area stands to win in relative terms from a global trade war, as its net exports to the world will rise rather than fall as global demand is reallocated across the global network, offsetting the hit to domestic consumption.[31]

    In other words, for as long as tariffs are not prohibitive to trade and the uncertainty paralysing activity fades, aggregate euro area foreign demand may prove relatively resilient under a range of potential tariff outcomes.

    The recent appreciation of the euro does not refute this view.

    The euro has gone through two distinct phases since the US presidential election in November last year. It first depreciated in nominal effective terms by 3% until mid-February, before starting to appreciate. So, in net terms, the euro is trading just 2.6% above last year’s average.

    In addition, as most exports to the United States are invoiced in US dollars, the pass-through of changes in the exchange rate to import prices tends to be moderate – by recent estimates just about one-fifth.[32] And potential losses in price competitiveness in third countries are in part compensated by lower import costs, as euro area exports have, on average, a large import content.

    This price inelasticity is also reflected in recent surveys, with manufacturing firms reporting an expansion in output for the first time in more than two years (Slide 9). Also, fewer firms are reporting falling export orders.

    Even if part of these developments may reflect frontloading by firms, it is remarkable how resilient sentiment has remained in the face of the extraordinary increase in economic uncertainty.

    Supply shock puts upward pressure on inflation, reinforced by global supply chains

    The downward effects on inflation caused by lower demand are likely to be offset, partly or even fully, by the supply shock hitting the euro area through retaliatory tariffs imposed by the EU and other economies.

    The strength of this supply shock also depends on two factors.

    One is the extent to which firms pass higher tariffs on to consumers.

    In the United States, evidence from the 2018 tariff increase suggests that, in most cases, the pass-through to import prices was de facto complete.[33] At the same time, many firms chose to absorb part of the increase in import prices in their profit margins, thereby limiting the increase in consumer price inflation, at least in the short run.[34]

    Whether firms will respond similarly to a renewed rise in tariffs in the current environment is uncertain.

    On the one hand, the recent appreciation of the euro, if persistent, provides some margin for euro area firms to buffer cost increases from retaliatory tariffs. On the other hand, profit margins have already been squeezed by high wage growth and a sluggish economy, and the post-pandemic inflation surge may have lowered the bar for firms to pass higher costs on to consumers.

    Overall, recent surveys of companies in the United States and the euro area suggest that they plan to gradually pass higher tariffs on to consumers over the coming years.[35]

    In addition, in order to compensate for the hit to input costs, firms also tend to raise the prices of goods not directly affected by tariffs. There is evidence that retailers broadly adjust price markups even if only a subset of wholesale prices change.[36]

    The second, and related, factor determining the strength of the supply shock relates to global value chains.

    Unlike during the wave of protectionism in the 1930s, today the dominant share of international trade, about 70%, reflects multinational firms distributing production across countries and along the value chain to minimise costs. In this process, parts and components often cross borders many times.

    Prohibitive tariffs between the United States and China are already disrupting supply chains. Shipments of goods are declining, potentially causing future shortages of critical intermediate goods that could reverberate across the world.

    While current conditions are very different from those seen during the pandemic, when supply chain disruptions were a main factor driving the surge in inflation, the impact of tariffs is likely to be amplified as the increase in firms’ marginal costs propagates through the production network.

    ECB staff analysis shows that, even if the EU does not retaliate, higher production costs transmitted through global value chains could more than offset the disinflationary pressure coming from lower foreign demand, making tariffs inflationary overall (Slide 10, left-hand side).[37]

    These effects will become stronger with full retaliation, including intermediate goods. So far, the EU’s retaliatory measures have disproportionately targeted final consumer goods, such as beverages, food and home appliances – precisely to avoid broader cost effects being transmitted through value chains (Slide 10, right-hand side).

    But if the trade conflict intensifies, the scale of retaliation will widen and increasingly include intermediate goods, as these account for nearly 70% of euro area imports from the United States.

    In other words, retaliatory tariffs on intermediate goods would constitute a much broader cost-push shock for euro area firms, reminiscent of the post-pandemic supply chain disruptions.[38]

    It is possible that these effects will be mitigated by China redirecting goods originally destined for the United States towards the euro area and other economies at a discount.

    In practice, however, this mitigation channel is likely to be contained. India, for example, has already raised temporary tariffs on China to curb a surge in imports. Similarly, the European Commission has repeatedly clarified that it intends to protect euro area firms against dumping prices should imports from China rise significantly in response to the evolving trade conflict with the United States.[39]

    Policy implications

    How, then, should the ECB respond to the current shocks?

    The lessons from the post-pandemic surge in inflation suggest that, from today’s perspective, the appropriate course of action is to keep rates close to where they are today – that is, firmly in neutral territory.

    A “steady hand” policy provides the best insurance against a wide range of potential outcomes. In other words, it is robust to many contingencies.

    Specifically, it avoids reacting excessively to volatility in headline inflation at a time when domestic inflation remains sticky and new forces are putting upward pressure on underlying inflation over the medium term. Given lags in policy transmission, an accommodative policy stance could amplify risks to medium-term price stability.

    This steady hand policy also avoids overreacting to concerns that tariffs may destabilise inflation expectations once again.

    In recent months, households’ short-term inflation expectations have reversed and started rising again. According to the ECB’s Consumer Expectations Survey, expectations for inflation one year ahead increased to 2.9% in March from their trough of 2.4% in September 2024 (Slide 11, left-hand side). Qualitative inflation expectations, as measured by the European Commission, even rose to levels last seen in late 2022 (Slide 11, right-hand side).

    Currently, there are no indications that this rise is persistent, or that inflation expectations are at risk of unanchoring.

    Hence, we can afford to look through the rise in short-term inflation expectations. This could change if we see clear signs of a strong and front-loaded pass-through of potential tariff increases – something that could bring us back to the steep part of the Phillips curve. So far, however, evidence suggests that firms have notably slowed the frequency with which they revise their prices.

    A steady hand policy also addresses risks of a more substantial decline in aggregate demand in response to the trade conflict.

    If tight labour markets were the main culprit for the recent steepening of the Phillips curve, risks of a sharp decline in inflation caused by a rise in unemployment are much more moderate today.

    The reason for this is that in both the United States and the euro area, the vacancy-to-unemployment ratio has fallen markedly and is now at a level that suggests that labour markets are much more balanced (Slide 12).

    We are thus likely to be operating close to, or at, the flat part of the Phillips curve where a change in unemployment has only limited effects on underlying inflation, in stark contrast to the high inflation period.[40]

    We would only need to react more forcefully to the tariff shock if we observed a sharp deterioration in labour market conditions or an unanchoring of inflation expectations to the downside.

    Both seem unlikely at the current juncture.

    Despite the number of vacancies declining, the euro area labour market has proven resilient, with unemployment at a record low. And most measures of medium-term inflation expectations remain tilted to the upside, including those of professional forecasters (Slide 13).

    Conclusion

    My main message today, and with this I would like to conclude, is therefore simple: now is the time to keep a steady hand.

    In the current environment of elevated volatility, the ECB needs to remain focused on the medium term. Given long and variable transmission lags, reacting to short-term developments could result in the peak impact of our policy only unfolding when the current disinflationary forces have passed.

    Over the medium term, risks to euro area inflation are likely tilted to the upside, reflecting both the increase in fiscal spending and the risks of renewed cost-push shocks from tariffs propagating through global value chains.

    Therefore, from today’s perspective, an accommodative monetary policy stance would be inappropriate, also because recent inflation data suggest that past shocks may unwind more slowly than previously anticipated.

    By keeping interest rates near their current levels, we can be confident that monetary policy is neither excessively holding back growth and employment, nor stimulating it. We are thus in a good place to evaluate the likely future evolution of the economy and to take action if risks materialise that threaten price stability.

    Thank you.

    MIL OSI Europe News –

  • MIL-OSI Security: Athens Tax Preparer Sentenced to Prison for Filing Over $3.5 Million in False Returns

    Source: Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) State Crime Alerts (b)

    Defendant Received a Portion of Proceeds from Clients’ Fraudulent Pandemic Benefit Claims

    MACON, Ga. – A tax preparer who admitted to filing more than $3.5 million in fraudulent tax returns tied to a multi-state investigation of a COVID-19 pandemic unemployment benefit scheme in which she received a percentage of the ill-gotten gains was sentenced to serve eight years in prison for her crime.

    Jessica Crawford, 34, of Athens, Georgia, was sentenced to serve 96 months in prison to be followed by five years of supervised release by U.S. District Judge Tilman E. “Tripp” Self, III on May 8. Crawford previously pleaded guilty to one count of wire fraud and one count of aiding and assisting in preparing and presenting false income tax returns on Nov. 22, 2024. There is no parole in the federal system.

    “Federal law enforcement uncovered a large-scale tax return scheme during the pandemic that was costing taxpayers while benefiting fraudsters,” said Acting U.S. Attorney C. Shanelle Booker. “Alongside our law enforcement partners, federal prosecutors will continue to uphold the law and pursue justice in these cases.”

    “Jessica Crawford used her position as a tax preparer to defraud the U.S. government through a CARES Act program intended for those unemployed because of the COVID-19 pandemic,” said Atlanta Field Office Assistant Special Agent in Charge Lisa Fontanette. “In addition, she continued her theft of taxpayers’ money by fraudulently filing tax returns on behalf of her clients. The sentencing Crawford received should serve notice to unscrupulous tax preparers that IRS Criminal Investigation special agents and our law enforcement partners will continue investigating and holding them accountable for their unethical conduct.”

    “Jessica Crawford lied and took advantage of funds designed to help those who were truly in need during the pandemic,” said Paul Brown, Special Agent in Charge of FBI Atlanta. “The FBI and our law enforcement partners will continue to identify and hold accountable anyone who defrauds taxpayers.”

    According to court documents and statements made in court, FBI agents investigating a multi-state unemployment benefit scheme conducted during the COVID-19 pandemic discovered text messages between individuals involved in the scheme and Crawford, a tax preparer with Crawford Tax Services in Athens. Crawford filed for Pandemic Unemployment Assistance (PUA) benefits on behalf of those individuals who had created fake businesses or submitted false information to fraudulently obtain benefits. In return, Crawford received a percentage of the ill-gotten gains.

    Internal Revenue Service-Criminal Investigations (IRS-CI) agents executed an undercover operation at Crawford’s business in April 2022 as part of the continuing investigation. The undercover agent (UA) met Crawford to have taxes prepared, and Crawford asked if the UA did anything on the side. At first, the UA responded no, but Crawford said that expenses could be deducted if he did, and the UA said he mowed an aunt’s lawn sometimes, which Crawford said was good enough. The UA did not provide any income or expense amounts. Still, Crawford created a Schedule C business for landscaping on the UA’s federal income tax return based solely on that interaction. Crawford prepared a Form 1040 and filed electronically, including a fictitious Schedule C loss of $19,373, and claimed an Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC), a Child Tax Credit (CTC), and a Qualified Business Income (QBI) deduction, which were affected by the fraudulent Schedule C loss. As a result, the UA’s return claimed a fraudulent federal income tax refund of $12,359.

    The IRS completed a statistical review of 1,261 total tax returns filed by Crawford in tax years 2020 and 2021. Of those, the IRS determined that Crawford fraudulently filed tax returns on behalf of clients, resulting in losses to the IRS exceeding $3 million from falsely claimed Form 7202 credits for sick leave and family leave, tax credits and dependent care credits.

    The case was investigated by the FBI and the IRS-CI.

    Criminal Chief Leah E. McEwen prosecuted the case for the Government.

    MIL Security OSI –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Senators Warren, Banks, in Bipartisan Letter, Push DOJ to Investigate High Egg Prices, Anticompetitive Behavior by Egg Producers

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Massachusetts – Elizabeth Warren
    May 09, 2025
    Warren (D-Mass.) and Banks (R-Ind.) raise concerns about major egg producers jacking up prices, raking in record profits while blaming bird flu
    After previous letter led by Warren, DOJ opened probe into potential anticompetitive behavior by egg producers
    Text of Letter (PDF)
    Washington, D.C. – In a new bipartisan letter, U.S. Senators Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) and Jim Banks (R-Ind.) applauded the Department of Justice’s (DOJ) ongoing investigation into potential anticompetitive practices by major egg producers and urged the agency to continue its thorough investigation as egg prices continue to rise.
    “Large egg producers and trade associations have previously been found liable for price fixing,” wrote the senators. “Given this history, we urge DOJ to thoroughly review whether recent trends in egg prices reflect impermissible coordination among egg producers and trade associations.”
    The average retail price of a dozen eggs has reached unprecedented levels, surpassing $6 in March 2025, tripling since 2021. While egg producers and trade associations continue to point to recent bird flu outbreaks as the reason for increased prices, large egg producers, like Cal-Maine, are reporting record profitability while families feel economic pain.
    The cost of eggs started to drop from record peaks just after the DOJ announced an investigation into egg prices, raising concerns as to whether large egg producers are engaging in anticompetitive behaviors to raise prices or restrict supply. A federal jury previously found that large egg producers and trade groups increased egg prices by conspiring to artificially limit the supply of hens between 2004 and 2008. Another lawsuit alleges that Cal-Maine inflated egg prices after a 2015 bird flu outbreak and during the onset of the Covid-19 pandemic.
    The five largest egg producers — CalMaine Foods, Rose Acre Farms, Daybreak Foods, Hillendale Farms, and Versova Holdings — control nearly half of the U.S. egg-laying flock, leaving Americans with limited alternatives to purchase eggs if companies are in fact price-gouging consumers.
    The senators requested that the DOJ address their concerns, including if price increases in the egg market can be reasonably explained by bird flu-related supply chain disruptions; how much the five largest egg producers profited during the first three-quarters of fiscal year 2025; if large egg producers’ purchasing patterns potentially reflect an effort to extend the egg supply shortage and maintain high prices; and whether the decline in egg prices following the DOJ’s announcement reflects potential price-fixing among large egg producers.
    “We support DOJ’s investigation into potential anticompetitive behavior by egg producers and urge the agency to consider whether a ‘precipitous drop’ in egg prices just ‘days’ after reports of the investigation broke suggests that egg producers had conspired to artificially inflate prices,” concluded the senators.
    DOJ announced its probe following a January letter Sen. Warren sent to Donald Trump, pressing him to use tools to lower egg prices, including “encouraging DOJ to prosecute actors in the agricultural and food sectors for price-fixing and other anticompetitive behavior.”
    Senators Warren and Banks recently teamed up to open a bipartisan investigation into the harms of private equity roll-ups of fire truck manufacturers. The lawmakers wrote to the International Association of Fire Fighters (IAFF), North America’s largest union of firefighters, seeking information about the adverse impact of private equity consolidation on firefighters and communities in Massachusetts, Indiana, and across the country. 

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI: The Herzfeld Caribbean Basin Fund, Inc. Announces Distribution in Stock and Cash

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    MIAMI BEACH, Fla., May 09, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — The Herzfeld Caribbean Basin Fund, Inc. (NASDAQ: CUBA) (the “Fund”) today announced that the Fund will pay a distribution pursuant to the Fund’s managed distribution policy (the “Policy”) using a combination of shares of common stock and cash.

    Distribution in Stock and Cash:

    The Fund has announced a distribution to be paid as follows:

    Declaration Date Ex-Date Record Date Payment Date Per Share
    05/09/2025 05/23/2025 05/23/2025 06/30/2025 $0.2325
             

    The distribution for stockholders will be paid in cash or shares of our common stock at the election of stockholders. The total amount of cash distributed to all stockholders will be limited to 20% of the total distribution to be paid, excluding any cash paid for fractional shares. The remainder of the distribution (approximately 80%) will be paid in the form of shares of our common stock. The exact distribution of cash and stock to any given stockholder will be dependent upon his/her election as well as elections of other stockholders, subject to the pro-rata limitation.

    The number of shares of common stock to be issued to stockholders receiving all or a portion of the dividend in shares of common stock will be based on the volume weighted average price per share of common stock on the Nasdaq Capital Market on June 12, 13, and June 16, 2025.

    Management believes that the cash and stock distribution will allow the Fund to strengthen its balance sheet and to be in a position to capitalize on potential future investment opportunities.

    The schedule above applies to the distribution for stockholders of record on the close of business on the record date.

    The details of the distribution will be described in the election form and accompanying materials that will be mailed to stockholders in connection with the distribution not later than promptly following the record date. Election forms must be returned on or before 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time on June 16, 2025 to be effective.

    Stockholders who do not return a timely and properly completed election form before the election deadline will be deemed to have made an election to receive 100% of their distribution in stock.

    Participants in the Fund’s dividend reinvestment plan will also receive an election form. The investment feature of the dividend reinvestment plan will be suspended for the distribution and will be reinstated after the distribution has been completed.

    Stockholders who hold their shares through a bank, broker or nominee, or in “street name” will not receive an election form directly from the Company and should receive information regarding the election process from their bank, broker or nominee. Street name holders should contact their bank, broker or nominee for additional information.

    In determining whether to elect to receive distributions in the form of stock or cash, stockholders are reminded that the Fund has filed preliminary proxy materials (“Proxy Materials”) with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission in connection with a special meeting of stockholders to be held on June 17, 2025, for its stockholders to consider and vote on proposals necessary to approve the Fund’s conversion from its current investment strategy and redirect the Fund to focus on a “CLO Equity Strategy”. With this change, the Fund’s primary investment objective will change to a total return strategy with a secondary objective of generating high current income for stockholders. In accordance with the change in investment objective, the Fund will focus on investing in equity and junior debt tranches of collateralized loan obligations, or “CLOs”. CLOs are portfolios of collateralized loans consisting primarily of below investment grade U.S. senior secured loans with a large number of distinct underlying borrowers across various industry sectors. In addition, the Proxy Materials describe other changes to be implemented by the Fund, including a) revisions to the terms of the investment management agreement between the Fund and is investment adviser, Thomas J. Herzfeld Advisors, Inc., and b) changes to the fundamental policies applicable to the Fund. Stockholders can obtain the Proxy Materials (when available) free of charge from the SEC’s website at www.sec.gov. The definitive Proxy Statement for the Fund also will be posted (when available) on the Fund’s website at www.herzfeld.com/cuba. In addition, free copies (when it becomes available) of the definitive Proxy Statement and other documents filed with the SEC may also be obtained by directing a request to the Fund at (800) 854-3863.

    Stockholders should consider the matters discussed in the Proxy Materials when determining whether to make the election to receive stock or cash with respect to the distribution.

    The Fund expects that distributions under the Policy will exceed investment income and available capital gains and thus expects that distributions under the Policy will likely include returns of capital for the foreseeable future. A return of capital may occur, for example, when some or all of a stockholder’s investment is paid back to the stockholder. A return of capital distribution does not necessarily reflect the Fund’s investment performance and should not be confused with ‘yield’ or ‘income.’ Furthermore, a return of capital distribution is not a guarantee of future distributions or yield. Any such returns of capital will decrease the Fund’s total assets and, therefore, could have the effect of increasing the Fund’s expense ratio. In addition, in order to maintain the level of distributions called for under its Policy, the Fund may have to sell portfolio securities at a less than opportune time.

    The following table sets forth the estimated amounts of the current distribution and the cumulative distributions paid this fiscal year to date from the following sources: net investment income, net realized capital gains and return of capital. All amounts are expressed per common share.

      Current Distribution % Breakdown of the Current Distribution Total Cumulative Distributions for the Fiscal Year to Date % Breakdown of the Total Cumulative Distributions for the Fiscal Year to Date
    Net Investment Income $0.00 0% $0.00 0%
    Net Realized Short- Term Capital Gains $0.00 0% $0.00 0%
    Net Realized Long- Term Capital Gains $0.2122 91.25% $0.2122 45.6%
    Return of Capital $0.0203 8.75% $0.2528 54.4%
    Total (per common share) $0.2325 100% $0.4650 100%
             

    The primary purpose of the Policy is to provide stockholders with a constant, but not guaranteed, fixed minimum rate of distribution (currently set at the annual rate of 15% of the Fund’s net asset value as determined on June 30, 2024). The Board recently amended the Policy to maintain the 15% annual rate of distribution, but at quarterly, semi-annual or annual periods of distribution to be reviewed by the Board each quarter. The purpose of the modification is to allow the Fund to maintain its 15% annual distribution of NAV, but provide flexibility in determining the timing of those distributions in order to account for required year-end regulatory distributions of capital gains necessary to maintain the Fund’s tax-free status. The Fund cannot predict what effect, if any, the Policy will have on the market price of its shares or whether such market price will reflect a greater or lesser discount to net asset value as compared to prior to the adoption of the Policy.

    The amount distributed per share is subject to change at the discretion of the Board. The Policy is subject to ongoing review by the Board to determine whether it should be continued, modified or terminated. The Board may amend the terms of the Policy, suspend the Policy, or terminate the Policy at any time without prior notice to the Fund’s stockholders if it deems such actions to be in the best interest of the Fund or its stockholders. The amendment or termination of the Policy could have an adverse effect on the market price of the Fund’s shares. On May 9, 2024, the Board approved certain modifications to the Policy and extended the Policy through June 30, 2025.

    With each distribution that does not consist solely of net investment income, the Fund will issue a notice to stockholders and an accompanying press release that will provide detailed information regarding the amount and composition of the distribution and other related information. The amounts and sources of distributions reported in the notice to stockholders are only estimates and are not being provided for tax reporting purposes. The actual amounts and sources of the amounts for tax reporting purposes will depend upon the Fund’s investment experience during its full fiscal year and may be subject to changes based on tax regulations. The Fund will send stockholders a Form 1099-DIV for the respective calendar year that will tell them how to report these distributions for federal income tax purposes. Stockholders should consult their tax advisor for proper tax treatment of the Fund’s distributions.

    Under the Policy, the Fund will distribute all available investment income to its stockholders, consistent with its investment objective and as required by the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the “Code”). The amount distributed per share is subject to change at the discretion of the Fund’s Board of Directors (“Board”). If sufficient investment income is not available, the Fund will distribute long-term capital gains and/or return capital to its stockholders in order to maintain its managed distribution level. The Fund is currently not relying on any exemptive relief from Section 19(b) of the Investment Company Act of 1940, as amended (the “1940 Act”). The Fund may make additional distributions from time to time, including additional capital gain distributions at the end of the taxable year, if required to meet requirements imposed by the Code and/or the 1940 Act.

    Future distributions by the Fund may be made in cash or using a combination of shares of common stock and cash, as shall be determined from time to time by the Board.

    About Thomas J. Herzfeld Advisors, Inc.

    Thomas J. Herzfeld Advisors, Inc., founded in 1984, is an SEC registered investment advisor, specializing in investment analysis and account management in closed-end funds. The Firm also specializes in investment in the Caribbean Basin. The HERZFELD/CUBA division of Thomas J. Herzfeld Advisors, Inc. serves as the investment advisor to The Herzfeld Caribbean Basin Fund, Inc. a publicly traded closed-end fund (NASDAQ: CUBA).

    More information about the advisor can be found at www.herzfeld.com.

    Past performance is no guarantee of future performance. An investment in the Fund is subject to certain risks, including market risk. In general, shares of closed-end funds often trade at a discount from their net asset value and at the time of sale may be trading on the exchange at a price which is more or less than the original purchase price or the net asset value. An investor should carefully consider the Fund’s investment objective, risks, charges and expenses. Please read the Fund’s disclosure documents before investing.

    Forward-Looking Statements

    This press release, and other statements that TJHA or the Fund may make regarding management’s future expectations, beliefs, intentions, goals, strategies, plans or prospects, including statements relating to: management’s beliefs that the cash and stock distribution will allow the Fund to strengthen its balance sheet and to be in a position to capitalize on potential future investment opportunities, when there can be no assurance either will occur; the tax consequences of the distributions to stockholders; and other factors may contain forward looking statements within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act, with respect to the Fund’s or TJHA’s future financial or business performance, strategies or expectations. Forward-looking statements are typically identified by words or phrases such as “trend,” “potential,” “opportunity,” “pipeline,” “believe,” “comfortable,” “expect,” “anticipate,” “current,” “intention,” “estimate,” “position,” “assume,” “outlook,” “continue,” “remain,” “maintain,” “sustain,” “seek,” “achieve,” and similar expressions, or future or conditional verbs such as “will,” “would,” “should,” “could,” “may” or similar expressions. TJHA and the Fund caution that forward-looking statements are subject to numerous assumptions, risks and uncertainties, which change over time. Forward-looking statements speak only as of the date they are made, and TJHA and the Fund assume no duty to and do not undertake to update forward-looking statements. Actual results could differ materially from those anticipated in forward-looking statements and future results could differ materially from historical performance. With respect to the Fund, the following factors, among others, could cause actual events to differ materially from forward-looking statements or historical performance: (1) changes and volatility in political, economic or industry conditions, particularly with respect to Cuba and other Caribbean Basin countries, the interest rate environment, foreign exchange rates or financial and capital markets, which could result in changes in demand for the Fund or in the Fund’s net asset value; (2) the relative and absolute investment performance of the Fund and its investments; (3) the impact of increased competition; (4) the unfavorable resolution of any legal proceedings; (5) the extent and timing of any distributions or share repurchases; (6) the impact, extent and timing of technological changes; (7) the impact of legislative and regulatory actions and reforms, including the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, and regulatory, supervisory or enforcement actions of government agencies relating to the Fund or TJHA, as applicable; (8) terrorist activities, international hostilities and natural disasters, which may adversely affect the general economy, domestic and local financial and capital markets, specific industries or TJHA or the Fund; (9) TJHA’s and the Fund’s ability to attract and retain highly talented professionals; (10) the impact of TJHA electing to provide support to its products from time to time; (11) the impact of problems at other financial institutions or the failure or negative performance of products at other financial institutions; and (12) the effects of an epidemic, pandemic or public health emergency, including without limitation, COVID-19. Annual and Semi-Annual Reports and other regulatory filings of the Fund with the SEC are accessible on the SEC’s website at www.sec.gov and on TJHA’s website at www.herzfeld.com/cuba, and may discuss these or other factors that affect the Fund. The information contained on TJHA’s website is not a part of this press release.

    Contact:
    Tom Morgan
    Chief Compliance Officer
    Thomas J. Herzfeld Advisors, Inc.
    1-305-777-1660

    The MIL Network –

  • MIL-OSI Security: New York tax preparer sentenced to two years in prison for submitting fraudulent pandemic relief applications

    Source: Office of United States Attorneys

    RICHMOND, Va. – A New York man was sentenced today to two years in prison for making false statements on loan applications he submitted on behalf of his clients through a pandemic relief program.

    According to court documents, Baltej Singh Brar, 42, of South Richmond Hill, New York, owned and operated Aspire Tax & Accounting Services Inc., a tax preparation, accounting, and consulting firm where Brar was an Internal Revenue Service (IRS) registered tax preparer. In 2021, Brar began filing loan applications on behalf of other individuals through the Paycheck Protection Program (PPP), a COVID-19 relief program intended to provide loans backed by the Small Business Administration (SBA) to certain businesses, nonprofit organizations, and others to help them remain afloat during the pandemic.

    Brar advertised, including on TikTok, that he would file PPP loan applications on behalf of clients in exchange for a flat up-front fee paired with 10% of the loan value after the loan was approved. Brar instructed prospective PPP applicants to provide him with their Social Security number, a copy of their driver’s license, email address, prior bank statements, 2019 tax return, and a void check to be used as supporting documentation on applications.

    Most of Brar’s clients were sole proprietors, including taxi drivers, truck drivers, and construction workers. Where clients’ prior year incomes fell below the threshold to receive the maximum PPP loan amount of $20,833, Brar falsely inflated the income amounts in the PPP applications to trigger the maximum loan amount. Brar generated and submitted false and fabricated IRS forms as supporting documentation. Brar certified on each application that the information provided in the applications and supporting documents and forms was “true and accurate in all material respects.”

    Many of Brar’s clients were eligible to receive PPP loans, though not in the inflated amounts of the PPP loan applications that Brar prepared. Others were not entitled to receive PPP loans at all. Across the hundreds of PPP loan applications that Brar falsified, Brar caused the SBA at least $550,000 in actual losses.

    Erik S. Siebert, U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia; Patricia Tarasca, Special Agent in Charge of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation Office of Inspector General, New York Field Office; Harry Chavis, Special Agent in Charge of the Internal Revenue Service Criminal Investigation, New York Field Office; Edward Gallashaw, Acting Inspector in Charge of the United States Postal Inspection Service, New York Division; Brian Tucker, Special Agent in Charge of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System and Consumer Financial Protection Bureau Office of Inspector General, Eastern Region; Patrick J. Freaney, Special Agent in Charge of the U.S. Secret Service, New York Field Office; and Amaleka McCall-Brathwaite, Eastern Region Special Agent in Charge for the Small Business Administration Office of Inspector General, made the announcement after sentencing by Senior U.S. District Judge John A. Gibney Jr.

    Assistant U.S. Attorney Avi Panth prosecuted the case.

    A copy of this press release is located on the website of the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Eastern District of Virginia. Related court documents and information are located on the website of the District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia or on PACER by searching for Case No. 3:24-cr-148.

    MIL Security OSI –

  • MIL-OSI Security: THREE BATON ROUGE INDIVIDUALS PLEAD GUILTY IN FEDERAL COURT IN CONNECTION WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE’S 2024 NATIONAL HEALTH CARE FRAUD ENFORCEMENT ACTION

    Source: Office of United States Attorneys

    Acting United States Attorney April M. Leon announced that three Baton Rouge individuals pled guilty before U.S. District Court Judge Brian A. Jackson in connection with schemes to obtain controlled substances from pharmacies using fraudulent prescriptions with the stolen identities of licensed medical professionals, and to obtain funds from federal pandemic assistance programs by submitting false and fraudulent applications.

    Kevan Andre Hills, age 31, Devin Tyrone Stampley, Jr., age 33, and Asia Deshan Guess, age 28, all of Baton Rouge, admitted that they caused the submission of fraudulent prescriptions for controlled substances, such as Promethazine with Codeine and Hydrocodone, to Medicaid, causing Medicaid to be fraudulently billed for filling those fraudulent prescriptions. They used the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) registration numbers and other identifying information of several physicians and other medical providers, without authority, on the fraudulent prescriptions. As part of the scheme to unlawfully obtain controlled substances for resale, Stampley burglarized a pharmacy in Louisiana.

    Hills, Stampley, and their co-conspirators also submitted, caused to be submitted, and assisted others in submitting numerous false and fraudulent applications for federal funds, seeking at least $293,498 in funds administrated by the Paycheck Protection Program (PPP), the Economic Injury Disaster Loan (EIDL) Program, and Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act unemployment benefits. Hills, Stampley, and their co-conspirators submitted and caused to be submitted falsified bank statements, tax forms, and other documents in support of the fraudulent PPP applications. Hills, Stampley, and their co-conspirators defrauded the federal pandemic assistance programs of at least $87,663 by posing as fake small business owners and residents in need of assistance. Upon receipt of the illegal funds, Hills, Stampley, and their co-conspirators made electronic transfers and personal purchases. 

    Guess illegally sought at least $125,978 in federal funds, including federal Pandemic Unemployment Assistance (PUA) benefits under the CARES Act for eligible workers during the COVID-19 pandemic. Guess caused the submission of fraudulent applications and claims for unemployment benefits to the Louisiana Workforce Commission (LWC), Maine Department of Labor (Maine DOL), and other state workforce agencies around the country. Guess assisted in the submission of falsified application details, such as her employment history and residency, to appear eligible for PUA funds and other benefits. Guess fraudulently obtained at least $15,859 in unemployment insurance benefits from the LWC and Maine DOL.

    Hills, Stampley, and Guess pleaded guilty to one count of conspiracy to commit health care fraud. Hills and Stampley pleaded guilty to one count of aggravated identity theft and one count of conspiracy to commit wire fraud. Stampley pleaded guilty to one count of burglary of a pharmacy.  Guess pleaded guilty to one count of theft of government funds.

    Each count of conspiracy to commit wire fraud carries a maximum penalty of thirty years in prison, each count of conspiracy to commit health care fraud carries a maximum penalty of ten years in prison, each count of theft of government funds carries a maximum penalty of ten years in prison, each count of burglary of a pharmacy carries a maximum penalty of twenty years in prison, and each count of aggravated identity theft carries a mandatory minimum penalty of two years in prison. A federal district court judge will determine any sentence after considering the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines and other statutory factors.

    Matthew R. Galeotti, Head of the Justice Department’s Criminal Division; April M. Leon, Acting U.S. Attorney for the Middle District of Louisiana; Special Agent in Charge Jason E. Meadows of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Office of Inspector General (HHS-OIG), Dallas Region, Baton Rouge Field Office; Special Agent in Charge Steven L. Hofer of the DEA, New Orleans Division; and Special Agent in Charge Casey J. Howard of the U.S. Department of Labor, Office of Inspector General (DOL-OIG), Central Region, made the announcement.

    HHS-OIG, DEA, and DOL-OIG are investigating the case.

    Assistant U.S. Attorney Kristen L. Craig for the Middle District of Louisiana and Trial Attorneys Gary A. Crosby II and Samantha E. Usher of the Criminal Division’s Fraud Section are prosecuting the case.

    The Fraud Section leads the Criminal Division’s efforts to combat health care fraud through the Health Care Fraud Strike Force Program. Since March 2007, this program, currently comprised of nine strike forces operating in 27 federal districts, has charged more than 5,800 defendants who collectively have billed federal health care programs and private insurers more than $30 billion. In addition, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, working in conjunction with HHS-OIG, are taking steps to hold providers accountable for their involvement in health care fraud schemes. More information can be found at www.justice.gov/criminal-fraud/health-care-fraud-unit.

    MIL Security OSI –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Fighting Crime and Keeping New Yorkers Safe

    Source: US State of New York

    overnor Kathy Hochul today signed new legislation as part of the FY26 Enacted Budget to fight crime and reduce recidivism, protect public transit workers and commuters, combat sexual and domestic violence, and enhance the safety and security of correction officers and incarcerated individuals. Highlights of Governor Hochul’s public safety budget priorities include strengthening the State’s discovery statutes, increasing law enforcement presence in the New York City subways, combatting the rise in hate crimes, and cracking down on individuals who use a mask to conceal their identities to commit crimes.

    “Keeping New Yorkers safe has always been and always will be my top priority – and we are delivering a budget that makes record investments to crack down on crime while making commonsense changes that close the revolving door of our court system,” Governor Hochul said. “With this Budget, we are sending a clear message: we will do everything in our power to protect New Yorkers to make our streets, communities and families safer all across our State.”

    Fighting Crime and Reducing Recidivism

    Building upon Governor Hochul’s record investments in proven crime prevention initiatives, the FY26 Enacted Budget includes essential, commonsense changes to New York’s Discovery Laws to support survivors, hold perpetrators accountable and safeguard the right to a fair and speedy trial. The changes will prevent cases from being thrown out over technical errors and eliminate dismissals and disruptions that have re-traumatized survivors of domestic violence and other serious crimes. There is $135 million allocated for prosecutors and defenders to ensure compliance with discovery, a year-to-year increase of $15 million.

    Governor Hochul is investing $347 million in gun violence prevention programs that have helped drive gun violence down by more than 50% when compared to pandemic-era peaks. This includes $50 million for Law Enforcement Technology grants.

    The Budget includes investments to further protect our borders with $8 million to boost the State Police’s enforcement efforts at the Northern Border with dedicated law enforcement and technology to stop transnational criminal organizations and the trafficking of guns, drugs and people.

    New York State continues to combat the rise in hate crimes with $35 million for Securing Communities Against Hate Crimes (SCAHC) program. These grants provide funding to boost safety and security for certain organizations at risk of hate crimes or attacks because of their ideology, beliefs, or mission.

    A new statute creates a Class B misdemeanor to crack down on individuals who use a mask to conceal their identity when committing or fleeing from a Class A misdemeanor or higher.

    $2.3 million for mass violence crisis response preparation. The funding is to support local communities in preparedness and to ensure rapid, coordinated support for survivors and their communities, addressing immediate needs in the aftermath of any mass violence event.

    Protecting Subway Riders and Transit Workers

    The Budget delivers on the Governor’s public safety commitments to continue making our subways safer for all riders and transit workers. These major investments increase the presence of law enforcement, make crucial safety upgrades in protective barriers and LED lighting and continue cracking down on fare evasion.

    The Budget allocates $77 million to partner with NYPD to increase police presence on platforms and trains by temporarily surging patrol levels for six months.

    An additional $45 million for the National Guard’s Joint Task Force – Empire Shield mission will continue to deter and prevent terrorist activity in the New York City area, including transit and commuter hubs.

    New protective barriers installed on subway platforms will protect riders and LED lighting in all subway stations throughout the system to increase visibility throughout the stations.

    Additionally, new fare gate systems in more than 150 subway stations will increase fare collection and improve accessibility.

    Combatting Sexual Assault and Domestic Violence

    Supporting survivors remains a top priority for Governor Hochul, as she continues to lead efforts to address sexual assault, domestic violence, gender-based violence and sex trafficking. Through historic investments and bold policy initiatives, New York is setting a national standard for protecting survivors and holding offenders accountable.

    The FY26 Enacted Budget expands protections and services to victims of sexual assault including extending HIV prophylaxis medication coverage to all survivors of sexual assault, and over $3.3 million to increase reimbursement rates for forensic exams and expand virtual forensic exam services in underserved areas.

    The FY26 enacted budget also includes the first funding increase for rape crisis centers in a decade: nearly $13 million – double the funding included in last year’s budget – for the 52 programs across the state certified by the state Department of Health.

    New York State is also expanding victim support services by providing $3.8 million to increase the cap for funeral expenses for homicide victims from $6,000 to $12,000 and increase the compensation for scam victims.

    Governor Hochul continues strengthening support for survivors of gender-based violence by improving access to public assistance for survivors of gender-based violence, and codifying gender-based violence workplace policy that requires vendors doing business with New York State to affirm they have a gender-based violence workplace policy.

    Protecting the Safety and Security of Correctional Staff and Incarcerated Population

    Following the death of Robert Brooks, Governor Hochul directed the Department of Corrections and Community Supervision (DOCCS) to implement immediate changes to protect the safety and well-being of all DOCCS personnel and incarcerated individuals. The Budget delivers on these crucial changes while working to address safety and quality of life issues by staff following an illegal job action as the department continues to recover, recruit, and rebuild. These changes include:

    Investing over $18 million for the expansion of the body worn camera program and codifying the program to ensure cameras are powered on and recording at all times when employees are interacting with incarcerated individuals; $400 million for the acceleration and continued installation of fixed cameras in all facilities; $7.2 million to expand and restructure the Office of Special Investigations (OSI); and $685 million to stabilize the correctional system as a result of the correction officer strike, including corrections operating costs and the extended deployment of the National Guard.

    Governor Hochul’s Budget also allows the DOCCS Commissioner to designate new programs that incarcerated individuals can participate in and complete to qualify for merit time or limited credit time allowance. These allowances have successfully provided incentives for incarcerated individuals to participate in programming and keep clean disciplinary records. The new programming will help rehabilitate individuals and ensure they are ready for reentry into the community after they have served their time. These changes will promote a safer environment within facilities for both incarcerated individuals and corrections officers.

    Additional funding for the State Commission of Correction (SCOC) oversight of DOCCS: $1.5 million for additional staff to allow the SCOC to conduct regular inspections of DOCCS facilities and enhance other oversight functions

    In order to manage the ongoing staffing shortages of correction officers at New York’s correctional facilities, the Budget allows the Commissioner of Corrections and Community Supervision to hire persons aged 18 and over as corrections officers while the Department works to restore its staffing capacity to sustainable levels. These officers will receive enhanced training and mentorship, and they will be restricted from certain roles that generally require more experience, such as roles that require a firearm or those involving unsupervised contact with incarcerated individuals. Additionally, it authorizes the Commissioner to close up to three correctional facilities with 90 day notification.

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI Security: Two Women Sentenced for Running a More Than $1.5 Million COVID-19 Fraud Scheme

    Source: United States Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco Firearms and Explosives (ATF)

    WILMINGTON, N.C. – A Zebulon woman was sentenced Thursday to 8 years in prison for her role in a multi-million-dollar COVID-19 fraud scheme.  Loretta Clarice James, 49, had previously pled guilty to conspiracy to commit wire fraud on May 29, 2024.  One of James’ co-conspirators, Lakesha Bowles, 43, was sentenced on April 24, 2025, to 30 months imprisonment for her role in the conspiracy.  Both women were also ordered to repay over one million dollars in restitution.

    According to court documents and other information presented in court, James and Bowles conspired to commit wire fraud by fraudulently submitting loan applications to the federal Paycheck Protection Program(PPP), which was established by Congress through the CARES Act to support small businesses during the economic uncertainty and layoffs that accompanied the COVID-19 pandemic.

    The fraudulent claims on the PPP loan applications, guaranteed by the United States Small Business Association, inflated payroll numbers and asked for funding on behalf of dormant or non-existent businesses.  James and Bowles submitted loan applications in their own names, and on behalf of others whom they recruited.  James and Bowles were given a portion of the loan proceeds if the third-party loans were approved.

    In addition to PPP fraud, James also conspired to commit wire fraud by fraudulently submitting loan and grant applications to the Economic Injury Disaster Loan (EIDL) Program and the Restaurant Revitalization Fund (RRF) Program. These other programs were also created by the federal government as a lifeline to struggling small businesses affected by COVID-19. James submitted fraudulent EIDL loans applications in her name, her family members’ names, and in the names of other friends and associates.  James submitted EIDL applications for businesses that did not exist and for salaries of employees who were fictitious. James submitted several hundred fraudulent EIDL applications, leading to over $500,000 in fraudulent EIDL disbursements. 

    In all, James, Bowles and other co-conspirators facilitated the fraudulent disbursement of more than $1.5 million in COVID-19 Loans.  Darnell William King, who conspired with both women, pled guilty to PPP fraud and identity theft charges on March 11, 2025.

    In addition to this significant COVID-19 loan fraud conspiracy, Loretta James was involved in an identity theft scheme where she and others used stolen identities to obtain loans or personal lines of credit from private lenders. James’ main role in that scheme included obtaining Social Security Numbers of individuals with good credit, completing a loan application in that individual’s name, using forged documents and email accounts in furtherance of the loan applications.  James and her conspirators then hired “Mules” to physically obtain the funds from the bank or lender.  Equipped with fake identity documentation made by James or others, the Mule would physically sign the application and associated paperwork, claiming to be the true applicant and promising to pay the loan back. After securing the funds, the Mule would bring the money back to James and other members of the scheme, and they would give the Mule a cut of the loan, ranging from $100 to $2,000 per loan. James and her compatriots did this over and over again, with loans that ranged from $5,000 to $10,000, none of which was ever paid back.

    “This office is committed holding accountable those who exploited a national crisis and the hardships of others for their personal gain and greed. Public relief funds were created to support hardworking individuals and small businesses during times of crisis—not to line the pockets of criminals,” said Acting U.S. Attorney Daniel P. Bubar. “We will continue to work diligently with our many state and federal partners to peruse justice for those who choose to abuse public trust by lying, cheating, and stealing resources that are meant to support our community in its greatest time of need.”

    “This extensive investigation, known as Operation Overload, uncovered a sophisticated criminal enterprise that fraudulently utilized thousands of North Carolina licenses, resulting in financial crimes that impacted individuals across multiple states,” said Captain Vaughn of the North Carolina DMV License & Theft Bureau. “Bureau commends its inspectors, intelligence analysts, and all partner agencies for their hard work and collaboration. Their efforts underscore the importance of interagency cooperation in combating complex fraud schemes and safeguarding the identities of North Carolina residents.”

    “The defendants conspired to take advantage of critical aid programs intended to provide relief for businesses affected during the pandemic by fraudulently applying for and obtaining COVID-19 program funds,” said Special Agent in Charge Donald “Trey” Eakins, Charlotte Field Office, IRS Criminal Investigation. “IRS Criminal Investigation special agents will continue to work alongside our law enforcement partners to pursue individuals who try to exploit federal relief programs for their personal gain.”

    “This investigation began following several complaints from Wake County residents regarding identity theft and fraud. Over the course of nearly a year, a thorough investigation led to multiple arrests, supported by the NCDMV License and Theft, Clayton Police Department, U.S. Department of Homeland Security, and the IRS Criminal Investigations. The investigators involved demonstrated exceptional diligence in pursuing the suspects and uncovering a vast network of crimes. Their efforts resulted in identifying hundreds of victims, not only in Wake County, but across North Carolina, and uncovering hundreds of thousands of dollars in fraud. I would like to commend the investigators for their tireless work and unwavering commitment to serving the residents of our county and state,” Wake County Sheriff Willie Rowe said.

    Daniel P. Bubar, Acting U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of North Carolina made the announcement after Chief U.S. District Judge Richard E. Myers II announced James’ sentence.  The Internal Revenue Service, Criminal Investigation investigated the case with the assistance of Homeland Security Investigations; the Wake County Sheriff’s Office; the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives; and the North Carolina Department of Motor Vehicle License & Theft Bureau. The Clayton Police Department and other local agencies also aided over the course of the investigation.  Assistant U.S. Attorneys David G. Beraka, Ashley H. Foxx, and Karen Haughton prosecuted the cases.

    Related court documents and information can be found on the website of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina or on PACER by searching for Case Nos. 5:24-CR-00132 and 5:24-CR-00363.

    ###

    MIL Security OSI –

  • MIL-OSI Global: Spit science: why saliva is a great way to detect disease

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Genecy Calado de Melo, Lecturer in Operative and Primary Care Dentistry, RCSI University of Medicine and Health Sciences

    noriver/Shutterstock.com

    A few drops of saliva can now reveal what used to require a scalpel, a syringe or a scan.

    Scientists have developed ways to analyse spit for the tiniest traces of illness – from mouth cancer to diabetes, and even brain diseases like Alzheimer’s.

    Unlike blood tests or biopsies, saliva is easy to collect, painless and inexpensive. During the COVID pandemic, some countries used saliva-based testing for rapid screening.

    This isn’t entirely new. Scientists first noticed the diagnostic potential of spit decades ago. In the 1980s, researchers used saliva to detect hormones and drug use. By the 1990s, it was being explored as a way to detect HIV.

    What’s new is the speed and precision. Today’s techniques can detect subtle molecular shifts that would have been impossible to measure just a few years ago.

    Saliva holds a surprising amount of information. It’s full of tiny fragments of DNA, RNA, proteins and fats – many of which change when disease takes hold. Researchers have already shown that saliva can be used to detect changes linked to diabetes, Parkinson’s, heart disease and some cancers.

    A recent study even showed saliva could help distinguish between healthy people and those with mild cognitive impairment, a possible early sign of Alzheimer’s.

    In dentistry, spit science is being studied for early signs of gum disease and even the risk of tooth decay.

    A light-based technique called Raman spectroscopy is one of the latest tools being used to scan saliva for hidden chemical changes. It works by bouncing harmless light off molecules in a spit sample and reading the pattern it sends back – a kind of fingerprint for what’s happening inside your body.

    It sounds like science fiction, but the technology is already being used in labs to detect early signs of cancer and other diseases often before symptoms appear.

    This could be a gamechanger for oral cancer, which often starts with small, painless changes inside the mouth that are easy to miss. Early detection is vital, but many people don’t realise they have a problem until it’s much harder to treat.

    A simple spit test during a regular dental check-up could help find cancer early, before it spreads.

    It’s not just about cancer, either. Saliva is being trialled as a tool to monitor everything from stress levels to infections.

    Spit could monitor stress levels.
    ViDI Studio/Shutterstock

    Simplicity

    What makes saliva so appealing is its simplicity – no needles, no specialist clinics. Samples can often be collected at home, posted to a lab and analysed within hours. This could make a huge difference in places with limited access to healthcare or for people who avoid doctors out of fear, cost or time.

    Of course, not every disease leaves a clear marker in spit and researchers are still working out which conditions saliva can reliably detect. But the idea of using what’s already naturally produced by the body to give an early warning is a powerful one. It could help catch disease when it’s most treatable, save lives and make healthcare faster, cheaper and more comfortable for everyone.

    There’s still work to be done before spit tests become part of routine check-ups. Larger clinical trials are needed and researchers are still fine tuning the best ways to analyse and interpret the data. But the direction of travel is clear: the days of saliva being seen as just drool are over.

    Saliva may not seem glamorous, but thanks to the rise of spit science, it’s fast becoming one of the most promising tools in the fight against disease. A future where your dentist, doctor, or even you could spot health problems early with nothing more than simple spit.

    Genecy Calado de Melo received funding from Science without Borders – Brazil (2015).

    Cathy E. Richards 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. Spit science: why saliva is a great way to detect disease – https://theconversation.com/spit-science-why-saliva-is-a-great-way-to-detect-disease-255342

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Security: Former Algona Meatpacking Plant Worker Convicted in Pandemic Benefits Fraud Conspiracy

    Source: Office of United States Attorneys

    A former Algona, Iowa, meatpacking plant worker who obtained fraudulent Paycheck Protection Program loans and recruited others into the scheme was convicted by a jury on May 8, 2025, after a four-day trial in federal court in Sioux City.

    Yovany Ciero, age 48, from Mason City, Iowa, formerly of Cuba, Colombia, and Venezuela, was convicted of three counts of wire fraud, 23 counts of money laundering, one count of engaging in a monetary transaction in property derived from a specified unlawful activity, and one count of money laundering conspiracy.  The verdict was returned following about three and a half hours of jury deliberations.

    The evidence at trial showed that Ciero is a former Sergeant in the Cuban military who crossed the Mexican border nearly twenty years ago after his request for a visa to enter the United States was denied.  In 2020, Ciero was working at an Algona meatpacking plant when the COVID-19 pandemic began.  Beginning in July 2020, Ciero, and over one hundred other immigrants from Cuba, obtained fraudulent Paycheck Protection Program (PPP) loans on the false and fraudulent pretenses that they were self-employed businesspeople who earned approximately $100,000 in gross income in 2019 when they actually worked at the meatpacking plant or elsewhere in 2019.         

    Ciero was one of six “bundlers” in the fraudulent PPP loan scheme.  Ciero’s role was to recruit individuals into the scheme, obtain their personal identifying information for the fraudulent loan applications, and then pass that information to others who submitted the fraudulent loan applications to lenders who were participating in the PPP.  The evidence established that over $4 million in fraudulent loan PPP applications were submitted, and the government lost over $2.4 million as a result.

    Once the individuals received their fraudulent PPP loan funds, typically $20,000 each, Ciero served as a “funnel” in a money laundering conspiracy.  Ciero collected fees that the organizers of the scheme charged the applicants, typically $3,000 per $20,000 fraudulent loan.

    Ciero also obtained two fraudulent PPP loans for himself and his paramour.  Ciero used most of this PPP loan money to purchase a semi-truck.  Ciero is the sixth former Iowa meatpacking plant worker convicted in the PPP scheme.

    Sentencing before United States District Court Judge Leonard T. Strand will be set after a presentence report is prepared.  Ciero remains free on bond pending sentencing.  Ciero faces a possible maximum sentence of life imprisonment, over $10,000,000 in fines, and three years of supervised release following any imprisonment.

    The case is being prosecuted by Assistant United States Attorneys Timothy L. Vavricek and Daniel A. Chatham and was investigated by the Small Business Administration – Office of Inspector General, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation – Office of Inspector General, Homeland Security Investigations, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, and the Storm Lake Police Department.

    Court file information at https://ecf.iand.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/login.pl. 

    The case file number is 24-CR-3013.

    Follow us on X @USAO_NDIA.

    MIL Security OSI –

  • MIL-OSI Global: To fend off Reform, mainstream parties must address the tangible decline of British towns

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Thiemo Fetzer, Associate Professor in Economics, University of Warwick

    Reform UK’s surge in recent local elections is not an isolated incident but a culmination of long-term economic and social shifts that have reshaped British society. It is the latest chapter in a narrative that includes the 2016 Brexit referendum and reflects a broader disillusionment with mainstream politics.

    To respond to their losses in these elections and the wider trend, Labour and the Conservatives must not treat the Reform vote as a transient protest but as a symptom of systemic challenges.

    Structural forces, digital disruption, demographic shifts and austerity have all eroded trust in institutions and fuelled demands for radical change. Reform UK’s success lies in its ability to channel these grievances, often thanks to the crafty use of social media, into a political platform. It’s imperative for mainstream parties to address the root causes of discontent if they wish to fend off Reform as an electoral threat.

    The structural roots of discontent

    Reform’s rise is deeply tied to a series of interconnected crises that have left communities feeling abandoned. Digital disruption has transformed the economy, with e-commerce and automation eliminating jobs in local retail and manufacturing. This has led to the decline of high streets, which have become symbols of economic marginalisation.

    At the same time, demographic shifts have seen younger, more skilled workers move to major cities, leaving behind ageing populations in rural and smaller towns. This exodus has created a sense of neglect.

    The 2008–2009 financial crisis further exacerbated these trends, as economic downturns hit already vulnerable regions hard. Unemployment spiked, and austerity measures introduced in the aftermath of the crisis deepened the divide. Public services such as libraries, youth clubs and adult education centres faced severe budget cuts. The notable worsening of public service delivery made it very tempting for politicians to attribute blame for faltering services on pressures arising from immigration.

    Reform taps into this “geography of loss” and offers a political platform that promises to address the pain of marginalisation, albeit, never from a position of actual political responsibility.

    The daily experience of decline

    The erosion of community infrastructure has become a visceral experience for many. Closed community centres have reduced opportunities for social interaction, leading to increased isolation and, in some cases, rising gang activity. Shuttered shops and the decline of local businesses have weakened the sense of place in towns and cities, removing vital “third spaces” where people gather, connect, and build relationships. These spaces, once the heart of local life, have given way to empty storefronts and underused public areas.

    At the same time, shrinking council budgets have left local governments struggling to maintain basic services. Public spaces that once served as hubs for civic engagement are now in disrepair, becoming visible signs of institutional failure. This physical decay has become a metaphor for systemic neglect, reinforcing the perception that mainstream parties have abandoned these communities. The result is a deepening sense of disillusionment, as residents feel that their needs are not being met and their voices are not being heard.

    Possible healing shocks on the horizon

    Emerging trends may offer opportunities to reverse some of the damage caused by structural forces. Remote work, which gained momentum during the pandemic, has the potential to reshape regional economies. It enables skilled workers to relocate to smaller towns and rural areas, bringing with them spending power and civic capacity. If sustained, this shift could help revitalise peripheral communities by reducing the concentration of economic activity in major cities.

    The adoption of generative artificial intelligence (AI) also presents both challenges and opportunities. While AI threatens some high-status cognitive and licensed roles, it may also compress the wage premiums that have favoured big-city professionals. This could slightly ease the sharpest edges of inequality, as the benefits of AI-driven productivity are more evenly distributed. However, the transition must be managed carefully to avoid exacerbating existing divides.

    Digitally enabled public services, such as chatbots for benefits and predictive maintenance for infrastructure, could improve service quality even under fiscal constraints. These tools could improve the performative state capacity, increase the state’s presence in areas where it has felt absent, rebuilding trust in institutions. Yet, it may also require a renegotiating of the informational boundaries of the state as AI thrives on interconnected data. By leveraging these shocks, mainstream parties could begin to address the spatial and skill gaps that populists exploit.

    To reclaim legitimacy and counter populist momentum, mainstream parties must adopt targeted, evidence-based policies. Protecting communities that have been left behind during economic transitions is critical.

    Workers displaced by retail automation need support to retrain, and funding is needed to repurpose high streets for new uses such as community workshops, health hubs and community centres. These initiatives would not only create new opportunities but also restore a sense of agency for those who have felt excluded from the economy.

    Planning reforms to convert empty retail spaces into co-working hubs and housing would further support this transition, creating vibrant, inclusive communities.

    Rebuilding social infrastructure is equally vital. Restoring per-capita funding for youth clubs, libraries and adult education centres would revive community spaces and foster social cohesion. Making grants conditional on measurable outcomes such as reducing crime rates and increasing volunteering participation would add an extra layer of benefit for local populations.

    Populism in Britain is not a cultural accident, but the political expression of decades of skill-biased, place-biased, and age-biased shocks, culminating in an austerity programme that localised pain. Reform UK surfs this wave, but the tide can turn. By cushioning ongoing transitions (remote work, AI), visibly reviving public spaces, and sharing new sources of economic value with smaller towns and younger generations, mainstream parties can reclaim legitimacy.

    The challenge is not only to respond to populist demands but to reimagine the role of the state in fostering social cohesion and economic opportunity. The path forward lies in proactive, inclusive policies that address the tangible, everyday experiences of decline and restore faith in the political system.

    Thiemo Fetzer has benefited from research funding from ESRC, CAGE, UKRI, and the European Research Council.

    – ref. To fend off Reform, mainstream parties must address the tangible decline of British towns – https://theconversation.com/to-fend-off-reform-mainstream-parties-must-address-the-tangible-decline-of-british-towns-256249

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: Science requires ethical oversight – without federal dollars, society’s health and safety are at risk

    Source: The Conversation – USA – By Christine Coughlin, Professor of Law, Wake Forest University

    Brain organoids, pictured here, raise both many medical possibilities and ethical questions. NIAID/Flickr, CC BY-SA

    As the Trump administration continues to make significant cuts to NIH budgets and personnel and to freeze billions of dollars of funding to major research universities – citing ideological concerns – there’s more being threatened than just progress in science and medicine. Something valuable but often overlooked is also being hit hard: preventing research abuse.

    The National Institutes of Health has been the world’s largest public funder of biomedical research. Its support helps translate basic science into biomedical therapies and technologies, providing funding for nearly all treatments approved by the Food and Drug Administration from 2010 to 2019. This enables the U.S. to lead global research while maintaining transparency and preventing research misconduct.

    While the legality of directives to shrink the NIH is unclear, the Trump administration’s actions have already led to suspended clinical trials, institutional hiring freezes and layoffs, rescinded graduate student admissions, and canceled federal grant review meetings. Researchers at affected universities say that funding will delay or possibly eliminate ongoing studies on critical conditions like cancer and Alzheimer’s.

    The Trump administration has deeply culled U.S. science across agencies and institutions.

    It is clear to us, as legal and bioethics scholars whose research often focuses on the ethical, legal and social implications of emerging biotechnologies, that these directives will have profoundly negative consequences for medical research and human health, with ripple effects that will last decades. Our scholarship demonstrates that in order to contribute to knowledge and, ultimately, to biomedical treatments, medical research at every stage depends on significant infrastructure support and ethical oversight.

    Our recent focus on brain organoid research – 3D lab models grown from human stem cells that simulate brain structure and function – shows how federal support for research is key to not only promote innovation, but to protect participants and future patients.

    History of NIH and research ethics

    The National Institutes of Health began as a one-room laboratory within the Marine Hospital Service in 1887. After World War I, chemists involved in the war effort sought to apply their knowledge to medicine. They partnered with Louisiana Sen. Joseph E. Ransdell who, motivated by the devastation of malaria, yellow fever and the 1928 influenza pandemic, introduced federal legislation to support basic research and fund fellowships focusing on solving medical problems.

    By World War II, biomedical advances like surgical techniques and antibiotics had proved vital on the battlefield. Survival rates increased from 4% during World War I to 50% in World War II. Congress passed the 1944 Public Health Services Act to expand NIH’s authority to fund biomedical research at public and private institutions. President Franklin D. Roosevelt called it “as sound an investment as any Government can make; the dividends are payable in human life and health.”

    As science advanced, so did the need for guardrails. After World War II, among the top Nazi leaders prosecuted for war crimes were physicians who conducted experiments on people without consent, such as exposure to hypothermia and infectious disease. The verdicts of these Doctors’ Trials included 10 points about ethical human research that became the Nuremberg Code, emphasizing voluntary consent to participation, societal benefit as the goal of human research, and significant limitations on permissible risks of harm. The World Medical Association established complementary international guidelines for physician-researchers in the 1964 Declaration of Helsinki.

    At least 100 participants died in the Tuskegee Untreated Syphilis Study.
    National Archives

    In the 1970s, information about the Tuskegee study – a deceptive and unethical 40-year study of untreated syphilis in Black men – came to light. The researchers told study participants they would be given treatment but did not give them medication. They also prevented participants from accessing a cure when it became available in order to study the disease as it progressed. The men enrolled in the study experienced significant health problems, including blindness, mental impairment and death.

    The public outrage that followed starkly demonstrated that the U.S. couldn’t simply rely on international guidelines but needed federal standards on research ethics. As a result, the National Research Act of 1974 led to the Belmont Report, which identified ethical principles essential to human research: respect for persons, beneficence and justice.

    Federal regulations reinforced these principles by requiring all federally funded research to comply with rigorous ethical standards for human research. By prohibiting financial conflicts of interest and by implementing an independent ethics review process, new policies helped ensure that federally supported research has scientific and social value, is scientifically valid, fairly selects and adequately protects participants.

    These standards and recommendations guide both federally and nonfederally funded research today. The breadth of NIH’s mandate and budget has provided not only the essential structure for research oversight, but also key resources for ethics consultation and advice.

    Brain organoids and the need for ethical inquiry

    Biomedical research on cell and animal models requires extensive ethics oversight systems that complement those for human research. Our research on the ethical and policy issues of human brain organoid research provides a good example of the complexities of biomedical research and the infrastructure and oversight mechanisms necessary to support it.

    Organoid research is increasing in importance, as the FDA wants to expand its use as an alternative to using animals to test new drugs before administering them to humans. Because these models can simulate brain structure and function, brain organoid research is integral to developing and testing potential treatments for brain diseases and conditions like Alzheimer’s, Parkinson’s and cancer. Brain organoids are also useful for personalized and regenerative medicine, artificial intelligence, brain-computer interfaces and other biotechnologies.

    Brain organoids are built on knowledge about the fundamentals of biology that was developed primarily in universities receiving federal funding. Organoid technology began in 1907 with research on sponge cells, and continued in the 1980s with advances in stem cell research. Since researchers generated the first human organoid in 2009, the field has rapidly expanded.

    Brain organoids have come a long way since their beginnings over a century ago.
    Madeline Andrews, Arnold Kriegstein’s lab, UCSF, CC BY-ND

    These advances were only possible through federally supported research infrastructure, which helps ensure the quality of all biomedical research. Indirect costs cover operational expenses necessary to maintain research safety and ethics, including utilities, administrative support, biohazard handling and regulatory compliance. In these ways, federally supported research infrastructure protects and promotes the scientific and ethical value of biotechnologies like brain organoids.

    Brain organoid research requires significant scientific and ethical inquiry to safely reach its future potential. It raises potential moral and legal questions about donor consent, the extent to which organoids should be grown and how they should be disposed, and consciousness and personhood. As science progresses, infrastructure for oversight can help ensure these ethical and societal issues are addressed.

    New frontiers in scientific research

    Since World War II, there has been bipartisan support for scientific innovation, in part because it is an economic and national security imperative. As Harvard University President Alan Garber recently wrote, “[n]ew frontiers beckon us with the prospect of life-changing advances. … For the government to retreat from these partnerships now risks not only the health and well-being of millions of individuals but also the economic security and vitality of our nation.”

    Cuts to research overhead may seem like easy savings, but it fails to account for the infrastructure that provides essential support for scientific innovation. The investment the NIH has put into academic research is significantly paid forward, adding nearly US$95 billion to local economies in fiscal year 2024, or $2.46 for every $1 of grant funding. NIH funding had also supported over 407,700 jobs that year.

    President Donald Trump pledged to “unleash the power of American innovation” to battle brain-based diseases when he accepted his second Republican nomination for president. Around 6.7 million Americans live with Alzheimer’s, and over a million more suffer from Parkinson’s. Hundreds of thousands of Americans are diagnosed with aggressive brain cancers each year, and 20% of the population experiences varying forms of mental illness at any one time. These numbers are expected to grow considerably, possibly doubling by 2050.

    Organoid research is just one of the essential components in the process of learning about the brain and using that knowledge to find better treatment for diseases affecting the brain.

    Science benefits society only if it is rigorous, ethically conducted and fairly funded. Current NIH policy directives and steep cuts to the agency’s size and budget, along with attacks on universities, undermine globally shared goals of increasing understanding and improving human health.

    The federal system of overseeing and funding biomedical science may need a scalpel, but to defund efforts based on “efficiency” is to wield a chainsaw.

    The authors do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

    – ref. Science requires ethical oversight – without federal dollars, society’s health and safety are at risk – https://theconversation.com/science-requires-ethical-oversight-without-federal-dollars-societys-health-and-safety-are-at-risk-252794

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI: Plains All American Reports First-Quarter 2025 Results

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    HOUSTON, May 09, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Plains All American Pipeline, L.P. (Nasdaq: PAA) and Plains GP Holdings (Nasdaq: PAGP) today reported first-quarter 2025 results and provided the following highlights:

    First-Quarter Results

    • Reported net income attributable to PAA of $443 million and net cash provided by operating activities of $639 million
    • Delivered Adjusted EBITDA attributable to PAA of $754 million
    • Exited the quarter with 3.3x leverage ratio, toward the low end of our target range of 3.25x – 3.75x (includes previously announced and closed transactions)
    • Paid a quarterly cash distribution of $0.38 per unit ($1.52 per unit annualized), representing a current distribution yield of ~9.0%

    Business Highlights

    • Plains acquired the remaining 50% interest in Cheyenne Pipeline, enhancing our integration from the Guernsey market to pipelines supplying Cushing, Oklahoma, which closed on February 28, 2025
    • Plains acquired Black Knight Midstream’s Permian Basin crude oil gathering business, for approximately $55 million, which closed effective May 1, 2025
    • Placed into service the 30 Mb/d Fort Saskatchewan fractionation complex debottleneck project enhancing our fee-based cash flow in Canada
    • Increased our 2025 C3+ spec product sales hedge profile to approximately 80% at approximately $0.70 per gallon level

    “Plains delivered another quarter of solid operational and financial performance,” said Willie Chiang, Chairman and CEO. “Substantial cash flow generation from our integrated Crude Oil and NGL footprints coupled with a strong balance sheet positions us well through a time of market volatility and uncertainty. Our focus on efficient growth remains consistent with the addition of two new bolt-on acquisitions and our Fort Saskatchewan fractionation complex debottleneck project now in service. Finally, our commitment to financial discipline and financial flexibility remains unchanged while continuing to return cash to unitholders through a strong distribution payout.”

    Plains All American Pipeline

    Summary Financial Information (unaudited)
    (in millions, except per unit data)

        Three Months Ended
    March 31,    		   %
    GAAP Results   2025
    		   2024
    		   Change
    Net income attributable to PAA (1)   $ 443     $ 266       67 %
    Diluted net income per common unit   $ 0.49     $ 0.29       69 %
    Diluted weighted average common units outstanding     704       701       — %
    Net cash provided by operating activities   $ 639     $ 419       53 %
    Distribution per common unit declared for the period   $ 0.3800     $ 0.3175       20 %
                             
        Three Months Ended
    March 31,    		   %
    Non-GAAP Results (2)   2025   2024   Change
    Adjusted net income attributable to PAA (1)   $ 375     $ 354       6 %
    Diluted adjusted net income per common unit   $ 0.39     $ 0.41     (5 )%
    Adjusted EBITDA   $ 881     $ 847       4 %
    Adjusted EBITDA attributable to PAA (1)   $ 754     $ 718       5 %
    Implied DCF per common unit and common unit equivalent   $ 0.66     $ 0.67     (1 )%
    Adjusted Free Cash Flow (3)   $ (308 )   $ 70     **
    Adjusted Free Cash Flow after Distributions (3)   $ (639 )   $ (217 )   **
    Adjusted Free Cash Flow (Excluding Changes in Assets & Liabilities) (3)   $ (169 )   $ 262     **
    Adjusted Free Cash Flow after Distributions (Excluding Changes in Assets & Liabilities) (3)   $ (500 )   $ (25 )   **

    _____________________

    ** Indicates that variance as a percentage is not meaningful.
    (1) Excludes amounts attributable to noncontrolling interests in the Plains Oryx Permian Basin LLC (the “Permian JV”), Cactus II Pipeline LLC and Red River Pipeline LLC joint ventures.
    (2) See the section of this release entitled “Non-GAAP Financial Measures and Selected Items Impacting Comparability” and the tables attached hereto for information regarding our Non-GAAP financial measures, including their reconciliation to the most directly comparable measures as reported in accordance with GAAP, and certain selected items that PAA believes impact comparability of financial results between reporting periods.
    (3) The 2025 period includes the impact of a net cash outflow of $624 million for bolt-on acquisitions.
       

    Summary of Selected Financial Data by Segment (unaudited)
    (in millions)

      Segment Adjusted EBITDA
      Crude Oil   NGL
    Three Months Ended March 31, 2025 $ 559     $ 189  
    Three Months Ended March 31, 2024 $ 553     $ 159  
    Percentage change in Segment Adjusted EBITDA versus 2024 period   1 %     19 %
                   

    First-quarter 2025 Crude Oil Segment Adjusted EBITDA was in line with comparable 2024 results. Favorable results in the 2025 period from (i) higher tariff volumes on our pipelines, (ii) tariff escalations and (iii) contributions from recently completed bolt-on acquisitions were largely offset by (iv) higher operating expenses and (v) the impact to our assets from refinery downtime.

    First-quarter 2025 NGL Segment Adjusted EBITDA increased 19% versus comparable 2024 results primarily due to higher weighted average frac spreads and NGL sales volumes in the first quarter of 2025.

    Plains GP Holdings

    PAGP owns an indirect non-economic controlling interest in PAA’s general partner and an indirect limited partner interest in PAA. As the control entity of PAA, PAGP consolidates PAA’s results into its financial statements, which is reflected in the condensed consolidating balance sheet and income statement tables attached hereto.

    Conference Call and Webcast Instructions

    PAA and PAGP will hold a joint conference call at 9:00 a.m. CT on Friday, May 9, 2025 to discuss first-quarter performance and related items.

    To access the internet webcast, please go to https://edge.media-server.com/mmc/p/qqvgtyoa/

    Alternatively, the webcast can be accessed on our website at https://ir.plains.com/news-events/events-presentations. Following the live webcast, an audio replay will be available on our website and will be accessible for a period of 365 days. Slides will be posted prior to the call at the above referenced website.

    Non-GAAP Financial Measures and Selected Items Impacting Comparability

    To supplement our financial information presented in accordance with GAAP, management uses additional measures known as “non-GAAP financial measures” in its evaluation of past performance and prospects for the future and to assess the amount of cash that is available for distributions, debt repayments, common equity repurchases and other general partnership purposes. The primary additional measures used by management are Adjusted EBITDA, Adjusted EBITDA attributable to PAA, Implied Distributable Cash Flow (“DCF”), Adjusted Free Cash Flow and Adjusted Free Cash Flow after Distributions.

    Our definition and calculation of certain non-GAAP financial measures may not be comparable to similarly-titled measures of other companies. Adjusted EBITDA, Adjusted EBITDA attributable to PAA, Implied DCF and certain other non-GAAP financial performance measures are reconciled to Net Income, and Adjusted Free Cash Flow, Adjusted Free Cash Flow after Distributions and certain other non-GAAP financial liquidity measures are reconciled to Net Cash Provided by Operating Activities (the most directly comparable measures as reported in accordance with GAAP) for the historical periods presented in the tables attached to this release, and should be viewed in addition to, and not in lieu of, our Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements and accompanying notes. In addition, we encourage you to visit our website at www.plains.com (in particular the section under “Financial Information” entitled “Non-GAAP Reconciliations” within the Investor Relations tab), which presents a reconciliation of our commonly used non-GAAP and supplemental financial measures. We do not reconcile non-GAAP financial measures on a forward-looking basis as it is impractical to do so without unreasonable effort.

    Non-GAAP Financial Performance Measures

    Adjusted EBITDA is defined as earnings before (i) interest expense, (ii) income tax (expense)/benefit, (iii) depreciation and amortization (including our proportionate share of depreciation and amortization, including write-downs related to cancelled projects and impairments, of unconsolidated entities), (iv) gains and losses on asset sales, asset impairments and other, net, (v) gains on investments in unconsolidated entities, net and (vi) interest income on promissory notes by and among PAA and certain Plains entities, and (vii) adjusted for certain selected items impacting comparability. Adjusted EBITDA attributable to PAA excludes the portion of Adjusted EBITDA that is attributable to noncontrolling interests.

    Management believes that the presentation of Adjusted EBITDA, Adjusted EBITDA attributable to PAA and Implied DCF provides useful information to investors regarding our performance and results of operations because these measures, when used to supplement related GAAP financial measures, (i) provide additional information about our core operating performance and ability to fund distributions to our unitholders through cash generated by our operations and (ii) provide investors with the same financial analytical framework upon which management bases financial, operational, compensation and planning/budgeting decisions. We also present these and additional non-GAAP financial measures, including adjusted net income attributable to PAA and basic and diluted adjusted net income per common unit, as they are measures that investors, rating agencies and debt holders have indicated are useful in assessing us and our results of operations. These non-GAAP financial performance measures may exclude, for example, (i) charges for obligations that are expected to be settled with the issuance of equity instruments, (ii) gains and losses on derivative instruments that are related to underlying activities in another period (or the reversal of such adjustments from a prior period), gains and losses on derivatives that are either related to investing activities (such as the purchase of linefill) or purchases of long-term inventory, and inventory valuation adjustments, as applicable, (iii) long-term inventory costing adjustments, (iv) items that are not indicative of our core operating results and/or (v) other items that we believe should be excluded in understanding our core operating performance. These measures may be further adjusted to include amounts related to deficiencies associated with minimum volume commitments whereby we have billed the counterparties for their deficiency obligation and such amounts are recognized as deferred revenue in “Other current liabilities” in our Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements. We also adjust for amounts billed by our equity method investees related to deficiencies under minimum volume commitments. Such amounts are presented net of applicable amounts subsequently recognized into revenue. Furthermore, the calculation of these measures contemplates tax effects as a separate reconciling item, where applicable. We have defined all such items as “selected items impacting comparability.” Due to the nature of the selected items, certain selected items impacting comparability may impact certain non-GAAP financial measures, referred to as adjusted results, but not impact other non-GAAP financial measures. We do not necessarily consider all of our selected items impacting comparability to be non-recurring, infrequent or unusual, but we believe that an understanding of these selected items impacting comparability is material to the evaluation of our operating results and prospects.

    Although we present selected items impacting comparability that management considers in evaluating our performance, you should also be aware that the items presented do not represent all items that affect comparability between the periods presented. Variations in our operating results are also caused by changes in volumes, prices, exchange rates, mechanical interruptions, acquisitions, divestitures, investment capital projects and numerous other factors. These types of variations may not be separately identified in this release, but will be discussed, as applicable, in management’s discussion and analysis of operating results in our Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q.

    Non-GAAP Financial Liquidity Measures

    Management uses the non-GAAP financial liquidity measures Adjusted Free Cash Flow and Adjusted Free Cash Flow after Distributions to assess the amount of cash that is available for distributions, debt repayments, common equity repurchases and other general partnership purposes. Adjusted Free Cash Flow is defined as Net Cash Provided by Operating Activities, less Net Cash Provided by/(Used in) Investing Activities, which primarily includes acquisition, investment and maintenance capital expenditures, investments in unconsolidated entities and the impact from the purchase and sale of linefill, net of proceeds from the sales of assets and further impacted by distributions to and contributions from noncontrolling interests and proceeds from the issuance of related party notes. Adjusted Free Cash Flow is further reduced by cash distributions paid to our preferred and common unitholders to arrive at Adjusted Free Cash Flow after Distributions.

    We also present these measures and additional non-GAAP financial liquidity measures as they are measures that investors have indicated are useful. We present the Adjusted Free Cash Flow (Excluding Changes in Assets & Liabilities) for use in assessing our underlying business liquidity and cash flow generating capacity excluding fluctuations caused by timing of when amounts earned or incurred were collected, received or paid from period to period. Adjusted Free Cash Flow (Excluding Changes in Assets & Liabilities) is defined as Adjusted Free Cash Flow excluding the impact of “Changes in assets and liabilities, net of acquisitions” on our Condensed Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows. Adjusted Free Cash Flow (Excluding Changes in Assets & Liabilities) is further reduced by cash distributions paid to our preferred and common unitholders to arrive at Adjusted Free Cash Flow after Distributions (Excluding Changes in Assets & Liabilities).

       
    PLAINS ALL AMERICAN PIPELINE, L.P. AND SUBSIDIARIES
    FINANCIAL SUMMARY (unaudited)
    CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS
    (in millions, except per unit data)
       
      Three Months Ended
    March 31,
        2025       2024  
    REVENUES $ 12,011     $ 11,995  
           
    COSTS AND EXPENSES      
    Purchases and related costs   10,761       10,917  
    Field operating costs   368       358  
    General and administrative expenses   100       96  
    Depreciation and amortization   262       254  
    Gain on asset sales, net   (13 )     —  
    Total costs and expenses   11,478       11,625  
           
    OPERATING INCOME   533       370  
           
    OTHER INCOME/(EXPENSE)      
    Equity earnings in unconsolidated entities   103       95  
    Gain on investments in unconsolidated entities, net   31       —  
    Interest expense, net (1)   (127 )     (95 )
    Other income/(expense), net (1)   26       (5 )
           
    INCOME BEFORE TAX   566       365  
    Current income tax expense   (46 )     (53 )
    Deferred income tax (expense)/benefit   (4 )     39  
           
    NET INCOME   516       351  
    Net income attributable to noncontrolling interests   (73 )     (85 )
    NET INCOME ATTRIBUTABLE TO PAA $ 443     $ 266  
           
    NET INCOME PER COMMON UNIT:      
    Net income allocated to common unitholders — Basic and Diluted $ 343     $ 203  
    Basic and diluted weighted average common units outstanding   704       701  
    Basic and diluted net income per common unit $ 0.49     $ 0.29  

    _____________________

    (1) PAA and certain Plains entities have issued promissory notes by and among such entities to facilitate financing. “Interest expense, net” and “Other income/(expense), net” each include $20 million for the three months ended March 31, 2025 related to interest on such related party promissory notes. These amounts offset and do not impact Net Income or Non-GAAP metrics such as Adjusted EBITDA, Implied DCF and Adjusted Free Cash Flow.
       
    PLAINS ALL AMERICAN PIPELINE, L.P. AND SUBSIDIARIES
    FINANCIAL SUMMARY (unaudited)
    CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET DATA
    (in millions)
           
      March 31,
    2025    		   December 31,
    2024
    ASSETS      
    Current assets (including cash and cash equivalents of $427 and $348, respectively) $ 4,735     $ 4,802  
    Property and equipment, net   16,062       15,424  
    Investments in unconsolidated entities   2,745       2,811  
    Intangible assets, net   1,675       1,677  
    Linefill   988       968  
    Long-term operating lease right-of-use assets, net   321       332  
    Long-term inventory   289       280  
    Other long-term assets, net   244       268  
    Total assets $ 27,059     $ 26,562  
           
    LIABILITIES AND PARTNERS’ CAPITAL      
    Current liabilities $ 4,691     $ 4,950  
    Senior notes, net   8,131       7,141  
    Other long-term debt, net   73       72  
    Long-term operating lease liabilities   301       313  
    Other long-term liabilities and deferred credits   1,003       990  
    Total liabilities   14,199       13,466  
           
    Partners’ capital excluding noncontrolling interests   9,632       9,813  
    Noncontrolling interests   3,228       3,283  
    Total partners’ capital   12,860       13,096  
    Total liabilities and partners’ capital $ 27,059     $ 26,562  
                   

    DEBT CAPITALIZATION RATIOS
    (in millions)

      March 31,
    2025    		   December 31,
    2024
    Short-term debt $ 478     $ 408  
    Long-term debt   8,204       7,213  
    Total debt $ 8,682     $ 7,621  
           
    Long-term debt $ 8,204     $ 7,213  
    Partners’ capital excluding noncontrolling interests   9,632       9,813  
    Total book capitalization excluding noncontrolling interests (“Total book capitalization”) $ 17,836     $ 17,026  
    Total book capitalization, including short-term debt $ 18,314     $ 17,434  
           
    Long-term debt-to-total book capitalization   46 %     42 %
    Total debt-to-total book capitalization, including short-term debt   47 %     44 %
                   
    PLAINS ALL AMERICAN PIPELINE, L.P. AND SUBSIDIARIES
    FINANCIAL SUMMARY (unaudited)
    COMPUTATION OF BASIC AND DILUTED NET INCOME PER COMMON UNIT (1)
    (in millions, except per unit data)
       
      Three Months Ended
    March 31,
      2025   2024
    Basic and Diluted Net Income per Common Unit      
    Net income attributable to PAA $ 443     $ 266  
    Distributions to Series A preferred unitholders   (39 )     (44 )
    Distributions to Series B preferred unitholders   (18 )     (19 )
    Amounts allocated to participating securities   (1 )     (1 )
    Impact from repurchase of Series A preferred units (2)   (43 )     —  
    Other   1       1  
    Net income allocated to common unitholders $ 343     $ 203  
           
    Basic and diluted weighted average common units outstanding (3) (4)   704       701  
           
    Basic and diluted net income per common unit $ 0.49     $ 0.29  

    _____________________

    (1) We calculate net income allocated to common unitholders based on the distributions pertaining to the current period’s net income. After adjusting for the appropriate period’s distributions, the remaining undistributed earnings or excess distributions over earnings, if any, are allocated to common unitholders and participating securities in accordance with the contractual terms of our partnership agreement in effect for the period and as further prescribed under the two-class method.
    (2) We repurchased approximately 12.7 million Series A preferred units on January 31, 2025. The difference between the cash we paid for the repurchase of such units and their carrying value on our balance sheet is considered a return to Series A preferred unitholders for the calculation of net income allocated to common unitholders.
    (3) The possible conversion of our Series A preferred units was excluded from the calculation of diluted net income per common unit for each of the three months ended March 31, 2025 and 2024 as the effect was antidilutive.
    (4) Our equity-indexed compensation plan awards that contemplate the issuance of common units are considered potentially dilutive unless (i) they become vested only upon the satisfaction of a performance condition and (ii) that performance condition has yet to be satisfied. Equity-indexed compensation plan awards that are deemed to be dilutive are reduced by a hypothetical common unit repurchase based on the remaining unamortized fair value, as prescribed by the treasury stock method in guidance issued by the FASB.
       
    PLAINS ALL AMERICAN PIPELINE, L.P. AND SUBSIDIARIES
    FINANCIAL SUMMARY (unaudited)
    CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED CASH FLOW DATA
    (in millions)
       
      Three Months Ended
    March 31,
      2025   2024
    CASH FLOWS FROM OPERATING ACTIVITIES      
    Net income $ 516     $ 351  
    Reconciliation of net income to net cash provided by operating activities:      
    Depreciation and amortization   262       254  
    Gain on asset sales, net   (13 )     —  
    Deferred income tax expense/(benefit)   4       (39 )
    Equity earnings in unconsolidated entities   (103 )     (95 )
    Distributions on earnings from unconsolidated entities   125       132  
    Other   (13 )     8  
    Changes in assets and liabilities, net of acquisitions   (139 )     (192 )
    Net cash provided by operating activities   639       419  
           
    CASH FLOWS FROM INVESTING ACTIVITIES      
    Net cash used in investing activities (1)(2)   (1,149 )     (261 )
           
    CASH FLOWS FROM FINANCING ACTIVITIES      
    Net cash provided by/(used in) financing activities (1)   590       (273 )
           
    Effect of translation adjustment   (1 )     (4 )
           
    Net increase/(decrease) in cash and cash equivalents and restricted cash   79       (119 )
           
    Cash and cash equivalents and restricted cash, beginning of period   348       450  
    Cash and cash equivalents and restricted cash, end of period $ 427     $ 331  

    _____________________

    (1) PAA and certain Plains entities have issued promissory notes by and among such entities to facilitate financing. For the three months ended March 31, 2025, “Net cash used in investing activities” includes a cash outflow of approximately $330 million associated with our investment in related party notes. An equal and offsetting cash inflow associated with our issuance of related party notes is included in “Net cash provided by/(used in) financing activities.”
    (2) The 2025 period includes a net cash outflow of $624 million for bolt-on acquisitions.
       

    CAPITAL EXPENDITURES
    (in millions)

      Net to PAA (1)   Consolidated
      Three Months Ended
    March 31,    		   Three Months Ended
    March 31,
      2025
    		   2024
    		   2025
    		   2024
    Investment capital expenditures:              
    Crude Oil $ 89     $ 65     $ 120     $ 90  
    NGL   41       14       41       14  
    Total Investment capital expenditures   130       79       161       104  
    Maintenance capital expenditures   38       53       41       57  
      $ 168     $ 132     $ 202     $ 161  

    _____________________

    (1) Excludes expenditures attributable to noncontrolling interests.
       
    PLAINS ALL AMERICAN PIPELINE, L.P. AND SUBSIDIARIES
    FINANCIAL SUMMARY (unaudited)
    NON-GAAP RECONCILIATIONS
    (in millions, except per unit and ratio data)
       
    Computation of Basic and Diluted Adjusted Net Income Per Common Unit (1):
       
      Three Months Ended
    March 31,
      2025   2024
    Basic and Diluted Adjusted Net Income per Common Unit      
    Net income attributable to PAA $ 443     $ 266  
    Selected items impacting comparability – Adjusted net income attributable to PAA (2)   (68 )     88  
    Adjusted net income attributable to PAA $ 375     $ 354  
    Distributions to Series A preferred unitholders   (39 )     (44 )
    Distributions to Series B preferred unitholders   (18 )     (19 )
    Amounts allocated to participating securities   (1 )     (2 )
    Impact from repurchase of Series A preferred units (3)   (43 )     —  
    Other   1       1  
    Adjusted net income allocated to common unitholders $ 275     $ 290  
           
    Basic and diluted weighted average common units outstanding (4) (5)   704       701  
           
    Basic and diluted adjusted net income per common unit $ 0.39     $ 0.41  

    _____________________

    (1) We calculate adjusted net income allocated to common unitholders based on the distributions pertaining to the current period’s net income. After adjusting for the appropriate period’s distributions, the remaining undistributed earnings or excess distributions over earnings, if any, are allocated to the common unitholders and participating securities in accordance with the contractual terms of our partnership agreement in effect for the period and as further prescribed under the two-class method.
    (2) See the “Selected Items Impacting Comparability” table for additional information.
    (3) We repurchased approximately 12.7 million Series A preferred units on January 31, 2025. The difference between the cash we paid for the repurchase of such units and their carrying value on our balance sheet is considered a return to Series A preferred unitholders for the calculation of adjusted net income allocated to common unitholders.
    (4) The possible conversion of our Series A preferred units was excluded from the calculation of diluted adjusted net income per common unit for each of the three months ended March 31, 2025 and 2024 as the effect was antidilutive.
    (5) Our equity-indexed compensation plan awards that contemplate the issuance of common units are considered potentially dilutive unless (i) they become vested only upon the satisfaction of a performance condition and (ii) that performance condition has yet to be satisfied. Equity-indexed compensation plan awards that are deemed to be dilutive are reduced by a hypothetical common unit repurchase based on the remaining unamortized fair value, as prescribed by the treasury stock method in guidance issued by the FASB.
       

    Net Income Per Common Unit to Adjusted Net Income Per Common Unit Reconciliation:

      Three Months Ended
    March 31,
      2025   2024
    Basic and diluted net income per common unit $ 0.49     $ 0.29  
    Selected items impacting comparability per common unit (1)   (0.10 )     0.12  
    Basic and diluted adjusted net income per common unit $ 0.39     $ 0.41  

    _____________________

    (1)   See the “Selected Items Impacting Comparability” and the “Computation of Basic and Diluted Adjusted Net Income Per Common Unit” tables for additional information.
       
    PLAINS ALL AMERICAN PIPELINE, L.P. AND SUBSIDIARIES
    FINANCIAL SUMMARY (unaudited)
       
    Net Income to Adjusted EBITDA attributable to PAA and Implied DCF Reconciliation:
       
      Three Months Ended
    March 31,
      2025   2024
    Net income $ 516     $ 351  
    Interest expense, net of certain items (1)   107       95  
    Income tax expense   50       14  
    Depreciation and amortization   262       254  
    Gain on asset sales, net   (13 )     —  
    Gain on investments in unconsolidated entities, net   (31 )     —  
    Depreciation and amortization of unconsolidated entities (2)   20       19  
    Selected items impacting comparability – Adjusted EBITDA (3)   (30 )     114  
    Adjusted EBITDA $ 881     $ 847  
    Adjusted EBITDA attributable to noncontrolling interests   (127 )     (129 )
    Adjusted EBITDA attributable to PAA $ 754     $ 718  
           
    Adjusted EBITDA $ 881     $ 847  
    Interest expense, net of certain non-cash and other items (4)   (104 )     (90 )
    Maintenance capital   (41 )     (57 )
    Investment capital of noncontrolling interests (5)   (30 )     (25 )
    Current income tax expense   (46 )     (53 )
    Distributions from unconsolidated entities in excess of/(less than) adjusted equity earnings (6)   (2 )     12  
    Distributions to noncontrolling interests (7)   (132 )     (100 )
    Implied DCF $ 526     $ 534  
    Preferred unit distributions paid (7)   (64 )     (64 )
    Implied DCF Available to Common Unitholders $ 462     $ 470  
           
    Weighted Average Common Units Outstanding   704       701  
    Weighted Average Common Units and Common Unit Equivalents   767       772  
           
    Implied DCF per Common Unit (8) $ 0.66     $ 0.67  
    Implied DCF per Common Unit and Common Unit Equivalent (9) $ 0.66     $ 0.67  
           
    Cash Distribution Paid per Common Unit $ 0.3800     $ 0.3175  
    Common Unit Cash Distributions (7) $ 267     $ 223  
    Common Unit Distribution Coverage Ratio 1.73x   2.11x
           
    Implied DCF Excess $ 195     $ 247  

    _____________________

    (1) Represents “Interest expense, net” as reported on our Condensed Consolidated Statements of Operations, net of interest income associated with promissory notes by and among PAA and certain Plains entities.
    (2) Adjustment to exclude our proportionate share of depreciation and amortization expense (including write-downs related to cancelled projects and impairments) of unconsolidated entities.
    (3) See the “Selected Items Impacting Comparability” table for additional information.
    (4) Amount excludes certain non-cash items impacting interest expense such as amortization of debt issuance costs and terminated interest rate swaps and is net of interest income associated with promissory notes by and among PAA and certain Plains entities.
    (5) Investment capital expenditures attributable to noncontrolling interests that reduce Implied DCF available to PAA common unitholders.
    (6) Comprised of cash distributions received from unconsolidated entities less equity earnings in unconsolidated entities (adjusted for our proportionate share of depreciation and amortization, including write-downs related to cancelled projects and impairments, and selected items impacting comparability of unconsolidated entities).
    (7) Cash distributions paid during the period presented.
    (8) Implied DCF Available to Common Unitholders for the period divided by the weighted average common units outstanding for the period.
    (9) Implied DCF Available to Common Unitholders for the period, adjusted for Series A preferred unit cash distributions paid, divided by the weighted average common units and common unit equivalents outstanding for the period. Our Series A preferred units are convertible into common units, generally on a one-for-one basis and subject to customary anti-dilution adjustments, in whole or in part, subject to certain minimum conversion amounts.
       
    PLAINS ALL AMERICAN PIPELINE, L.P. AND SUBSIDIARIES
    FINANCIAL SUMMARY (unaudited)
       
    Net Income Per Common Unit to Implied DCF Per Common Unit and Common Unit Equivalent Reconciliation:
       
      Three Months Ended
    March 31,
      2025
    		   2024
    Basic net income per common unit $ 0.49     $ 0.29  
    Reconciling items per common unit (1) (2)   0.17       0.38  
    Implied DCF per common unit $ 0.66     $ 0.67  
           
    Basic net income per common unit $ 0.49     $ 0.29  
    Reconciling items per common unit and common unit equivalent (1) (3)   0.17       0.38  
    Implied DCF per common unit and common unit equivalent $ 0.66     $ 0.67  

    _____________________

    (1)  Represents adjustments to Net Income to calculate Implied DCF Available to Common Unitholders. See the “Net Income to Adjusted EBITDA attributable to PAA and Implied DCF Reconciliation” table for additional information.
    (2)  Based on weighted average common units outstanding for the three months ended March 31, 2025 and 2024 of 704 million and 701 million, respectively.
    (3)  Based on weighted average common units outstanding for the period, as well as weighted average Series A preferred units outstanding for the three months ended March 31, 2025 and 2024 of 63 million and 71 million, respectively.
       
    PLAINS ALL AMERICAN PIPELINE, L.P. AND SUBSIDIARIES
    FINANCIAL SUMMARY (unaudited)
       
    Net Cash Provided by Operating Activities to Non-GAAP Financial Liquidity Measures Reconciliation:
       
      Three Months Ended
    March 31,
        2025       2024  
    Net cash provided by operating activities $ 639     $ 419  
    Adjustments to reconcile Net cash provided by operating activities to Adjusted Free Cash Flow:      
    Net cash used in investing activities (1)(2)   (1,149 )     (261 )
    Cash contributions from noncontrolling interests   4       12  
    Cash distributions paid to noncontrolling interests (3)   (132 )     (100 )
    Proceeds from the issuance of related party notes (1)   330       —  
    Adjusted Free Cash Flow (4) $ (308 )   $ 70  
    Cash distributions (5)   (331 )     (287 )
    Adjusted Free Cash Flow after Distributions (4) (6) $ (639 )   $ (217 )
           
      Three Months Ended
    March 31,
        2025       2024  
    Adjusted Free Cash Flow (4) $ (308 )   $ 70  
    Changes in assets and liabilities, net of acquisitions (7)   139       192  
    Adjusted Free Cash Flow (Excluding Changes in Assets & Liabilities) (8) $ (169 )   $ 262  
    Cash distributions (5)   (331 )     (287 )
    Adjusted Free Cash Flow after Distributions (Excluding Changes in Assets & Liabilities) (8) $ (500 )   $ (25 )

    _____________________

    (1) PAA and certain Plains entities have issued promissory notes by and among such entities to facilitate financing. “Proceeds from the issuance of related party notes” has an equal and offsetting cash outflow associated with our investment in related party notes, which is included as a component of “Net cash used in investing activities.”
    (2) The 2025 period includes a net cash outflow of $624 million for bolt-on acquisitions.
    (3) Cash distributions paid during the period presented.
    (4) Management uses the non-GAAP financial liquidity measures Adjusted Free Cash Flow and Adjusted Free Cash Flow after Distributions to assess the amount of cash that is available for distributions, debt repayments, common equity repurchases and other general partnership purposes. Adjusted Free Cash Flow after Distributions shortages, if any, may be funded from previously established reserves, cash on hand or from borrowings under our credit facilities or commercial paper program.
    (5) Cash distributions paid to preferred and common unitholders during the period.
    (6) Excess Adjusted Free Cash Flow after Distributions is retained to establish reserves for future distributions, capital expenditures, debt reduction and other partnership purposes. Adjusted Free Cash Flow after Distributions shortages may be funded from previously established reserves, cash on hand or from borrowings under our credit facilities or commercial paper program.
    (7) See the “Condensed Consolidated Cash Flow Data” table.
    (8) Management uses the non-GAAP financial liquidity measures Adjusted Free Cash Flow (Excluding Changes in Assets & Liabilities) and Adjusted Free Cash Flow after Distributions (Excluding Changes in Assets & Liabilities) to assess the underlying business liquidity and cash flow generating capacity excluding fluctuations caused by timing of when amounts earned or incurred were collected, received or paid from period to period.
       
    PLAINS ALL AMERICAN PIPELINE, L.P. AND SUBSIDIARIES
    FINANCIAL SUMMARY (unaudited)
    SELECTED ITEMS IMPACTING COMPARABILITY
    (in millions)
       
      Three Months Ended
    March 31,
      2025   2024
    Selected Items Impacting Comparability: (1)      
    Derivative activities and inventory valuation adjustments (2) $ 34     $ (159 )
    Long-term inventory costing adjustments (3)   3       33  
    Deficiencies under minimum volume commitments, net (4)   7       12  
    Equity-indexed compensation expense (5)   (9 )     (9 )
    Foreign currency revaluation (6)   —       9  
    Transaction-related expenses (7)   (5 )     —  
    Selected items impacting comparability – Adjusted EBITDA $ 30     $ (114 )
    Gain on investments in unconsolidated entities, net   31       —  
    Gain on asset sales, net   13       —  
    Tax effect on selected items impacting comparability   (3 )     30  
    Aggregate selected items impacting noncontrolling interests   (3 )     (4 )
    Selected items impacting comparability – Adjusted net income attributable to PAA $ 68     $ (88 )

    _____________________

    (1) Certain of our non-GAAP financial measures may not be impacted by each of the selected items impacting comparability. See the “Net Income to Adjusted EBITDA attributable to PAA and Implied DCF Reconciliation” and “Computation of Basic and Diluted Adjusted Net Income Per Common Unit” tables for additional details on how these selected items impacting comparability affect such measures.
    (2) We use derivative instruments for risk management purposes and our related processes include specific identification of hedging instruments to an underlying hedged transaction. Although we identify an underlying transaction for each derivative instrument we enter into, there may not be an accounting hedge relationship between the instrument and the underlying transaction. In the course of evaluating our results, we identify differences in the timing of earnings from the derivative instruments and the underlying transactions and exclude the related gains and losses in determining adjusted results such that the earnings from the derivative instruments and the underlying transactions impact adjusted results in the same period. In addition, we exclude gains and losses on derivatives that are related to (i) investing activities, such as the purchase of linefill, and (ii) purchases of long-term inventory. We also exclude the impact of corresponding inventory valuation adjustments, as applicable. For applicable periods, we excluded gains and losses from the mark-to-market of the embedded derivative associated with the Preferred Distribution Rate Reset Option of our Series A preferred units.
    (3) We carry crude oil and NGL inventory that is comprised of minimum working inventory requirements in third-party assets and other working inventory that is needed for our commercial operations. We consider this inventory necessary to conduct our operations and we intend to carry this inventory for the foreseeable future. Therefore, we classify this inventory as long-term on our balance sheet and do not hedge the inventory with derivative instruments (similar to linefill in our own assets). We treat the impact of changes in the average cost of the long-term inventory (that result from fluctuations in market prices) and write-downs of such inventory that result from price declines as a selected item impacting comparability.
    (4) We, and certain of our equity method investees, have certain agreements that require counterparties to deliver, transport or throughput a minimum volume over an agreed upon period. Substantially all of such agreements were entered into with counterparties to economically support the return on capital expenditure necessary to construct the related asset. Some of these agreements include make-up rights if the minimum volume is not met. We record a receivable from the counterparty in the period that services are provided or when the transaction occurs, including amounts for deficiency obligations from counterparties associated with minimum volume commitments. If a counterparty has a make-up right associated with a deficiency, we defer the revenue attributable to the counterparty’s make-up right and subsequently recognize the revenue at the earlier of when the deficiency volume is delivered or shipped, when the make-up right expires or when it is determined that the counterparty’s ability to utilize the make-up right is remote. We include the impact of amounts billed to counterparties for their deficiency obligation, net of applicable amounts subsequently recognized into revenue or equity earnings, as a selected item impacting comparability. We believe the inclusion of the contractually committed revenues associated with that period is meaningful to investors as the related asset has been constructed, is standing ready to provide the committed service and the fixed operating costs are included in the current period results.
    (5) Our total equity-indexed compensation expense includes expense associated with awards that will be settled in units and awards that will be settled in cash. The awards that will be settled in units are included in our diluted net income per unit calculation when the applicable performance criteria have been met. We consider the compensation expense associated with these awards as a selected item impacting comparability as the dilutive impact of the outstanding awards is included in our diluted net income per unit calculation, as applicable. The portion of compensation expense associated with awards that will be settled in cash is not considered a selected item impacting comparability.
    (6) During the periods presented, there were fluctuations in the value of the Canadian dollar to the U.S. dollar, resulting in the realization of foreign exchange gains and losses on the settlement of foreign currency transactions as well as the revaluation of monetary assets and liabilities denominated in a foreign currency. The associated gains and losses are not integral to our results and were thus classified as a selected item impacting comparability.
    (7) Primarily related to acquisitions completed during the first quarter of 2025.
       
    PLAINS ALL AMERICAN PIPELINE, L.P. AND SUBSIDIARIES
    FINANCIAL SUMMARY (unaudited)
    SELECTED FINANCIAL DATA BY SEGMENT
    (in millions)
             
      Three Months Ended
    March 31, 2025    		     Three Months Ended
    March 31, 2024
      Crude Oil   NGL     Crude Oil   NGL
    Revenues (1) $ 11,439     $ 638       $ 11,582     $ 507  
    Purchases and related costs (1)   (10,488 )     (339 )       (10,665 )     (346 )
    Field operating costs (2)   (292 )     (76 )       (266 )     (92 )
    Segment general and administrative expenses (2) (3)   (79 )     (21 )       (73 )     (23 )
    Equity earnings in unconsolidated entities   103       —         95       —  
                     
    Other segment items: (4)                
    Depreciation and amortization of unconsolidated entities   20       —         19       —  
    Derivative activities and inventory valuation adjustments   (24 )     (10 )       37       122  
    Long-term inventory costing adjustments   —       (3 )       (28 )     (5 )
    Deficiencies under minimum volume commitments, net   (7 )     —         (12 )     —  
    Equity-indexed compensation expense   9       —         9       —  
    Foreign currency revaluation   —       —         (17 )     (4 )
    Transaction-related expenses   5       —         —       —  
    Segment amounts attributable to noncontrolling interests (5)   (127 )     —         (128 )     —  
    Segment Adjusted EBITDA $ 559     $ 189       $ 553     $ 159  
                     
    Maintenance capital expenditures $ 31     $ 10       $ 46     $ 11  

    _____________________

    (1)   Includes intersegment amounts.
    (2)   Field operating costs and Segment general and administrative expenses include equity-indexed compensation expense.
    (3)   Segment general and administrative expenses reflect direct costs attributable to each segment and an allocation of other expenses to the segments. The proportional allocations by segment require judgment by management and are based on the business activities that exist during each period.
    (4)  Represents adjustments utilized by our CODM in the evaluation of segment results. Many of these adjustments are also considered selected items impacting comparability when calculating consolidated non-GAAP financial measures such as Adjusted EBITDA. See the “Selected Items Impacting Comparability” table for additional discussion.
    (5)  Reflects amounts attributable to noncontrolling interests in the Permian JV, Cactus II Pipeline LLC and Red River Pipeline LLC.
       
    PLAINS ALL AMERICAN PIPELINE, L.P. AND SUBSIDIARIES
    FINANCIAL SUMMARY (unaudited)
       
    OPERATING DATA BY SEGMENT (1)
       
      Three Months Ended
    March 31,
      2025
    		   2024
    Crude Oil Segment Volumes              
    Crude oil pipeline tariff (by region)              
    Permian Basin (2)   6,869       6,428  
    South Texas / Eagle Ford (2)   492       378  
    Mid-Continent (2)   415       486  
    Gulf Coast (2)   214       202  
    Rocky Mountain (2)   495       499  
    Western   247       259  
    Canada   354       348  
    Total crude oil pipeline tariff (2)   9,086       8,600  
                   
    NGL Segment Volumes              
    NGL fractionation   157       128  
    NGL pipeline tariff   234       214  
    Propane and butane sales   147       128  

    _____________________

    (1) Average volumes in thousands of barrels per day calculated as the total volumes (attributable to our interest for assets owned by unconsolidated entities or through undivided joint interests) for the period divided by the number of days in the period. Volumes associated with assets acquired during the period represent total volumes for the number of days we actually owned the assets divided by the number of days in the period.
    (2) Includes volumes (attributable to our interest) from assets owned by unconsolidated entities.
       
    PLAINS ALL AMERICAN PIPELINE, L.P. AND SUBSIDIARIES
    FINANCIAL SUMMARY (unaudited)
    NON-GAAP SEGMENT RECONCILIATIONS
    (in millions)
       
    Supplemental Adjusted EBITDA attributable to PAA Reconciliation:
       
      Three Months Ended
    March 31,
      2025
    		   2024
    Crude Oil Segment Adjusted EBITDA $ 559     $ 553  
    NGL Segment Adjusted EBITDA   189       159  
    Adjusted other income, net (1)   6       6  
    Adjusted EBITDA attributable to PAA (2) $ 754     $ 718  

    _____________________

    (1)    Represents “Other income/(expense), net” as reported on our Condensed Consolidated Statements of Operations, excluding interest income on promissory notes by and among PAA and certain Plains entities, as well as other income, net attributable to noncontrolling interests, adjusted for selected items impacting comparability. See the “Selected Items Impacting Comparability” table for additional information.
    (2)    See the “Net Income to Adjusted EBITDA attributable to PAA and Implied DCF Reconciliation” table for reconciliation to Net Income.
       
    PLAINS GP HOLDINGS AND SUBSIDIARIES
    FINANCIAL SUMMARY (unaudited)
    CONDENSED CONSOLIDATING STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS
    (in millions, except per share data)
             
      Three Months Ended
    March 31, 2025    		     Three Months Ended
    March 31, 2024
          Consolidating             Consolidating    
      PAA   Adjustments (1)   PAGP     PAA   Adjustments (1)   PAGP
    REVENUES $ 12,011     $ —     $ 12,011       $ 11,995     $ —     $ 11,995  
                             
    COSTS AND EXPENSES                        
    Purchases and related costs   10,761       —       10,761         10,917       —       10,917  
    Field operating costs   368       —       368         358       —       358  
    General and administrative expenses   100       1       101         96       1       97  
    Depreciation and amortization   262       —       262         254       —       254  
    Gain on asset sales, net   (13 )     —       (13 )       —       —       —  
    Total costs and expenses   11,478       1       11,479         11,625       1       11,626  
                             
    OPERATING INCOME   533       (1 )     532         370       (1 )     369  
                             
    OTHER INCOME/(EXPENSE)                        
    Equity earnings in unconsolidated entities   103       —       103         95       —       95  
    Gain on investments in unconsolidated entities, net   31       —       31         —       —       —  
    Interest expense, net   (127 )     20       (107 )       (95 )     —       (95 )
    Other income/(expense), net   26       (20 )     6         (5 )     —       (5 )
                             
    INCOME BEFORE TAX   566       (1 )     565         365       (1 )     364  
    Current income tax expense   (46 )     —       (46 )       (53 )     —       (53 )
    Deferred income tax (expense)/benefit   (4 )     (23 )     (27 )       39       (14 )     25  
                             
    NET INCOME   516       (24 )     492         351       (15 )     336  
    Net income attributable to noncontrolling interests   (73 )     (335 )     (408 )       (85 )     (209 )     (294 )
    NET INCOME ATTRIBUTABLE TO PAGP $ 443     $ (359 )   $ 84       $ 266     $ (224 )   $ 42  
                             
    Basic and diluted weighted average Class A shares outstanding     198                 197  
                             
    Basic and diluted net income per Class A share   $ 0.42               $ 0.21  

    _____________________

    (1)  Represents the aggregate consolidating adjustments necessary to produce consolidated financial statements for PAGP.
       

     

    PLAINS GP HOLDINGS AND SUBSIDIARIES
    FINANCIAL SUMMARY (unaudited)
    CONDENSED CONSOLIDATING BALANCE SHEET DATA
    (in millions)
             
      March 31, 2025     December 31, 2024
          Consolidating             Consolidating    
      PAA   Adjustments (1)   PAGP     PAA   Adjustments (1)   PAGP
    ASSETS                        
    Current assets $ 4,735     $ (6 )   $ 4,729       $ 4,802     $ (26 )   $ 4,776  
    Property and equipment, net   16,062       —       16,062         15,424       —       15,424  
    Investments in unconsolidated entities   2,745       —       2,745         2,811       —       2,811  
    Intangible assets, net   1,675       —       1,675         1,677       —       1,677  
    Deferred tax asset   —       1,199       1,199         —       1,220       1,220  
    Linefill   988       —       988         968       —       968  
    Long-term operating lease right-of-use assets, net   321       —       321         332       —       332  
    Long-term inventory   289       —       289         280       —       280  
    Other long-term assets, net   244       —       244         268       —       268  
    Total assets $ 27,059     $ 1,193     $ 28,252       $ 26,562     $ 1,194     $ 27,756  
                             
    LIABILITIES AND PARTNERS’ CAPITAL                        
    Current liabilities $ 4,691     $ (7 )   $ 4,684       $ 4,950     $ (26 )   $ 4,924  
    Senior notes, net   8,131       —       8,131         7,141       —       7,141  
    Other long-term debt, net   73       —       73         72       —       72  
    Long-term operating lease liabilities   301       —       301         313       —       313  
    Other long-term liabilities and deferred credits   1,003       —       1,003         990       —       990  
    Total liabilities   14,199       (7 )     14,192         13,466       (26 )     13,440  
                             
    Partners’ capital excluding noncontrolling interests   9,632       (8,276 )     1,356         9,813       (8,462 )     1,351  
    Noncontrolling interests   3,228       9,476       12,704         3,283       9,682       12,965  
    Total partners’ capital   12,860       1,200       14,060         13,096       1,220       14,316  
    Total liabilities and partners’ capital $ 27,059     $ 1,193     $ 28,252       $ 26,562     $ 1,194     $ 27,756  

    _____________________

    (1)  Represents the aggregate consolidating adjustments necessary to produce consolidated financial statements for PAGP.
       
    PLAINS GP HOLDINGS AND SUBSIDIARIES
    FINANCIAL SUMMARY (unaudited)    		  
    COMPUTATION OF BASIC AND DILUTED NET INCOME PER CLASS A SHARE
    (in millions, except per share data)
       
      Three Months Ended
    March 31,
      2025
    		   2024
    Basic and Diluted Net Income per Class A Share      
    Net income attributable to PAGP $ 84     $ 42  
    Basic and diluted weighted average Class A shares outstanding   198       197  
           
    Basic and diluted net income per Class A share $ 0.42     $ 0.21  
                   

    Forward-Looking Statements

    Except for the historical information contained herein, the matters discussed in this release consist of forward-looking statements that involve certain risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results or outcomes to differ materially from results or outcomes anticipated in the forward-looking statements. These risks and uncertainties include, among other things, the following:

    • general economic, market or business conditions in the United States and elsewhere (including the potential for a recession or significant slowdown in economic activity levels, the risk of persistently high inflation and supply chain issues, the impact of global public health events, such as pandemics, on demand and growth, and the timing, pace and extent of economic recovery) that impact (i) demand for crude oil, drilling and production activities and therefore the demand for the midstream services we provide and (ii) commercial opportunities available to us;
    • declines in global crude oil demand and/or crude oil prices or other factors that correspondingly lead to a significant reduction of North American crude oil and NGL production (whether due to reduced producer cash flow to fund drilling activities or the inability of producers to access capital, or both, the unavailability of pipeline and/or storage capacity, the shutting-in of production by producers, government-mandated pro-ration orders, or other factors), which in turn could result in significant declines in the actual or expected volume of crude oil and NGL shipped, processed, purchased, stored, fractionated and/or gathered at or through the use of our assets and/or the reduction of the margins we can earn or the commercial opportunities that might otherwise be available to us;
    • fluctuations in refinery capacity and other factors affecting demand for various grades of crude oil and NGL and resulting changes in pricing conditions or transportation throughput requirements;
    • unanticipated changes in crude oil and NGL market structure, grade differentials and volatility (or lack thereof);
    • the effects of competition and capacity overbuild in areas where we operate, including downward pressure on rates, volumes and margins, contract renewal risk and the risk of loss of business to other midstream operators who are willing or under pressure to aggressively reduce transportation rates in order to capture or preserve customers;
    • the successful operation of joint ventures and joint operating arrangements we enter into from time to time, whether relating to assets operated by us or by third parties, and the successful integration and future performance of acquired assets or businesses;
    • the availability of, and our ability to consummate, acquisitions, divestitures, joint ventures or other strategic opportunities and realize benefits therefrom;
    • environmental liabilities, litigation or other events that are not covered by an indemnity, insurance or existing reserves;
    • negative societal sentiment regarding the hydrocarbon energy industry and the continued development and consumption of hydrocarbons, which could influence consumer preferences and governmental or regulatory actions that adversely impact our business;
    • the occurrence of a natural disaster, catastrophe, terrorist attack (including eco-terrorist attacks) or other event that materially impacts our operations, including cyber or other attacks on our or our service providers’ electronic and computer systems;
    • weather interference with business operations or project construction, including the impact of extreme weather events or conditions (including hurricanes, floods, wildfires and drought);
    • the impact of current and future laws, rulings, legislation, governmental regulations, executive orders, trade policies, trade tariffs, accounting standards and statements, and related interpretations that (i) prohibit, restrict or regulate the development of oil and gas resources and the related infrastructure on lands dedicated to or served by our pipelines or (ii) negatively impact our ability to develop, operate or repair midstream assets, or (iii) otherwise negatively impact our business or increase our exposure to risk;
    • negative impacts on production levels in the Permian Basin or elsewhere due to issues associated with (or laws, rules or regulations relating to) hydraulic fracturing and related activities (including wastewater injection or disposal), including earthquakes, subsidence, expansion or other issues;
    • the pace of development of natural gas or other infrastructure and its impact on expected crude oil production growth in the Permian Basin;
    • the refusal or inability of our customers or counterparties to perform their obligations under their contracts with us (including commercial contracts, asset sale agreements and other agreements), whether justified or not and whether due to financial constraints (such as reduced creditworthiness, liquidity issues or insolvency), market constraints, legal constraints (including governmental orders or guidance), the exercise of contractual or common law rights that allegedly excuse their performance (such as force majeure or similar claims) or other factors;
    • loss of key personnel and inability to attract and retain new talent;
    • disruptions to futures markets for crude oil, NGL and other petroleum products, which may impair our ability to execute our commercial or hedging strategies;
    • the effectiveness of our risk management activities;
    • shortages or cost increases of supplies, materials or labor;
    • maintenance of our credit ratings and ability to receive open credit from our suppliers and trade counterparties;
    • our inability to perform our obligations under our contracts, whether due to non-performance by third parties, including our customers or counterparties, market constraints, third-party constraints, supply chain issues, legal constraints (including governmental orders or guidance), or other factors or events;
    • the incurrence of costs and expenses related to unexpected or unplanned capital or maintenance expenditures, third-party claims or other factors;
    • failure to implement or capitalize, or delays in implementing or capitalizing, on investment capital projects, whether due to permitting delays, permitting withdrawals or other factors;
    • tightened capital markets or other factors that increase our cost of capital or limit our ability to obtain debt or equity financing on satisfactory terms to fund additional acquisitions, investment capital projects, working capital requirements and the repayment or refinancing of indebtedness;
    • the amplification of other risks caused by volatile or closed financial markets, capital constraints, liquidity concerns and inflation;
    • the use or availability of third-party assets upon which our operations depend and over which we have little or no control;
    • the currency exchange rate of the Canadian dollar to the United States dollar;
    • the deferral of current revenue recognition attributable to deficiency payments received from customers who fail to ship or move their minimum contracted volumes;
    • significant under-utilization of our assets and facilities;
    • increased costs, or lack of availability, of insurance;
    • fluctuations in the debt and equity markets, including the price of our units at the time of vesting under our long-term incentive plans;
    • risks related to the development and operation of our assets; and
    • other factors and uncertainties inherent in the transportation, storage, terminalling and marketing of crude oil, as well as in the processing, transportation, fractionation, storage and marketing of NGL as discussed in the Partnerships’ filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission.

    About Plains:

    PAA is a publicly traded master limited partnership that owns and operates midstream energy infrastructure and provides logistics services for crude oil and natural gas liquids (“NGL”). PAA owns an extensive network of pipeline gathering and transportation systems, in addition to terminalling, storage, processing, fractionation and other infrastructure assets serving key producing basins, transportation corridors and major market hubs and export outlets in the United States and Canada. On average, PAA handles over 8 million barrels per day of crude oil and NGL.

    PAGP is a publicly traded entity that owns an indirect, non-economic controlling general partner interest in PAA and an indirect limited partner interest in PAA, one of the largest energy infrastructure and logistics companies in North America.

    PAA and PAGP are headquartered in Houston, Texas. For more information, please visit www.plains.com.

    Contacts:

    Blake Fernandez
    Vice President, Investor Relations
    (866) 809-1291

    Michael Gladstein
    Director, Investor Relations
    (866) 809-1291

    The MIL Network –

  • MIL-OSI United Nations: 9 May 2025 Joint News Release WHO and Medicines Patent Pool announce sublicensing agreement for rapid diagnostic test technology

    Source: World Health Organisation

    The World Health Organization (WHO) and Medicines Patent Pool (MPP) have today announced a sublicensing agreement between MPP and a Nigerian health technology company – Codix Bio – to start development and manufacturing of rapid diagnostic tests (RDTs) using technology transferred from global in-vitro diagnostics company – SD Biosensor (SDB). This agreement will contribute to advancing equitable access to vital diagnostic tools through local production, expanding manufacturing capacity in the African Region.

    The new RDT technology is especially useful for low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), as it is easy to use in health facilities without requiring additional equipment. Tests are highly sensitive and can generate results within 20 minutes. Codix Bio will initially focus on producing RDTs for HIV, but the technology can also be used for manufacturing tests for malaria and syphilis, among others. It can also be quickly adapted to other diseases, which will prove valuable during health emergencies and pandemics, contributing to improvements in health security and equity.

    “Sublicensing SDB’s RDT technology marks a major milestone in strengthening manufacturing capabilities in regions where they are needed most,” said Dr Yukiko Nakatani, WHO Assistant Director-General, Access to Medicines and Health Products. “It can help advance global commitments made at the 2023 World Health Assembly to promote equitable access to diagnostics as a cornerstone of universal health coverage and pandemic preparedness.”

    “We are delighted to have signed this first sublicense agreement for RDTs with Codix Bio. Today marks a major step forward in diversifying diagnostic production and ensuring access where it is needed most,” said Charles Gore, Executive Director of the Medicines Patent Pool. “It shows how voluntary licensing and coordinated technology transfer can empower manufacturers in LMICs, ultimately helping reshape global supply chains to become more equitable and resilient.”

    A new beginning for HTAP

    This agreement is the first to come out of a non-exclusive, transparent license between SDB and MPP, which was agreed in December 2023 under the auspices of the WHO COVID-19 Technology Access Pool (C-TAP) initiative. C-TAP has since evolved as HTAP – the Health Technology Access Programme, with the goal of reducing the access gap in underserved regions and countries by empowering capable local producers of health products (tests, vaccines, treatments and medical devices) through sublicensing, technology and know-how transfer.

    “The announcement of this sublicensing agreement with Codix Bio marks an important milestone in our partnership with WHO and MPP. By coupling the technology transfer with coordinated support, this initiative not only helps Codix Bio respond to health priorities in Nigeria and the region – it also demonstrates a collaborative model for building sustainable and self-reliant local manufacturing capacity,” said Hyo-Keun Lee, Vice Chairman of SD Biosensor, Inc. “We are proud that our highly adaptable and reliable rapid diagnostic testing technology will contribute to strengthening regional manufacturing ecosystems and expanding equitable access to diagnostics.”  

    After the WHO and MPP open call was announced for applications for LMIC-based manufacturers, Codix Bio was selected as the first sublicensee. “This landmark agreement is a defining moment in our journey of health-tech innovation and a breakthrough for local healthcare manufacturing in Africa. Being selected as the first sublicensee under this global initiative underscores our commitment to contribute meaningfully to pandemic preparedness and regional health security,” said Sammy Ogunjimi, Group Managing Director/CEO, Codix Group. “With support from WHO and MPP, we are committed to producing high-quality, rapid diagnostic tests that can transform access to timely diagnosis, not just in Nigeria, but across the continent.”

    HTAP will coordinate support from across WHO and its partners, covering areas such as workforce development, regulatory compliance and product uptake. It is also continuing with evaluations for a potential second sublicensee for this technology transfer.

    Most LMICs rely on importing health diagnostics. Following fragility and heavy dependence on imported health product supplies during the COVID-19 pandemic and important lessons learnt for regional health security, there is growing momentum for improving local production and supply resilience, including by institutions such as the Africa Centres for Disease Control and Prevention (Africa CDC), the Global Fund and Unitaid.
     

    Note to editors

    About Medicines Patent Pool (MPP)
    The Medicines Patent Pool (MPP) is a United Nations-backed public health organization working to increase access to and facilitate the development of life-saving medicines for low- and middle-income countries. Through its innovative business model, MPP partners with civil society, governments, international organizations, industry, patient groups, and other stakeholders to prioritize and license needed medicines and pool intellectual property to encourage generic manufacture and the development of new formulations. medicinespatentpool.org

    About WHO
    Dedicated to the well-being of all people and guided by science, the World Health Organization leads and champions global efforts to give everyone, everywhere an equal chance at a safe and healthy life. We are the UN agency for health that connects nations, partners and people on the front lines in 150+ locations – leading the world’s response to health emergencies, preventing disease, addressing the root causes of health issues and expanding access to medicines and health care. Our mission is to promote health, keep the world safe and serve the vulnerable. www.who.int

    MIL OSI United Nations News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Kugler, Assessing Maximum Employment

    Source: US State of New York Federal Reserve

    Thank you, Francine, and thank you to the Central Bank of Iceland for the invitation to speak to you today.1
    My subject is the Federal Reserve’s mandate of maximum employment. In the Fed’s monetary policymaking, maximum employment and stable prices are linked in the mandate assigned to the Federal Reserve by U.S. law, which we refer to as the dual mandate. Icelanders, I know, are a seafaring people, and those here will understand what I mean when I say that the dual mandate is our “lodestar,” a word our two languages share. It is our goal and our guide in setting monetary policy.
    There is an important distinction between our dual-mandate goals. For reasons that I will explain, while the Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) has defined “stable prices” as 2 percent annual inflation, such numerical precision is not possible in defining maximum employment.
    To achieve price stability, the Fed adopted a numerical target for inflation in 2012 that hasn’t changed. It has remained unchanged because the Committee has repeatedly reaffirmed the judgment that it made in 2012 that 2 percent inflation is the rate most consistent with its statutory mandate. In contrast, the Federal Reserve has not spelled out a numerical goal for the unemployment rate or some other measure of employment because maximum employment can move up and down over time and is not directly measurable, and also because the different factors that determine it are either difficult or impossible to measure in real time.
    Plan of the TalkThe unemployment rate is the statistic that the public most often uses to form views about labor market conditions, and it is also the statistic that economists most often use to try to infer maximum employment. And economists frequently refer to u* as the unemployment rate that corresponds to maximum employment. That said, in my speech today, I would like to offer historical examples of why u* varies over time and why it would be a mistake to assume that it is a fixed number.2 Then, I will review the evolution of the unemployment rate over the past two decades and show that this rate has varied over time, moved by the interplay of myriad factors such as demographics, labor market regulations, changes in business or consumer confidence, or cyclical changes in aggregate demand and monetary policy shocks. In contrast, u* is moved mostly by either structural changes, such as skill deterioration or capital depreciation, or by long-run factors in the labor market, such as the demographic and skill composition of the population. As a result, u* does not move as much as the unemployment rate over time.3 This is significant because monetary policy is aimed at managing the business cycle to minimize deviations from maximum employment.
    In reviewing the unemployment rate, I will also note that it certainly bears valuable information, but, in many cases, this needs to be complemented with other labor market indicators to have a fuller picture of the state of the economy.
    As I have noted, maximum employment is not directly measurable. Likewise, we cannot observe u* directly, and it has to be inferred by statistical techniques, which I’ll review.4 One element common to all the approaches that I review is that they use a number of labor market indicators in addition to the unemployment rate in forming their estimates of maximum employment. Another element in common to some of the approaches is that they try to separate transient factors, or higher-frequency variation, from a more permanent, long-run feature of the economy that can be interpreted as u*.
    Case Study: The Assumption of a Fixed Maximum Employment in the 1970sA common assumption in the economics profession during the 1960s was that u* was 4 percent.5
    While this number might have been a decent approximation of u* during that period, it did not consider the possibility of meaningful changes in that value and, specifically, changes due to the rapid growth in labor supply from the post–World War II baby boomers entering the workforce. Especially because younger workers have higher levels of unemployment, the advent of the baby boomers meant that u* in the 1970s was surely higher than 4 percent. The Federal Reserve was slow in revising its estimate of u*. The high unemployment rate and too low fixed estimate of u* minimum unemployment, in conjunction with the failure to recognize the slowdown in trend productivity, led the Federal Reserve to exaggerate the estimate of slack in the economy and maintain monetary policy that was too loose, adding to other factors driving persistently high inflation over that decade.6 This experience led the Federal Reserve to recognize that a fixed 4 percent value for u* was a poor basis for understanding the cyclical position of the economy.
    The experience of the 1960s and 1970s made it clear that demographic changes need to be considered in estimating u*—a topic I will explore further in my speech.
    The U.S. Labor Market over the Past Two DecadesThe U.S. labor market over the past two decades provides some valuable circumstantial evidence for how maximum employment can change over time. Let me start by discussing the Great Recession, which began in late 2007 and was driven by a severe financial crisis. In the months before the recession began, the unemployment rate reached a low of 4.4 percent and then peaked at 10 percent in October 2009. Although the unemployment rate is a useful metric of the severity of that event, an additional variable that reflects the depth and persistence of the downturn in the labor market after the Great Recession was the share of long-term unemployed—the percentage of unemployed people out of work for 27 weeks or more—which was nearly twice as high as during the deep recession of the 1980s. Longer spells of unemployment can generate persistence because the longer the duration of unemployment for workers, the more their skills erode and the harder it is to become reemployed, leading, in turn, to higher unemployment, a phenomenon known as hysteresis. While some have argued that only workers unemployed for shorter durations should be counted in estimating the slack in the economy, hysteresis is an important part of slack during periods with high unemployment.7 Instead, the experience of the Great Recession reinforced the value of consulting other useful measures of slack.
    After the Great Recession, it took eight years for the unemployment rate to reach the pre-recession low, but when it did, in 2016, it continued to fall, reaching 3.5 percent in 2019 and remaining close to this level until the beginning of the COVID-19 recession in 2020. One thing that was remarkable about this period was that this low level of unemployment occurred without any escalation of inflation. Personal consumption expenditures inflation ran well below an annual rate of 2 percent for almost all of the decade after the Great Recession, when monetary policy was highly accommodative. One could infer that u* had moved down over this period.
    Turning to the pandemic recession, the unemployment rate rose to nearly 15 percent in two months, but a distinguishing feature of this increase was that a large fraction of the unemployed were temporarily laid off.8 Economic research suggests that those who lose their jobs via temporary layoffs have a high likelihood of being recalled, with the latest estimates suggesting a 60 percent probability.9 Considering this, it was not surprising that the post-pandemic recovery was characterized by a fast decline in the unemployment rate.10 In this sense, the unemployment rate alone was not a sufficient indicator of the true state of the labor market. In the post-pandemic recovery, the unemployment rate fell to 3.4 percent by April 2023. Again, for a second time we saw the unemployment rate falling to levels that were in the past associated with price pressures, whereas in this case inflation was also falling.
    In summary, the past two recessions underscored that there are useful statistics beyond the unemployment rate that help inform a reading of maximum employment, and the past two recoveries suggest that the U.S. economy may sustain unemployment as low as 3.5 percent.
    Turning to the current state of the labor market, the unemployment rate has risen only very slowly, and it has moved within a tight range of around 4.2 percent, which is its current reading. In addition, temporary layoffs are back at their pre-pandemic level, and vacancies and quits have leveled off. As a consequence, I judge the labor market to be stable. Most likely, the labor market is also close to maximum employment given that the estimates of u* from some of the models that I will consider in the rest of this speech are in the vicinity of 4.2 percent.
    I have used some historical examples to illustrate how the unemployment rate has changed over time, and I have made some informal inference on the movements of u* in certain periods. Now let me explore different ways of estimating maximum employment. I will cover three separate methods: a method that uses the demographic composition of the population; a definition that considers the unemployment rate in conjunction with inflation in order to get closer to a definition of u* consistent with stable prices; and, lastly, a definition that focuses on maximum employment that one can obtain by taking into account that workers take time to find jobs and firms take time to fill job openings. Some of the models that I review also consider the labor force participation rate, as structural variation in this rate also affects maximum employment. Historical experience with the different forces that can move around maximum employment indicates that all three of these approaches could be helpful in the future when trying to estimate maximum employment.11
    Estimation of Maximum Employment Using DemographicsIn describing the impact of the baby boomers on the labor market, I have already provided an example of how the demographic composition of the workforce may affect maximum employment. More generally, the age distribution in the population or educational attainment or skill distribution are always important factors in evaluating the potential workforce. Beyond the composition of the workforce, developments within specific demographic subgroups also may be relevant for maximum employment. For instance, the increase in labor force participation of women over the past 50 years has been an important factor that has augmented the available workforce. Granular data from the Labor Department’s monthly survey of household employment known as the Current Population Survey, sometimes in conjunction with data on job openings and flows in and out of employment, can add demographic details to the estimation of maximum employment.
    The models that exploit demographic data separate the trend or structural factors in both the unemployment rate and labor force participation rate from transient factors in individual demographic groups, allowing an estimate of maximum employment.12 I think of this as a “bottom up” approach.13
    One can add an additional layer of complexity in working with demographic groups. One important aspect of the unemployment rate is its characteristic countercyclical dynamics—that is, the way this rate increases at the onset of recessions due to an increase in the flow out of employment or layoffs, and its decline in expansions as more unemployed workers find jobs and flow into employment. In recognition of the importance of these flows, one alternative to extracting trends by demographic group is to extract trends in the flows by demographic groups and reconstruct u* dynamics from those flows. The implicit assumption is that the trend components of flows into and out of unemployment capture structural characteristics of the labor market, including market imperfections and the cost of job searches for both workers and employers.14 The models in this class estimate a trend unemployment rate in the range between 4.1 and 4.3 percent in the fourth quarter of 2024.15
    Estimation of Maximum Employment Consistent with Stable PricesAs I mentioned, the dual mandate includes stable prices. The models that I have just described do not contain information on prices. However, one may include price information by adding inflation as a measure of aggregate price pressures in order to come up with an estimate of maximum employment consistent with stable prices.16 A higher unemployment rate signals more workers are available to work, indicating more slack. As more workers are employed, the economy is moving to a situation of fewer resources being available for additional output and most likely to more price pressures. Maximum employment consistent with stable prices ideally strikes a balance between additional workers being hired and additional increases in prices. I have alluded to this concept in an informal way when arguing that in the period after the Great Recession, u* may have moved down through 2019.
    In practice, inflation information is folded into the model by adding a relationship between prices and the unemployment rate known as the Philips curve. There is a long tradition in extracting trend employment consistent with stable prices using a various labor market and output measures. I will draw upon that heritage and briefly describe a model that like the statistical methods that I have already reviewed also aims at estimating maximum employment by separating the unemployment rate from cyclical factors, but it does so by using numerous output and labor market indicators in conjunction with price information.17 Output indicators include both gross domestic product and gross domestic income. Among labor market indicators, in addition to the unemployment rate, there are payrolls, the workweek, and labor force participation, which means that the model is not limited to just the unemployment rate in inferring trend unemployment. The purpose of using many indicators is the belief that all of them follow the same cycle, and that it is easier to identify and separate the cycle from trend using a large set of indicators. Coming back to the Phillips curve, I would note that models that estimate u* are somewhat sensitive to the specification of the Phillips curve. For instance, the model that I have just described has a u* estimate of about 5 percent in the fourth quarter of 2024, but alternative Phillips curve specifications may lower it below 5 percent.18
    Estimation of the Efficient Level of EmploymentA third, often less mentioned concept of full employment is the “efficient” level of unemployment. This concept starts with the idea that it is inefficient for society to have unemployed workers and job openings. Society as a whole would gain by matching those workers with those job openings in a productive way. Of course, it is impossible to instantaneously reduce unemployed workers and job openings to zero. Newly unemployed workers take time to find a job, and vacancies take time to fill as firms find and screen applicants with the right skills. The empirical relationship between the unemployment rate and the job openings rate is summarized by the Beveridge curve, a downward-sloping curve along which more unemployed workers are associated with fewer job openings. The Beveridge curve is a structural aspect of the labor market, and it is effectively a constraint on the relationship between the unemployment rate and the job openings rate. However, given the Beveridge curve, monetary policymakers can try to move the economy along the curve closer to a point at which the total number of vacancies plus unemployed is minimized. One can show that this happens somewhere in between the two, precisely around a value of the unemployment rate equal to the geometric average of the unemployment and vacancy rate.19 The current estimate of this full employment concept places the unemployment rate at 4.2 percent in the fourth quarter of 2024.
    Conclusion and Policy MessageI want to draw some conclusions from the points I have made today.
    My discussion has touched upon many different statistics of the labor market, including the possibility of using data that exploits the heterogeneity of different demographic groups, which I judge to be very informative about u*. The reason is that different business cycles are generated by different shocks that affect the economy in different ways, so that useful indicators of slack in past cycles may not be as insightful in the future. For instance, when there is slack in the labor market, measures taking into account unemployment duration can be more informative about the persistence of unemployment and future slack. By contrast, when labor markets are tight, measures of flows into, out of, and across jobs will give a better measure of the job opportunities for workers and potential upward pressures on wages. Similarly, the vacancy and unemployment ratio combination used in the definition of efficient u* can provide an alternative measure of maximum employment.
    Of course, any one of the estimation techniques that I have reviewed has limitations. For instance, there are constraints on the number of indicators that each model can process. This implies that some models will be better at capturing some drivers of maximum employment than others. That is why I cannot point to the best statistic or best model of maximum employment. I can only acknowledge that a rich set of models and indicators only benefits the policymaker. Given the uncertainty in estimating maximum employment in real time and the many options available, I consider it undesirable to adopt one particular measure to guide monetary policy. This is something to bear in mind as I approach the current review of the FOMC’s Statement on Longer-Run Goals and Monetary Policy Strategy, which we call our framework.

    1. The views expressed here are my own and are not necessarily those of my colleagues on the Federal Reserve Board or the Federal Open Market Committee. Return to text
    2. In fact, early on, economists have embarked to estimate the time-varying maximum employment in the economy. At least since Perry (1970), it was noted that u* can vary over time; see George L. Perry (1970), “Changing Labor Markets and Inflation,” (PDF) Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, no. 3, pp. 411–48. Return to text
    3. Consistent with the view that u* moves less than the unemployment rate over time, in this speech, most of the models that I review assume that u* is the trend component of the unemployment rate. For an alternative view that challenges the weaker cyclicality of u* relative to the unemployment rate, see Robert E. Hall and Marianna Kudlyak (2023), “The Active Role of the Natural Rate of Unemployment,” NBER Working Paper Series 31848 (Cambridge, Mass.: National Bureau of Economic Research, November; revised December 2024). Return to text
    4. For some early examples of the use of advanced statistical techniques such as the application of Kalman filtering techniques, see, for instance, the early examples of Peter K. Clark (1987), “The Cyclical Component of U.S. Economic Activity,” Quarterly Journal of Economics, vol. 102 (November), pp. 797–814; and Kenneth N. Kuttner (1994), “Estimating Potential Output as a Latent Variable,” Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, vol. 12 (July), pp. 361–68. For a recent summary of the literature, see Alessandro Barbarino, Travis J. Berge, and Andrea Stella (2024), “The Stability and Economic Relevance of Output Gap Estimates,” Journal of Applied Econometrics, vol. 39 (September/October), pp. 1065–81. Return to text
    5. See Arthur M. Okun (1962), “Potential GNP: Its Measurement and Significance,” Proceedings of the Business and Economics Statistics Section, pp. 98–104. Return to text
    6. See Athanasios Orphanides (2003), “The Quest for Prosperity without Inflation,” Journal of Monetary Economics, vol. 50 (April), pp. 633–63. Return to text
    7. See, for instance, Olivier J. Blanchard and Lawrence H. Summers (1987), “Hysteresis in Unemployment,” European Economic Review, vol. 31 (February–March), pp. 288–95. Return to text
    8. In addition, the rise in temporary layoffs was considered by the Bureau of Labor Statistics to be understated, because many respondents to the Current Population Survey misreported their status as employed but not at work—that is, the properly measured unemployment rate would have risen by much more than was actually reported; see, for example, page 6 of the May 2020 Employment Situation report, which is available on the Bureau of Labor Statistics’ website at https://www.bls.gov/news.release/archives/empsit_06052020.pdf. Return to text
    9. See the classic study of David M. Lilien (1980), “The Cyclical Pattern of Temporary Layoffs in United States Manufacturing,” Review of Economics and Statistics, vol. 62 (February), pp. 24–31. For a more recent paper that makes use of matched employer–employee data, see Arash Nekoei and Andrea Weber (2015), “Recall Expectations and Duration Dependence,” American Economic Review, vol. 105 (May), pp. 142–46. Return to text
    10. Moreover, academic research also suggests that the extent of firms’ recourse to temporary layoffs is correlated with firms’ expectations of near-term economic activity. This would have suggested in real time that a sharp rise in temporary layoffs was not as worrisome as a similar increase in permanent job losses. See Arash Nekoei and Andrea Weber (2020), “Seven Facts about Temporary Layoffs,” CEPR Discussion Paper 14845 (London: Centre for Economic Policy Research, June 3). Return to text
    11. Some studies distinguish long-run unemployment, which would fall in the first category of models that use demographic information, from stable price unemployment, which also adds a Phillips curve to the model. For a recent review, see Richard K. Crump, Christopher J. Nekarda, and Nicolas Petrosky-Nadeau (2020), “Unemployment Rate Benchmarks,” Finance and Economics Discussion Series 2020-072 (Washington: Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, August). Return to text
    12. The resulting unemployment rate trend can be thought of as a “natural rate.” The first reference to a “natural rate” of unemployment is from Milton Friedman in 1968. Friedman made it clear that he used the term to try and separate real forces from monetary forces, which are assumed to be more transient; therefore, it seems appropriate to use the term “natural rate” for estimates from demographic trends. See Milton Friedman (1968), “The Role of Monetary Policy,” American Economic Review, vol. 58 (March), pp. 1–17. That said, such a concept is controversial; see Richard Rogerson (1997), “Theory Ahead of Language in the Economics of Unemployment,” Journal of Economic Perspectives, vol. 11 (Winter), pp. 73–92. Return to text
    13. See, for instance, Stephanie Aaronson, Bruce Fallick, Andrew Figura, Jonathan Pingle, and William Wascher (2006), “The Recent Decline in the Labor Force Participation Rate and Its Implications for Potential Labor Supply,” (PDF) Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, pp. 69–154; Daniel Aaronson, Luojia Hu, Arian Seifoddini, and Daniel G. Sullivan (2015), “Changing Labor Force Composition and the Natural Rate of Unemployment,” Chicago Fed Letter 338 (Chicago: Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago); Andreas Hornstein and Marianna Kudlyak (2019), “Aggregate Labor Force Participation and Unemployment and Demographic Trends,” February 28, https://ssrn.com/abstract=3347310; and Didem Tüzemen (2019), “Job Polarization and the Natural Rate of Unemployment in the United States,” Economics Letters, vol. 175 (February), pp. 97–100. Return to text
    14. See, for instance, Mary C. Daly, Bart Hobijn, Ayşegül Şahin, and Robert G. Valletta (2012), “A Search and Matching Approach to Labor Markets: Did the Natural Rate of Unemployment Rise?” Journal of Economic Perspectives, vol. 26 (Summer), pp. 3–26. Return to text
    15. See Murat Tasci (2012), “The Ins and Outs of Unemployment in the Long Run: Unemployment Flows and the Natural Rate,” Working Paper 12-24 (Cleveland: Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland, November). See also Richard K. Crump, Stefano Eusepi, Marc Giannoni, and Ayşegül Şahin (2019), “A Unified Approach to Measuring u*,” (PDF) BPEA Conference Drafts, March 7–8. Ahn adds unemployment duration in conjunction with flows to estimate u*; see Hie Joo Ahn (2023), “Duration Structure of Unemployment Hazards and the Trend Unemployment Rate,” Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, vol. 151 (June), 104664. Return to text
    16. Estimates that use prices are sometimes referred to as the non-accelerating inflation rate of unemployment, or NAIRU, although NAIRU is somewhat of a misnomer. In fact, the inflation process in the Great Moderation is not described well by an accelerationist Phillips curve but rather by a mean reverting process around a stable trend, conveniently proxied by long-run inflation expectations. In that case, it would be more accurate to talk about “NIRU,” or non-inflationary rate of unemployment. Return to text
    17. The estimate that I report are from a variant of the model in Charles A. Fleischman and John M. Roberts (2011), “From Many Series, One Cycle: Improved Estimates of the Business Cycle from a Multivariate Unobserved Components Model,” (PDF) Finance and Economics Discussion Series 2011-46 (Washington: Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, October). Return to text
    18. For instance, the Phillips curve could be non-linear as in Pierpaolo Benigno and Gauti B. Eggertsson (2023), “It’s Baaack: The Surge in Inflation in the 2020s and the Return of the Non-Linear Phillips Curve,” NBER Working Paper Series 31197 (Cambridge, Mass.: National Bureau of Economic Research, April). Return to text
    19. The efficient level of unemployment is also referred to as the “full employment rate of unemployment” or FERU; see Pascal Michaillat and Emmanuel Saez (2024), “u* = √uv: The Full-Employment Rate of Unemployment in the United States,” (PDF) BPEA Conference Draft, September 26–27. Return to text

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Barr, Artificial Intelligence and the Labor Market: A Scenario-Based Approach

    Source: US State of New York Federal Reserve

    Thank you for the opportunity to speak to you today.1 In my remarks, I would like to address a key question facing economists, policymakers, and people all over the world: How will artificial intelligence, particularly generative artificial intelligence, or GenAI, affect workers and the labor market in the years ahead?
    Before I turn to that issue, I’d like to touch on a topic that I expect is also of interest: the outlook for the U.S. economy and the implications for monetary policy.
    The U.S. economy entered this quarter in a relatively strong position: The unemployment rate has been low and stable, and the disinflationary process has continued on a gradual, albeit uneven, path towards our 2 percent objective. Private domestic final purchases have been solid. Overall, the economy has been resilient.
    Against that backdrop, the outlook has been clouded by trade policies that have led to an increase in uncertainty, contributing to declines in measures of consumer and business sentiment. I expect tariffs to lead to higher inflation in the United States and lower growth both in the United States and abroad starting later this year.
    In my view, higher tariffs could lead to disruption to global supply chains and create persistent upward pressure on inflation. Faced with substantial tariffs, businesses will likely change how they source intermediate inputs, and it will take time and investment for them to reroute their distribution networks. Conversely, global trade networks may change rapidly, and some suppliers may not be able to adapt quickly enough to survive these changes. This concern is particularly acute for small businesses, which are less diversified, less able to access credit, and hence more vulnerable to adverse shocks. Small businesses play a vital role in production networks, often providing specialized inputs that can’t easily be sourced elsewhere, and business failures could further disrupt supply chains. As we saw during the pandemic, such disruptions can have large and lasting effects on prices, as well as output.
    I am equally concerned that tariffs will lead to higher unemployment as the economy slows. Thus, the FOMC may be in a difficult position if we were to see both rising inflation and rising unemployment.
    The size and scope of the recent tariff increases are without modern precedent, we don’t know their final form, and it is too soon to know how they will affect the economy. Yet given the economy’s strong starting point and the progress we have made in bringing inflation back toward our 2 percent objective, monetary policy is in a good position to adjust as conditions unfold. Meanwhile, we will also be closely monitoring how technologies like artificial intelligence are being integrated into economic activity and analyzing the implications for how the economy will evolve.
    Let me now return to the longer-term question of how AI will affect the labor market. Debate about machines replacing workers is nothing new, and even artificial intelligence is not particularly new either. AI has, in some form, arguably been around for decades. Computer scientists have been developing machine learning algorithms for many years, and these algorithms have been widely used in commercial applications, such as fraud detection and advertising. Speech and facial recognition are already ubiquitous. These more long-standing forms of AI are continuing to improve, driving progress in domains ranging from finance to medical diagnosis, and becoming so deeply embedded in our daily lives that we scarcely notice them anymore.
    But GenAI promises to go much further. Unlike traditional machine learning techniques, which often focus on relatively simple prediction and classification tasks, the large language models that have emerged in recent years can generate new content—anything from news articles to computer code to images and video to customer service dialogue. Emerging forms of “agentic” AI can undertake complex, multistep tasks—for example, taking a customer through a transaction and then placing an automated order. As AI continues to develop, it will increasingly be combined with physical technologies like autonomous vehicles and advanced robotics, further extending its ability to interact with the real world. And AI may be shaping up to become what the esteemed economist Zvi Griliches called an “invention of a method of inventing” that speeds up the research and development process itself.2
    Growing evidence indicates that AI will be a “general purpose technology”—such as railroads, electricity, or computers—which is characterized by widespread adoption, complementary progress in many downstream applications, and ongoing improvement in the core technology.3 Past general purpose technologies have dramatically improved productivity. So, against this background, the natural question is, what about AI?
    In trying to understand how AI might transform work, it’s useful to consider how it could be applied in individual occupations, each of which comprises a range of tasks that vary in their susceptibility to automation. Like past waves of information technology, AI will substitute for human labor in some tasks, complement human labor in other tasks, and spur the creation of new tasks that humans will perform, at least initially.4 The net effects of AI on employment, both in the aggregate and across demographic and education groups, will depend on the relative size of these offsetting effects.
    A pessimistic view is that AI and robotics could become so capable and cost effective as to render most human labor obsolete, culminating in mass unemployment. Such concerns about technological advances are hardly a novel development. At least since the Luddites of the early 19th century tried to disable textile looms, people have feared that machines would bring about steep declines in employment, wages, and human welfare.5
    Economists have long been skeptical of that view, which suffers from the “lump of labor fallacy”—the presumption that there’s a fixed amount of work to be done, so if machines do it, humans will not.6 New technologies do eliminate some existing occupations, and not all workers benefit from technological change. But technology also creates new occupations, and the many waves of technological advances over the centuries haven’t rendered humans obsolete. For example, many of the tasks that were performed by humans in the 1950s are now performed by computers and robots, and yet the unemployment rate is similar to what it was back then, while the labor force participation rate is higher overall.
    However, the amazing potential capabilities and breadth of applications associated with AI—many of which are already apparent—make it worth asking whether this time may be different. AI holds enormous promise of faster economic growth, advances in human health, and a higher standard of living. But alongside the kinds of labor market disruptions seen in past episodes of revolutionary technological change, we will need to consider the possibility of more sweeping changes in the way we work.
    A Scenario ApproachIn a previous speech, I outlined two hypothetical scenarios describing how AI could evolve.7 In the first scenario, we see only incremental adoption that primarily augments what humans do today but still leads to significant and widespread productivity gains. In the second scenario, we see profound change, in which we extend human capabilities with far-reaching consequences.
    Today, I will apply the same approach to analyze the potential effects of AI on the labor market. Of course, there is tremendous uncertainty about how AI will evolve and how it will affect the economy, as well as society more broadly. Amid this uncertainty, a scenario-based approach can give us a framework for thinking about the potential effects of AI on employment, real wages, and productivity, as well as for considering the possible role that government could play in influencing this transition.
    Scenario 1: Incremental ProgressLet’s start with the “gradual” scenario, in which new AI technologies are adopted at a brisk, but not a breathless, pace or advance quickly at first and then plateau—perhaps because of constraints imposed by computing resources, the exhaustion of novel training data, and rising energy consumption.
    Under this scenario, AI primarily operates by automating some—but not all—tasks within many occupations. We’ve seen some of this task substitution happen already: Computer programmers rely on AI copilots to write code, allowing them to focus on higher-level tasks, while customer support agents can use chatbots to improve and expedite their responses.8 Lawyers draw on GenAI to conduct legal research, while AI-powered safety features improve the performance of human automobile drivers.
    Under this scenario, as foundational models improve, novel use cases are discovered, and businesses continue to integrate AI into their operations, more and more occupations will be affected, and many jobs will use AI tools more intensively. As these technologies improve, even incremental change may allow AI to become accurate and cheap enough to replace some occupations altogether. It’s hard to make predictions at this stage. But a plausible conjecture is that we could see, for example, fewer human programmers, lawyers, or commercial drivers. At the same time, most current occupations would persist in this scenario—albeit in modified and more productive forms.
    Beyond existing occupations, general purpose technologies also encourage the creation of new occupations, fueled by new products and novel ways of doing business. It’s difficult to envision the novel jobs that will replace the ones we might lose to an incremental AI scenario. But one possibility is that the future could bring us managers of AI agents, specialists in human–AI collaboration, ethicists, safety experts, and large numbers of people involved in adopting, maintaining, and educating about AI tools. Technology, and how we use a particular innovation, evolves in unpredictable ways, and we should expect to be surprised.
    Under this scenario, jobs remain plentiful, real wages are buoyed by productivity gains, and employment and labor force participation remain high and could even rise, if strong wage growth entices new labor market entrants and if improvements in health care increase work capacity among older or disabled individuals. If the widespread adoption of AI proceeds gradually, then workers will have time to adjust, reducing the disruption to the labor market—though, as with previous general purpose technologies, AI would likely imply that some groups of workers experience a painful process of dislocation and transition.
    Retraining could help here. A recent survey carried out by the Federal Reserve Bank of New York found that many businesses plan to retrain their workers to use AI rather than laying them off.9 In some cases, AI may disrupt career ladders by automating many entry-level tasks—such as reviewing legal documents or drafting code—that were historically performed by early-career workers. But if labor demand changes slowly enough, students and workers are more likely to have time to predict which skills will be marketable and to make and recoup human capital investments before their skills become obsolete.
    What about the effect of AI on inequality? Some research suggests that GenAI may help less-productive workers catch up to their more-productive peers.10 That said, the AI economy will likely put a premium on digital skills, facility with new technologies, and adaptability. The precedent of the computer revolution suggests that highly educated workers may benefit most, boosting wage inequality—a phenomenon called “skill-biased technological change.”11 Another possibility is that the labor share of income could decline, if capital owners benefit more than wage earners—for example, because the gains accruing from AI adoption go to large, highly capitalized firms whose technical capabilities, consumer networks, and training data allow them to develop state-of-the-art AI techniques.
    Scenario 2: TransformationNow let’s consider an alternative scenario in which AI completely transforms the economy. As I described in my earlier speech, in this transformative scenario, humans employ AI to unleash their imagination and creativity—combined with robust investment in research and development—to make rapid breakthroughs that have the potential to improve our lives. With growth propelled by swift technological progress, society’s resources would be vastly expanded, AI would spur revolutionary advances in health, and many individuals would enjoy more time for leisure activities.
    Indeed, transformative AI could bring about a state of affairs that John Maynard Keynes famously envisioned almost a hundred years ago, one in which there are “ever larger and larger classes and groups of people from whom problems of economic necessity have been practically removed.”12 At the same time, transformative AI could imply a much smaller role for human labor—a development that would entail sweeping social changes and profound challenges for government.
    Under this scenario, AI would take over a broad range of existing jobs. As economist Anton Korinek writes, “AI systems advance toward mastering all forms of cognitive work that can be performed by humans, including new tasks that don’t even exist yet.”13 Building on developments we are already starting to see, improved chatbots and AI agents would outperform their human counterparts in activities ranging from customer support to medical diagnosis. Along similar lines, advanced robotics could increasingly substitute for human workers in manual and production jobs. Widespread automation would bring many benefits. The availability and quality of many services could increase markedly, and many less-desirable jobs—such as those involving tedious tasks or dangerous working conditions—could be transferred to machines.
    What jobs would exist in this more transformative scenario? As in the more gradual scenario—and just as has happened in the past, when earlier general purpose technologies were adopted—we would see the emergence of new occupations. These would notably include jobs that involve managing the new AI-dominated economy. In addition, some existing occupations would likely persist, at least for some time. This would be the case for three key reasons. First, some jobs may prove especially hard to automate. For example, plumbers and mechanics rely on physical dexterity and adaptability to situations—attributes that machines may find difficult to replicate, or to replicate cheaply. Second, in some contexts, consumers may insist on a human touch. Patients may still want human doctors and therapists, while parents may want human teachers and caregivers to look after their children. Third, even when AI has the technical capability to carry out tasks, some jobs are likely to be protected by laws and regulations. For example, legal and political systems would likely continue to insist on human judges and elected officials. Eventually, however, an increasing share of current jobs may be automated. The technological frontier is moving quickly, consumers’ preferences may change as they become more comfortable interacting with AI, and the regulatory landscape could evolve to provide broader roles for AI.
    It’s difficult to say how many jobs will exist under transformative AI. On the one hand, it’s possible that—as has happened so often in the past—the economy will find inventive new ways to keep most people employed. On the other hand, there are concerns that some workers could experience a large enough decline in their earnings potential that paid work may no longer be an available option. Employment and labor force participation could fall; displaced workers may grapple with a loss of daily routines, social connectedness, and the meaning they derived from employment. The risk of a significant decline in employment looms large in many people’s concerns about AI, and it’s important for policymakers to be attentive to that risk.
    Even if AI ultimately creates as many jobs as it eliminates, we should expect that the transition will be difficult. Existing firms would likely reorganize their production, laying off workers in the process. They could also lose market share to technologically sophisticated start-ups, which could scale up with a minimal number of human workers managing AI subordinates.14 Many displaced workers would have obsolete skills, and skill mismatch could lead to a structural increase in unemployment as these workers retool for new occupations. It is possible that unemployment might rise only temporarily. It is also possible, however, that more sustained increases could be observed. That would be the case if technology continued to evolve too quickly for many workers to keep up, leading to continual churn and ongoing dislocation.
    How might transformative AI affect income inequality? Both traditionally high-wage occupations, such as lawyers and financial professionals, and lower-wage occupations, such as factory and retail workers, could be automated, and it is difficult to predict how AI would affect wage structures. But the largest wage gains would likely go to the highest-skilled workers, as they would be best positioned to implement frontier technologies and help oversee the AI economy. In addition, if capital owners are the main beneficiaries, the labor share of income could decline precipitously.
    Transformative AI could bring about profound improvements in living standards, leisure opportunities, and human health. At the same time, society would confront profound distributional changes and potential challenges. Much would depend on how broadly the economic benefits are shared, how policymakers respond, and how society adapts to the rapid pace of change.
    How Will We Know Which Future We Are Living in?The world looks very different across these two scenarios. As AI spreads throughout the economy, how will we know which world we’re living in, particularly in view of the likelihood that AI adoption will proceed at different rates in different occupations and industries?
    First, we will need to track how many businesses are using AI and how it is affecting their operations. Recent surveys give different impressions about AI adoption thus far, but they consistently show rapid increases in usage over time.15
    Second, we will need to monitor AI’s evolving technological capabilities. AI developers test their models against human performance in benchmark activities like standardized tests and visual tasks. Results of these tests will continue to provide important clues about which activities, and thus which occupations, are at risk of being automated. Along these lines, economists have already developed measures of occupations’ exposure to automation. They have based these measures on the characteristics of the tasks involved in different occupations.16 Of course, as the set of tasks that AI can perform expands, these measures can be updated accordingly.
    A third way to judge how AI is changing the economy is that data on job openings will likely be a leading indicator of changes in labor demand. What kinds of jobs are employers creating? What skills do they cite in job ads?17
    And, lastly, job growth by occupation and industry is likely to reflect the emerging effects of AI. So far, the imprint of AI is difficult to discern in the employment statistics, but that is likely to change. It may be difficult to disentangle the effects of AI from the other determinants of employment growth, especially in real time. But in the event of truly sweeping changes in the occupational structure, the effects of AI should show up in the data.
    Looking AheadWhat do these two scenarios imply for society? In scenario 1, the issues that society has to address will be more straightforward. Policymakers will have to decide how to regulate emergent technologies, education and training programs will have to be tailored to shifts in labor demand, and some labor market regulations may need to be updated. In scenario 2, the issues that society will need to address will be more profound. Questions will include how to ensure that the economic gains associated with AI are broadly shared across individuals and households, and how to adapt social institutions to a world in which many more individuals in their prime working years may be working less. Fortunately, although this second scenario would entail many difficult challenges, it also implies a world in which society has many more resources to deploy against those challenges.
    Those are some of the big questions that society may need to grapple with in the future, and most of these questions are not those that will be primarily addressed by monetary policymakers. As a central banker, I can speak more specifically about how structural changes in the economy related to AI could affect monetary policy considerations—in particular, the Federal Reserve’s dual mandate to promote maximum employment and stable prices. Monetary policy considerations could be affected in many ways; I will limit myself to two prominent possibilities.
    First, AI may require monetary policymakers to reassess our estimates of the natural rate of unemployment, which informs our assessment of the cyclical state of the economy and thus the appropriate stance of monetary policy. The natural rate, which we call u*, is the unemployment rate that corresponds to the maximum level of employment that can be maintained without producing undesirably high inflation. Among other things, u* depends on the efficiency with which matches are formed between workers and firms, and it could rise if shifts in labor demand across industries and occupations lead to skill mismatch and lengthy unemployment spells as workers retrain and switch careers. The natural rate also depends on the demographic composition of the labor force, which AI could affect. If AI shifts the workforce toward groups that have higher labor force attachment but lower unemployment rates (such as college graduates), the result could be downward pressure on u*. It should be stressed that u* is never directly observed and is difficult to discern in real time. But economists use a wide range of models to estimate the natural rate, and we can use those models to see how u* is changing as AI is adopted more widely.18
    Another related consideration relevant for monetary policy is how economic changes due to AI will affect the neutral interest rate, or r*, which is the level of the real interest rate consistent with the economy being at its potential and inflation being at our 2 percent objective. Economic theory suggests that a permanently higher growth rate of productivity, of the kind that might arise under either AI scenario, tends to raise r*. When that happens, a higher real interest rate would be required to deliver any desired monetary policy stance. A challenge that we face is that it is difficult to work out in real time how r* is evolving. But we can make judgments about developments in the behavior of r* by monitoring the relationship between economic activity and interest rates and by using financial market information to estimate longer-run real interest rates.
    ConclusionI’ll return to the broader point and conclude. AI is poised to transform our economy, likely in profound ways. But the speed and extent of that transformation are not yet clear. AI is likely to boost productivity, increase scientific discovery, and transform the nature of work. How these developments unfold will have important implications for society and for central bankers.

    1. The views expressed here are my own and are not necessarily those of my colleagues on the Federal Reserve Board or the Federal Open Market Committee. Return to text
    2. See page 502 in Zvi Griliches (1957), “Hybrid Corn: An Exploration in the Economics of Technological Change,” Econometrica, vol. 25 (October), pp. 501–22. See also Iain M. Cockburn, Rebecca Henderson, and Scott Stern (2019), “The Impact of Artificial Intelligence on Innovation: An Exploratory Analysis,” in Ajay Agrawal, Joshua Gans, and Avi Goldfarb, eds., The Economics of Artificial Intelligence: An Agenda (Chicago: University of Chicago Press), pp. 115–48, and Martin Neil Baily, David M. Byrne, Aidan T. Kane, and Paul E. Soto (forthcoming), “Generative AI at the Crossroads: Light Bulb, Dynamo, or Microscope,” Brookings Institution working paper. Return to text
    3. The term “general purpose technology” is typically abbreviated to GPT. To avoid confusion with ChatGPT, I will continue to use the longer term. For a definition and discussion of past general purpose technologies, see Timothy F. Bresnahan and Manuel Trajtenberg (1995), “General Purpose Technologies ‘Engines of Growth’?” Journal of Econometrics, vol. 65 (January), pp. 83–108. For a discussion of whether earlier AI techniques already meet these criteria, see Avi Goldfarb, Bledi Taska, and Florenta Teodoridis (2023), “Could Machine Learning Be a General Purpose Technology? A Comparison of Emerging Technologies Using Data from Online Job Postings,” Research Policy, vol. 52 (January), 104653. For a discussion of GenAI specifically, see Tyna Eloundou, Sam Manning, Pamela Mishkin, and Daniel Rock (2023), “GPTs Are GPTs: An Early Look at the Labor Market Impact Potential of Large Language Models,” (PDF) March 17 (revised August 22). For a contrasting view that AI will have only modest effects on productivity over the next 10 years, see Daron Acemoglu (2025), “The Simple Macroeconomics of AI,” Economic Policy, vol. 40 (January), pp. 13–58. Return to text
    4. See Daron Acemoglu and Pascual Restrepo (2019), “Automation and New Tasks: How Technology Displaces and Reinstates Labor,” Journal of Economic Perspectives, vol. 33 (Spring), pp. 3–30. Return to text
    5. As David Autor writes, “There have been periodic warnings in the last two centuries that automation and new technology were going to wipe out large numbers of middle class jobs. The best-known early example is the Luddite movement of the early 19th century, in which a group of English textile artisans protested the automation of textile production by seeking to destroy some of the machines.” See page 3 in David H. Autor (2015), “Why Are There Still So Many Jobs? The History and Future of Workplace Automation,” Journal of Economic Perspectives, vol. 29 (Summer), pp. 3–30. Return to text
    6. For example, see textbook discussions of automation and unemployment by Paul A. Samuelson (1964), Economics: An Introductory Analysis, 6th ed. (New York: McGraw-Hill), pp. 333–37; and James D. Gwartney and Richard Stroup (1982), Economics: Private and Public Choice, 3rd ed. (New York: Academic Press), pp. 518–19. Return to text
    7. See Michael S. Barr (2025), “Artificial Intelligence: Hypothetical Scenarios for the Future,” speech delivered at the Council on Foreign Relations, New York, February 18. See also Anton Korinek and Donghyun Suh (2024), “Scenarios for the Transition to AGI,” NBER Working Paper Series 32255 (Cambridge, Mass.: National Bureau of Economic Research, March). Return to text
    8. For evidence that GenAI increases the productivity of human programmers, see Sida Peng, Eirini Kalliamvakou, Peter Cihon, and Mert Demirer (2023), “The Impact of AI on Developer Productivity: Evidence from GitHub Copilot,” (PDF) February 13. For similar evidence regarding customer support agents, see Erik Brynjolfsson, Danielle Li, and Lindsey Raymond (2025), “Generative AI at Work,” Quarterly Journal of Economics, vol. 140 (May), pp. 889–942. Return to text
    9. See Jaison R. Abel, Richard Deitz, Natalia Emanuel, and Benjamin Hyman (2024), “AI and the Labor Market: Will Firms Hire, Fire, or Retrain?” Federal Reserve Bank of New York, Liberty Street Economics (blog), September 4. Among surveyed businesses in New York and New Jersey, about half of businesses that planned to use AI within the next six months expected to retrain their current staff to use AI. Return to text
    10. See Shakked Noy and Whitney Zhang (2023), “Experimental Evidence on the Productivity Effects of Generative Artificial Intelligence,” Science, July 13, vol. 381 (6654), pp. 187–92. Return to text
    11. See Claudia Goldin and Lawrence F. Katz (2008), The Race between Education and Technology (Cambridge: Harvard University Press). Return to text
    12. See page 372 in John Maynard Keynes (1930), “Economic Possibilities for Our Grandchildren,” in Essays in Persuasion (New York: W.W. Norton & Company, 1963), pp. 358–73. Return to text
    13. See page 9 in Anton Korinek (2024), “The Economics of Transformative AI,” (PDF) Reporter, no. 4 (Cambridge, Mass.: National Bureau of Economic Research), pp. 9–12. Return to text
    14. See Erin Griffith (2025), “A.I. Is Changing How Silicon Valley Builds Start-Ups,” New York Times, February 20. See also Microsoft (2025), 2025: The Year the Frontier Firm Is Born, Work Trend Index Annual Report, April 23, https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/worklab/work-trend-index/2025-the-year-the-frontier-firm-is-born. Return to text
    15. For a summary of recent survey evidence on AI adoption, see Leland Crane, Michael Green, and Paul Soto (2025), “Measuring AI Uptake in the Workplace,” FEDS Notes (Washington: Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, February 5). Across six firm-level surveys, the share of respondents using some form of AI ranges widely—from 5 to 40 percent—likely in part reflecting differences in sample composition, question wording, and the period over which AI usage is measured. Across 10 individual-level surveys, usage of GenAI generally ranges between 20 and 40 percent, with much higher rates among computer programmers. Return to text
    16. For examples of this approach, see Carl Benedikt Frey and Michael A. Osborne (2017), “The Future of Employment: How Susceptible Are Jobs to Computerisation?” Technological Forecasting and Social Change, vol. 114 (January), pp. 254–80; Erik Brynjolfsson, Tom Mitchell, and Daniel Rock (2018), “What Can Machines Learn, and What Does It Mean for Occupations and the Economy?” AEA Papers and Proceedings, vol. 108 (May), pp. 43–47; Edward W. Felten, Manav Raj, and Robert Seamans (2018), “A Method to Link Advances in Artificial Intelligence to Occupational Abilities,” AEA Papers and Proceedings, vol. 108 (May), pp. 54–57; and Eloundou, Manning, Mishkin, and Rock, “GPTs Are GPTs” (see note 3). Return to text
    17. See Daron Acemoglu, David Autor, Jonathon Hazell, and Pascual Restrepo (2022), “Artificial Intelligence and Jobs: Evidence from Online Vacancies,” Journal of Labor Economics, vol. 40 (April), pp. S293–340. Return to text
    18. See Brandyn Bok, Richard K. Crump, Christopher J. Nekarda, and Nicolas Petrosky-Nadeau (2023), “Estimating Natural Rates of Unemployment: A Primer,” (PDF) Working Paper Series 2023-25 (San Francisco: Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco, August). One approach for estimating u* is to aggregate across demographic groups that differ in their average unemployment rates over long periods. Another common approach is to estimate state-space models that incorporate a Phillips curve relationship between unemployment and inflation, as in Thomas Laubach (2001), “Measuring the NAIRU: Evidence from Seven Economies,” Review of Economics and Statistics, vol. 83 (May), pp. 218–31. In addition, assessments of the natural rate can be informed by models that yield estimates of matching efficiency, such as Regis Barnichon and Andrew Figura (2015), “Labor Market Heterogeneity and the Aggregate Matching Function,” American Economic Journal: Macroeconomics, vol. 7 (October), pp. 222–49; and Hie Joo Ahn and Leland D. Crane (2020), “Dynamic Beveridge Curve Accounting,” Finance and Economics Discussion Series 2020-027 (Washington: Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, March). Return to text

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI United Nations: 8 May 2025 Departmental update Strengthening the PHSM evidence base: a draft resolution welcomed by Non-State Actors

    Source: World Health Organisation

    WHO actively engages with nongovernmental organizations, international business associations and philanthropic foundations – collectively referred to as non-State actors (NSAs) – to support Member States’ effort to advance the public health agenda. In this context, NSAs requested a dedicated opportunity to discuss the draft resolution on Strengthening the evidence base for public health and social measures, with the aim of promoting a shared understanding of the draft resolution and facilitating technical exchanges and collaboration between Member States, NSAs and WHO.

    On 29 April 2025, NSAs, represented by the World Heart Federation and the International Alliance of Patients’ Organizations led a focused webinar to contribute perspectives ahead of the 78th World Health Assembly.

    About the draft resolutio

    Public health and social measures (PHSM) refer to nonpharmaceutical interventions implemented by individuals, communities, institutions and governments to reduce the risk and scale of infectious disease transmission and lower hospitalizations and deaths. As part of Community Protection, the subsystem of the global architecture for health emergency preparedness, prevention, response and resilience, Examples include symptom screening, personal hygiene measures, surface cleaning, vector control, modifications to gatherings, and domestic or international mobility. PHSM, therefore, play a critical role in reducing the pressure on the health care system, buying time to develop and distribute medical countermeasures (MCM) such as vaccines and treatments, thereby saving lives and safeguarding livelihoods. 

    An overview of systematic reviews on the effects of PHSM implemented during the COVID-19 pandemic uncovered that the evidence base is limited to provide robust and reliable evidence-informed guidance on PHSM effectiveness.  

    Norway and several other Member States, therefore, have tabled a draft resolution urging to strengthen research capacities and systems to measure the effectiveness and unintended negative consequences of PHSM implementation, with an emphasis on the importance on behavioral and social change science, community participatory research, supportive ethics and regulatory bodies and the highest level of human research subject protections. Furthermore, the draft resolution underscores the importance of the use of robust evidence to inform decisions on proportionate, relevant and context-specific PHSM policy and implementation.

    An informal session with non-State actors (NSA) held ahead of the 78th World Health Assembly (WHA)

    Panelists from the Centre for Epidemic Interventions Research within Norwegian Institute of Public Health (NIPH), the International Alliance of Patients’ Organizations (IAPO) and WHO, moderated by the World Heart Federation exchanged views on the critical need for better evidence on PHSM during health emergencies, and reflected a diverse perspectives on the opportunities for implementing the draft resolution.

    The panel stressed the resolution’s landmark commitment to building a robust evidence base for PHSM, the importance of expanding the knowledge base not only for PHSM effectiveness research, but also for research on PHSM implementation, adherence, and its unintended consequences. The session underscored the importance of involving non-State actors, particularly CSOs and academia, in both PHSM research and its implementation.

    Panelists and participants also addressed the complexities of conducting rigorous PHSM research during health emergencies, including the need to gain public and political support, navigate ethical and legal constraints on research, and adapt to rapidly evolving nature of health emergencies. The draft resolution aims to catalyze rapid evidence generation during emergencies, integrate behavioral science, ensure transparent data sharing, and uphold ethical oversight especially research subject protection.

    As part of Community Protection, the subsystem of the global architecture for health emergency preparedness, prevention, response and resilience, PHSM research and implementation are pivotal. The resolution reflects a strong commitment to collaboration among Member States, NSAs, and WHO—aiming to advance evidence-informed and equitable PHSM approaches for future health crises.

    MIL OSI United Nations News –

  • MIL-OSI: Himax to Debut Breakthrough Ultra-Luminous Miniature Dual-Edge Front-lit LCoS Microdisplay at SID Display Week 2025

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    TAINAN, Taiwan, May 09, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Himax Technologies, Inc. (Nasdaq: HIMX) (“Himax” or “Company”), a leading supplier and fabless manufacturer of display drivers and other semiconductor products, today announced the unveiling of its miniature ultra-luminous Dual-Edge Front-lit LCoS microdisplay at Display Week 2025. Organized by the Society for Information Display (SID), Display Week is one of the premier symposiums and exhibitions in the display industry and taking place May 11–16, 2025 in San Jose. Himax Senior Director, Simon Fan-Chiang will deliver an in-depth presentation on this cutting-edge technology during Session 3 of the symposium on May 13.

    Himax’s proprietary Dual-Edge Front-lit LCoS microdisplay integrates both the illumination optics and LCoS panel into an exceptionally compact form factor, as small as 0.09 c.c., and weighing only 0.2 grams, while targeting up to 350,000 nits brightness and 1 lumen output at just 250mW maximum total power consumption, demonstrating unparalleled optical efficiency. With a 720×720 resolution and 4.25µm pixel pitch, it delivers outstanding clarity and color vibrancy in a miniature footprint. The microdisplay’s compact and power-efficient design enables significantly smaller form factors without compromising brightness, clarity, or color, redefining the boundaries of high-performance miniature optics. With industry-leading compact form factor, superior brightness and power efficiency, it is ideally suited for next-generation AR glasses and head-mounted displays where space, weight, and thermal constraints are critical.

    “We are proud to introduce our state-of-the-art Dual-Edge Front-lit LCoS microdisplay, a true milestone in display innovation,” said Jordan Wu, CEO of Himax. This achievement is the result of years of rigorous development, delivering an industry-leading combination of ultra-compact size, extremely lightweight design, high brightness, and exceptional power efficiency to meet the demanding needs of AR device makers. We believe this breakthrough technology will be a game-changer for next-generation AR applications.”

    About Himax Technologies, Inc.

    Himax Technologies, Inc. (NASDAQ: HIMX) is a leading global fabless semiconductor solution provider dedicated to display imaging processing technologies. The Company’s display driver ICs and timing controllers have been adopted at scale across multiple industries worldwide including TVs, PC monitors, laptops, mobile phones, tablets, automotive, ePaper devices, industrial displays, among others. As the global market share leader in automotive display technology, the Company offers innovative and comprehensive automotive IC solutions, including traditional driver ICs, advanced in-cell Touch and Display Driver Integration (TDDI), local dimming timing controllers (Local Dimming Tcon), Large Touch and Display Driver Integration (LTDI) and OLED display technologies. Himax is also a pioneer in tinyML visual-AI and optical technology related fields. The Company’s industry-leading WiseEye™ Ultralow Power AI Sensing technology which incorporates Himax proprietary ultralow power AI processor, always-on CMOS image sensor, and CNN-based AI algorithm has been widely deployed in consumer electronics and AIoT related applications. Himax optics technologies, such as diffractive wafer level optics, LCoS microdisplays and 3D sensing solutions, are critical for facilitating emerging AR/VR/metaverse technologies. Additionally, Himax designs and provides touch controllers, OLED ICs, LED ICs, EPD ICs, power management ICs, and CMOS image sensors for diverse display application coverage. Founded in 2001 and headquartered in Tainan, Taiwan, Himax currently employs around 2,200 people from three Taiwan-based offices in Tainan, Hsinchu and Taipei and country offices in China, Korea, Japan, Germany, and the US. Himax has 2,603 patents granted and 389 patents pending approval worldwide as of March 31, 2025.

    http://www.himax.com.tw

    Forward Looking Statements

    Factors that could cause actual events or results to differ materially from those described in this conference call include, but are not limited to, the effect of the Covid-19 pandemic on the Company’s business; general business and economic conditions and the state of the semiconductor industry; market acceptance and competitiveness of the driver and non-driver products developed by the Company; demand for end-use applications products; reliance on a small group of principal customers; the uncertainty of continued success in technological innovations; our ability to develop and protect our intellectual property; pricing pressures including declines in average selling prices; changes in customer order patterns; changes in estimated full-year effective tax rate; shortage in supply of key components; changes in environmental laws and regulations; changes in export license regulated by Export Administration Regulations (EAR); exchange rate fluctuations; regulatory approvals for further investments in our subsidiaries; our ability to collect accounts receivable and manage inventory and other risks described from time to time in the Company’s SEC filings, including those risks identified in the section entitled “Risk Factors” in its Form 20-F for the year ended December 31, 2024 filed with the SEC, as may be amended.

    Company Contacts:

    Karen Tiao, Head of IR/PR
    Himax Technologies, Inc.
    Tel: +886-2-2370-3999
    Fax: +886-2-2314-0877
    Email: hx_ir@himax.com.tw
    www.himax.com.tw

    Mark Schwalenberg, Director
    Investor Relations – US Representative
    MZ North America
    Tel: +1-312-261-6430
    Email: HIMX@mzgroup.us
    www.mzgroup.us

    The MIL Network –

  • MIL-OSI Asia-Pac: President Lai extends congratulations on election of His Holiness Pope Leo XIV  

    Source: Republic of China Taiwan

    Details
    2025-05-05
    President Lai meets Japanese Diet Member and former Minister of Economy, Trade, and Industry Nishimura Yasutoshi
    On the afternoon of May 5, President Lai Ching-te met with a delegation from Japan led by House of Representatives Member and former Minister of Economy, Trade, and Industry Nishimura Yasutoshi. President Lai thanked the government of Japan for continuously speaking up for Taiwan at international venues and reiterating the importance of peace and stability in the Taiwan Strait. The president stated that to address China’s gray-zone aggression against neighboring countries, Taiwan and Japan, both located in the first island chain, should strengthen cooperation and respond together. He said he looks forward to bilateral industrial cooperation in fields including semiconductors, hydrogen energy, AI, and drones, jointly strengthening the resilience of non-red supply chains, and promoting mutual prosperity and development.    A translation of President Lai’s remarks follows: I would like to welcome all the members of the Japanese Diet who are using their valuable Golden Week vacation to visit Taiwan, especially House of Representatives Member Nishimura Yasutoshi, whom former Prime Minister Shinzo Abe deeply trusted and relied on, and who for many years held important cabinet positions. This is his first visit after a hiatus of 17 years, so I am sure he will sense Taiwan’s progress and development. House of Representatives Member Tanaka Kazunori has long promoted local exchanges between Taiwan and Japan, and I hope that our visitors will all gain a deeper understanding of Taiwan through this visit.  Yesterday, several of our distinguished guests made a special trip to Kaohsiung to pay their respects at the statue of former Prime Minister Abe, a visionary politician with a broad, international perspective. The former prime minister pioneered the vision of a free and open Indo-Pacific, and once said that “if Taiwan has a problem, then Japan has a problem,” demonstrating strong support for Taiwan and making a deep and lasting impression on the hearts of Taiwanese. Over the past few years, China has continuously conducted military exercises in the Taiwan Strait, East and South China Seas, and carried out acts of gray-zone aggression against neighboring countries, severely undermining regional peace and stability. Taiwan and Japan, both located in the first island chain, should strengthen cooperation and respond together. Especially since Taiwan and Japan are democratic partners who share values such as freedom, democracy, and respect for human rights, if we can strengthen cooperation in areas such as maritime security, social resilience, and addressing gray-zone aggression, I am confident we can demonstrate the strength of deterrence, ensure peace and stability in the Indo-Pacific region, and safeguard our cherished democratic institutions. I would like to take this opportunity to thank the Japanese government for continuously speaking up for Taiwan at international venues, including this year’s US-Japan leaders’ summit, the G7 foreign ministers’ joint statement, and the Japan-NATO bilateral meeting, reiterating the importance of peace and stability in the Taiwan Strait and expressing opposition to unilaterally changing the status quo by force or coercion. In the face of global economic and trade changes, economic security is becoming increasingly important, and Taiwan looks forward to further deepening economic cooperation with Japan. In addition to actively seeking to participate in the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP), Taiwan hopes to sign an economic partnership agreement (EPA) with Japan as soon as possible. This will expand our cooperation in industries such as semiconductors, hydrogen energy, AI, and drones, establish a closer economic partnership, jointly strengthen the resilience of non-red supply chains, and promote mutual prosperity and development. Once again, I welcome all of our guests. I am deeply grateful for your taking concrete action to deepen Taiwan-Japan relations and show support for Taiwan. I wish you a successful and rewarding visit.  Representative Nishimura then delivered remarks, first thanking President Lai for taking time out of his busy schedule to meet with the visiting delegation. He also expressed admiration for the performance of President Lai’s government, which has allowed Taiwan to develop smoothly amidst the current complex international situation. Representative Nishimura mentioned that when former Prime Minister Abe unfortunately passed away in 2020, President Lai, who was vice president at the time, personally visited the former prime minister’s residence to offer his condolences. The representative said that including that meeting, today is the second time he and President Lai have met. This delegation’s visit to Taiwan, he said, carries on the legacy of former Prime Minister Abe. He said that Taiwan and Japan are countries that share universal values and have close ties in terms of economic cooperation and mutual visits. Notably, he highlighted, in 2024, business travelers from Taiwan made over six million visits to Japan, and based on population, Taiwan has the highest percentage of visitors to Japan. He also expressed hope that more Japanese people will visit Taiwan for tourism.   Representative Nishimura stated that the delegation visited Kaohsiung yesterday to pay their respects at the statue of former Prime Minister Abe. Then, he said, they traveled to Tainan to sample a wide variety of fruits and local delicacies, during which time they also discussed the Wushantou Reservoir, built by Japanese engineer Hatta Yoichi. Since May 8 is the anniversary of Mr. Hatta’s birth, Representative Nishimura said he hopes to use this opportunity to continue Mr. Hatta’s concern and love for Taiwan, and further deepen the friendship between Taiwan and Japan. Representative Nishimura said that when he served as Japan’s Minister of Economy, Trade, and Industry, he welcomed Taiwan’s application to join the CPTPP on behalf of the Japanese government. He also said that his government has also provided substantial assistance for the establishment of Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company’s (TSMC) fab in Kumamoto, Japan. He said he believes that mutual cooperation between Taiwan and Japan in the semiconductor sector can further promote semiconductor industry development, and build a more resilient supply chain system. Representative Nishimura pointed out that former Prime Minister Abe once said, “If Taiwan has a problem, then Japan has a problem.” Currently, many European countries are also very concerned about peace and stability in the Asia-Pacific region, because it is crucial to peace and stability in the entire international community. It can therefore be said that “if Taiwan has a problem, the world has a problem.” He said he believes that in order to maintain peace and stability in the Taiwan Strait, like-minded countries and allied nations must all cooperate closely and definitively proclaim that message. He then said he looks forward to exchanging views with President Lai on issues such as strengthening Taiwan-Japan relations and changes in the international situation. The delegation also included Chairman of Kanagawa Prefecture Japan-Taiwan Friendship Association Matsumoto Jun, Japanese House of Representatives members Nishime Kosaburo, Sasaki Hajime, Yana Kazuo, and Katou Ryusho, and Japan-Taiwan Exchange Association Taipei Office Chief Representative Katayama Kazuyuki. 

    Details
    2025-05-02
    President Lai meets Atlantic Council delegation
    On the afternoon of May 2, President Lai Ching-te met with a delegation from the Atlantic Council, a think tank based in Washington, DC. In remarks, President Lai said that we have already proposed a roadmap for deepening Taiwan-US trade ties to achieve a common objective of reducing all bilateral tariffs. At the same time, the president said, we will expand investments across the United States and create win-win outcomes for both sides through the trade and economic strategy of “Taiwan plus the US.” The president also emphasized that Taiwan is not only a bastion of freedom and democracy, but also an indispensable hub for global supply chains. He expressed hope that, given shared economic and security interests, Taiwan and the US will generate even greater synergy and prove to be each other’s strongest support. A translation of President Lai’s remarks follows: I welcome you all to Taiwan. In particular, Vice President Matthew Kroenig visited Taiwan last June and now is making another trip less than a year later. He also contributed an important article supporting Taiwan to a major international publication, highlighting the concern that our international friends have for Taiwan. We are truly moved and thankful. On behalf of the people of Taiwan, I sincerely thank all sectors of the US for their longstanding and steadfast support for Taiwan. Especially, as we face the challenges arising from the regional situation, we hope to continue deepening the Taiwan-US partnership. Holding a key position on the first island chain, Taiwan faces military threats and gray-zone aggression from China. We will continue to show our unwavering determination to defend ourselves. I want to emphasize that Taiwan is accelerating efforts to enhance its overall defense capabilities. The government will also prioritize special budget allocations to increase Taiwan’s defense spending from 2.5 percent of GDP to more than 3 percent. This reflects the efforts we are putting into safeguarding our nation and demonstrates our determination to safeguard regional peace and stability. During President Donald Trump’s first term, Taiwan purchased 66 new F-16V fighter jets. The first of these rolled off the assembly line in South Carolina at the end of this March. This is crucial for Taiwan’s strategy of achieving peace through strength. In the future, we will continue to procure defense equipment from the US that helps ensure peace and stability across the Taiwan Strait. We also look forward to bilateral security collaboration evolving beyond arms sales to a partnership that encompasses joint research and development and joint manufacturing, further strengthening our cooperation and exchanges. Taiwan firmly believes in fair, free, and mutually beneficial trade ties. Indeed, we have already proposed a roadmap for deepening Taiwan-US trade ties. This includes our common objective of reducing all bilateral tariffs as well as narrowing the trade imbalance through the procurement of energy and agricultural and other industrial products from the US. At the same time, we will expand investments across the US. We will promote our “Taiwan plus one” policy, that is, the new trade and economic strategy of “Taiwan plus the US,” to build non-red supply chains and create win-win outcomes for both sides. As the US is moving to reindustrialize its manufacturing industry and may hope to become a global manufacturing center for AI, Taiwan is willing to join in the efforts. Taiwan is not only a bastion of freedom and democracy, but also an indispensable hub for global supply chains. We have every confidence that, given shared Taiwan-US economic and security interests, we can generate even greater synergy and prove to be each other’s strongest support. In closing, I thank Vice President Kroenig once again for leading this delegation, demonstrating support for Taiwan. I look forward to exchanging opinions with you all in just a few moments. I wish you a smooth and successful trip. Vice President Kroenig then delivered remarks, first thanking President Lai for hosting them. He said that it is an honor to be here and to lead a delegation from the Atlanta Council, which consists of a mix of former senior US government officials with responsibility for Taiwan and also rising stars visiting Taiwan for the first time. Vice President Kroenig said that they are here at a critical moment, as there is an ongoing war in Europe, multiple conflicts in the Middle East, and increased Chinese aggression in the Indo-Pacific. Moreover, he pointed out, the regimes of China, Russia, Iran, and North Korea are increasingly working together in a new axis of aggressors. Vice President Kroenig indicated that the challenge facing the US and its allies and partners, including Taiwan, is how to deter these autocracies and maintain global peace, prosperity, and freedom, especially in Taiwan, whose security and stability matter, not only for Taiwan, but also for the US and the world. Vice President Kroenig assured President Lai and the people of Taiwan that the US is a reliable partner for Taiwan. The vice president stated that the administration under President Trump is prioritizing the deterrence of China, and that President Trump has announced an intention to have the largest US defense budget in history, more than US$1 trillion, to resource this priority. Pointing out that an America-first president will not help a country that is not helping itself, Vice President Kroenig said that their delegation has been impressed with the steps President Lai and the administration are taking to strengthen Taiwan’s security, including increasing defense spending, developing a societal resilience strategy, and using cutting edge technologies like unmanned systems to promote indigenous defense production. Vice President Kroenig said that more than money and equipment are necessary to secure a democracy against a powerful and ruthless neighbor, adding that history shows that the human factor is the most important. In the end, he said, it will be the will of the people of Taiwan to resist coercion and to defend their home which will be the most important factor determining the future fate of Taiwan and for the ability of the people of Taiwan to chart their own destiny. Vice President Kroenig emphasized that Americans are willing to support Taiwan in this endeavor, but it will be the people of Taiwan and strong and capable leaders like President Lai at the forefront of this struggle, with the firm support of America. Vice President Kroenig said that as the US and Taiwan work together on these challenges, the Atlantic Council looks forward to offering support behind the scenes. Founded in 1961 to support the Transatlantic Alliance, he said, the Atlantic Council is a global think tank, and part of its DNA is working closely with friends and allies in the Indo-Pacific, including Taiwan. He said they look forward to continuing their close and longstanding cooperation with Taiwan through visiting delegations, research and reports, and public and private events. In closing, Vice President Kroenig thanked President Lai again for hosting them and for the work he is doing to secure the free world. The delegation also included former Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for East Asia Heino Klinck and former Director for Taiwan Affairs at the White House National Security Council Marvin Park.

    Details
    2025-05-01
    President Lai meets Japan’s LDP Youth Division delegation
    On the morning of May 1, President Lai Ching-te met with a delegation from Japan’s Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) Youth Division. In remarks, President Lai thanked the guests for demonstrating support for deepening Taiwan-Japan ties through concrete actions. The president expressed hope that Taiwan and Japan can continue to conduct exchanges in such areas as national defense, the economy, education, culture, sports, and the arts so that bilateral relations reach even greater heights. A translation of President Lai’s remarks follows: I want to welcome our distinguished guests, who include Diet members in the LDP Youth Division and guests from Junior Chamber International (JCI) Japan, to the Presidential Office. It is also a pleasure to see LDP Youth Division Director Nakasone Yasutaka, House of Representatives Member Hiranuma Shojiro, and House of Councillors Member Kamiya Masayuki again today. I look forward to discussions with all our distinguished guests. The LDP Youth Division and JCI Japan have once again demonstrated support for deepening Taiwan-Japan ties through concrete actions. On behalf of the people of Taiwan, I also want to thank the LDP Youth Division for launching a fundraising campaign to help those affected by the earthquake in Hualien County on April 3 last year. LDP Youth Division members will be important leaders in Japan’s political arena in the future. Taiwan deeply values our exchanges with the Youth Division and hopes to bring about concrete results from such exchanges. Peace and stability in the Taiwan Strait are critical to the security and prosperity of the world, and Taiwan and Japan can work together to promote peace and stability in the Indo-Pacific region. Former Prime Ministers Abe Shinzo and Kishida Fumio, and current Prime Minister Ishiba Shigeru have repeatedly stressed the importance of peace and stability in the Taiwan Strait at important international venues. Taiwan is deeply grateful to Japan’s current and former prime ministers for their concern and support for this issue. Taiwan and Japan can also cooperate in industry and the economy. As our industries are complementary, further cooperation can create win-win outcomes. In the semiconductor industry, for instance, Taiwan’s strengths lie in manufacturing, while Japan’s strengths lie in materials, equipment, and technology. If we work together, the semiconductor industry is sure to see even more robust development. In addition to the economy and national defense, Taiwan and Japan can also conduct exchanges in such areas as education, culture, sports, and the arts. Our countries have long shared deep ties – Director Nakasone’s grandfather, former Prime Minister Nakasone Yasuhiro, was stationed in Taiwan and lived in what is now the Mingde New Residential Quarter of Kaohsiung City’s Zuoying District. I am confident that on the basis of our already solid foundations, Taiwan-Japan relations can reach even greater heights. Director Nakasone then delivered remarks, first thanking President Lai for finding time in his busy schedule to meet with the visiting delegation. He said that the LDP Youth Division sends a visiting delegation to Taiwan each year and is always granted the opportunity to meet with the president, demonstrating his high regard for the delegation, for which the director again expressed his gratitude. He remarked that he, together with House of Representatives Member Suzuki Keisuke, visited Taiwan last July, and that whenever he visits Taiwan, it feels as if he is returning home. Director Nakasone recalled President Lai’s earlier remarks, saying that he hopes the young people of Taiwan and Japan can fully engage in exchanges in the areas of national defense, the economy, culture, education, and the arts. The director said he believes that in today’s complex and difficult international situation, such directives are necessary. This is especially so, he emphasized, during United States President Donald Trump’s second term, when things once taken for granted are no longer so, and when the global economy is undergoing significant changes. Director Nakasone expressed his full support for strengthening Taiwan and Japan’s practical and strategic cooperation. He said he believes each side will be able to benefit from such cooperation and hopes that exchanges will progress toward shared goals. He pointed out that, as maritime nations, Taiwan and Japan share the goals of protecting the ocean and using marine resources wisely, goals that we ought to cooperate on and devote our full efforts to. The peace and stability of the Taiwan Strait are critical to the peace and stability of East Asia and even the world, he said, so we must ensure that the world and its leaders recognize this point, and Japan will do its utmost to advocate for it. Director Nakasone said, on the topic of semiconductors, that Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company’s new fab in Japan’s Kumamoto Prefecture has made the area very lively, adding that the Japanese government is providing more than 1.25 trillion yen in subsidies. Moving forward, the Japanese government plans to inject an additional 10 trillion yen, he said, to aid in the development of AI and other fields. Noting that Taiwan and Japan both excel in semiconductors, he expressed his hope that each can give free rein to its strengths to produce an even greater effect. Director Nakasone said that despite Taiwan’s facing formidable internal and external circumstances, it saw 4.6 percent economic growth last year under President Lai’s strong leadership, and it continued to promote measures to enhance overall societal resilience, all of which is admirable. In closing, the director thanked President Lai once again for taking the time to meet with them. Also in attendance were Japanese House of Representatives Members Nemoto Taku and Fukuda Kaoru, and Japan-Taiwan Exchange Association Taipei Office Chief Representative Katayama Kazuyuki.

    Details
    2025-04-29
    President Lai meets NBR delegation  
    On the morning of April 29, President Lai Ching-te met with a delegation from the National Bureau of Asian Research (NBR). In remarks, President Lai stated that as Taiwan stands at the very frontline of defense of global democracy, we are actively implementing our Four Pillars of Peace action plan, which includes continuing to enhance our national defense capabilities, demonstrating our commitment to defending freedom and democracy. The president said he hopes to further advance national security and industrial cooperation between Taiwan and the United States. He also expressed hope that this will help boost economic resilience for both sides and establish each as a key pillar of regional security, elevating our relations to even higher levels. A translation of President Lai’s remarks follows: I am delighted to meet with Admiral John Aquilino again today. I also warmly welcome NBR President Michael Wills and our distinguished guests from the bureau to Taiwan. I look forward to exchanging views with you all on Taiwan-US relations and the regional situation. During his tenure as commander of the US Indo-Pacific Command, Admiral Aquilino placed much attention on the Taiwan Strait issue. And the NBR has conducted a wealth of research and analysis focusing on matters of regional security. Thanks to all of your outstanding contributions and efforts, the international community has gained a better understanding of the role Taiwan plays in the Indo-Pacific region and in global democratic development. For this, I want to extend my deepest gratitude. Taiwan stands at the very frontline of defending global democracy and is located at a strategically important location in the first island chain. We are actively implementing our Four Pillars of Peace action plan, which includes continuing to enhance our national defense capabilities, building economic security, demonstrating stable and principled cross-strait leadership, and standing side-by-side with the democratic community to jointly demonstrate the strength of deterrence and safeguard regional peace and stability. At the beginning of this month, I announced an increase in military allowances for volunteer service members and combat troops. The government will also continue to reform national defense and enhance self-sufficiency in defense. In addition, we will prioritize special budget allocations to ensure that Taiwan’s defense budget exceeds 3 percent of GDP. These efforts continue to strengthen Taiwan’s self-defense capabilities and demonstrate our commitment to defending freedom and democracy. As we mark the 46th anniversary of the enactment of the Taiwan Relations Act, we thank the US government for continuing its arms sales to Taiwan and strengthening the Taiwan-US partnership over the years. We believe that, in addition to engaging in military exchanges and cooperation, Taiwan and the US can build an even closer economic and trade relationship, boosting each other’s economic resilience and establishing each as a key pillar of regional security. I expect that your continued assistance will help advance national security and industrial cooperation between Taiwan and the US, elevating our relations to even higher levels. Once again, I welcome our distinguished guests to Taiwan and wish you a pleasant and successful trip. I hope that through this visit, you gain a more comprehensive and in-depth understanding of Taiwan’s economy and national defense. Admiral Aquilino then delivered remarks, thanking the Ministry of National Defense for the invitation and President Lai for receiving and spending time with them. Mentioning that this is his second visit in five months, he said he continues to be incredibly impressed with the president’s leadership and the actions he has taken to secure Taiwan and defend its people. Admiral Aquilino said that he has watched the efforts of the ministers on whole-of-society defense to demonstrate deterrence and added that the pace of the work is nothing short of inspiring. Admiral Aquilino noted that Taiwan’s thriving democracy is incredibly important to the peace and stability of the region. He stated that he, alongside the NBR, will continue to offer support, noting that President Wills and his team are an asset to Taiwan and the US that helps continue our close relationship and ensure peace and stability in the region.  

    Details
    2025-04-28
    President Lai meets Japanese Diet Member and former Minister of State for Economic Security Takaichi Sanae
    On the afternoon of April 28, President Lai Ching-te met with a delegation led by Member of the Japanese House of Representatives and former Minister of State for Economic Security Takaichi Sanae. In remarks, President Lai thanked the government of Japan for repeatedly emphasizing the importance of peace and stability across the Taiwan Strait at important international venues. The president expressed hope that in the face of China’s continually expanding red supply chains, Taiwan and Japan can continue to cooperate closely in such fields as semiconductors, energy, and AI technology to create non-red supply chains that enhance economic resilience and industrial competitiveness for both sides, and jointly pave the way for further prosperity and growth in the Indo-Pacific region. A translation of President Lai’s remarks follows: First, I would like to extend a warm welcome to Representative Takaichi as she returns for another visit to Taiwan. I am also very happy to have Members of the House of Representatives Kikawada Hitoshi and Ozaki Masanao, and Member of the House of Councillors Sato Kei all gathered together here to engage in these very important exchanges. Our visitors will be taking part in many exchange activities during this trip. Earlier today at the Indo-Pacific Strategy Thinktank’s International Political and Economic Forum, Representative Takaichi delivered a speech in which she clearly demonstrated the great importance she places upon the friendship between Taiwan and Japan. For this I want to express my deepest appreciation to each of our guests. The peoples of Taiwan and Japan have a deep friendship and mutual trust. We have a shared commitment to the universal values of democracy, freedom, and respect for human rights, but beyond that, we both have striven to contribute to regional peace and stability. I also want to thank the government of Japan for repeatedly emphasizing the importance of peace and stability across the Taiwan Strait at important international venues. Tomorrow you will all make a trip to Kaohsiung to visit a bronze statue of former Prime Minister Abe Shinzo, who once said, “If Taiwan has a problem, then Japan has a problem.” We will always remember the firm support and friendship he showed Taiwan. Since taking office last year, I have worked hard to improve Taiwan’s whole-of-society defense resilience and implement our Four Pillars of Peace action plan. By strengthening our national defense capabilities, building up economic security, demonstrating stable and principled cross-strait leadership, and deepening partnerships with democratic countries including Japan, we can together maintain peace and stability in the Indo-Pacific region and across the Taiwan Strait. At the same time, in the face of China’s continually expanding red supply chains, we hope that Taiwan and Japan, as important economic and trade partners, can continue to cooperate closely in such fields as semiconductors, energy, and AI technology to create non-red supply chains that further enhance economic resilience and industrial competitiveness for both sides. Going forward, Taiwan will work hard to play an important role in the international community and contribute its key strengths. I hope that, with the support of our guests, Taiwan can soon accede to the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership and sign an economic partnership agreement (EPA) with Japan so that we can jointly pave the way for further prosperity and growth in the Indo-Pacific region. Lastly, I thank each of you once again for taking concrete action to support Taiwan. I am confident that your visit will help deepen Taiwan-Japan ties and create even greater opportunities for cooperation. Let us all strive together to keep propelling Taiwan-Japan relations forward.  Representative Takaichi then delivered remarks, first thanking President Lai and Taiwanese political leaders for the warm hospitality they extended to the delegation, and mentioning that the visiting delegation members are all like-minded partners carrying on the legacy of former Prime Minister Abe. July 8 this year will mark the third anniversary of the passing of former Prime Minister Abe, she said, and when the former prime minister unfortunately passed away, President Lai, then serving as vice president, was among the first to come offer condolences, for which she expressed sincere admiration and gratitude. Representative Takaichi stated that Taiwan and Japan are island nations that face the same circumstances and problems, and that Japan’s trade activities rely heavily on ocean transport, so once a problem arises nearby that threatens maritime shipping lanes, it will be a matter of life and death for Japan. Taiwan and Japan are similar, as once a problem arises, both will face food and energy security issues, and supply chains may even be threatened, she said. Regarding Taiwan-Japan cooperation, Representative Takaichi stated that both sides must first protect and strengthen supply chain resilience. President Lai has previously said that he wants to turn Taiwan into an AI island, she said, and in semiconductors, Taiwan has the world’s leading technology. Representative Takaichi went on to say that Taiwan and Japan can collaborate in the fields of AI and semiconductors, quantum computing, and dual-use industries, as well as in areas such as drones and new energy technologies to build more resilient supply chains, so that if problems arise, we can maintain our current standard of living with peace of mind. Representative Takaichi indicated that cooperation in the defense sector is also crucial, and that by uniting like-minded countries including Taiwan, the United States, Japan, the Philippines, and Australia, and even countries in Europe, we can build a stronger network to jointly maintain our security guarantees. Representative Takaichi expressed hope that Taiwan and Japan will continue to strengthen substantive non-governmental relations, including personnel exchange visits and information sharing, so that we can jointly face and respond to crises when they arise. Regarding the hope to sign a Taiwan-Japan EPA that President Lai had mentioned earlier, she also expressed support and said she looks forward to upcoming exchanges and talks. The visiting delegation also included Japan-Taiwan Exchange Association Taipei Office Chief Representative Katayama Kazuyuki.

    Details
    2025-04-06
    President Lai delivers remarks on US tariff policy response
    On April 6, President Lai Ching-te delivered recorded remarks regarding the impact of the 32 percent tariff that the United States government recently imposed on imports from Taiwan in the name of reciprocity. In his remarks, President Lai explained that the government will adopt five response strategies, including making every effort to improve reciprocal tariff rates through negotiations, adopting a support plan for affected domestic industries, adopting medium- and long-term economic development plans, forming new “Taiwan plus the US” arrangements, and launching industry listening tours. The president emphasized that as we face this latest challenge, the government and civil society will work hand in hand, and expressed hope that all parties, both ruling and opposition, will support the measures that the Executive Yuan will take to open up a broader path for Taiwan’s economy. A translation of President Lai’s remarks follows: My fellow citizens, good evening. The US government recently announced higher tariffs on countries around the world in the name of reciprocity, including imposing a 32 percent tariff on imports from Taiwan. This is bound to have a major impact on our nation. Various countries have already responded, and some have even adopted retaliatory measures. Tremendous changes in the global economy are expected. Taiwan is an export-led economy, and in facing future challenges there will inevitably be difficulties, so we must proceed carefully to turn danger into safety. During this time, I want to express gratitude to all sectors of society for providing valuable opinions, which the government regards highly, and will use as a reference to make policy decisions.  However, if we calmly and carefully analyze Taiwan’s trade with the US, we find that last year Taiwan’s exports to the US were valued at US$111.4 billion, accounting for 23.4 percent of total export value, with the other 75-plus percent of products sold worldwide to countries other than the US. Of products sold to the US, competitive ICT products and electronic components accounted for 65.4 percent. This shows that Taiwan’s economy does still have considerable resilience. As long as our response strategies are appropriate, and the public and private sectors join forces, we can reduce impacts. Please do not panic. To address the reciprocal tariffs by the US, Taiwan has no plans to adopt retaliatory tariffs. There will be no change in corporate investment commitments to the US, as long as they are consistent with national interests. But we must ensure the US clearly understands Taiwan’s contributions to US economic development. More importantly, we must actively seek to understand changes in the global economic situation, strengthen Taiwan-US industry cooperation, elevate the status of Taiwan industries in global supply chains, and with safeguarding the continued development of Taiwan’s economy as our goal, adopt the following five strategies to respond. Strategy one: Make every effort to improve reciprocal tariff rates through negotiations using the following five methods:  1. Taiwan has already formed a negotiation team led by Vice Premier Cheng Li-chiun (鄭麗君). The team includes members from the National Security Council, the Office of Trade Negotiations, and relevant Executive Yuan ministries and agencies, as well as academia and industry. Like the US-Mexico-Canada free trade agreement, negotiations on tariffs can start from Taiwan-US bilateral zero-tariff treatment. 2. To expand purchases from the US and thereby reduce the trade deficit, the Executive Yuan has already completed an inventory regarding large-scale procurement plans for agricultural, industrial, petroleum, and natural gas products, and the Ministry of National Defense has also proposed a military procurement list. All procurement plans will be actively pursued. 3. Expand investments in the US. Taiwan’s cumulative investment in the US already exceeds US$100 billion, creating approximately 400,000 jobs. In the future, in addition to increased investment in the US by Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company, other industries such as electronics, ICT, petrochemicals, and natural gas can all increase their US investments, deepening Taiwan-US industry cooperation. Taiwan’s government has helped form a “Taiwan investment in the US” team, and hopes that the US will reciprocate by forming a “US investment in Taiwan” team to bring about closer Taiwan-US trade cooperation, jointly creating a future economic golden age.  4. We must eliminate non-tariff barriers to trade. Non-tariff barriers are an indicator by which the US assesses whether a trading partner is trading fairly with the US. Therefore, we will proactively resolve longstanding non-tariff barriers so that negotiations can proceed more smoothly. 5. We must resolve two issues that have been matters of longstanding concern to the US. One regards high-tech export controls, and the other regards illegal transshipment of dumped goods, otherwise referred to as “origin washing.” Strategy two: We must adopt a plan for supporting our industries. For industries that will be affected by the tariffs, and especially traditional industries as well as micro-, small-, and medium-sized enterprises, we will provide timely and needed support and assistance. Premier Cho Jung-tai (卓榮泰) and his administrative team recently announced a package of 20 specific measures designed to address nine areas. Moving forward, the support we provide to different industries will depend on how they are affected by the tariffs, will take into account the particular features of each industry, and will help each industry innovate, upgrade, and transform. Strategy three: We must adopt medium- and long-term economic development plans. At this point in time, our government must simultaneously adopt new strategies for economic and industrial development. This is also the fundamental path to solutions for future economic challenges. The government will proactively cooperate with friends and allies, develop a diverse range of markets, and achieve closer integration of entities in the upper, middle, and lower reaches of industrial supply chains. This course of action will make Taiwan’s industrial ecosystem more complete, and will help Taiwanese industries upgrade and transform. We must also make good use of the competitive advantages we possess in such areas as semiconductor manufacturing, integrated chip design, ICT, and smart manufacturing to build Taiwan into an AI island, and promote relevant applications for food, clothing, housing, and transportation, as well as military, security and surveillance, next-generation communications, and the medical and health and wellness industries as we advance toward a smarter, more sustainable, and more prosperous new Taiwan. Strategy four: “Taiwan plus one,” i.e., new “Taiwan plus the US” arrangements: While staying firmly rooted in Taiwan, our enterprises are expanding their global presence and marketing worldwide. This has been our national economic development strategy, and the most important aspect is maintaining a solid base here in Taiwan. We absolutely must maintain a solid footing, and cannot allow the present strife to cause us to waver. Therefore, our government will incentivize investments, carry out deregulation, and continue to improve Taiwan’s investment climate by actively resolving problems involving access to water, electricity, land, human resources, and professional talent. This will enable corporations to stay in Taiwan and continue investing here. In addition, we must also help the overseas manufacturing facilities of offshore Taiwanese businesses to make necessary adjustments to support our “Taiwan plus one” policy, in that our national economic development strategy will be adjusted as follows: to stay firmly rooted in Taiwan while expanding our global presence, strengthening US ties, and marketing worldwide. We intend to make use of the new state of supply chains to strengthen cooperation between Taiwanese and US industries, and gain further access to US markets. Strategy five: Launch industry listening tours: All industrial firms, regardless of sector or size, will be affected to some degree once the US reciprocal tariffs go into effect. The administrative teams led by myself and Premier Cho will hear out industry concerns so that we can quickly resolve problems and make sure policies meet actual needs. My fellow citizens, over the past half-century and more, Taiwan has been through two energy crises, the Asian financial crisis, the global financial crisis, and pandemics. We have been able to not only withstand one test after another, but even turn crises into opportunities. The Taiwanese economy has emerged from these crises stronger and more resilient than ever. As we face this latest challenge, the government and civil society will work hand in hand, and I hope that all parties in the legislature, both ruling and opposition, will support the measures that the Executive Yuan will take to open up a broader path for Taiwan’s economy. Let us join together and give it our all. Thank you.

    MIL OSI Asia Pacific News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: WA Airports Get $66.7M For Safety & Capacity Upgrades From Bipartisan Infrastructure Law Funding

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Washington Maria Cantwell
    05.08.25
    WA Airports Get $66.7M For Safety & Capacity Upgrades From Bipartisan Infrastructure Law Funding
    Cantwell announces $45.4M for Sea-Tac Airport, $7.3M for Tri-Cities Airport, $6.5M for Spokane Airport, nearly $4M for San Juan County airports; Other airports receive funding in Bellingham, Deer Park, Auburn, Richland, Anacortes, Odessa, & Bremerton
    WASHINGTON, D.C. – Today, U.S. Senator Maria Cantwell (D-WA), ranking member of the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation, and senior member of the Senate Finance Committee, announced that 12 airports across the State of Washington received a total of $66,758,406 in Airport Infrastructure Grants (AIG).
    Enacted by the 2021 Bipartisan Infrastructure Law (BIL), the Airport Infrastructure Grant (AIG) program provides $14.5 billion nationwide in funding over five years. Sen. Cantwell was instrumental in securing funding for the AIG program and Airport Terminal Program (ATP) in the 2021 BIL.
    AIG funding announced today includes:
    Seattle-Tacoma International Airport:  $45,400,000
    Tri-Cities Airport:  $7,366,530
    Spokane International Airport: $6,537,017
    Orcas Island Airport: $3,153,888
    Bellingham International Airport: $2,000,000
    Friday Harbor Airport: $834,000
    Deer Park Airport: $585,000
    Auburn Municipal Airport: $395,125
    Richland Airport: $180,500
    Anacortes Airport: $137,000
    Odessa Municipal Airport: $110,000
    Bremerton National Airport: $59,346
    Sea-Tac Award: Seattle-Tacoma International Airport will receive $45,400,000 for the Concourse S reconstruction project. This grant funds structural, seismic, and building system upgrades that have reached the end of their useful lives. This grant funds phase 2, which consists of design and pre-construction.
    “Sea-Tac is a vital hub for our region’s economy, and this investment will help ensure it remains safe, modern, and resilient,” said Senator Cantwell. “These upgrades to the S Concourse, the international doorway for travelers in the Pacific Northwest, will support the airport’s continued growth while creating good-paying jobs.”
    Tri-Cities Award: Tri-Cities Airport will receive $7,366,530 for its terminal expansion project. This grant funds an additional baggage make-up area to accommodate more passengers. This grant funds phase 1, which consists of design and construction. Last October, Sen. Cantwell visited the airport to tour the project.
    “Tri-Cities Airport is in the midst of a decade-long terminal redevelopment plan, and this funding adds to previous federal investments to speed up expansion of its outdated terminal and baggage handling infrastructure,” said Sen. Cantwell. “As passenger traffic continues to break records, this investment ensures the airport can meet future demand while supporting local jobs and economic development that benefit the region.”
    Spokane Award: Spokane International Airport will receive $6,537,017 for its TREX terminal expansion project. This grant funds construction of three gates and related areas, loading dock access road, fencing, and gates.
    “This funding is another win for Spokane International Airport’s terminal expansion project,” said Sen. Cantwell. ”The Inland Northwest’s main air travel hub continues to break records, serving more than 4.2 million passengers in 2024, the most ever. Expanding Concourse C by over 70,000 square feet and adding new gates will significantly enhance the airport’s capacity and passenger experience.”
    San Juan County Awards:
    Orcas Island Airport will receive $3,153,888 to rehabilitate 14,000 square yards of the existing northern and central portions of the Terminal Apron pavement to maintain the structural integrity of the pavement and to minimize foreign object debris.
    Friday Harbor Airport will receive a total of $834,000 for two projects. The airport will receive $486,000 to construct a new 10,000-square-foot sponsor-owned hangar for aircraft storage. The airport will also receive $348,000 project to expand an existing pump fuel facility.
    “This funding is a critical investment in the safety and sustainability of Orcas Island and Friday Harbor Airports, key gateways to the San Juans,” said Sen. Cantwell. “Rehabilitated runways will make flights into Orcas Island safer and smoother. Aircraft owners will be able to lease space at Friday Harbor Airport’s new hangar and buy more fuel at their expanded pump, generating more operating revenue for the airport. These projects will set the airports up to serve San Juan County visitors and residents for decades to come.”
    Other Awards:
    Bellingham International Airport will receive $2,000,000 for a project to rehabilitate 6,700 feet of existing paved Runway 16/34 to maintain its structural integrity and minimize foreign object debris to extend its useful life. This grant funds phase 1, which consists of design.
    Deer Park Airport will receive $585,000 toward construction of a new 347-foot Taxilane AS-1, 475-foot Taxilane AS-2, 369-foot Taxilane AS-3, and 312-foot Taxilane AS-4 to provide airfield access to a non-exclusive hangar development area to bring the airport into conformity with current standards.
    Auburn Municipal Airport will receive $395,125 for multiple infrastructure improvements including a new automated weather observing system (AWOS-IIIPT) to provide site-specific weather information and a new electrical generator and replace an existing airport rotating beacon that has reached the end of its useful life. This grant funds a portion of phase 2, which consists of construction.
    Richland Airport will receive $180,500 to expand the existing main apron by adding 6,040 square yards to bring the airport into conformity with current standards. This grant funds phase 1, which consists of design.
    Anacortes Airport will receive $137,000 for runway safety improvements including a new lighted wind cone navigational aid to provide pilots with critical airfield information, a runway end identifier lights system and precision approach path indicator system, and reconstructing the runway signage that has reached the end of its useful life. This grant funds phase 2, which consists of construction.
    Odessa Municipal Airport will receive $110,000 to acquire and install a replacement wind cone navigational aid to provide pilots with critical airfield information. This grant funds phase 2, which consists of construction.
    Bremerton National Airport will receive $59,346 to conduct an environmental study required to comply with the National Environmental Policy Act for the proposed Eastside Development Area project, which includes taxiway infrastructure, lighting, hangar, and cargo development.
    Sen. Cantwell worked hard to secure funding for air travel infrastructure nationwide as part of the 2021 Bipartisan Infrastructure Law. With her support, the infrastructure package provided a total of $25 billion for airport improvements, including $5 billion for the Airport Terminal Program and $15 billion in Airport Infrastructure Grants. In 2023, airports across the state of Washington received nearly $200 million in federal funding through a combination of AIG, ATP, and the Airport Improvement Program, and in 2024, Washington state airports received over $133 million in federal funding.
    In addition, Sen. Cantwell also helped to secure over $217 million in Airport Rescue Grants for Washington airports to help them weather the COVID-19 pandemic.
    Last May, Sen. Cantwell additionally shepherded the passage of the FAA Reauthorization Act of 2024, which reauthorized the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) for five years. The new law included top Cantwell priorities including enhancing safety oversight, strengthening workforce development, boosting next-generation aviation innovation, and codifying consumer protections.

    Airport

    Amount

    City

    County

    Seattle-Tacoma International

    $           45,400,000

    Seattle

    King

    Tri-Cities

    $             7,366,530

    Pasco

    Franklin

    Spokane International

    $             6,537,017

    Spokane

    Spokane

    Orcas Island

    $             3,153,888

    Eastsound

    San Juan

    Bellingham International

    $             2,000,000

    Bellingham

    Whatcom

    Deer Park

    $                585,000

    Deer Park

    Spokane

    Friday Harbor

    $                486,000

    Friday Harbor

    San Juan

    Auburn Municipal

    $                395,125

    Auburn

    King

    Friday Harbor

    $                348,000

    Friday Harbor

    San Juan

    Richland

    $                180,500

    Richland

    Benton

    Anacortes

    $                137,000

    Anacortes

    Skagit

    Odessa Municipal

    $                110,000

    Odessa

    Lincoln

    Bremerton National

    $                  59,346

    Bremerton

    Kitsap

    TOTAL

    $          66,758,406

     
     

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-Evening Report: ER Report: A Roundup of Significant Articles on EveningReport.nz for May 9, 2025

    ER Report: Here is a summary of significant articles published on EveningReport.nz on May 9, 2025.

    What is grounding and could it improve my sleep? Here’s the science behind this TikTok trend
    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Dean J. Miller, Senior Lecturer, Appleton Institute, HealthWise Research Group, CQUniversity Australia Alexey Demidov/Pexels Have you ever felt an unexpected sense of calm while walking barefoot on grass? Or noticed your stress begin to fade as you stood ankle deep in the ocean? If so, you may

    Google is rolling out its Gemini AI chatbot to kids under 13. It’s a risky move
    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Lisa M. Given, Professor of Information Sciences & Director, Social Change Enabling Impact Platform, RMIT University Studio Nut/Shutterstock Google has announced it will roll out its Gemini artificial intelligence (AI) chatbot to children under the age of 13. While the launch starts within the next week in

    PNG’s Gorethy Kenneth: 23 years of fearless journalism and unwavering truth
    PROFILE: By Alu J Kalinoe At Papua New Guinea’s Post-Courier, our senior journalists often operate in the shadows, yet their courageous efforts are often overlooked — continuously pushing boundaries to bring us important stories that shape our lives and venturing outside their comfort zones to deliver top-notch content. This is the tale of one of

    ‘Peace be with all of you’: how Pope Leo XIV embodies a living dialogue between tradition and modernity
    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Darius von Guttner Sporzynski, Historian, Australian Catholic University When Robert Francis Prevost appeared on the loggia of St Peter’s Basilica as Pope Leo XIV, he set three precedents. He is the first pope from North America, the first Augustinian to occupy the throne of Peter, and the

    Experts split on Australia’s Papua New Guinea military recruitment plan
    By Caleb Fotheringham, RNZ Pacific journalist Australia’s plan to recruit from Papua New Guinea for its Defence Force raises “major ethical concerns”, according to the Australia Defence Association, while another expert thinks it is broadly a good idea. The two nations are set to begin negotiating a new defence treaty that is expected to see

    Hidden connections of more than 100 migratory marine species revealed in interactive map
    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Lily Bentley, Postdoctoral Research Fellow, School of the Environment, The University of Queensland Wirestock Creators/Shutterstock From the enormous blue whale to the delicate monarch butterfly, animals of all shapes and sizes migrate across the globe. These migrations connect distant habitats, from the tropics to the poles. They

    As Filipinos prepare to vote, ex-strongman Rodrigo Duterte’s arrest is dividing families – all the way to the president
    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Noel Morada, Visiting Professor, Nelson Mandela Centre, Chulalongkorn University; and Research Fellow, Asia Pacific Centre for the Responsibility to Protect, Chulalongkorn University It’s been two months since former Philippines President Rodrigo Duterte was arrested and handed over to the International Criminal Court (ICC) to face potential prosecution

    How the word ‘incel’ got away from us
    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Farid Zaid, Senior Lecturer, Psychology, Monash University Javier Bermudez Zayas/Shutterstock Imagine a young man whose voice has been worn down by years of feeling invisible. Plain, numb and bitter, the “incel” tries to explain the kind of hopelessness most of us would rather not confront: I believed

    Kiwi kids once led the world in reading – this 1950s primary school syllabus still has lessons for today
    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Ruth Boyask, Director of LitPlus, AUT School of Education, Auckland University of Technology Getty Images There is a well-known whakatauki (Māori proverb) that goes: “Ka mua, ka muri” – “walking backwards into the future”. It applies to many areas of life, but in education the idea of

    Some Reddit users just love to disagree, new AI-powered troll-spotting algorithm finds
    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Marian-Andrei Rizoiu, Associate Professor in Behavioral Data Science, University of Technology Sydney ginger_polina_bublik/Shutterstock In today’s fractured online landscape, it is harder than ever to identify harmful actors such as trolls and misinformation spreaders. Often, efforts to spot malicious accounts focus on analysing what they say. However, our

    To split Moscow from Beijing, Trump is reviving Nixon’s ‘madman diplomacy’. It could backfire badly
    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Ian Langford, Executive Director, Security & Defence PLuS and Professor, UNSW Sydney When United States President William McKinley advocated high‑tariff protectionism in 1896, he argued squeezing foreign competitors behind a 50% wall of duties would make America richer and safer. That logic framed US trade debates for

    A community-led health program in remote Arnhem land is showing promising results for First Nations locals
    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Hasthi Dissanayake, Research Fellow in Indigenous Health, The University of Melbourne The Doherty Institute Indigenous Australians are more than twice as likely as non-Indigenous Australians to suffer from disease, particularly chronic diseases such as diabetes, heart disease and kidney disease. The health disparities are worse in remote

    Why it’s important to read aloud to your kids – even after they can read themselves
    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Robyn Cox, Professor of Literacy Education, University of Tasmania Mart Production/Pexels , CC BY Is reading to your kids a bedtime ritual in your home? For many of us, it will be a visceral memory of our own childhoods. Or of the time raising now grown-up children.

    Old drains and railways are full of life. Here’s how to make the most of these overlooked green spaces
    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Hugh Stanford, Researcher Associate, Centre for Urban Research, RMIT University Much of the old circular railway line in Paris, La Petite Ceinture, or Little Belt, has been turned into a public park. ldgfr photos, Shutterstock Across Australian cities, leftover and overlooked green spaces are everywhere. Just think

    Ever wanted to ditch the 9-to-5 and teach snowsports? We followed people who did it for 10 years
    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Marian Makkar, Senior Lecturer in Marketing, RMIT University Konstantin Shishkin/Shutterstock Workplace burnout – a state of emotional, physical, and mental exhaustion – and the COVID pandemic have sparked a rethink of the traditional 9-to-5 job. It’s been estimated 30% of the Australian workforce is experiencing some degree

    Stepmums, alien mums, robot mums, vengeful mums: 7 films to watch this Mother’s Day
    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Jessica Gildersleeve, Professor of English Literature, University of Southern Queensland With Mother’s Day around the corner, you may be wondering what gift you’ll give mum – or any of the mums in your life. This year, why not skip the fancy dinner and offer one of the

    Pope Leo XIV faces limits on changing the Catholic Church − but Francis made reforms that set the stage for larger changes
    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Dennis Doyle, Professor Emeritus of Religious Studies, University of Dayton Newly elected Pope Leo XIV appears at the balcony of St. Peter’s Basilica at the Vatican on Thursday, May 8, 2025. AP Photo/Andrew Medichini Cardinal Robert Prevost of the United States has been picked to be the

    Grattan on Friday: Bitter struggle in Liberals for likely poisoned chalice, as Jacinta Price defects from Nationals
    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of Canberra By late last week it was clear Labor would win the election, but it came as more of a surprise when Peter Dutton lost the Queensland seat of Dickson he’d held since 2001. Nor did many anticipate Greens leader Adam

    Fiji media’s Stan Simpson blasts ‘hypocrites’ in social media clash over press freedom
    Pacific Media Watch Barely hours after being guest speaker at the University of the South Pacific‘s annual World Press Freedom Day event this week, Fiji media industry stalwart Stanley Simpson was forced to fend off local trolls whom he described as “hypocrites”. “Attacked by both the Fiji Labour Party and ex-FijiFirst MPs in just one

    Politics with Michelle Grattan: David Pocock wants us to aim for up to 90% reduction in emissions by 2035
    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of Canberra In the new parliament the government is expected to need only the Greens to pass the legislation opposed by the Coalition. Counting is not finished but on present indications it won’t require any other Senate crossbenchers. Given Labor’s enhanced position

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: PNG’s Gorethy Kenneth: 23 years of fearless journalism and unwavering truth

    PROFILE: By Alu J Kalinoe

    At Papua New Guinea’s Post-Courier, our senior journalists often operate in the shadows, yet their courageous efforts are often overlooked — continuously pushing boundaries to bring us important stories that shape our lives and venturing outside their comfort zones to deliver top-notch content.

    This is the tale of one of Post-Courier’s esteemed senior journalists, Gorethy Kenneth. From Tegese Village, Lontis on Buka Island in the Autonomous Region of Bougainville, “GK” (Gee-Kay) as her colleagues fondly call her, has dedicated 23 years of her life to journalism at this newspaper.

    When asked about who inspired her to pursue a career in media and journalism, she said, “My late father!” She mentions that she “always wanted to be an economist like her uncle Julius Longa”.

    However, she states that “Maths was horrible . . .  So, my late papa told me, I talk too much and should think about television — I ended up with newspaper reporting.”

    Fast forward to 2024
    Through her dedication and persistence, Kenneth is now a senior journalist within the company, specialising as a political editor. She commends the company for its commitment to well-researched investigative journalism, impartial reporting, comprehensive coverage, community involvement, thorough analysis, and informative content.

    Starting off with Uni Tavur student journalist newspaper at the University of Papua New Guinea, Kenneth has amassed a wealth of experience as a profound writer and encountered different personalities over the years, noting numerous stories she covered during her tenure at the Post-Courier.

    As a proud Bougainvillean, she highlights her interview with Francis Ona, the reclusive leader of her home province at the time. Reflecting on the experience, she remarks, “I was the first and last to interview him — the journey to get through to him was tough, despite my Bougainvillean heritage.”

    Kenneth is known for her unique approach to investigative journalism. One memorable story she recalls, is about a scandalous love triangle between a former Secretary of Foreign Affairs and his secret lover, known as “Jolyne”.

    Senior Post-Courier journalist Gorethy Kenneth . . . a distinguished career marked by championing significant projects and advocating for social change. Image: Post-Courier

    Using a clever tactic, Kenneth assumed the identity of “Jolyne” and managed to reach the Secretary through a landline call, shedding light on the secretive affair. Amusingly, veteran journalists now refer to her as “Jolyne”, a nod to the character she ingeniously portrayed to deceive the unsuspecting Secretary.

    In the early 2000s, she, alongside security reporter Robyn Sela, daringly stepped out of their comfort zone, orchestrating an audacious plan: deliberately getting themselves arrested and spending time in Boroko Jail.

    Their goal? To delve into the conditions of a prison cell in Port Moresby and report on it firsthand. However, their scheme didn’t escape the notice of chief-of-staff Blaise Nangoi and editor Oseah Philemon, who, upon discovering their intentions, expressed concern.

    “They almost sidelined us for getting bailed out with company money – BUT, we got our story,” she gladly remarked.

    As one of Post-Courier’s prominent writers, Kenneth has faced numerous hurdles during her time as a journalist. She faced threats and legal disputes from unsatisfied readers and grappled with “ethical dilemmas” while covering sensitive topics — she has encountered her fair share of challenges.

    Moreover, she has confronted issues surrounding gender and diversity during her career.

    Senior Post-Courier journalist Gorethy Kenneth with her “big, big, big very big boss”, News Corp’s Rupert Murdoch. Image: Gorethy Kenneth/FB

    In addition to these personal and professional obstacles, Kenneth highlights the impact of “digital disruption” on the newspaper industry. The transition from traditional print media to digital platforms, including the widespread use of social media and streaming services, has significantly challenged newspaper companies like the Post-Courier in recent years.

    Fortunately, Kenneth managed to power through these challenges with the support of training and supervision provided by Post-Courier. She applauds the company for its unwavering support during trying times.

    Additionally, she took proactive steps to enhance her understanding of journalistic issues, demonstrating her commitment to growth and professional development.

    Gorethy Kenneth . . . proactive steps to enhance her understanding of journalistic issues, demonstrating her commitment to growth and professional development. Image: Post-Courier

    Continuing to persevere, Gorethy forged a distinguished career marked by championing significant projects and advocating for social change. Armed with the ability to influence public opinion, she found her work as a journalist immensely rewarding.

    Her career afforded her the opportunity to travel both locally and internationally, and she reported on stories rife with conflict and controversy. Furthermore, she finds fulfillment in the role of mentoring future journalists, cherishing the chance to impart her knowledge and experience onto the next generation.

    When asked about what she is proud of, she says . . .  “I am still 16 at heart – don’t tell me I’m old among my young journo colleagues.”

    During her free time, she enjoys sipping on her whiskey and reading. She continues to support her family, friends, enemies and her community at a personal level and at a professional level as a senior journalist.

    Republished from the Post-Courier with permission.

    Reporting during the covid-19 pandemic in Papua New Guinea. Image: Post-Courier

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Debates – Thursday, 8 May 2025 – Strasbourg – Revised edition

    Source: European Parliament
    Verbatim report of proceedings
     490k  558k
    Thursday, 8 May 2025 – Strasbourg
    1. Opening of the sitting
      2. Composition of political groups
      3. Composition of committees and delegations
      4. 80 years after the end of World War II – freedom, democracy and security as the heritage of Europe (debate)
      5. Old challenges and new commercial practices in the internal market (debate)
      6. Resumption of the sitting
      7. Voting time
        7.1. Arrest and risk of execution of Tundu Lissu, Chair of Chadema, the main opposition party in Tanzania (RC-B10-0260/2025, B10-0260/2025, B10-0261/2025, B10-0262/2025, B10-0263/2025, B10-0264/2025, B10-0265/2025) (vote)
        7.2. Return of Ukrainian children forcibly transferred and deported by Russia (RC-B10-0249/2025, B10-0247/2025, B10-0249/2025, B10-0250/2025, B10-0252/2025, B10-0255/2025, B10-0258/2025) (vote)
        7.3. Violations of religious freedom in Tibet (RC-B10-0248/2025, B10-0248/2025, B10-0251/2025, B10-0253/2025, B10-0254/2025, B10-0256/2025, B10-0259/2025) (vote)
        7.4. Ninth report on economic and social cohesion (A10-0066/2025 – Jacek Protas) (vote)
        7.5. CO2 emission performance standards for new passenger cars and new light commercial vehicles for 2025 to 2027 (vote)
        7.6. The protection status of the wolf (Canis lupus) (vote)
        7.7. The role of gas storage for securing gas supplies ahead of the winter season (A10-0079/2025 – Borys Budka) (vote)
        7.8. Screening of foreign investments in the Union (A10-0061/2025 – Raphaël Glucksmann) (vote)
        7.9. Suspending certain parts of Regulation (EU) 2015/478 as regards imports of Ukrainian products into the European Union (A10-0059/2025 – Karin Karlsbro) (vote)
        7.10. Competition policy – annual report 2024 (A10-0071/2025 – Lara Wolters) (vote)
        7.11. Banking Union – annual report 2024 (A10-0044/2025 – Ralf Seekatz) (vote)
        7.12. Objection pursuant to Rule 115(2) and (3): genetically modified soybean MON 87705 × MON 87708 × MON 89788 (B10-0244/2025) (vote)
        7.13. Old challenges and new commercial practices in the internal market (B10-0246/2025) (vote)
      8. Resumption of the sitting
      9. Approval of the minutes of the previous sitting
      10. EU action on treating and preventing diseases such as cancer, cardiovascular neurological diseases and measles (debate)
      11. Explanations of vote
        11.1. Ninth report on economic and social cohesion (A10-0066/2025 – Jacek Protas)
        11.2. The role of gas storage for securing gas supplies ahead of the winter season (A10-0079/2025 – Borys Budka)
        11.3. Competition policy – annual report 2024 (A10-0071/2025 – Lara Wolters)
        11.4. Old challenges and new commercial practices in the internal market (B10-0246/2025)
      12. Approval of the minutes of the sitting and forwarding of texts adopted
      13. Dates of the next part-session
      14. Closure of the sitting
      15. Adjournment of the session

       

    FORSÆDE: CHRISTEL SCHALDEMOSE
    Næstformand

    		  
    1. Opening of the sitting

       

    (Mødet åbnet kl. 9:00)

    		  

    2. Composition of political groups

    		 

      President. – Volker Schnurrbusch is a member of the ESN Group as of 8 May 2025.

    		  

    3. Composition of committees and delegations

    		 

      President. – The ESN Group has notified the President of a decision relating to changes to appointments within committees. This decision will be set out in the minutes of today’s sitting and take effect on the date of this announcement.

    		  

    4. 80 years after the end of World War II – freedom, democracy and security as the heritage of Europe (debate)


    		 

      Sebastião Bugalho, on behalf of the PPE Group. – Madam President, in the history books, the post-war world means not just the world after the war, but a world without it.

    Today, 80 years after the surrender of the Nazi regime, we live in a world that faces a darkness most of us can’t recall. 50 million lives in six years made us say ‘never again’. The Second World War confronted mankind with humanity, patriotism with fascism, truth with anger. The Great War was brought to an end with peace, with a hard lesson. Those who chose to resist forgave those who refuse to forget.

    And that, dear colleagues, is the founding principle of our Union. That those who weld against invasion are here bounded together with those who commit, never to commit it again. That those who said we shall never surrender are here side by side with those who say, we shall always remember.

    The Ukrainian people know as we know, that the courage to carry on is the same courage not to let history be rewritten. And we are to keep that in our minds that their fight was once our fight. That their freedom is also our freedom. That their victory will be our peace. They may not be our fathers or our sons, but they are our brothers, our brothers in arms and in rights, our brothers in their hope and in their defiance.

    In this world, in this war, we may be lonely but never alone. 80 years ago we too faced that loneliness and defeated a great evil on this VE Day. Today it’s the survival of freedom, of democracy now and then at stake in our continent.

    So today, from this time and place, let it be known that victory for Europe Day stands not only for the victory that once was, but also for the victory that must be. Let it be known that the torch of history lights this common cause, that the words VE Day will also, and soon enough mean, Slava Ukraini.

    		  
       

    		 

      Marc Angel, on behalf of the S&D Group. – Madam President, dear colleagues, 80 years ago, the guns fell silent across Europe, marking the end of the most devastating war our continent has ever known. And today we honour the memory of those who were murdered, who suffered and perished. And we reflect also on the long, difficult path from destruction to peace.

    Out of the ashes of conflict, Europe chose reconciliation over revenge. Former enemies reached out in solidarity, laying the foundations for a united, peaceful continent. The European Union stands today not only as a political and an economic alliance, but as a powerful symbol of what unity, mutual respect and shared values can achieve.

    Today, this legacy is under threat. Across our continent, the far right and nationalism are once again gaining ground, fuelling hatred and division. But we must not forget where such ideologies once led us. The horrors of the past are not just history – they are warnings.

    On this important anniversary, let us reaffirm our commitment to a strong, united Europe, one that champions peace, democracy, equality and the dignity of all its people. Let our history be our guide and our unity be our strength.

    Today we must also pay tribute to the brave people of Ukraine, victims of the brutal aggression of Russia’s autocratic regime.

    		  
       

    		 

      Kinga Gál, a PfE képviselőcsoport nevében. – Elnök Asszony! A második világháború elképzelhetetlen pusztítása és szenvedése után Európa romokban hevert. Soha többé! Az alapító atyák, felismerve a pusztítás következményeit, létrehozták a közös Európát, melynek fő célja a tartós béke, biztonság és jólét biztosítása kontinensünkön. A májusi örömünnepnek nyolcvan éve, a háború vége viszont nem hozott valódi békét és jólétet minden európai nemzetnek. Hiszen Közép-Kelet-Európában, így nekünk, magyaroknak nem ért véget a szenvedés. A kommunizmus sötét évei következtek, férfiak és nők ezreinek gulágra hurcolása, kitelepítések, megtorlás, politikai tisztogatások és a szabadság korlátozása tartották félelemben az embereket még évtizedekig.

    Szüleink és nagyszüleink, de még a mi emlékezetünkben is ezek az érzések ma is élénken élnek. Méltán vágytak tehát az Unióba, a vasfüggönyön túlra, ami a szabadság, béke, biztonság és jólét szimbóluma volt számukra. Erre viszont még sokáig, 2004-ig várni kellett, ezért érint meg minket különösen fájdalmasan, ha úgy érezzük, hogy ezek az értékek most veszélyben vannak, hiszen béke helyett háború dúl a szomszédunkban. Biztonság helyett az illegális migráció egyre nagyobb fenyegetést jelent a közbiztonságra. Jólét helyett pedig gazdasági gyengüléssel kell szembenéznünk. Vissza kell térnünk az alapokhoz: a kölcsönös tiszteletre és szuverén nemzetek jóhiszemű együttműködésére épülő Unióhoz. Amely nem kioktat, hanem tisztel és támogat. Csak így maradhat Európa továbbra is a béke, a biztonság és a jólét otthona.

    		  
       

    		 

      Patryk Jaki, on behalf of the ECR Group. – Madam President, on the 80th anniversary of the end of World War II, you are talking about responsibility, courage, justice. But those are only words. We are still waiting for action. Poland, the country where the war was started, was divided between Germany and Russia after the Ribbentrop‑Molotov Pact. From the first to the last day of the war, Poland was on the right side. It had no institutional collaborators and lost almost 30 % of its pre-war resources – the most in Europe – and six million citizens. One third of this territory was taken and given to Russia.

    Until today, Poland has not received any reparation – no real compensation, only symbolic. Instead of giving justice and equal chances to Polish citizens, instead of helping new generations of Poles who should not pay for the fact that their parents stayed on the right side and did not collaborate with evil, the EU spent billions on silly ideology because the Earth will burn. This is not responsibility or justice which you are talking about so much. This unfair advantage built through a barbaric attack on the other nations must finally be reduced. This is not only about Poland, but also about Greece, the Baltic states and other victims.

    This 80th anniversary should finally bring real action to clean this stain. It is time to create compensation and an equal‑opportunity budget in Europe instead of a special budget for green ideology. To make up for the guilt, the effects of the evil must be removed completely.

    		  
       

    		 

      Marie-Pierre Vedrenne, au nom du groupe Renew. – Madame la Présidente, chers collègues, héritière de celles et de ceux qui ont vécu la guerre et la barbarie au plus profond de leur chair, héritière du silence autour de ces blessures enfouies et longtemps tues, je commémore aujourd’hui et avec vous, ici, dans cet hémicycle de Strasbourg, les héros dont les noms traversent nos manuels et nos rues, comme les anonymes restés dans l’ombre de la Seconde Guerre mondiale.

    Être héritière de ces morts et traumatismes, c’est se voir conférer une responsabilité sacrée: celle de ne jamais être un simple témoin, ni dans le présent, ni dans l’avenir. Être héritière de celles et de ceux qui ont œuvré pour la liberté, un projet de réconciliation, c’est se voir assumer un devoir exigeant, celui de ne jamais céder au «deux poids, deux mesures».

    Être héritière d’une anonyme, en ce 8 mai 2025, c’est faire entendre, en se tenant devant vous, que cet anniversaire nous engage, nous, parlementaires européens. C’est un appel à regarder en face la réalité brutale du monde, un appel à nous battre à notre tour pour la démocratie, pour la liberté, pour la sécurité, pour l’universalisme, et ceci pour tous nos héritiers.

    		  
       

    		 

      Thomas Waitz, on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group. – Madam President, colleagues, the Second World War was raw brutality. It was demonisation and dehumanisation of big parts of society. It was devastating warfare, total destruction and mass murder. That’s what it was. Fascism didn’t happen overnight. It was carefully woven into parts of society or into society, piece by piece, many years before the Nazis took over Germany and Austria, driven by blind hatred, by white supremacy and racism. Countless people were targeted and killed.

    But based on acknowledgement of crime, reconciliation and forgiveness, we are building this, our European Union. Yes, to forgive, but never to forget. Because remembrance is not an act of the past, it’s a pact with the future.

    But, colleagues, somehow I have the impression that we did not learn. Once again, strong men have returned – in the US, in Russia, in China, in Hungary. Based on hatred and on disrespect for human rights, we once again see the rising forces of anti-democratic and anti-human policies. Even here in this House we hear hate speech, we hear blunt, fearmongering propaganda.

    But freedom is still strong and the fight for freedom is still strong. The freedom to love who you love, the freedom to decide over your own body, the freedom to live the life that you want to live, and the freedom to learn from history and the freedom to strive for peace. Because ‘never again’ is now!

    		  
       

    		 

      Konstantinos Arvanitis, εξ ονόματος της ομάδας The Left. – Κυρία Πρόεδρε, 80 χρόνια από τη λήξη του Β΄ Παγκοσμίου Πολέμου αλλά και 80 χρόνια από τη μεγάλη αντιφασιστική νίκη. Ας θυμηθούμε, λοιπόν, τις αιτίες. Να ξαναδιαβάσουμε την ιστορία· να μην ξαναγράψουμε την ιστορία όπως επιτάσσουν συμφέροντα, ώστε να μην επαναλάβουμε τα ίδια λάθη γιατί αυτό θα συνιστά έγκλημα στο έγκλημα.

    Να θυμηθούμε πως οι αντιθέσεις του κεφαλαίου σε Ευρώπη και Αμερική ενίσχυσαν, χρηματοδότησαν και γιγάντωσαν τον φασισμό και τον ναζισμό στην ήπειρό μας. Να θυμηθούμε και να τιμήσουμε τα θύματα αυτής της θηριωδίας: τους Εβραίους, τους κομμουνιστές, τους σοσιαλιστές, τους δημοκράτες, τους δημοκράτες αντιναζί, τη ΛΟΑΤΚΙ κοινότητα, τους διαφορετικούς, τους ανήμπορους. Θύματα στο ιδεολόγημα της αθλιότητας περί καθαρής φυλής, αρίας φυλής. Να τιμήσουμε τα εκατομμύρια των θυμάτων, απλούς στρατιώτες, νέα λαϊκά παιδιά που δεν χάρηκαν τη ζωή. Να τιμήσουμε τους παρτιζάνους, τους αντάρτες, τις γυναίκες, τους άνδρες που βγήκαν στα βουνά για να αντισταθούν και να αντιμετωπίσουν τη ναζιστική φασιστική θηριωδία.

    Η χώρα μου, μια μικρή χώρα, έχασε το ένα έβδομο του πληθυσμού της. Τουλάχιστον 650.000 εκτελέστηκαν, πέθαναν από την πείνα, δολοφονήθηκαν. Κλάπηκε όλος ο ελληνικός θησαυρός και έμειναν πίσω καμένες εστίες, καμένα χωριά, μαρτυρικά χωριά.

    Με αφορμή τη σημερινή επέτειο, εδώ, από το βήμα του Ευρωπαϊκού Κοινοβουλίου, επαναφέρω το θέμα των ελληνικών αξιώσεων που αφορούν αποζημιώσεις και επανορθώσεις για ζημιές που υπέστη η χώρα μου και οι πολίτες της κατά τον Α΄ και Β΄ Παγκόσμιο Πόλεμο, για πολεμικές αποζημιώσεις για τα θύματα, τους απογόνους των θυμάτων της γερμανικής Κατοχής, την αποπληρωμή του κατοχικού δανείου και την επιστροφή των κλοπιμαίων και παράνομα αφαιρεθέντων αρχαιολογικών και πολιτιστικών αγαθών. Από τη χώρα μου, την Ελλάδα, που σήκωσε το ανάστημά της απέναντι στον ναζισμό και τον φασισμό. Είναι δίκαιο· και η Ευρώπη χωρίς δικαιοσύνη δεν υπάρχει.

    		  
       

    		 

      René Aust, im Namen der ESN-Fraktion. – Frau Präsidentin! Am 8. Mai 1945 endete mit der bedingungslosen Kapitulation der Wehrmacht die militärische Herrschaft des Nationalsozialismus. Auch in diesem Jahr gedenken wir der Millionen gefallenen Soldaten und getöteten Zivilisten des Zweiten Weltkrieges. Wir erkennen zunehmend auch die doppelte Bedeutung dieses Tages an: Der 8. Mai bedeutete für Westeuropa langfristig Freiheit, für Mittel‑ und Osteuropa jedoch die Zementierung einer 45-jährigen russischen Gewaltherrschaft.

    Richard von Weizsäcker verwies in seiner berühmten Rede am 8. Mai 1985 zu Recht darauf, dass dieser Tag untrennbar mit dem 30. Januar 1933, dem Beginn der nationalsozialistischen Diktatur, verbunden sei. Aber das ist nur ein Teil. Denn so gewiss der 8. Mai das Ende der NS‑Diktatur markierte, so gewiss schuf er zugleich die Grundlage für kommunistische Diktaturen. Ohne den 8. Mai 1945 hätte es durch Russland keine Verschleppung zehntausender baltischer Familien im März 1949 gegeben, keine russische Niederschlagung des Volksaufstandes in der DDR am 17. Juni 1953, keinen russischen Einmarsch in Ungarn 1956, keine russischen Panzer in Prag 1968 und keine Unterdrückung der Solidarność‑Bewegung in Polen.

    Heute gedenken wir der Opfer des Zweiten Weltkriegs vom 1. September 1939 bis zum 8. Mai 1945. Zugleich danken wir allen Männern und Frauen, die in Mittel‑ und Osteuropa nach dem 8. Mai 1945 mutig gegen die kommunistische Diktatur und die russische Vorherrschaft aufgestanden sind. Ihr Einsatz für Freiheit und nationale Selbstbestimmung bleibt ein unverzichtbarer Teil des europäischen Erbes.

    		  
       


    		 

      Javi López (S&D). – Señora presidenta, hoy conmemoramos el 80.º aniversario del fin de la Segunda Guerra Mundial, la guerra que desoló Europa, que mostró la cara más cruel del ser humano y de los espeluznantes horrores de los que somos capaces, de los que el hombre es capaz. La guerra no solo asesina a los vivos, acaba perdurando sobre las futuras generaciones.

    Hoy enormes cicatrices de esta guerra perduran aquí, en Europa. De aquella oscuridad y de las cenizas de esa guerra construimos las instituciones que hoy disfrutamos, la Europa de la paz y la dignidad, de la democracia y las libertades: la Europa de la reconciliación.

    Es una Europa que vuelve a estar amenazada por el totalitarismo y el autoritarismo que padecimos entonces, de líderes autoritarios que desde fuera amenazan la seguridad europea, de líderes autoritarios que también tienen peones aquí, en las instituciones europeas, y que amenazan con liquidar la democracia y las libertades que hoy disfrutamos. Son autoritarios que utilizan las mismas ideas e instrumentalizan el aislamiento, el miedo y la mentira para sembrar el odio frente a lo que nosotros reivindicamos: la verdad, la justicia y la memoria. Una Europa unida es la única respuesta frente a la barbarie.

    		  
       

    		 

      Hermann Tertsch (PfE). – Señor presidente, hace ochenta años la derrota militar del nacionalsocialismo alemán cerró una de las páginas más monstruosas de la historia de la humanidad, generada, recuérdenlo, en Europa y por Europa. Fue la nación de los poetas y los pensadores la causante del genocidio industrializado que fue el Holocausto del pueblo judío y el incendio de todo el continente. Fue la arrogancia del idealismo totalitario la que prima la utopía humana sobre la sacralidad de la vida hasta caer al agujero negro del crimen total.

    Iban al mundo ideal. «Am deutschen Wesen soll die Welt genesen»: la esencia alemana sanará al mundo. Resuena inquietante en la arrogancia de los que hoy marginan al discrepante. Aquella guerra mató a sesenta millones de personas. El nazismo sucumbió en doce años, pero quedó el comunismo, la otra ideología redentora en pos del ideal que solo genera infiernos. El comunismo asesinó a más de cien millones, sigue hoy vivo y presente y está también aquí en esta sala. Porque el 8 de mayo se liberó una parte de Europa, pero, en la otra, solo se cambió una tiranía por la otra.

    El comunismo se transformó y, si en Rusia tenemos una oligarquía agresora y criminal, hoy en Occidente lo tenemos disfrazado de ingeniería social, del igualitarismo colectivista, del socialismo que persigue los mismos fines. En honor de tantos millones de víctimas, defendamos la libertad y la verdad, las armas supremas frente a ideologías redentoras, totalitarias y criminales siempre.

    		  
       

    		 

      Adrian-George Axinia (ECR). – Doamnă președintă, există un citat anonim celebru care descrie cumva ciclicitatea războiului pe tărâm european: „Vremurile bune creează oameni puternici, oamenii puternici creează vremuri bune. Vremurile bune creează oameni slabi și oamenii slabi creează vremuri grele.”

    Într-o Europă a prosperității, la 80 de ani de la sfârșitul celui de-al Doilea Război Mondial, cu o inconștiență veselă, proiectul nostru se îndreaptă pe bâjbâite către un nou conflict paneuropean. Și asta din cauza unei conduceri a Uniunii Europene rupte de realitate și de voința cetățenilor europeni.

    M-am bucurat să aud vorbindu-se despre ce am reușit să construim în ultimii 80 de ani pe continent: libertate, prosperitate, securitate. Era bine dacă insistam pe cuvântul pace, care lipsește din descrierea acestui eveniment. Cât despre democrație, aș fi vrut să văd în ultima jumătate de an mai multe reacții față de abuzurile antidemocratice comise de puterea politică din România. Nu cum a făcut Bruxelles-ul, care a închis ochii sau chiar a aplaudat anularea voinței cetățenilor români. Din fericire, vocea lor s-a făcut auzită pe 4 mai și se va face auzită și pe 18 mai.

    		  
       

    		 

      Marie-Agnes Strack-Zimmermann (Renew). – Frau Präsidentin! „Es ist geschehen, und folglich kann es wieder geschehen.“ – So warnte der italienische Schriftsteller und Auschwitzüberlebende Primo Levi davor, den Zivilisationsbruch der Nazis zu vergessen, denn das Ende des Zweiten Weltkriegs erinnert an die Befreiung vom nationalsozialistischen Terror. Und daher erinnern wir auch an die Jahre vor 1945. Wie konnten zivilisierte Menschen zu diesem Grauen fähig sein? 80 Jahre später wird in Deutschland die AfD vom Verfassungsschutz als rechtsextrem eingestuft. Rechte Kräfte sind in ganz Europa seit Jahren auf dem Vormarsch. In den USA regiert ein Präsident, der offensichtlich das Autoritäre liebt.

    Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, die EU ist das größte und wunderbarste Friedensprojekt der Welt. Gerade uns sollte die Vergangenheit mahnen, was passieren kann, wenn Demokratien zerbrechen und autoritäre Regime an ihre Stelle treten. Lassen Sie uns deswegen wehrhaft sein, nach außen wie nach innen, damit das, was geschehen ist, nie wieder geschieht.

    (Die Rednerin ist damit einverstanden, auf mehrere Fragen nach dem Verfahren der „blauen Karte“ zu antworten.)

    		  
       

    		 

      Arkadiusz Mularczyk (ECR), pytanie zadane przez podniesienie niebieskiej kartki. – Pani Poseł! Jest Pani przedstawicielką narodu, państwa, które wywołało II wojnę światową, wyrządziło ogromne cierpienia dla mojego narodu, dla Polski, ale również dla innych narodów europejskich, dla Grecji.

    Dlaczego Niemcy nie chcą zapłacić reparacji wojennych Polsce – odszkodowania za II wojnę światową?

    Państwa naród, naziści, wymordowali 6 milionów Polaków, zniszczyli Polskę i do dzisiaj nie chcą się z Polską rozliczyć. Kiedy zapłacicie swój dług wobec Polski i Grecji?

    		  
       

    		 

      Marie-Agnes Strack-Zimmermann (Renew), Antwort auf eine Frage nach dem Verfahren der „blauen Karte“. – Vielen Dank für Ihre Einlassung. Deutschland hat gerade nach dem Fall der Mauer mit Unterstützung der Vereinigten Staaten, der Franzosen und auch der Briten gelernt, was Demokratie bedeutet. Ich glaube, wenn ich zurückschaue nach 80 Jahren, dass wir im Austausch mit unseren Nachbarn, mit unseren Nationen alles getan haben, was man tun muss, um in Frieden und Freiheit gemeinsam zu leben. Und deswegen: Ja, ich stehe hier als deutsche Staatsbürgerin, und ich war seinerzeit noch nicht geboren. Wir haben in Deutschland die Geschichte 80 Jahre lang – und das ist gut so – aufgearbeitet, bis heute. Ich bezweifle, dass es Länder gibt, wo die Geschichte des Mittuns aufgearbeitet worden ist. Wir haben es getan, und wir werden in Deutschland dafür sorgen, dass nie vergessen wird, was die Nazis diesem Kontinent und darüber hinaus angetan haben. Denn es ist richtig: Über 60 Millionen Menschen haben das Leben verloren. Deutschland ist ein demokratischer Staat, und wir sind in Verantwortung. Wir sind glücklich, hier Teil der Europäischen Union zu sein.

    		  
       


    		 

      Marie-Agnes Strack-Zimmermann (Renew), Antwort auf eine Frage nach dem Verfahren der „blauen Karte“. – Sie sind Mitglied einer Partei, die als gesichert rechtsextrem gilt. Ich glaube, Ihre Immunität ist gerade aufgehoben worden – korrigieren Sie mich, wenn das falsch ist. Dass Sie überhaupt die Traute haben, so zu sprechen. Ich habe gerade, wenn Sie zugehört haben, gesagt, in den USA regiert ein Präsident, der offensichtlich das Autoritäre liebt, so wie Sie es lieben. Und ich sage Ihnen: Die Mehrheit in diesem Hause wird nicht zulassen, dass Politiker wie Sie und Ihre Partei – die hier sitzt, die hier sich hat reinwählen lassen, nicht um Europa nach vorne zu bringen, sondern um dieses Europa von innen zu zerstören – diese Europäische Union zerstören. Deswegen sage ich: Wir haben nicht nur nach außen wehrhaft zu sein, sondern auch nach innen, damit solche Politiker wie Sie diese Europäische Union nicht zerstören.

    		  
       

    		 

      Nela Riehl (Verts/ALE). – Madam President, what is the most important EU value to you? To that question, young Europeans answered: human rights, democracy and peace. Eighty years after World War II, these values are still our most important heritage.

    But as Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has shown, peace and democracy are not a given – they call for a commitment. A commitment to not remain silent when extremist regimes deliberately starve civilians and commit war atrocities. A commitment from democratic forces to raise strong firewalls against the far right in Europe. And a commitment to remain vigilant when our allies progressively turn their back on democracy, censoring researchers and activists or threatening the rights of minorities and women.

    But what does this actually mean for us? It means we cannot compromise on the freedom of our artists, our universities, our citizens. Europe must remain a hub of creativity, of knowledge and also of democracy, providing equal opportunities for all. It means we cannot let foreign forces interfere in our democratic processes, be it in the ballots or on social media. And it means we cannot be complicit when fundamental rights are being walked over, all in this very Union.

    Turning a blind eye would be a betrayal to the lessons our grandparents painfully learned. Our European Union youth is rightfully demanding us to stay loyal to this heritage. More than a celebration, today’s anniversary is a reminder of Europe’s responsibility.

    		  
       

    		 

      Marina Mesure (The Left). – Madame la Présidente, chers collègues, nous ne devons jamais oublier l’horreur de cette guerre. Ne jamais oublier le visage de tous ces innocents qui ont péri dans les camps ou sur les champs de bataille, ni celui de celles et ceux qui ont résisté avec courage pour notre liberté. Ne jamais oublier que cette guerre totale fut provoquée par des régimes d’extrême droite, car, oui, ce qui fait le ciment de nos sociétés européennes est de nouveau menacé. Le retour en force de l’extrême droite met en péril l’unité des peuples en désignant, comme en 1940, des ennemis de l’intérieur et en rejetant l’état de droit, garant des libertés fondamentales. En s’alimentant sur la montée des inégalités, en banalisant les discours de haine, ils créent le ferment de la division.

    Face à cette menace, rappelons-nous que du chaos de la Seconde Guerre mondiale est sorti un héritage commun, celui des Nations unies, un internationalisme guidé par un idéal de paix, de coopération, de solidarité entre les peuples. Un héritage qui nous montre la voie et qu’il convient de protéger.

    Ainsi, en cette journée de commémoration, ne laissons pas l’oubli envahir nos cœurs. Gardons cette mémoire vive et continuons à lutter avec force et détermination pour un projet humaniste et universaliste.

    		  
       


    		 

      Ruth Firmenich (NI). – Frau Präsidentin, meine Damen und Herren! Heute vor 80 Jahren wurde Deutschland vom Faschismus befreit. Heute ist der Tag, den Befreiern aus der Sowjetunion, den USA, Großbritannien und Frankreich sowie den Partisanen zu danken, die für unsere Freiheit gekämpft haben. Es war die Sowjetunion, die die Hauptlast im Kampf gegen den Hitlerfaschismus getragen hat. Über 27 Millionen Sowjetbürger, die meisten davon Zivilisten, starben beim Feldzug der Nazis, der die slawischen Völker versklaven und vernichten sollte – mehr als eine Million allein bei der Blockade Leningrads. Doch die deutsche Bundesregierung weigert sich, dieses Verbrechen als Völkermord anzuerkennen.

    Die Erinnerung an die Geschichte ist in Gefahr. Leider gibt es – auch hier im Haus – Versuche, den Anteil der Sowjetunion am Sieg über Nazideutschland kleinzureden. Aber es war die Rote Armee, die das Vernichtungslager Auschwitz und das Konzentrationslager Sachsenhausen bei Berlin befreite. Es ist eine Schande, wenn Vertreter Russlands, des größten Nachfolgestaats der Sowjetunion, am 80. Jahrestag der Befreiung vom Gedenken ausgeschlossen werden. Wir dürfen es nicht zulassen, dass die Geschichte verfälscht wird. Das sind wir auch den Millionen Opfern des deutschen Faschismus schuldig.

    		  
       

    		 

      Łukasz Kohut (PPE). – Pani Przewodnicząca! Wojna nie jest rozwiązaniem – zawsze jest okrucieństwem. Wojna niszczy to, co piękne, poddaje w wątpliwość to, co słuszne, i nie pozostawia wyboru dla tego, co konieczne. Wojna nie nauczyła nas niczego, co wartościowe. Uświadomiła nam jednak, na co już nigdy nie możemy pozwolić i co za wszelką cenę musimy powstrzymać.

    80 lat temu zakończyły się działania wojenne. Nie wszędzie przyniosły pokój. Są miejsca w Europie, gdzie Armia Czerwona kontynuowała to, co rozpoczął Adolf Hitler. Tak było na Śląsku, gdzie Sowieci popełniali najobrzydliwsze zbrodnie na miejscowej ludności. Takich miejsc jak Śląsk było więcej. Jeden terror zastąpił drugi.

    Wojna w Ukrainie przypomina nam, że nic nie jest dane raz na zawsze, że pokój nie spada z nieba. Więcej: pokój wymaga ciągłej pracy, ciągłej walki, nieustannych kompromisów czy rezygnacji z wybujałych ambicji.

    80 lat temu okrucieństwa wojny zmieniły nie tylko układ sił, granic, wygląd miast, ale także nas samych, Europejczyków. Wolność, demokracja, bezpieczeństwo – te trzy elementy składają się na nasze wspólne europejskie dziedzictwo, któremu nadaliśmy konkretną nazwę: Unia Europejska.

    To jest droga, którą podążamy. Może bywa wyboista i trudna, bo nic, co wartościowe, nie przychodzi łatwo, ale nie ma większego sukcesu Europejczyków niż pokój, który nam zapewnia.

    		  
       


    		 

      António Tânger Corrêa (PfE). – Senhora Presidente, caros colegas, celebra-se hoje — e é motivo para celebrar — o fim da Segunda Guerra Mundial, a maior guerra que o mundo já conheceu até hoje.

    Não, não foram 50 milhões, não foram 60 milhões, foram 75 milhões, entre militares, civis e genocídios. 3 % da população mundial na altura morreu devido à guerra. Isto não se pode repetir.

    Mas, se o fim da guerra foi uma boa notícia, a melhor notícia foi a criação de um espaço de paz e prosperidade chamado União Europeia. E a União Europeia tem de ser reforçada, mas tem de ser reforçada com países soberanos, e não com estruturas federais ou federalistas que nos querem impor soluções. Nós somos diferentes uns dos outros e temos muita honra nessas diferenças, e queremos mantê-las — pela positiva, com colaboração, mas cada um de nós é diferente do outro, e isso é altamente positivo para a criação de um corpo como a União Europeia.

    Por outro lado, em termos de defesa, é bom que não inventemos muito. Nós temos a NATO, que é uma organização fiel a si própria e a nós próprios, e que tem sempre acorrido quando nós precisamos dela. E não nos esqueçamos de que os Estados Unidos da América do Norte têm sido o garante da nossa liberdade, e nós, a partir de agora, temos de ser também os garantes da nossa liberdade, para que nunca mais se repitam os horrores desta guerra cujo fim agora celebramos.

    		  
       


    		 

      Michał Kobosko (Renew). – Pani Przewodnicząca! Jestem z Polski, kraju, który najbardziej ucierpiał podczas II wojny światowej. Miliony istnień ludzkich – Polaków, ale i Żydów – zostało zabitych w imię nienawiści i podziałów – społeczność, która od wieków znajdowała swoje miejsce właśnie w Polsce, w kraju porozumienia i tolerancji.

    Po zagładzie milionów ludzi, destrukcji setek miast i traumie na pokolenia przyszedł pokój. To właśnie dlatego dokładnie 75 lat temu zaczęła powstawać Unia Europejska. By budować pokój i wspólnotę.

    Nie łudźmy się: eurosceptycyzm karmiony radykalizmem, napędzany pieniędzmi z Moskwy, to droga w przeszłość, droga do katastrofy. Dlatego z całą mocą potępiam dziś haniebne antysemickie wystąpienia posła Grzegorza Brauna. To nie tylko mowa nienawiści, to atak na wartości, na których zbudowana jest Europa.

    Apeluję też do eurosceptyków: otwórzcie podręczniki historii, zobaczcie, jak wiele dał nam projekt europejski – gwarantuje wolność, bezpieczeństwo i współpracę, jak nigdy wcześniej w dziejach Europy.

    		  
       

    		 

      Benedetta Scuderi (Verts/ALE). – Signora Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, la Seconda guerra mondiale non è arrivata per la mera follia di un paio di dittatori: è stato anche il calcolo miope di chi, pur di fermare l’avanzata delle istanze sociali, ha preferito cedere spazio ai fascisti.

    Liberali e popolari pensavano di poterli usare come argine e usare la loro violenza a favore di un proprio profitto momentaneo. Il capitale ha scelto di sostenerli. Ma l’argine ha ceduto e si sono ritrovati complici di una catastrofe, il cui prezzo l’hanno pagato milioni di persone.

    Chi scioperava o dissentiva veniva schedato, perseguito. La polizia entrava nelle università, i giornalisti venivano spiati. L’odio diventava linguaggio politico, i diritti una concessione temporanea, le donne ancor più discriminate, l’omosessualità sempre più illegale. La corsa al riarmo venne definita giustificata, inevitabile. E poi la pagina più buia: il genocidio, coperto da un silenzio complice.

    Never again, abbiamo detto. Eppure questa descrizione potrebbe essere il telegiornale di oggi. Contro quella guerra, quegli orrori, il fascismo nasce questa istituzione; un’istituzione che doveva proteggere la pace, il disarmo, l’unione tra popoli, combattere per il diritto internazionale e contro ogni genocidio. Lo stiamo facendo?

    Colleghi e colleghe, rileggiamo la storia e guardatevi bene dentro e ditemi se pensate che questa sia la direzione giusta. Ogni volta che scegliete di stare dalla parte di chi priva della libertà e dello Stato di diritto, la parte di Meloni, Orban, Trump, Putin e tutti gli altri, state svendendo libertà, pace e democrazia.

    		  
       

    		 

      Danilo Della Valle (The Left). – Signora Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, forse c’è un piccolo misunderstanding nella discussione di oggi. Noi festeggiamo la fine della Seconda guerra mondiale: ma non dobbiamo mai dimenticare che è stata l’Europa che ha partorito il mostro del nazifascismo. Hitler e Mussolini non erano dei pazzi venuti da Marte ma il prodotto di un’ideologia suprematista che sopravvive ancora oggi e non sopravvive solo in chi aderisce alle formazioni estremiste.

    Dobbiamo ricordare perché solo con la memoria possiamo evitare di ricadere nel baratro del passato. Dobbiamo ricordare cosa accadde nei lager e il genocidio che ne scaturì, nei quali persero la vita 6 milioni di ebrei, mezzo milione di sinti e milioni di cittadini sovietici. Oggi qualcuno vorrebbe riscrivere quella storia, escludendo dai festeggiamenti gli ex popoli sovietici, i russi e i popoli slavi, ma per pure ragioni di convenienza geopolitica.

    Quello che accade oggi in Ucraina non può essere la scusa per cancellare il contributo di vite umane che i russi, i polacchi, i popoli slavi e sovietici tutti hanno pagato per liberare tutti noi dal nazifascismo: 27 milioni di sovietici, uomini, donne e bambini massacrati, bruciati vivi nei villaggi, mandati al fronte a difendere un’Europa che forse non li considerava neanche dei pari, ma che hanno contribuito a liberare.

    Quelle morti meritano il rispetto e il nostro ricordo. La memoria ci obbliga alla pace, alla verità e al rispetto di tutti i popoli che hanno pagato il prezzo per la libertà.

    		  
       

    		 

      Zsuzsanna Borvendég (ESN). – Elnök Asszony! A történelmi bűnökből okulni kell, nem megismételni. Miközben a békét hirdetik, az emberiséget egy újabb világháború felé sodorják. Magyarországon a második világháború vége szovjet megszállást hozott. A nagyhatalmak a megkérdezésünk nélkül döntöttek a sorsunkról. Megtanultuk, hogy a háborúk soha nem az igazságról, hanem a pénzről, a hatalomról és a politikai érdekekről szólnak, ahogy sajnos a békék is. Mégis, mindent meg kell tennünk a fegyvernyugvásért.

    De Európa nem tanult a múltból, újra fegyverkezéssel akarja megoldani a gazdasági problémáit, természetellenes ideológiákkal harcol a gondolatszabadság ellen, asszisztál a politikai ellenvélemények elhallgattatásához, és tagadja a realitásokat. Európa alapvető érdeke a békés gazdasági együttműködés Oroszországgal. Ahányszor ez megvalósulóban volt a történelem során, kitört egy háború. Most is ez történt. Idegen érdekek rángatják dróton Európát, miközben a végromlásba döntenek minket. Vessünk végre véget ennek! Ne beszéljünk a békéről, hanem valósítsuk meg!

    		  
       

    		 

      Ondřej Dostál (NI). – Paní předsedající, vážení kolegové, za vítězství nad nacismem položily své životy miliony spojeneckých vojáků. Bohužel zapomínáme na ty, kteří přinesli obětí nejvíce. Stydím se za kolegy, kteří tvrdí, že Československo osvobodili jen Američané. Řekli byste to matkám sovětských padlých při osvobození naší země? Řekli byste zbídačelým vězňům v Osvětimi, že příchodem sovětské armády nebyli osvobozeni, ale okupováni? Stydím se za svou vládu, že neuctí padlé z řad sovětské armády, a jsem rád, že tak za bývalé Československo učiní premiér Robert Fico, ač je za to ostouzen. Rozhodl jsem se proto, že i já zítra položím květy k hrobu Neznámého vojína v Moskvě. Činím tak ze tří důvodů. Zaprvé, z osobního přesvědčení, že na padlé se nezapomíná. Za druhé, z vůle mých voličů, kteří mají hrůzy nacismu stále v paměti. Zatřetí, z vůle po míru. Oslava 80. výročí porážky nacismu nás spojuje a může otevřít cestu k míru, k diplomacii, k vyřešení nynějšího konfliktu, který vojenské řešení nemá. Přeji šťastnou cestu všem státníkům, ať už míří na oslavy kamkoli, a prosím je, aby šířili vůli po míru v souladu s principy Charty OSN. Já tak zítra učiním.

    		  
       

    		 

      Wouter Beke (PPE). – Voorzitter, vandaag herdenken we het einde van de Tweede Wereldoorlog. Tachtig jaar geleden, in de puinhopen van 1945, kozen visionaire leiders zoals Adenauer, Schuman en De Gasperi voor verzoening, verzoening boven wraak, samenwerking boven conflict, democratie boven dictatuur.

    Hun radicale antwoord legde de kiem van waar wij vandaag nog steeds de vruchten van plukken. Een Europese Unie van gedeelde soevereiniteit, democratie en menselijke waardigheid. Die keuze blijft brandend actueel, want extremen in Europa – we hebben het hier vandaag in het debat opnieuw gezien – willen onze rechtsstaat ondermijnen en proberen de banden te breken die ons juist samenhouden.

    En de agressie tegen Oekraïne dwingt ons tot een sterker defensiebeleid, juist om een nieuwe oorlog te voorkomen. Een slagkrachtiger Europa is niet de vijand van de subsidiariteit, maar het is juist de voorwaarde van subsidiariteit. Alleen via samenwerking kunnen we onze veiligheid, onze grondrechten en onze welvaart garanderen.

    Ik heb drie kinderen en ik hoop dat ze kunnen opgroeien in een Europa waarin vrijheid, democratie en menselijke waardigheid geen uitzondering zijn, maar de regel blijven. Laten we daarom vastberaden verder investeren in de Unie. Een Unie die uit deze puin verrezen is, want het is de beste garantie voor onze toekomst.

    		  
       

    		 

      Francisco Assis (S&D). – Senhora Presidente, em 18 de junho do já longínquo verão de 1940, um general do exército francês, à revelia do poder instituído, lançou um repto aos seus compatriotas: «não se rendam.» Charles de Gaulle constitui uma das mais sugestivas manifestações do papel do indivíduo na história e da importância da ação livre no curso dos acontecimentos humanos.

    Hannah Arendt, depois de assistir ao julgamento de Adolf Eichmann em Israel, desenvolveu a ideia da banalidade do mal. O homem que aceita ser uma peça acrítica num mecanismo institucional monstruoso torna-se irremissivelmente um agente do mal. Não há inocência na aceitação pacífica da perfídia. Eichmann, na sua pavorosa normalidade, representa o ser humano burocratizado e reduzido a uma condição não moral.

    De Gaulle representa o contrário de tudo isto. Ele sabia os riscos que corria. Numa conversa com amigos, terá dito «vão tomar-me por um aventureiro e, contudo, nunca fui um aventureiro. Dirão que sou um rebelde porque me recuso a obedecer a certas ordens. Mas os verdadeiros rebeldes são os que não obedecem ao dever mais sagrado: defender o seu país até à derradeira possibilidade, ao lado do seu último aliado. Vão talvez condenar-me à morte. Até aqui, os generais condenavam à morte os simples soldados que iam abandonar o campo de batalha. Desta vez vão condenar um general que se recusou a fugir desse mesmo campo de batalha».

    Essa é a grande lição de Charles de Gaulle. Nós, em certas circunstâncias, não podemos fugir do campo de batalha.

    (O orador aceita responder a uma pergunta «cartão azul»)

    		  
       


    		 

      Francisco Assis (S&D), Resposta segundo o procedimento «cartão azul». – Caro Deputado Sebastião Bugalho e caro amigo, eu julgo que há determinadas circunstâncias em que nós temos de saber transcender aquilo que são os nossos posicionamentos políticos. Há momentos para a disputa política mais banal e mais quotidiana, e há outros momentos em que temos de estar acima disso.

    E, se há exemplo na Europa — e neste último século há vários —, um deles foi e é indiscutivelmente o do general De Gaulle. Estando hoje aqui em Estrasburgo, estando hoje aqui em França, parecer-me-ia uma enorme injustiça que neste Parlamento ninguém se referisse a essa figura absolutamente extraordinária do século XX europeu que foi o general Charles de Gaulle.

    De Gaulle representa tudo, representa o que de mais relevante um homem de Estado pode representar, a luta pela liberdade, a coragem, a disponibilidade para correr o risco de vida em nome de valores mais altos.

    		  
       

    		 

      Anders Vistisen (PfE). – Fru formand! I dag markerer vi 80-året for nazisternes kapitulation. Et historisk øjeblik, hvor Europas frie nationer og modige folk besejrede en af de mest brutale ideologier, som verden har kendt. Det burde være en dag dedikeret til de, der kæmpede, led og døde for et frit Europa. Men i stedet for har huset her lavet det om til en trang til at promovere jeres eget føderale projekt. Intet symboliserer det bedre end den bevilling, I har givet til Huset for Europæisk Historie. Et såkaldt museum, som I har brugt mere end 400 millioner kroner af skatteborgernes penge på. Her forsøger I at skrive historien om. Det fremstår som om, at Europas historie begynder i 1945 og som om, at det ikke er nationalstaterne, der er udgangspunktet for den civilisation, fred og fremgang, Europa har kendt. Det er historisk manipulation og ideologisk propaganda, og det er en hån imod de generationer, der i over tusinde år har opbygget de nationer, kæmpet for den frihed og skabt den kulturarv, som Europa udgør. EU er ved at udvaske det hele i jagten på en føderal superstat.

    		  
       

    		 

      Rihards Kols (ECR). – Madam President, dear colleagues, for Western Europe World War Two ended in May 1945, but for millions in Central and Eastern Europe, Latvia included, the end of the tyranny meant the beginning of another. Soviet tanks replaced Nazi boots. Freedom was postponed for nearly five decades.

    Nazi crimes were prosecuted at Nuremberg, justice was served, and rightly so. But there was no Nuremberg for Communism, no tribunal for the gulags, the deportations, the erasure of Baltic independence.

    Europe’s memory remains divided. This is no accident; it’s by design. The Kremlin today wages war not only on Ukraine, but on historical truth itself. It denies the Molotov-Ribbentrop pact, glorifies Stalinism under the banner of liberation, and brands our resistance as fascism.

    Historical revisionism is a weapon, a tool to legitimise aggression, blur guilt and erase the suffering of nations. A united Europe demands a united memory, one that condemns all totalitarian regimes. There can be no reconciliation without truth and no security if lies go unchallenged.

    		  
       

    		 

      Charles Goerens (Renew). – Madame la Présidente, voici ce que nous inspire le 80ᵉ anniversaire de la fin de la Seconde Guerre mondiale: premièrement, de la reconnaissance en saluant les mérites de ceux qui nous ont libérés. J’entends par là, bien entendu, la résistance dans tous nos États membres, l’apport des Américains et aussi celui de l’Armée rouge – l’Armée rouge, dans le temps, était différente de ce que font les soldats russes en Ukraine actuellement.

    Deuxièmement, retenir les leçons de l’histoire. L’«appeasement» ne peut en aucun cas être le fil conducteur de la politique extérieure de l’Union européenne aujourd’hui. Nous avons vu où cela a mené dans les années 1930.

    Troisièmement, dans un monde où seul semble compter le rapport de force, nous devons être plus solidaires et développer davantage le projet européen.

    Quatrièmement, l’Europe est seule, mais elle est encore là. Il faut continuer à travailler sur le projet.

    Ce matin, en venant ici, j’ai entendu sur Deutschlandfunk une phrase historique prononcée par Richard von Weizsäcker il y a 40 ans:

    „Der 8. Mai war ein Tag der Befreiung.“

    Je crois qu’il faut que nous nous inspirions de cette phase, qui a une profondeur historique exemplaire.

    		  
       


       

    IN THE CHAIR: ESTEBAN GONZÁLEZ PONS
    Vice-President

    		  
       


    		 

      Jaume Asens Llodrà (Verts/ALE). – Señor presidente, hoy no basta con recordar. Hay que reconocer el mal cuando se repite con otras víctimas y con otros rostros. La memoria debe servir para prevenir el mal, no como coartada para practicarlo. Eso nos lo recuerdan algunos intelectuales judíos de Israel como Idith Zertal o Meir Margalit cuando nos dicen que Israel utiliza el pasado como escudo para no rendir cuentas con el presente y que Europa —y especialmente Alemania— se aferra a su culpa histórica para seguir manteniendo su lealtad a un Gobierno que está practicando otro genocidio, y así traiciona precisamente aquello que prometió no volver a repetir: nunca más el exterminio de un pueblo, nunca más la complicidad de las democracias europeas.

    Pero ahora, a diferencia de entonces, no podemos decir que no sabíamos nada, porque Europa sigue mandando armas, sigue manteniendo el acuerdo comercial con Netanyahu. ¿Qué culpa tienen los palestinos de lo que hicieron en el pasado los europeos, de lo que hicieron algunos, que son los padres ideológicos de los que están hoy aquí sentados y que justifican otra vez otro genocidio? Como entonces, la historia les está mirando a ustedes y les va a volver a juzgar.

    		  
       

    		 

      João Oliveira (The Left). – Senhor Presidente, a evocação dos 80 anos do dia da vitória sobre o nazifascismo tem de servir para lembrar as duras lições aprendidas pela humanidade com a tragédia dessa guerra, para que os povos possam evitar a sua repetição.

    O legado da barbárie nazifascista é uma destruição sem precedentes — o genocídio, os campos de concentração, as dezenas de milhões de mortos. Com 20 milhões de mortos, foi a União Soviética quem suportou o maior sacrifício do conjunto da coligação de países aliados formada durante a guerra.

    Democratas de vários quadrantes construíram a luta de resistência. O papel destacado assumido pelos comunistas foi determinante e, por isso, ainda hoje, os herdeiros das forças nazifascistas e os seus cúmplices destilam ódio anticomunista.

    Nos 80 anos do dia da vitória, é imprescindível relembrar que o combate ao nazismo e ao fascismo, às forças reacionárias e obscurantistas também se faz dando resposta aos problemas dos trabalhadores e dos povos, com a melhoria das suas condições de vida, a garantia dos direitos sociais, o respeito pelo direito dos Estados ao seu desenvolvimento, com a defesa intransigente da paz e da cooperação.

    O rasto de morte e destruição da barbárie nazifascista tem de ser suficiente para que hoje façamos tudo para defender a paz, a segurança coletiva e a resolução política dos conflitos. Estas são lutas que partilhamos com as gerações anteriores e, tal como há 80 anos, os comunistas cá continuarão para as travar.

    		  
       


    		 

      Danuše Nerudová (PPE). – Pane předsedající, kolegové, dnes si připomínáme konec druhé světové války. Den vítězství, odvahy a naděje těch, kteří bojovali za svobodu a demokracii, protože věřili, že po porážce nacismu přijde svobodný svět. Jenže do střední a východní Evropy místo svobody přišla další temnota. Ti, kterým jsme desítky let museli říkat osvoboditelé, přinesli jen nový teror, popravy, lágry a totalitu. Zlo vystřídalo jen další zlo. Jejich oběťmi se stali skuteční hrdinové, letci RAF, legionáři nebo odbojáři. Ti všichni byli pronásledováni, vězněni a trestáni, protože pro totalitní režim znamenali vše, co moskevské loutky neměly – svobodu, hrdinství a lásku k demokracii. Dnes, 80 let poté, se kolaborace se zlem znovu stává závažným problémem celé Evropy. Naše demokracie dokonce umožňuje, že někteří podporovatelé fašismu a komunismu pořád sedí s námi tady v Evropském parlamentu a mají tu drzost šířit ruskou propagandu a lež. Přála bych si, abychom i my, stejně jako naši váleční hrdinové, měli odvahu čelit zlu. Začněme nazývat věci správnými jmény. Skutečný osvoboditel nikdy nemůže přinést novou totalitu. Svůj proslov věnuji všem československým hrdinům, včetně letců RAF, kteří po skončení druhé světové války byli zavražděni a umučeni komunisty.

    		  
       

    		 

      Cecilia Strada (S&D). – Signor presidente, onorevoli colleghi, se l’Europa si occuperà solo dei problemi interni dei singoli Paesi, resteranno in piedi le cause di conflitti, di militarismi, di guerre. Così scrivevano Altiero Spinelli e gli altri fondatori del Movimento federalista europeo nel pieno della Seconda guerra mondiale, finita 80 anni fa. Una triste profezia.

    Oggi i ragazzi e le ragazze d’Europa studiano gli orrori della Seconda guerra mondiale, il genocidio degli ebrei, lo sterminio di disabili, rom, sinti, omosessuali e si chiedono: qualcuno poteva fermare questo orrore e non l’ha fatto?

    Fra qualche anno anche noi saremo sui libri di storia: Commissione, Consiglio, questo Parlamento. Saremo su una pagina nera. Ottant’anni dopo l’Olocausto i cittadini del mondo guardano il genocidio della popolazione palestinese teorizzato e portato avanti dal governo di Israele e ci chiedono: perché non fermate la strage? Perché continuate a vendere armi a Israele? Perché siete complici di tutto questo? Perché?

    Sono passati 80 anni e, come diceva Gramsci, la storia insegna ma non ha scolari. Che vergogna!

    		  
       

    		 

      Alexandre Varaut (PfE). – Monsieur le Président, au moment d’évoquer l’anniversaire de la fin de la Seconde Guerre mondiale, je veux d’abord évoquer les soldats, les civils, les résistants français, acteurs ou victimes de cette guerre, et avoir une pensée personnelle pour mon grand-père, décoré de la Croix de guerre pour sa contribution à la Résistance.

    Nous commémorons aujourd’hui la liberté comme patrimoine pour l’Europe; pour l’Europe, mais pas pour les millions d’Européens de l’Est livrés à Staline, qui fut l’allié de Hitler jusqu’à l’été 1941, ne l’oublions pas. Aujourd’hui, le soviétisme a disparu à son tour, mais à quel profit?

    La liberté et la démocratie sont refusées par les libéraux et les démocrates prétendus à leurs adversaires en Roumanie ou en Hongrie, montrant que, dans leur bouche, ces principes universels sont un capital politique qu’ils exploitent, mais ne respectent pas. La sécurité est absente de nos sociétés fracturées par l’immigration de masse. Les crimes se multiplient.

    Ce bilan prouve que les leçons de la guerre n’ont pas été tirées. Il prouve que les idéologues modernes persistent à sacrifier des hommes et des vies à leurs utopies désastreuses. Il prouve que, de plus en plus contestés dans leur dogme, c’est à la répression idéologique ou juridique qu’ils recourent et qu’ils n’hésiteront pas, pour édifier leur paradis terrestre, à faire de l’Europe un purgatoire.

    		  
       


    		 

      Dan Barna (Renew). – Domnule președinte, comemorăm astăzi 80 de ani de la Al Doilea Război Mondial, dar lecțiile sale sunt mai actuale ca niciodată. În ’38, când Germania nazistă anexa Austria, nu a fost doar un act de forță, el fusese pavat de o campanie neîncetată de propagandă și dezinformare. Regimul nazist a portretizat o narațiune falsă a unui popor austriac dornic de unire, fabricând crize și suprimând orice știre care contrazicea povestea oficială. Naziștii controlau informația și controlau percepția, făcând agresiunea lor să pară justificată, ba chiar binevenită.

    În zilele noastre, lupta pentru adevăr s-a mutat pe ecranele din viața noastră. Dezinformarea, amplificată de viteza și amplitudinea rețelelor sociale, erodează încrederea în instituții și în democrație și poate destabiliza societăți. Tacticile evoluează – de la emisiuni radio și fotografii trucate, la deepfake-uri și bule conduse de algoritmi – dar scopul de a manipula adevărul pentru putere rămâne înfiorător de familiar.

    Trecutul ne oferă o lecție dură și urgentă: trebuie să fim consumatori critici de informație. Trebuie să punem întrebări, trebuie să verificăm și trebuie să înțelegem agendele care se pot ascunde în spatele narațiunilor care ne sunt prezentate. Istoria ne arată că atunci când adevărul este compromis, libertatea și pacea sunt grav periclitate. Trebuie să învățăm din tenebrele trecutului pentru a proteja prezentul și viitorul.

    		  
       

    		 

      Anna Strolenberg (Verts/ALE). – Mr President, ‘never again’ are words often spoken, but difficult to uphold. We are here amongst Europeans and we all have different war traumas, be it Nazism, Fascism, Communism or colonialism. These stories make us who we are, and these histories also put a great responsibility upon us to act when we see that freedom is taken away from others.

    We are not doing that enough, Europe is not doing it enough. We are too silent about Netanyahu’s war crimes in Gaza. We are too timid in supporting Ukraine in defeating Russian imperialism.

    We can do so much more, and I am proud that I can stand here and be critical, because this freedom is a luxury for some. I am proud that I am European, and that we managed to turn our history into the biggest peace project there is.

    But I would be even prouder if we managed to live up to our responsibility and to show actions that speak louder than these words. Let’s live up to our responsibility, and let’s remember that ‘never again’ is not a prayer to the past, but a promise to the future.

    		  
       


    		 

      Paulius Saudargas (PPE). – Mr President, honourable colleagues, eighty years ago Europe rose from the ashes of the most brutal war in human history. However, in some European countries, the suffering was not over. For Lithuanians, Latvians, Estonians, Ukrainians, Poles and many other nations occupied by the Soviet Union, it was the beginning of the new wave of Stalin’s repressions. Imprisonment in gulags, mass deportations to extreme exile demolished millions of lives. But we resisted; we fought the enemy. We fought alone. In Lithuania and Ukraine the partisan war lasted for a decade, taking away thousands of the bravest.

    We must remember this in the context nowadays, because the enemy is the same. The peacemakers of the Second World War declared ‘we will never let this happen again’. Well, today these very foundations are under attack once more. The unprovoked and unjust invasion of Ukraine, war crimes, genocide of the Ukrainian people and mass propaganda mirrors the aggression and the suffering we once said would never be tolerated.

    I ask everyone here today to keep that promise. Not any peace, but a just peace must be our ultimate goal, and only then, for the final time, can we say ‘never again’.

    		  
       

    		 

      René Repasi (S&D). – Herr Präsident, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! 80 Jahre nach dem Ende des Zweiten Weltkriegs verlassen uns die letzten Überlebenden der Schoah, der Konzentrationslager des Krieges. Mit ihnen verlieren wir nicht nur Zeitzeugen. Wir verlieren Stimmen, die aus erster Hand gewarnt haben, was passieren kann, wenn Hass und Gleichgültigkeit zusammenkommen. Wir dürfen niemals zulassen, dass ihre Erlebnisse verstummen. Wir müssen ihre Augen, ihre Herzen, ihre Gedanken sein. Sie haben das Unfassbare gesehen. Sie haben gelitten. Sie haben gewarnt. Und sie haben auf uns gehofft.

    Jetzt mehr denn je ist es Zeit, diese Erinnerung nicht in Vergessenheit geraten zu lassen. Für uns Deutsche war das Ende des Weltkrieges eine Niederlage – nicht im Sinne nationaler Schmach, sondern als notwendiger Bruch mit einem verbrecherischen System. Die europäische Integration, die auf den Trümmern des Weltkrieges entstand, wurde geboren, um den Nationalismus, der nur das Trennende kennt und uns auf den Weg zum Krieg führt, zu überwinden. Es ist unsere Verantwortung, dieses Friedenswerk zu schützen und zu stärken. Denn Frieden ist nicht alles, aber ohne Frieden ist alles nichts!

    (Der Redner ist damit einverstanden, auf mehrere Fragen nach dem Verfahren der „blauen Karte“ zu antworten.)

    		  
       


    		 

      René Repasi (S&D), Antwort auf eine Frage nach dem Verfahren der „blauen Karte“. – Herr Kollege! Das, was Nazideutschland der Welt angetan hat, ist im Sinne von Kompensation niemals wiedergutmachbar. Dieses Verbrechen hat eine Intensität, dass es uns Deutsche, aber mit uns Deutschen uns Europäerinnen und Europäer und alle Bürgerinnen und Bürger dieser Welt niemals verlassen kann, weil es eine Verantwortung für unser alltägliches Handeln darstellt. Deswegen kann man sich von dieser Verantwortung auch nicht freikaufen, auch nicht freireden und heute auch nicht sagen, alles wäre jetzt wieder gut. Das ist es nicht, und das wird es nie sein. Das ist die politische Verantwortung, die wir als Deutsche, aber eben auch als Bürgerinnen und Bürger dieser Europäischen Union für immer tragen werden.

    		  
       

    		 

      Arkadiusz Mularczyk (ECR), pytanie zadane przez podniesienie niebieskiej kartki. – Mam pytanie, czy ma Pan świadomość, że obecnie polskie ofiary II wojny światowej nie mają dostępu do drogi sądowej, nie mają możliwości dochodzenia roszczeń? Znam osobiście takie ofiary poszkodowane przez Pana dziadków, pradziadków. Czy ma Pan świadomość, że Niemcy nie zawarły nigdy z Polską żadnej umowy o naprawie szkód i zadośćuczynieniu ofiarom? Czy ma Pan świadomość, że Niemcy nie zapłaciły nic polskim ofiarom ani Polsce? Czy nie jest Wam, Niemcom, wstyd? Czy nie jest wstyd Unii Europejskiej za to, że odwraca głowę od tej sprawy?

    		  
       



    		 

      Aurelijus Veryga (ECR). – Ponas pirmininke, 45-ųjų metų gegužės aštuntą dieną pasirašytas kapituliacijos aktas Lietuvai ir kitoms Baltijos šalims nereiškė nei karo pabaigos, nei laisvės. Save pristatantys išlaisvintojais sovietai „pamiršo“ išeiti iš išlaisvintų šalių, ir išlaisvintojai ėmėsi uoliai naikinti visus bent kiek pilietiškai nusiteikusius žmones. Tūkstančiai gyvuliniais vagonais buvo išvežti į Sibirą. Atimta žemė ir namai, sunaikinta pilietinė visuomenė, nevyriausybinės organizacijos bandė pasipriešinti ginklu miškuose, buvo nukankinti kalėjimuose, nužudyti ir išniekinti miestų aikštėse. Buvo bandoma sunaikinti kalbą, ribojama religijos laisvę, žiniasklaida tapo propagandos ruporais, klastojama istorija ir klastotėmis plaunamos vaikų smegenys. Tą teko patirti ir man, tuomet dar vaikui, augusiam sovietų okupuotoje Lietuvoje. Deja, Sovietų Sąjunga už visus nusikaltimus savo Niurnbergo neturėjo, o komunizmas visuotinai nebuvo pasmerktas. Vadinamasis išlaisvinimas mums virto ilgais dešimtmečiais okupacijos. Todėl raginame pasaulį išmokti Antrojo pasaulinio karo pamokas ir jų nekartoti.

    		  
       


    		 

      Sunčana Glavak (PPE). – Poštovani predsjedavajući, kolegice i kolege, 80 godina od najkrvavijeg rata u ljudskoj povijesti Europa je podigla najhrabriji projekt mira, ali danas taj projekt je na iskušenju. Dok rat ponovo tutnji na europskom tlu gledamo porast populizma i autoritarizma. Strah zamjenjuje razum. Moramo se zapitati hoćemo li braniti ono što nas čini Europljanima.

    Europa nije samo zajednica tržišta, već zajednica vrijednosti. Europa nije samo geografski prostor. Europa je ideja, ideja da razlike nisu slabost, već snaga i da se sloboda ne podrazumijeva. Mi to dobro znamo u Hrvatskoj. Kada govorimo o slobodi i o miru znamo koliko su sloboda i mir dragocjeni jer, nažalost, iskusili smo brutalnost velikosrpske agresije na Hrvatsku prije samo tridesetak godina. I pobijedili smo. Ali sjećamo se i žrtava nakon Drugog svjetskog rata. Sjećam se Macelja, Bleiburga i križnog puta.

    Stoga svi moramo imati na umu da Europa nije gotova priča. Europa se piše svakog dana, a pitanje je jednostavno: hoćemo li biti njezini autori ili promatrači?

    		  
       

    		 

      Vytenis Povilas Andriukaitis (S&D). – Labai ačiū, gerbiamasis posėdžio pirmininke, gerbiamas komisare, kolegos, išties kalbėsiu kaip laisvės kovų dalyvis, disidentas, kurį septynis kartus tardė KGB, du kartus suėmė, kuris devyniasdešimtųjų kovo vienuoliktąją pasirašė Nepriklausomybės deklaraciją, Petrai Gražuli. Taigi keturiasdešimt pirmų metų birželio keturioliktą Hitleris okupavo Paryžių. Tą pačią dieną Stalinas pateikė ultimatumą Lietuvai ir mano tėvai 17 metų praleido Stalino gulaguose. Džiaugiuosi, kad mano tėvas buvo 45 pabaltijiečių memorandumo signataras. Ir ačiū Europos Parlamentui, kuris 1983 m. sausio 13 d. priėmė rezoliuciją dėl Estijos, Latvijos, Lietuvos laisvės. Džiaugiuosi ir dėl to, kad šiame Parlamente skamba dvi pavardės: Simone Weil ir Altero Spinelli. Ir taigi šios dvi pavardės didingai mums primena, ką mes turime padaryti. For Free and United Europe – taip vadinosi Altiero Spinelli manifestas. Ir šiandien reikia aiškiai pasakyti: istorija man neskolinga, aš skolingas istorijai, kad būtų taika, demokratija ir laisvė.

    		  
       

    		 

      Sebastian Tynkkynen (ECR). – Mr President, in an alternative reality we would be living today under Hitler’s rule – not just all of Europe, but maybe even the whole world.

    In that reality, I wouldn’t be standing here. I would have been killed in a gas chamber, my ashes drifting in the air. Many of you also would not be here, because of your ethnicity, your sexuality or disability.

    That reality nearly came true. Too many in Europe believed Hitler would stop on his own. They spoke of peace and diplomacy. But reality struck, and the price was great, far greater.

    Now, 80 years later, Europe faces its worst attack since World War Two, and history is repeating itself. Today, it is the Left who lives in an alternative reality. You oppose European militarisation and sending weapons to Ukraine, and call for peace talks with Putin.

    But you should never negotiate with dictators – you must stop them!

    (The speaker declined to take a blue-card question from Petras Gražulis)

    		  
       

    		 

      Martin Hojsík (Renew). – Vážený pán predsedajúci, pred osemdesiatimi rokmi v Európe skončili hrôzy vojny. Ak však chceme chrániť mier, nesmieme si pripomínať len koniec, ale myslieť aj na to, prečo táto vojna začala. Vojna, ktorú môj dedo prežil v Mauthausene, kde moja babička musela počúvať zvuky vychádzajúce z gestapáckych výsluchovní. A ona začala už v roku 39. Keď Hitler spolu áno, aj s klérofašistickým Slovenským štátom, a áno, aj so Sovietskym zväzom napadol Poľsko. Ona začala preto, že sa Západ díval preč, keď takpovediac ustupoval diktátorom, pretože obetoval tých menších a slabších. Dnes stojíme znova na križovatke. Na križovatke, ktorá bude znamenať to, že či sa Európa znova rozdelí, či Putin získa znovu sovietsku sféru vplyvu, alebo bude silná a jednotná. Aby sa nestalo to, čo po druhej svetovej vojne zažil napríklad pán Skúpi z Moravského Lieskového, keď ho NKVD odviedlo do gulagu len preto, že pomáhal americkému letcovi.

    		  
       

    		 

      Evin Incir (S&D). – Mr President, colleagues, today, 8 May, is the time to commemorate. This is a time to remember, but also a moment to reflect on the lessons – the evil the Second World War emerged from. And it is a time to warn against the far-right ideologies that once drove our continent to the edge of complete self-destruction. The same ideology that, unfortunately, is embraced by some – even here in this Parliament, in Europe in 2025.

    The generations that survived the Second World War, those who knew the very essence of ‘never again’, understood that the tragedy of the 20th century did not begin with bombs or bullets. It began with words, with rising intolerance, and it continued to mass killing of men, women and children by the thousands, by the millions.

    In our European society today, we are once again witnessing this rise of political forces that set people against people. Colleagues, do not forget that EU was built to ensure that ‘never again’ means ‘never again’. Let’s ensure that ‘never again’ is transferred into words every day, with every action that we take.

    (The speaker agreed to take a blue-card question)

    		  
       

    		 

      Bogdan Rzońca (ECR), pytanie zadane przez podniesienie niebieskiej kartki. – Bardzo uważnie słuchałem Pani wypowiedzi. Chciałem w ciągu 20 sekund opowiedzieć Pani pewną historię i na końcu zadam pytanie.

    Jest 1944 rok. Jasło, moje miasto, w którym mieszkam, jest pod okupacją niemiecką. Walter Gentz, starosta niemiecki, wydaje rozkaz: wysiedlić kilkanaście tysięcy ludzi. Drugi rozkaz: zaminować całe Jasło. Trzeci rozkaz: okraść całe Jasło. Wszystko, co ukradli, spisali i wywieźli w ponad tysiącu wagonów. Wszystko wiemy – wiemy, dokąd te rzeczy pojechały, do których miast niemieckich.

    I pytanie: czy Pani uważa, że Niemcy powinni te rzeczy zwrócić albo przynajmniej zapłacić odszkodowanie za spalenie, zburzenie i okradzenie miasta Jasła?

    		  
       


    		 

      Adam Bielan (ECR). – Panie Przewodniczący! 8 maja 1945 r. zakończyła się II wojna światowa, najbardziej krwawa i wyniszczająca wojna w dziejach ludzkości. Dla Europy Zachodniej jest to dzień zwycięstwa odniesionego dzięki pomocy Stanów Zjednoczonych. Dla narodów Europy Centralnej i Wschodniej to symboliczny początek niemal półwiecznej okupacji przyniesionej przez Armię Czerwoną.

    Tę rocznicę obchodzimy w cieniu innej wojny, wojny toczonej na Ukrainie. Wczoraj na ten temat debatowaliśmy. Rozmawialiśmy również o tym, w jaki sposób agresor, czyli Rosja, powinna zadośćuczynić i wynagrodzić Ukrainie szkody, które wyrządziła. Ja te głosy oczywiście wspierałem, ale zastanówmy się, czy po II wojnie światowej agresor, czyli Niemcy, zadośćuczyniły szkodom, które one wyrządziły.

    Niemcy zamordowali ponad 6 mln polskich obywateli. Wyrządzili szkody – według oficjalnego polskiego raportu polskiego rządu – na ponad półtora biliona euro. Do dzisiaj nie zapłaciły reparacji. A wczoraj nowy kanclerz w Warszawie po raz kolejny postanowił nas upokorzyć i w obecności polskiego premiera oświadczył, że ta sprawa dla Niemiec jest zakończona. Otóż, panie kanclerzu Merz, nie jest zakończona. Będziemy się domagać zadośćuczynienia, a proniemiecki premier Donald Tusk prędzej czy później straci władzę.

    (Mówca zgodził się na pytanie zasygnalizowane przez podniesienie niebieskiej kartki)

    		  
       

    		 

      Petras Gražulis (ESN), pakėlus mėlynąją kortelę pateiktas klausimas. – Gerbiamas pranešėjau, jau 80 metų kaip Europa išsivadavo iš nacistinės Vokietijos, tačiau mūsų šalis Lietuva, tame tarpe ir Lenkija, pateko į Sovietų Sąjungos įtaką, kur taip pat buvo persekiojamas tikėjimas, žodžio laisvė. Kovojo lietuviai ir lenkai įvairiose organizacijose už savo laisvę. Atgavus mums nepriklausomybę, mes patekome į kitą ideologinę priespaudą – genderizmą. Kaip manot, ar Europa išsivaduos iš tos genderistinės ir leftistinės ideologijos, ar jinai joje ir mirs?

    		  
       


    		 

      Engin Eroglu (Renew). – Herr Präsident, sehr geehrter Herr Kommissar Séjourné! Vielen Dank, dass Sie heute bei uns sind. 80 Jahre nach dem Ende des Zweiten Weltkrieges erinnern wir uns und gedenken wir hier im Parlament einer sehr wichtigen Sache. Millionen von Menschen, Millionen von unschuldigen Menschen wurden brutalst ermordet aufgrund von Ideologien. Sie wurden überfallen. Ihnen wurde alles weggenommen – am Ende auch das Leben. Und dieses Gedenken muss uns eine Mahnung sein – eine Mahnung sein, was Ideologien anrichten. Und viele – auch in diesem Haus – haben scheinbar dieses Gedenken nicht richtig wahrgenommen, denn sie sind in ihren Mitgliedstaaten wieder mit Hass, Ideologien und einfachen Lösungen unterwegs, spalten die Europäische Union und verraten ihr eigenes Volk, indem sie sagen: Wir haben die einfache Lösung.

    Ich appelliere daran: Wir müssen gemeinsam – gerade jetzt in der heutigen Zeit, wo die Bedrohung an den Grenzen der Europäischen Union wieder so groß ist wie noch nie – die Gemeinsamkeiten der Europäischen Union suchen und aufhören mit der Mahnung, die wir heute hier in diesem Haus gehört haben. Wir müssen gemeinsam die Lösung suchen ohne Ideologien.

    		  
       

    		 

      Nils Ušakovs (S&D). – Priekšsēdētāja kungs! Cienījamie kolēģi! Šajās dienās cilvēki visā Eiropā svin uzvaru pār nacismu, piemin antihitleriskās koalīcijas karavīrus, pretošanās dalībniekus, partizānus, katru, kas cīnījās un krita, karojot pret šo absolūto ļaunumu. Eiropas Savienība tika izveidota tieši šīs uzvaras rezultātā, un viss, kas ir labs Eiropā, ir, pateicoties karavīriem, kas uzvarēja Hitleru.

    Viss, kas mums ir slikts, tas ir jau mūsu pašu neveiksmju un kļūdu rezultāts. Katru reizi, kad mums kaut kas neizdodas, cīnoties ar pavisam cita mēroga izaicinājumiem, ar ko saskaras patreiz Eiropas Savienība, mēs pieminam tos, kas pirms 80 gadiem upurēja absolūti visu, lai mēs un mūsu bērni varētu dzīvot mierā un drošībā. Veidojot labāku Eiropu, dzīvosim un strādāsim tā, lai mums nav kauns šo karavīru priekšā, ka mēs neizdarījām, nebijām spējīgi. Paldies antihitleriskās koalīcijas karavīriem, pretošanās dalībniekiem, partizāniem. Jūs esat un būsiet vienmēr mūsu varoņi.

    		  
       

    		 

      Christophe Grudler (Renew). – Monsieur le Président, le 8 mai marque la fin de la Seconde Guerre mondiale en Europe en 1945. Il est de notre devoir d’honorer la mémoire des soldats et de tous ceux qui, au prix de leur vie, se sont battus pour défendre la liberté et retrouver le chemin de la paix.

    Le 8 mai 1945 annonçait la victoire des Alliés sur le nazisme. N’oublions jamais les actes de barbarie dont ont été victimes les peuples d’Europe, perpétrés par des régimes autoritaires sans scrupule, avant et après 1945.

    Aujourd’hui, que voit-on, 80 ans après? Une montée en puissance des nationalismes, des autoritarismes, de la violence, des volontés d’hégémonie les plus primitives. Ils menacent directement la stabilité, la liberté et l’état de paix connus des citoyens européens.

    Ne reproduisons pas les erreurs du passé. Ces prédateurs n’auront pas raison de la belle Europe, car nous, fervents défenseurs de la démocratie, saurons nous tenir prêts pour la protéger. Restons unis pour ne jamais oublier! Restons unis pour ne jamais répéter!

    		  
       

    		 

      Nikos Papandreou (S&D). – Mr President, I find it very interesting that just a few minutes ago we had a Member who was born in the gulag who spoke here. We have two Members whose families were involved in the plot to assassinate Hitler. This Chamber is haunted by those memories. My grandmother told me stories of the Great Famine in Athens in 1941. My grandfather was chased by Kurt Waldheim and escaped to Egypt, and then was lucky enough to be prime minister on Liberation Day and lift the Greek flag over the Acropolis. So those are the memories that haunt us.

    Yet we still have this big divide, and it happens to be Russia and the Soviet Union. The problem with that – and that’s my problem – is that, yes, the Soviet Union helped defeat the Nazis, and that’s a plus, but then they dominated Eastern Europe and made a totalitarian world. So that tears us in half; it’s a ‘yes’ and a ‘no’, and we have to condemn atrocities whenever we see them if we are democratic people and believe in the European values. It does not matter if they had a victory star; they also have something very bad.

    Today we have a Fifth Column. It is not necessarily with weapons, it’s with suits, tweets and explosions of falsehoods. It promises easy solutions to complex problems. We see little men and little women who want to use freedoms to abolish freedoms. Our speeches today are part of the act of resistance.

    		  
       

    		 

      Thomas Pellerin-Carlin (S&D). – Monsieur le Président, quand j’avais dix ans, mon regard interrogea les lignes blanches et rouges d’un drapeau qui flottait dans le vent de ma Normandie natale. Je savais déjà ce qu’était la Seconde Guerre mondiale, mais ce drapeau-là, je ne le connaissais pas.

    Aujourd’hui, je pense aux soldats polonais de la première division blindée du général Maczek. Au mont Ormel, ils se battirent avec une bravoure rare. Sur les 1 500 soldats engagés, 60 seulement étaient encore en état de combattre après leur victoire. Je sais ce que je leur dois. Je sais qu’ils ont permis à mon grand-père de vivre dans une France libre. Je sais aussi que beaucoup d’entre eux n’ont jamais revu la Pologne libre.

    L’histoire ne se répète pas, mais les criminels d’hier ont leurs héritiers, qui sont aujourd’hui tentés par la récidive. Vladimir Poutine et Donald Trump trouvent des appuis ici même, au Parlement européen, dans cette extrême droite héritière des pires heures de notre histoire.

    Dans le combat pacifique que nous menons aujourd’hui pour la démocratie, rappelons-nous de ces héros polonais tombés au mont Ormel. Montrons-nous dignes de leur courage.

    		  
       

    		 

      Matjaž Nemec (S&D). – Mr President, dear Commissioner, dear colleagues, these days we celebrate a victory day. But considering the world around us, there isn’t really much to celebrate. Much of the responsibility for this lies with the inaction of the European institutions led by the Commission President von der Leyen.

    When the allies fought for peace 80 years ago, our common European project was born. Europe was meant to safeguard peace, freedom, rule of law and human rights. It was not meant to become a project of double standards and opportunistic political interests. Instead of demanding accountability, Europe’s top officials only repeat hollow rhetoric about upholding anti-fascist and anti-Nazi values. This is not the way forward.

    This anniversary must serve as a wake up call for the European Union to break free from the grip of hypocrisy. Europe was able to call out war crimes in Rwanda, Yugoslavia and Ukraine. Your leadership must clearly condemn and stop a genocide enfolding before our eyes in Gaza. A war crime is a war crime, whether done by Russia or by Israel.

    Europe must again become a source of pride, not shame. We owe this to our people and those who fought and died for Europe 80 years ago. We must end all wars. Peace must prevail again.

    		  
       

       

    Catch-the-eye procedure

    		  
       

    		 

      Juan Fernando López Aguilar (S&D). – Señor presidente, se cumplen ochenta años de la derrota del horror nazi, pero no del fin de la Segunda Guerra Mundial, cuya devastación fue planetaria, porque solo concluyó después de dos bombas atómicas en Japón en agosto de 1945. Nie wieder. Never again. Nunca más.

    Este no puede ser un mantra para esta Unión Europea, que recibió el Premio Nobel de la Paz en 2012, exactamente para avivar nuestra conciencia de que tenemos que estar permanentemente alerta contra el rebrote del autoritarismo y del totalitarismo en Europa y, por supuesto, de la guerra en todas partes. Ahí donde se perpetra un genocidio —como en Gaza— o una guerra —como la de agresión de Rusia contra Ucrania—, la Unión Europea tiene que tener una propuesta de paz activa.

    Por tanto, no puede ser un mantra repetir una y otra vez «Nie wieder» si no tenemos una política de la memoria que nos ayude a estar permanentemente contra cualquier forma de totalitarismo, contra cualquier amenaza a los valores fundadores de la Unión Europea. Allí donde el Consejo de Europa nació para la paz ha conocido la guerra entre miembros del Consejo de Europa. No puede pasar que la Unión Europea, círculo duro de integración basado, precisamente, en valores y en la paz, no tenga una política y un proceso de paz activo en la guerra contra Ucrania.

    		  
       

    		 

      Viktória Ferenc (PfE). – Elnök Úr! Ma a második világháború lezárására emlékezünk, és azokra az áldozatokra, katonákra és civilekre, akik átélték és megszenvedték történelmünk egyik legsötétebb időszakának borzalmait. Mennyire ironikus, hogy miközben a 80 évvel ezelőtt beköszöntött békét méltatjuk az Unió szomszédságában, a több mint három éve dúló orosz-ukrán háború még mindig emberéleteket követel.

    Nincs béke párbeszéd nélkül – hangzik Ferenc pápa üzenetében, aki élete utolsó napjáig azért küzdött, hogy békét teremtsen a világban, azon belül Ukrajnában is. Magyarország is a kezdetektől ezen az állásponton van. Diplomáciai eszközökkel, politikai támogatással és közös összefogással azért kell dolgoznunk, hogy elhallgattassuk a fegyverek zaját. Ukrajna lakossága már túl régóta szenved.

    		  
       

    		 

      Arkadiusz Mularczyk (ECR). – Panie Przewodniczący! Pani Komisarz! Wysoka Izbo! II wojna światowa to wciąż nierozliczona karta w relacjach europejskich. Mój kraj, Polska, w wyniku agresji niemieckiej poniósł niewyobrażalne straty: 6 mln zamordowanych polskich obywateli. 11 mln musiało wyjechać na emigrację. 50% terytoriów, które Polska utraciła. 40% PKB, które zostało zniszczone. Miliony kalek, miliony sierot, 200 tysięcy zgermanizowanych dzieci. 2 mln Polaków było wywiezionych na pracę przymusową. Miliony Polaków, które zginęły w obozach koncentracyjnych w wyniku chorób. Niemcy nigdy nie zapłaciły za swoje zbrodnie wojenne. To jest wyzwanie dla Unii Europejskiej, żeby nie odwracać oczu od tej sprawy, bo i Polska, i Grecja domagają się od Niemiec reparacji wojennych. Ja, Pani Komisarz, przekażę ten raport o polskich stratach wojennych. Oczekuję, że Unia Europejska stworzy mechanizm do zachęcenia Niemiec do rozmów o zapłacie odszkodowania dla Polski i Grecji. Nie odwracajcie Państwo od tego oczu ani głowy.

    		  
       


    		 

      Λευτέρης Νικολάου-Αλαβάνος (NI). – Κύριε Πρόεδρε, 80 χρόνια από την 9η Μάη 1945, όταν η ναζιστική Γερμανία παραδόθηκε άνευ όρων. Δεν πρόκειται για Ημέρα της Ευρώπης, όπως ισχυρίζεται η Ευρωπαϊκή Ένωση, αλλά για τη μεγάλη αντιφασιστική νίκη των λαών. Οι λαοί δεν ξεχνούν τα εκατομμύρια που έπεσαν στον αγώνα για να συντριβεί ο φασιστικός άξονας. Τιμούν την τεράστια προσφορά του Κόκκινου Στρατού, του σοβιετικού λαού, των εθνικοαπελευθερωτικών κινημάτων όπου πρωτοστάτησαν οι κομμουνιστές, όπως στην Ελλάδα.

    Η Ευρωπαϊκή Ένωση προκλητικά κάνει την ανήξερη για πολεμικές επανορθώσεις της ναζιστικής Γερμανίας. Το Ευρωπαϊκό Κοινοβούλιο απέρριψε αναφορά της ΠΕΑΕΑ, την οποία στήριξε το ΚΚΕ, για τις δίκαιες αξιώσεις του ελληνικού λαού. Σέρνετε τους λαούς στον πόλεμο, μπροστά σε νέα κρίση και σφοδρούς ανταγωνισμούς με Κίνα, Ρωσία αλλά και τις ΗΠΑ, που πληρώνουν οι εργαζόμενοι.

    Με τη διαστρέβλωση της ιστορίας, τον αντικομμουνισμό, την ταύτιση φασισμού και σοσιαλισμού, μάταια στοχεύετε να κρύψετε ότι υπάρχει διέξοδος σήμερα από την καπιταλιστική βαρβαρότητα, που η Ευρωπαϊκή Ένωση και οι αστικές κυβερνήσεις υπερασπίζονται. Απέναντι στο σκοτάδι των πολέμων, της εκμετάλλευσης, των κρίσεων, φωτεινό μέλλον της ανθρωπότητας είναι ο νέος κόσμος· ο σοσιαλισμός.

    		  
       

    		 

      Lukas Sieper (NI). – Herr Präsident, liebe Menschen Europas! Wir Deutschen kennen unsere Geschichte. Wir kennen die Verbrechen unseres Volkes unter den Nationalsozialisten. Und deshalb haben wir manchmal eine menschliche, aber gefährliche Angewohnheit: Wir erzählen uns, unsere Vorfahren hätten nicht mitgemacht, hätten nichts gewusst. Wir erzählen uns, wir selbst hätten im Widerstand gekämpft. Aber die Wahrheit ist: Die meisten deutschen Familien hatten Mitglieder in der SS, und die meisten von uns wären dabei gewesen.

    Schauen Sie auf mich. Meine Vorfahren haben ausschließlich in Deutschland gelebt. Ich habe mich nach der Schule freiwillig zum Militärdienst gemeldet. Ich liebe mein Land, meine Sprache, meine Kultur. Wäre ich, Lukas Sieper, vor 100 Jahren geboren, ich hätte wahrscheinlich die Propaganda geglaubt. Ich wäre wahrscheinlich ein weiterer Soldat in Hitlers Armeen gewesen. Wir sind immer nur eine Wahl von einer Diktatur entfernt. „Nie wieder“ ist nicht Erinnerung. „Nie wieder“ ist jetzt.

    		  
       

       

    (End of catch-the-eye procedure)

    		  
       

    		 

      President. – The debate is closed.

    		  

    5. Old challenges and new commercial practices in the internal market (debate)


    		 

      Anna Cavazzini, author. – Mr President, dear colleagues, we are facing numerous challenges in the EU. Looming trade wars, high energy prices, a lack of innovation and public investment, the China shock and shortages of skilled labour makes businesses suffer and results in rising costs of living for consumers. The climate crisis is accelerating and adding additional risks.

    The good news is the single market remains our best answer to geopolitical insecurity and to tackle those challenges. Nearly 450 million citizens, 23 million businesses with a GDP of EUR 17 trillion. These numbers make the single market one of the three largest economies in the world, and we need to use this unique resource to the benefit of people, businesses and the planet.

    Let me make four points on how the IMCO Committee in this resolution sees the way forward for the single market.

    One, reinforcing the single market. We need to make it easier, especially for small and medium sized enterprises to operate in it. Simplification is the core idea embedded in the creation of the single market. One rule instead of 27 means less administrative burden, less costs, and a better level playing field.

    But currently diverging implementation and fragmentation of legislation by the Member States create barriers in the single market. Therefore, the Commission needs to base its single market strategy on the idea of more Europe in legislation, implementation and enforcement.

    My second point, enforcing and developing the digital single market. Last term’s milestone legislations, the Digital Services Act, the Digital Markets Act and the world’s first AI Act now need to be enforced to ensure fair competition and a safe and trustful online environment. We therefore highly welcome the recent decision of the Commission to impose fines against Apple and Meta for their non-compliance with the Digital Markets Act, and we expect a continuous, rigorous enforcement also in other cases.

    And let me say it very clearly, especially regarding the pressure from the other side of the Atlantic. We do not let ourselves blackmail. We don’t trade away our tech regulation. Our laws are not for sale because they protect consumers, democracy and smaller companies.

    Three. The green transition. Also, the reports of Letta and Draghi make clear the transition towards a green and circular economy is a must, and to ensure our future competitiveness, we need to prepare for the economic disruptions the climate crisis will bring.

    Following a clear and predictable path for businesses accompanied by investment and strengthened public services, next to better labelling and fighting greenwashing, we need to create a real single market for second-hand goods and the Circular Economy Act. Digital tools can smoothen the complex processes of public procurement. Thus, we can simplify and create lead markets for sustainable products, quality jobs and regional value at the same time.

    Four consumer protection. A flourishing single market and high consumer protection are two sides of the same coin. A single market cannot function without strong consumer protection in both online and offline markets. So our resolution asks the Commission to come up in due course with a Digital Fairness Act. Targeted advertising, advertising of influencers, dark patterns and dynamic pricing, as well as the protection of minors, are challenges that this act needs to tackle.

    With a rapidly rising share of e-commerce, millions of parcels land directly at the consumer’s doorsteps, often from China, often not complying with our standards. This leads to safety risks and creates an uneven level playing field for European businesses.

    Therefore, the Commission must act. We need a swift implementation of the communication on e-commerce. We need to faster deploy the digital product passport and tracing laws to finalise the customs reform and to step up enforcement.

    More e-commerce leads to completely overloaded national market surveillance authorities. And that is why we need more European enforcement in order to live up to the giant online platforms, which is why the IMCO Committee, in our resolution, we call to reform the Consumer Protection Cooperation Network and for harmonised investigation to better fight unsafe products.

    Only joint action on EU level can get the tsunami of packages under control. So this is what the Imco committee suggests, and we hope that the Commission takes it into account in its upcoming single market strategy.

    		  
       

    		 

      Stéphane Séjourné, Vice-président exécutif de la Commission. – Monsieur le Président, Mesdames et Messieurs les députés, je remercie évidemment le Parlement européen pour ce débat, et je vous remercie en particulier, Madame la Présidente Cavazzini, car votre question orale couvre tous les grands enjeux relatifs au marché intérieur. Elle réaffirme d’ailleurs son rôle essentiel pour la prospérité de l’Europe.

    C’est aussi l’ambition que portera la stratégie pour le marché unique que la Commission présentera dans deux semaines exactement. Une ébauche de cette stratégie a, vous le savez, déjà fuité dans la presse. Je vais donc en dire quelques mots avant de répondre très concrètement à l’ensemble des questions qui sont posées par la rapporteure.

    Revenons ensemble sur le contexte, tout d’abord, puisque, après les excellents rapports, qui ont été unanimement salués, d’Enrico Letta et de Mario Draghi, les tensions et la fragmentation géopolitiques nous rappellent que le marché intérieur est notre premier atout et que les meilleurs partenaires des Européens sont les Européens eux-mêmes. Face à l’urgence de mieux puiser dans ce formidable espace économique, je propose donc une méthode ainsi qu’un certain nombre de compromis que nous devons collectivement trouver ensemble. D’abord, la méthode, qui consiste à s’attaquer aux barrières les plus coûteuses et les plus concrètes pour notre marché intérieur. Puis des compromis, qu’il faut que l’on fasse également, entre les États, avec les États membres, mais également entre les groupes politiques.

    Il est également question d’avoir moins de barrières internes contre plus de protection à l’extérieur. Vous parliez éminemment du commerce extérieur et du e-commerce, qui est probablement la cause, dans ce moment précis, d’un certain nombre de dérégulations de notre marché intérieur. Se protéger davantage de l’extérieur, mais dans un esprit d’ouverture aux nouveaux partenariats commerciaux, tout en adoptant une doctrine de la préférence européenne, du «made in Europe», pour certains secteurs stratégiques.

    Je serai ravi de revenir vers cette assemblée lors de la miniplénière du mois de mai pour présenter très officiellement la stratégie sur le marché intérieur. Je vais maintenant revenir sur les questions que vous avez posées dans votre résolution.

    Vous le savez, les efforts pour renforcer notre marché intérieur doivent être partagés par tous les acteurs de l’Union européenne. Au sein de la Commission, mes collègues et moi-même avons compté et savons pouvoir compter sur l’engagement du Parlement européen sur cette question. Bien évidemment, les États membres sont des acteurs centraux et, je le dis sans ambages, trop souvent encore, la lettre et l’esprit des règles adoptées au niveau européen se perdent au niveau national, souvent en raison d’une sous-transposition, parfois d’une surtransposition, parfois même d’une absence totale de transposition.

    Quelques mots sur les biens et les services en général. La libre circulation est effective pour les biens. Néanmoins, comme vous l’avez souligné très justement, Madame la Rapporteure, nous devons faire face à l’émergence de nouvelles problématiques, notamment en termes de conformité, de durabilité et également de transparence envers les consommateurs.

    En ce qui concerne la conformité, je pense par exemple à l’explosion du e-commerce, comme je l’évoquais en introduction. Elle exige de notre part des douanes fortes, des contrôles homogénéisés partout en Europe. Ce n’est pas encore le cas aujourd’hui et je voudrais vraiment remercier le Parlement européen pour sa proposition ambitieuse sur le sujet. La balle est maintenant dans le camp des États membres pour ce qui est de la réforme des douanes et nous allons également porter cette dynamique. La montée du e-commerce exige également des mécanismes de surveillance du marché plus harmonisés et plus performants.

    En matière de durabilité, un marché intérieur pour l’économie circulaire est nécessaire pour mettre en œuvre le droit à la réutilisation ainsi qu’à la réparation. Nous y travaillerons également avec vous.

    Quant à la transparence, je pense évidemment à la «shrinkflation», ce phénomène sur lequel vous avez souhaité interpeller la Commission, mais aussi à la «skimpflation». Le premier consiste à réduire la quantité à prix constants et, le second, à réduire le niveau de service sans réduire le prix. Ce sont de nouveaux mots-valises qui mettent le doigt sur un manque de transparence grandissant pour les consommateurs, sur lequel le Parlement européen et les institutions doivent se pencher. Des garde-fous réglementaires existent déjà à l’échelle de l’Union européenne pour mieux protéger les consommateurs et les États membres doivent mettre en place les dispositions que nous avions proposées – et les mettre en place pleinement. La Commission continuera en tout cas, de son côté, à aider les États membres, à travers des réseaux dédiés de coopération en la matière, et nous veillerons également à inscrire ces problématiques au cœur de l’agenda des consommateurs pour la période 2025-2030, sous la responsabilité du commissaire McGrath.

    Ensuite, Monsieur le Président, après les biens, quelques mots sur les services. Là aussi, vous interpellez la Commission sur les risques persistants de fragmentation de notre marché. Il est vrai que la situation actuelle est loin d’être satisfaisante. Près de deux tiers des barrières qui existent aujourd’hui sont les barrières qui existaient il y a 20 ans et qui persistent encore aujourd’hui. En particulier, l’accès à près de 5 700 services réglementés est encore très entravé au niveau des États membres, tandis que l’hétérogénéité des régimes concernant les travailleurs détachés ou les saisonniers complique encore un peu plus les services et les investissements transfrontaliers. Nous devons y remédier une bonne fois pour toutes. C’est pour cela que nous proposerons des solutions concrètes pour faciliter le recrutement des travailleurs et la reconnaissance des compétences et des qualifications dans les professions réglementées. Elles s’inscriront dans l’initiative de la Commission pour la portabilité des compétences, qui sera publiée à la fin de l’année prochaine. Nous allons également privilégier une approche sectorielle dans les services pour être plus efficaces.

    Votre question orale évoquait également la protection des consommateurs, en particulier eu égard aux usages numériques. J’ai parlé de l’explosion du commerce en ligne, mais, vous le savez, nous avons également voté, lors de la dernière mandature, le règlement sur les services numériques (DSA). L’Union européenne s’est dotée d’un outil unique au monde qui responsabilise les plateformes. Nous disposons également d’un règlement sur les marchés numériques (DMA), qui permet au plus grand nombre d’acteurs, quelle que soit leur taille ou leur statut, d’entrer sur le marché, lequel était jusque-là verrouillé par ceux qu’on appelle les «gate keepers». La mise en œuvre du DSA et du DMA démarre à peine, mais nous continuons et continuerons à porter exactement la même ambition pour ces deux textes que lors de la mandature précédente. Ils seront mis en œuvre par les différentes directions de la Commission et sous la supervision d’Henna Virkkunen, responsable de ces questions-là.

    Madame la Rapporteure, Monsieur le Président, je voudrais terminer par un mot, puisque je l’évoquais également en introduction: lors de la présentation de la stratégie sur le marché unique, qui occupera une place essentielle dans nos débats vers la fin de l’année, ce sera l’occasion pour nous d’accorder également une place à la question de la simplification. C’est du reste pour cela que nous présenterons, le 21 mai, le quatrième train de mesures omnibus de simplification. Son objectif est assez clair: pour nous, il s’agit de libérer le potentiel de toutes les entreprises qui font et organisent le marché unique et qui y opèrent. Nous travaillons sur deux enjeux en particulier: la définition des petites entreprises à moyenne capitalisation, qui est très attendue par les parlementaires, et la numérisation des procédures administratives et la mise en conformité pour les produits entrant sur le marché. Je sais pouvoir compter sur l’approche constructive du Parlement européen pour faire avancer ce dossier rapidement. Je me réjouis de cette opportunité de pouvoir recueillir, lors de ce débat, vos suggestions et vos priorités.

    		  
       

    		 

      Andreas Schwab, im Namen der PPE-Fraktion. – Herr Präsident, Herr Kommissar, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Alle Jahre wieder kommt eine neue Binnenmarktstrategie, und häufig steht in der neuen genau das drin, was in der alten auch drinstand. Insofern freue ich mich, Herr Kommissar, dass Sie in Ihrer Analyse des Europäischen Binnenmarktes für Güter und Dienstleistungen doch einige erfrischende neue Analysepunkte aufgegriffen haben. Allerdings bleibt das Problem so, wie Sie es beschrieben haben, das gleiche: Viel europäische Rechtsetzung verliert sich in ihrem Geist in den Mitgliedstaaten. Deswegen wird es entscheidend darauf ankommen, dass die Mitgliedstaaten, gerade auch die großen wie Deutschland und Frankreich, ihrer Verantwortung gerecht werden.

    Und das Zweite ist, dass wir es uns nicht zu leicht machen dürfen, hier im Europäischen Parlament über die Zölle der Amerikaner zu lamentieren – die möglicherweise 10 Prozent weitere Hindernisse bedeuten –, aber gleichzeitig die 40 Prozent vergessen, die wir selber innerhalb des europäischen Marktes noch immer nicht beiseite geräumt haben. Deswegen ist es eine harte Arbeit, mit der Binnenmarktstrategie zu versuchen, konkrete Anknüpfungspunkte für eine Vereinfachung zu finden. Die Entsendung von Arbeitnehmern, die ja vor allem in den Grenzregionen ein großes Problem ist, haben Sie bereits mit einem Vorschlag angegangen. Wir müssen alles dafür tun, dass alle Mitgliedstaaten dabei mitmachen, weil ansonsten der Vorschlag nicht die gewünschte Wirkung mit sich bringt.

    Wir müssen die europäische Zollpolitik neu bewerten, weil wir mit einer einheitlichen Zollorganisation natürlich sehr viel effektiver gegen Temu und Shein vorgehen könnten, wenn wir den Tsunami der vielen kleinen Pakete aus Fernost bekämpfen wollen. Aber, Herr Kommissar, gemeinsam mit Ihrem für den Zoll zuständigen Kollegen arbeiten wir daran schon seit über 15 Jahren. Und die Mitgliedstaaten haben jedes Mal Schwierigkeiten bereitet, wenn es um mehr Vereinheitlichung gegangen wäre.

    Das Dritte ist: Natürlich ist es populär, im Digitalraum jetzt Forderungen aufzustellen. Aber der Kern, wo wir neues Wachstum in Europa recht einfach generieren können, bleibt der klassische Binnenmarkt für Güter und Dienstleistungen. Deswegen müssen wir dort unbedingt ran. Deswegen hoffe ich, dass Ihre Strategie uns neue Wege aufzeigt.

    		  
       

    		 

      Laura Ballarín Cereza, en nombre del Grupo S&D. – Señor presidente, señor vicepresidente, la semana pasada, en España, tuvimos un apagón que dejó al país sin luz, sin teléfono y sin transporte. Yo estuve allí y tuve suerte, pero millones de personas se quedaron sin conexión, caminando horas desde sus lugares de trabajo a sus casas. Y en esta situación de emergencia, empresas como Cabify, Uber o Bolt aumentaron los precios de sus servicios un 300 %. Esta es una nueva práctica comercial derivada de la economía digital llamada «precios dinámicos», que hemos querido recoger en la Resolución que hoy votamos.

    Este Parlamento pide a la Comisión Europea que proponga regulación para abordar este problema y proteger a los consumidores, especialmente en la futura Ley de Equidad Digital, que también tiene que proteger a los menores en línea, porque la simplificación no nos va a salvar de todos los males. Nosotros —los consumidores, las familias— esperamos leyes que nos protejan de los abusos de las grandes compañías tecnológicas.

    		  
       

    		 

      Klara Dostalova, za skupinu PfE. – Pane předsedající, kolegyně, kolegové, návrh usnesení slibuje řešení starých výzev a nových obchodních postupů, ale zatím zůstává u prázdných slov. A právě to je dnes bohužel typické pro přístup Komise ke všemu, co vzejde z Parlamentu – skvělé slogany, málo výsledků. Ano, oceňuji důraz na snižování administrativní zátěže a podporu malých podnikatelů. Ano, naše spotřebitelské právo je silné, ale Komise opět ukazuje, že slyší jen to, co chce slyšet. Ochrana spotřebitelů je sice důležitá, ale v realitě dnes lidé čelí dramatickému růstu životních nákladů a nejsou schopni naplnit ani základní potřeby. A co na to Komise? Nic. Ani zmínka o tom, že přemrštěné ekologické ambice je potřeba přehodnotit. V tomto ohledu Komise zcela selhává.

    A Ukrajina? Její začlenění na jednotný trh je vydáváno za politický triumf. Ale nikdo se vážně neptá: Jakou cenu za to zaplatíme? Zavírání očí před rozdílnými standardy a problémy zničí rovné podmínky pro naše podniky. Pokud má jednotný trh fungovat, potřebujeme méně ideologických experimentů a víc zdravého rozumu. Komise musí přestat přehlížet realitu a začít chránit to, na čem Evropanům skutečně záleží – férové pracovní podmínky, konkurenceschopné firmy a dostupné bydlení. Slova nestačí. Potřebujeme činy a odvahu přiznat si, kde Komise opakovaně selhává.

    		  
       

    		 

      Stefano Cavedagna, a nome del gruppo ECR. – Signor Presidente, signor Commissario, onorevoli colleghi, mentre qui a livello parlamentare si parla troppo spesso di dazi, si parla di imposizioni sull’import, si parla tantissimo di Green Deal, si parla di tanti agenti extra mercato europeo, ci dimentichiamo di quello che noi siamo e di quello che dobbiamo essere. E purtroppo i dati sono molto chiari.

    Mentre il resto del mondo cresce, l’Europa è sostanzialmente ferma in stagnazione economica. Va avanti grazie solo ad alcuni Paesi, tra i quali l’Italia, ma la crescita è comunque modesta, generalizzata nel nostro continente.

    Vogliamo meno burocrazia, vogliamo una migliore semplificazione, vogliamo lasciare le imprese europee libere di poter lavorare e di poter competere ad armi pari con il resto del mondo. E sono sicuro che lo faremo al meglio.

    Chiediamo anche un grande investimento in termini di intelligenza artificiale, con delle vere e proprie infrastrutture europee che ci permettano di non dipendere dall’altra parte dell’oceano o dall’Oriente che troppo spesso è più un pericolo che una risorsa.

    		  
       

    		 

      Svenja Hahn, im Namen der Renew-Fraktion. – Herr Präsident, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! In geopolitisch unsicheren Zeiten müssen wir unseren Binnenmarkt radikal ausbauen. Unsere wirtschaftliche Stärke macht uns erst zu einem attraktiven Partner. Und wenn Partner wie die USA eben nicht mehr verlässlich sind, müssen wir unseren Heimatmarkt attraktiver machen, auch für unsere eigenen Unternehmen. Es muss endlich Schluss sein mit dieser regulatorischen Kleinstaaterei – ein Produkt, eine Dienstleistung, ein Markt nach denselben Regeln.

    Wir müssen rigoros Bürokratie abbauen, alle Binnenmarktgesetze auf den Prüfstand stellen. Und ich möchte vor allen Dingen daran erinnern: Wettbewerbsfähigkeit kommt von Wettbewerb. Ich bin ein bisschen skeptisch gegenüber unverhältnismäßigen staatlichen Eingriffen wie bei Leitmärkten. Das ist kein Garant, dass sich am Ende das beste Produkt zum besten Preis durchsetzt, sondern eben das politisch gewollte Produkt. Und ich baue wirklich auf die Kommission und Kommissar Séjourné, dass Sie den Mut haben, den Binnenmarkt groß zu machen. Denken Sie die Strategie groß, doktern Sie nicht nur an Kleinigkeiten herum. Wir müssen unseren Binnenmarkt jetzt stärken, damit wir in der Welt stärker werden. Andersrum gilt: Wer jetzt den Binnenmarkt nicht stärkt, schwächt uns in der Welt.

    		  
       


    		 

      Hanna Gedin, för The Left gruppen. – Herr talman! Ibland undrar jag om vi lever i samma verklighet. Frågar man kommissionen eller EPP eller högern i mitt hemland om vad som hotar EU:s ekonomi, så får man höra att miljökraven är för höga för företagen, att det är för svårt att konkurrensutsätta offentlig sektor, att det behövs färre regler och fler avregleringar. Men jag ser en helt annan verklighet.

    Jag ser människor som knappt får lönen att räcka till mat, jag ser arbetare som tvingas flytta från land till land, från gig till gig i en marknad där trygghet ses som hinder för flexibilitet. Jag ser en inre marknad som snarare än att lyfta villkoren för alla driver ett race to the bottom: på löner, arbetsrätt, välfärd och miljö.

    Det vi debatterar i dag genomsyras av samma logik. Färre hinder, snabbare upphandlingar, mer flexibilitet, mindre demokratiskt inflytande – allt för marknaden. Men vad händer när vi river regler för företagen? Vi river också ofta skydd för människor. Vi river regler som finns där för att trygga vår vardag, för att säkra schysta arbetsvillkor, för att bevara vår miljö och för att hålla demokratin levande.

    Vi i vänstern vill säga att det här är fel väg. Vi behöver inte färre regler, vi behöver rätt regler: regler som skyddar människor, inte vinstmarginaler, regler som sätter klimat, jämlikhet och trygghet över marknadslogik. För det är inte vi som är orealistiska – det är den blinda tron på avreglering som är det verkliga hotet mot framtiden.

    		  
       

    		 

      Pablo Arias Echeverría (PPE). – Señor presidente, señor comisario, en 2023 celebramos el trigésimo aniversario del mercado único. La construcción de esta Unión de libre circulación de bienes, servicios, capitales y personas refleja los valores y principios que compartimos; un proyecto que se ha convertido en el faro que guía la economía de la Unión Europea.

    Pero también existen sombras —sombras que debemos disipar—. Draghi y Letta lo han dejado muy claro: buscamos ser competitivos, sí, pero tenemos un mercado fragmentado. Buscamos ser innovadores, sí, pero ponemos trabas a nuestras pymes, start-ups y scale-ups, y dejamos que el talento se nos escape. Buscamos liderazgo, sí, pero ponemos cargas administrativas que ralentizan el crecimiento de nuestras empresas. Buscamos un mercado único, sí, pero nos encontramos con un exceso de normas desiguales en ese mismo mercado y proteccionismos nacionales.

    Lo que antes era capaz de aguantar nuestro mercado, hoy se antoja imposible. La coyuntura actual a nivel global nos exige abordar estas sombras con diligencia y determinación. La tarea no es sencilla: simplificación, menos burocracia, facilidades para financiar iniciativas digitales privadas, innovación, retención y atracción de talento. Necesitamos menos normas, pero iguales para todo el mercado, con el mismo nivel de garantías y protección. En definitiva, más seguridad jurídica.

    Los Estados miembros y las instituciones europeas tenemos que tener la suficiente altura de miras para abordar estas reformas estructurales, porque no nos jugamos mucho; probablemente, nos lo jugamos todo, señor comisario.

    Cuando todos dimos la bienvenida a los informes Letta y Draghi, ¿era solo una foto o era un compromiso? En el caso del Partido Popular, se lo aseguro: un compromiso. Espero que también lo sea para la Comisión y para el Consejo.

    		  
       

    		 

      Alex Agius Saliba (S&D). – Sur President, Is-suq uniku Ewropew jibqa’ wieħed mill-aktar elementi importanti fil-proġett Ewropew għaċ-ċittadini tagħna. Però huwa importanti li dan is-suq jibqa’ jevolvi, ir-regoli tiegħu jibqgħu jevolvu, sabiex fl-aħħar mill-aħħar naraw illi r-realtajiet tal-iktar Stati Membri li jinsabu fil-fruntiera, il-gżejjer, dawn l-istess regoli jkunu qegħdin jaħdmu favur tagħhom ukoll.

    U hawnhekk nixtieq nitkellem ukoll fuq realtajiet partikolari differenti li Stati Membri żgħar bħal Malta qegħdin jaffaċċjaw, b’mod speċjali minħabba żidiet fil-prezzijiet, inflazzjoni tal-aktar prodotti essenzjali f’dan is-suq komuni. U allura huwa importanti li naraw li jkollna aktar flessibilità fejn jidħlu r-regolamenti tas-suq uniku Ewropew sabiex jaraw illi Stati Membri żgħar u gżejjer ikunu fl-aħħar mill-aħħar jistgħu jibbenefikaw minn dan id-dritt, id-dritt tal-moviment u l-libertà tal-moviment għall-prodotti u s-servizzi, kif fl-aħħar mill-aħħar jibbenefikaw pajjiżi ferm ikbar minna.

    Imma fl-aħħar mill-aħħar ukoll huwa essenzjali li naraw illi jkollna regoli aktar stretti fejn jidħol ukoll l-importazzjoni tal-prodotti barra mill-Unjoni Ewropea. F’suq fejn qed imur aktar fuq bażi online milli fil-ħwienet tradizzjonali huwa importanti li naraw illi jkollna l-istess tip ta’ regoli u l-istess tip ta’ drittijiet għall-konsumaturi li jixtru fuq bażi online u dawk illi jixtru fuq bażi offline.

    Imma dan ma nistgħu nagħmluh qatt billi ngħabbu b’aktar piżijiet, speċjalment piżijiet finanzjarji, lill-konsumaturi tagħna.

    		  
       


    		 

      Kamila Gasiuk-Pihowicz (PPE). – Mr President, Commissioner, dear colleagues, the internal market is one of our greatest achievements and yet our businesses and our consumers still face barriers, are confronted with unpredictable legislative changes and a lack of consistency in the implementation of our single market rules.

    We need to simplify our rules we currently have in place, making sure that we keep those that protect consumers and entrepreneurs, but remove those that create excessive burdens. It is not enough to cut norms on paper, to delay them or to simply exempt certain categories. We need to change them in substance in order to make them easier to comply with.

    Online, our businesses face the challenge of complying with all these norms while foreign traders, especially from Asia, China ignore our rules and yet face little or no consequences at all. This is not a fair situation.

    The Commission is currently working on a new Digital Fairness Act (DFA). Before this is presented, the Commission should present a plan to cut unnecessary norms and only then legislate, in a very targeted manner. The next DFA cannot be another DSA. Businesses and consumers need predictability and a level playing field through the enforcement of existing norms.

    		  
       


    		 

      Elisabeth Dieringer (PfE). – Herr Präsident, sehr geehrte Damen und Herren! Wieder einmal erleben wir, wie die EU mit ihrem Entschließungsantrag zum Binnenmarkt große Worte schwingt, aber an den eigentlichen Problemen unserer Wirtschaft und unserer Bürger vorbeigeht. Seit Jahren hören wir Versprechen über Bürokratieabbau und weniger Belastung für unsere Unternehmen. Doch die Realität sieht anders aus: immer neue Vorschriften, immer mehr Regulierung, immer weniger Freiheit für unsere heimischen Betriebe.

    Der Binnenmarkt soll ein Motor für Wohlstand und Wachstum sein, doch stattdessen werden unsere kleinen und mittleren Unternehmen durch eine zu große Anzahl an EU‑Regeln und Berichtsanforderungen ausgebremst. Die Kommission redet von Innovation und Wettbewerbsfähigkeit. Aber in Wahrheit profitieren vor allem die Großkonzerne, während unsere regionalen Betriebe mit immer neuen Hürden kämpfen müssen. Wir fordern: Schluss mit der Überregulierung und den realitätsfernen Vorgaben aus Brüssel! Der Binnenmarkt muss endlich wieder den Menschen und Unternehmen dienen, die hier arbeiten und Steuern zahlen, nicht den Interessen globaler Konzerne oder den ideologischen Träumereien einer EU‑Elite. Weniger Bürokratie, mehr Eigenverantwortung und echte Wettbewerbsfähigkeit – das ist unser Weg für einen starken Binnenmarkt.

    (Die Rednerin ist damit einverstanden, auf eine Frage nach dem Verfahren der „blauen Karte“ zu antworten.)

    		  
       



    		 

      Tomislav Sokol (PPE). – Poštovani predsjedavajući, povjereniče, kolegice i kolege, Draghijevo izvješće jasno je pokazalo da troškovi koji proizlaze iz prevelikog broja propisa, kako europskih tako i nacionalnih, i dalje su vrlo visoki za europska poduzeća. To regulatorno opterećenje i fragmentacija posebno opterećuju mala i srednja poduzeća, koče inovacije i slabe našu konkurentnost na globalnoj razini.

    Prošlo je više od četiri godine otkako sam kao izvjestitelj Kluba EPP‑a za usluge na jedinstvenom tržištu upozoravao na prepreke slobodnom kretanju usluga. Nažalost, uslužni sektor koji zapošljava dvije trećine radne snage i stvara 9 od 10 novih radnih mjesta i dalje ostaje najslabije razvijen dio jedinstvenog tržišta. To je nedopustivo jer propuštamo priliku za rast, zapošljavanje i globalnu konkurentnost. Stoga je krajnje vrijeme da uklonimo preostale prepreke i taj golemi gospodarski potencijal pretvorimo u nova radna mjesta, veće ulaganje i gospodarski rast Unije.

    Bez pravog jedinstvenog tržišta nećemo se moći natjecati s globalnim konkurentima, a posebno je važno osiguravanje poštene tržišne utakmice. Karteli multinacionalnih kompanija koji održavaju visoke cijene hrane i drugih proizvoda apsolutno su nedopustivi. Također, implementacija Zakona o digitalnim tržištima, kojim će se stati na kraj zlouporabama od strane digitalnih divova, mora biti prioritet. Osim toga, u uvjetima brutalne globalne kompeticije, davanje prednosti europskim proizvodima i uslugama sasvim je legitimna opcija za zaštitu naših interesa.

    Na kraju, moramo zaštititi potrošače od nekvalitetnih i često opasnih proizvoda kupljenih preko interneta iz trećih država. Digitalne platforme moraju snositi odgovornost za štetu koju takvi proizvodi nanesu kupcima. Jedino tako ćemo ih natjerati da ozbiljno kontroliraju što se preko njih prodaje i zaštititi naše potrošače.

    		  
       

    		 

      Pierre Jouvet (S&D). – Monsieur le Président, Monsieur le Commissaire, envoyer un colis de Pékin à Strasbourg coûte moins cher qu’affranchir une carte postale pour écrire dans son propre pays.

    En 2024, 4,6 milliards de paquets expédiés par Temu, Shein ou AliExpress sont entrés en Europe: c’est 300 % d’augmentation en quatre ans. Ces produits sont fabriqués à perte puis expédiés grâce aux subventions publiques. Leurs producteurs détruisent la planète et pratiquent aussi l’esclavage moderne. Comble de l’absurdité et de l’hypocrisie, et signe aussi de notre complicité, ces colis d’une valeur de moins de 150 euros sont exonérés de droits de douane.

    Ces colis sont un poison lent qui tue notre planète, notre économie et nos emplois. Camaïeu, ChaussExpo, Casa, Jennifer: combien d’autres PME encore allons-nous laisser disparaître? Ces petits colis sont un grand poison et nous devons, en Europe, sortir de cette naïveté, changer nos règles douanières et assumer de protéger nos consommateurs, nos entreprises et nos emplois.

    		  
       

    		 

      Zala Tomašič (PPE). – Gospod predsednik. Leta 2023 je bilo na dnevni ravni približno 12 milijonov spletnih naročil z evropskega trga v tretje države, od tega 91 % iz Kitajske. Ko pogledamo te številke, je logično, da naši cariniki ne morejo kontrolirati vsega. Vemo tudi, da velikokrat izdelki iz Kitajske ne dosegajo evropskih standardov.

    Jaz verjamem v prosti trg in verjamem, da regulacija oziroma več regulacije ni odgovor na vse. Kot tudi ni odgovor na vse pritisk na naše platforme za težave, ki so povzročene drugje, posebej v državah, kjer imamo probleme z zagotavljanjem legitimnosti certifikatov.

    Mislim, da moramo nazaj prinesti tudi osebno odgovornost vseh nas potrošnikov in se moramo zavedati, da s tem, ko naročamo s kitajskih platform, ne škodimo le evropejski industriji, ampak tudi na koncu samemu sebi in našemu zdravju. Poleg tega pa tudi rabimo na evropski ravni rešitev glede vprašanja vplivnežev, a da bo to poenoteno in da bo tudi priznan njihov status kot ustvarjalcev vsebin, in ne le kot oglaševalcev.

    		  
       

    		 

      Δημήτρης Τσιόδρας (PPE). – Κύριε Πρόεδρε, κύριε Αντιπρόεδρε της Επιτροπής, τα εμπόδια εντός της ενιαίας αγοράς της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης ισοδυναμούν με δασμούς 45% για τη μεταποίηση και 110% για τις υπηρεσίες. Οι αριθμοί είναι αποκαλυπτικοί και μας υπενθυμίζουν σε ποια κατεύθυνση πρέπει να κινηθούμε.

    Για αυτό τον λόγο χαίρομαι, γιατί το ψήφισμα που έχουμε στα χέρια μας κάνει συγκεκριμένη αναφορά στους γεωγραφικούς και εδαφικούς περιορισμούς, οι οποίοι συρρικνώνουν την αγοραστική δύναμη των Ευρωπαίων πολιτών και πλήττουν τις μικρομεσαίες επιχειρήσεις. Είναι ένα θέμα που πολλοί συνάδελφοι έχουμε επισημάνει, ζητώντας μέτρα. Είναι απαράδεκτο, σε μια ενιαία αγορά, ορισμένες πολυεθνικές εταιρείες να εκμεταλλεύονται τη θέση τους προκειμένου να χρεώνουν εξαιρετικά διαφορετικές τιμές για ίδια προϊόντα, ανάλογα με το μέγεθος της αγοράς και εις βάρος των καταναλωτών. Ενόψει και της στρατηγικής για την ενιαία αγορά, αναμένουμε τη νομοθετική πρόταση για να βάλουμε τέλος σε αυτές τις πρακτικές.

    Δεύτερον, χρειάζονται ακόμα πιο φιλόδοξα μέτρα για την απλοποίηση των κανόνων και τη μείωση του διοικητικού φόρτου που αντιμετωπίζουν οι μικρομεσαίες επιχειρήσεις. Η μείωση της γραφειοκρατίας κατά 35% είναι αδήριτη ανάγκη να επιτευχθεί.

    Τρίτον, παρά το γεγονός ότι η Ένωση έχει το πιο στιβαρό πλαίσιο προστασίας των καταναλωτών, μόνο το 28% έχει καλή γνώση των δικαιωμάτων του.

    Και, τέλος, χρειαζόμαστε ενίσχυση της εφαρμογής του ψηφιακού νομοθετικού πλαισίου με συντονισμένους ελέγχους από τις αρμόδιες υπηρεσίες και καλύτερη συνεργασία μεταξύ τους, για να διασφαλίσουμε ότι η νομοθεσία εφαρμόζεται στην πράξη.

    		  
       

    		 

      Regina Doherty (PPE). – Mr President, Commissioner, when it comes to commercial practices, online is the only show in town. But when it comes to consumer fraud, online spaces still remain a Wild West. We need all actors on board to ensure that we have a shared responsibility. Because today, citizens in Europe are subject to fake advertising and online scams on a near daily basis, often via social media platforms.

    Our own Irish Data Protection Commission has already issued over EUR 3.5 billion worth of fines, as well as corrective measures. But it’s all too easy to put fake advertisements purporting to be from regulated institutions online, and for unsuspecting citizens to be scammed out of their own money before the advert just simply disappears. Three in every four Irish people have encountered some form of suspicious activity online, whilst 45 % of Europeans stated they have experienced more suspicious activity compared with last year.

    We know that such incidents are hard to track and almost impossible to reverse after they happen. The Digital Services Act obliges platforms to take down illegal content once it has been reported. However, it creates few proactive obligations prior to publication or even reporting by individuals. So we need to look at ways to ensure that electronic communications providers verify with national competent authorities that advertisements purporting to be from regulated entities are, in fact, legitimate, so that we can protect our people and their hard earnings.

    		  
       

       

    Catch-the-eye procedure

    		  
       

    		 

      Vytenis Povilas Andriukaitis (S&D). – Mr President, dear Commissioner, you rightly mentioned that we are still 20 years speaking about the same problems. But now the digital union is not completed. The energy union is not completed. I know our railway infrastructure is in difficulties, and when we are speaking about the necessity to do something more, first of all, we need to stress very much that we need to develop pan‑European infrastructures in digital, in energy, in transport.

    And, of course, also Letta rightly mentioned the ‘fifth freedom’: freedom for research, investment and innovation. But it requires also infrastructure in our research and innovations. It means the life sciences strategy should be connected with the internal market strategy hand in hand, otherwise we can lose once again competitiveness, investment and progress. Made in Europe requires more integration.

    		  
       





       

    (End of catch-the-eye procedure)

    Written Statements (Rule 178)

    		  
       

    		 

      Stéphane Séjourné, Vice-président exécutif de la Commission. – Monsieur le Président, Monsieur Sieper, je suis désolé, je vais parler français, mais je crois que vous avez la traduction.

    Je vais peut-être vous donner quelques convictions suite à ce débat. D’abord, une conviction, c’est que nous ne pouvons pas regarder notre stratégie du marché intérieur en silos, comme cela s’est probablement beaucoup fait lors des dernières mandatures.

    Au vu du contexte international que nous connaissons, un nouvel équilibre économique est à trouver. Il s’agit à la fois d’œuvrer pour plus de marché intérieur et donc, je le répète, d’aller plus loin en ce qui concerne les biens et les services ou l’union des marchés des capitaux, d’organiser et de faciliter les déplacements des biens et des services plus largement, de retirer les barrières qui contraignent notamment la circulation des marchandises et des biens, dans le cadre de nos travaux et des compétences de l’Union européenne.

    Il s’agit aussi de travailler, au niveau national, sur les différences de réglementations qui créent des contraintes et – je crois que l’un de vous l’a expliqué assez justement – sur l’équivalent en droits de douane des différentes réglementations nationales, puisqu’il est d’actualité de parler en termes d’équivalent en droits de douane et que cela montre qu’il est urgent que nous agissions. 40 à 50 % de droits de douane sur les biens, plus de 100 % sur les services: je vois le coût que cela peut engendrer pour une entreprise de produire dans un pays européen et de commercialiser dans un autre. Le paradoxe de la situation, c’est qu’il est probablement plus rentable aujourd’hui de produire en Chine et d’exporter un petit colis vers les pays européens que de mettre en place toute la réglementation européenne pour commercialiser depuis la France, l’Allemagne, la Pologne ou l’Italie. C’est ce que nous devons régler dans les prochains mois.

    En parallèle, il faut protéger les frontières commerciales extérieures de l’Union européenne et donc avancer sur la réforme douanière. Elle est aujourd’hui bloquée au Conseil et les États membres doivent avancer, je l’ai dit en introduction de ce débat. Je consacrerai beaucoup de capital politique à ce que la réforme des douanes puisse progresser au même rythme que notre réforme et notre stratégie sur le marché intérieur. D’un côté, libéralisation et rupture des barrières restantes sur le marché intérieur, de l’autre, protection des frontières européennes en ce qui concerne l’e-commerce, notamment en avançant sur la question du contrôle. Je pense que c’est le bon équilibre qu’il faut pouvoir trouver collectivement dans cette maison.

    Un autre équilibre – le dernier, j’en resterai là – auquel travailler également dans les prochains mois et les prochaines semaines concerne les nouveaux accords commerciaux et la diversification que nous devons opérer alors que le monde est de plus en plus protectionniste. Oui, des accords avec de nouveaux pays, portant sur des secteurs particuliers, doivent être trouvés. La présidente de la Commission s’emploie, avec mon collègue Maroš Šefčovič, à trouver de nouveaux débouchés pour nos industries et nos entreprises à l’extérieur de l’Union européenne, à condition que nous puissions opérer une préférence européenne et donc choisir le «made in Europe» dans un certain nombre de secteurs stratégiques.

    Pour résumer, voilà, en quelque sorte, notre nouvel équilibre, qu’il faut que nous puissions trouver entre nous, collectivement: à la fois l’approfondissement du marché intérieur, la protection des frontières extérieures par rapport au e-commerce, pour protéger notre marché, et la diversification des accords commerciaux, alors que le commerce devient de plus en plus compliqué et que la guerre tarifaire et la guerre douanière entre la Chine et les États-Unis peuvent avoir un impact important sur notre économie, en contrepartie d’une préférence européenne sur un certain nombre d’achats publics. Vous aurez notamment, dans ce cadre-là, à travailler sur la réforme des marchés publics que la Commission présentera dans les prochains mois.

    Je remercie le Parlement, particulièrement la présidente Cavazzini, pour cette discussion et, encore une fois, je reviendrai parmi vous pour présenter très officiellement la stratégie de la Commission sur le marché intérieur, le 21 mai, à Bruxelles.

    		  
       


     

    		  

      Vasile Dîncu (S&D), în scris. – Piața internă europeană trebuie să servească oamenilor, nu invers. Dincolo de eficiență și competitivitate, trebuie să evaluăm cine câștigă și cine pierde în acest model economic.

    Trei provocări majore amenință să adâncească fragmentările sociale și economice dintre cetățenii europeni:

    1. fragmentarea digitală: platformele digitale domină piața, dar beneficiile sunt distribuite inegal. IMM-urile din estul Europei, cetățenii din zone rurale sau periferice sunt adesea excluși. Aplicarea fermă a DSA și DMA este necesară pentru o piață digitală incluzivă – unde toți au acces la oportunități.

    2. tranziția verde și riscul de a produce o Europă cu două viteze: Pactul Verde este necesar, dar aplicarea sa trebuie adaptată. Regiunile industriale care încă se recuperează după tranziția post-comunistă (Valea Jiului, zone monoindustriale din România, Bulgaria, Polonia) necesită sprijin specific, direcționat și just. Nu putem cere aceleași sacrificii de la cei care au mai puține resurse.

    3. drepturile lucrătorilor în economia digitală: prea mulți europeni trăiesc în precaritate – livratori, freelanceri algoritmizați, angajați temporari. Drepturile fundamentale – salariu decent, protecție socială, stabilitate – trebuie garantate și în economia digitală.

    Avem nevoie de o piață internă bazată pe echitate, solidaritate și demnitate umană. Este timpul pentru mai multă politică și mai puțină tehnocrație. Avem nevoie de curaj.

    		  
       

       

    (The sitting was suspended at 11:51)

    		  
       

       

    IN THE CHAIR: JAVI LÓPEZ
    Vice-President

    		  

    6. Resumption of the sitting

       

    (The sitting resumed at 12:04)

    		  
       


    		 

      René Aust (ESN). – Herr Präsident, meine sehr geehrten Damen und Herren! Letzte Woche, am 30. April, kam es im Paul‑Henri‑Spaak‑Gebäude vor den Büros unserer Mitarbeiter zu massiven Lärmbelästigungen und auch Drohungen gegenüber einem unserer Mitarbeiter. Gegen 18.00 Uhr hat eine große Gruppe von Besuchern der Linken, unterstützt von akkreditierten Assistenten und Mitarbeitern der Linken, eine Art Demonstration durchgeführt und abgehalten. Die Besucher, oder besser gesagt die Aktivisten, wanderten dann die Treppen nach oben Richtung Ausgang und haben dabei noch eine EU‑Flagge, die auf dem Ehrentisch mit dem Bild und dem Gedenkbuch für den verstorbenen Papst aufgestellt war, heruntergerissen und die Treppe hinuntergeworfen. Einer unserer Mitarbeiter, der die Aktivisten um Ruhe bat, wurde von einer Demonstrantin mit den Worten „Du wirst sterben!“ sogar mit dem Tode bedroht.

    Sehr geehrter Herr Präsident! So ein Verhalten ist völlig inakzeptabel und hat in unserem Haus nichts zu suchen. Ich ersuche Sie sicherzustellen, dass solche Aktionen künftig unterbunden werden und die Sicherheit aller Mitarbeiter und ein normales Arbeitsklima zu jedem Zeitpunkt gewährleistet sind.

    		  
       

    		 

      President. – Thank you very much. The President is aware about the incident. We will inform about the point of order. The services of the House will draw up a report and she will follow up.

    We have no more points of order.

    		  

    7. Voting time

    		 

      President. – The next item is the vote.

    		  

    		 

      President. – The first vote is on the joint motion for a resolution tabled by five groups on the arrest and risk of execution of Tundu Lissu, Chair of Chadema, the main opposition party in Tanzania (see minutes, item 7.1).

    		  

    		 

      President. – The next vote is on the joint motion for a resolution tabled by five groups on the return of Ukrainian children forcibly transferred and deported by Russia (see minutes, item 7.2).

    		  


       

    – Before the vote on the motion for a resolution:

    		  
       



       

    (Parliament did not agree to put the oral amendment to the vote)

    		  

    7.4. Ninth report on economic and social cohesion (A10-0066/2025 – Jacek Protas) (vote)

    		 

      President. – The next vote is on the ninth report on economic and social cohesion (see minutes, item 7.4).

    		  

    7.5. CO2 emission performance standards for new passenger cars and new light commercial vehicles for 2025 to 2027 (vote)

    		 

      President. – The next vote is on CO2 emission performance standards for new passenger cars and new light commercial vehicles for 2025 to 2027 (see minutes, item 7.5).

    		  

    7.6. The protection status of the wolf (Canis lupus) (vote)

    		 

      President. – The next vote is on the protection status of the wolf (Canis lupus) (see minutes, item 7.6).

    		  

    7.7. The role of gas storage for securing gas supplies ahead of the winter season (A10-0079/2025 – Borys Budka) (vote)



       

    (Parliament approved the request for referral back to committee)

    		  

    7.8. Screening of foreign investments in the Union (A10-0061/2025 – Raphaël Glucksmann) (vote)



       

    (Parliament approved the request for referral back to committee)

    		  

    7.9. Suspending certain parts of Regulation (EU) 2015/478 as regards imports of Ukrainian products into the European Union (A10-0059/2025 – Karin Karlsbro) (vote)


    		 

      Hans Neuhoff, im Namen der ESN-Fraktion. – Herr Präsident, geschätzte Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Ich beantrage gemäß Artikel 206 Absatz 4 der Geschäftsordnung die Vertagung der Abstimmung über diesen Punkt der Tagesordnung. Gestatten Sie mir zur Begründung wenige Worte: Solidarität mit Drittstaaten darf nicht zur Selbstaufgabe Europas werden. Unsere Unternehmen, vom industriellen Mittelstand über die Landwirtschaft bis hin zu großen industriellen Arbeitgebern, spüren die Folgen einer Handelspolitik, die einseitig auf die Ukraine ausgerichtet ist. Dumpingimporte gefährden nicht nur einzelne Branchen wie die Stahlrohrhersteller. Sie treffen die gesamte europäische Wertschöpfungskette, von den Grundstoffindustrien bis zu den weiterverarbeitenden Sektoren und Zulieferern.

    Diese Politik gefährdet Arbeitsplätze und Existenzen in ganz Europa – auch in der Landwirtschaft, auch im verarbeitenden Gewerbe. Wer heute für die weitere Aussetzung der Schutzmaßnahmen stimmt, entscheidet sich nicht nur gegen faire Wettbewerbsbedingungen, sondern auch gegen Menschen in unseren Regionen, die für Wohlstand und …

    (Der Präsident entzieht dem Redner das Wort.)

    		  
       



       

    (Le Parlement rejette la demande)

    		  
       

       

    – Before the vote:

    		  
       


       

    – Before the vote:

    		  
       

    		 

      Costas Kadis, Member of the Commission. – Mr President, honourable Members, the European Commission would like to make the following statement before the vote:

    “Should the Commission consider that extending the suspension of Regulation (EU) 2015/478 as regards imports of Ukrainian products into the European Union beyond 5 June 2028 is warranted in view of the situation at that point of time, the Commission will endeavour to submit to the European Parliament and the Council any proposal to that effect not later than nine months before the end of the application of this Regulation.”

    I would like also to clarify two very separate issues: namely the suspension of the general safeguard regulation or under its other name, the common rules for imports regulation, and the Article 29 consultation process.

    Regarding the draft Regulation that is being submitted to the vote now, I would like to clarify that once adopted, it would suspend the application of the basic safeguard regulation to imports of goods from Ukraine. While the suspension of the general safeguard regulation is of general nature, currently there is only one safeguard measure for steel products that would be affected by the suspension. Suspending the general safeguard regulation was technically the only way to suspend the application of the steel safeguard measure concerning Ukraine.

    Trade in agricultural products is being discussed in a separate framework, namely the Article 29 consultation process with Ukraine.

    To conclude, today’s draft regulation has no implication for the Article 29 process.

    		  

    7.10. Competition policy – annual report 2024 (A10-0071/2025 – Lara Wolters) (vote)


       

    – Before the vote on Amendment 1:

    		  
       

    		 

      Majdouline Sbai (Verts/ALE). – Monsieur le Président, il y a urgence: il faut sauver l’acier européen! Le directeur d’ArcelorMittal a annoncé que tous les sites sidérurgiques en Europe étaient menacés. La France risque de perdre l’ensemble de ses hauts-fourneaux. Comme l’a fait le Royaume-Uni, nous devons réagir vite. C’est pourquoi je vous propose l’amendement suivant au paragraphe 8 du rapport que nous votons:

    «le Parlement exprime sa profonde désapprobation face à la décision du groupe ArcelorMittal de supprimer jusqu’à 1 400 emplois en Europe occidentale, dont près de la moitié en France; souligne que le groupe a réalisé un bénéfice de 1,3 milliard d’euros et versé plus de 1,5 milliard d’euros à ses actionnaires en 2024; demande à la Commission et aux États membres de prendre des mesures pour que les entreprises bénéficiant d’aides publiques ne puissent pas, comme le fait ArcelorMittal, fermer des sites industriels, élaborer des plans de licenciement, délocaliser leurs activités, verser des dividendes à leurs actionnaires et renoncer à leurs objectifs de transition écologique; demande au gouvernement français de prendre toutes les mesures en son pouvoir pour protéger les travailleurs et préserver la sidérurgie en tant qu’industrie stratégique;»

    		  
       

       

    (Parliament agreed to put the oral amendment to the vote)

    		  

    7.11. Banking Union – annual report 2024 (A10-0044/2025 – Ralf Seekatz) (vote)

    		 

      President. – The next vote is on the banking union – annual report 2024 (see minutes, item 7.11).

    		  

    7.12. Objection pursuant to Rule 115(2) and (3): genetically modified soybean MON 87705 × MON 87708 × MON 89788 (B10-0244/2025) (vote)

    		 

      President. – The next vote is on the objection pursuant to Rule 115(2) and (3): genetically modified soybean MON 87705×MON 87708×MON 89788 (see minutes, item 7.12).

    		  

    8. Resumption of the sitting

       

    (Posiedzenie zostało wznowione o godz. 15.00)

    		  

    9. Approval of the minutes of the previous sitting

    		 

      Przewodnicząca. – Protokół wczorajszego posiedzenia oraz teksty przyjęte są już dostępne.

    Czy są jakieś uwagi? Nie widzę.

    Protokół został przyjęty.

    		  

    10. EU action on treating and preventing diseases such as cancer, cardiovascular neurological diseases and measles (debate)


    		 

      Costas Kadis, Member of the Commission. – Madam President, honourable Members of the European Parliament, in a strong European Health Union we should work to protect EU citizens from diseases, promote healthy living and foster innovation that supports these goals. The Commission is committed to delivering a European Health Union that helps improve the health of all our citizens, no matter where they live in the European Union.

    Cardiovascular diseases are the leading cause of death in the EU. Many of these deaths are premature. In the EU, 24 % of deaths among men before the age of 65 and 17 % of deaths among women before the age of 65 are due to cardiovascular diseases. Cardiovascular diseases and neurological disorders share common risk factors such as hypertension, diabetes, smoking and obesity.

    Vascular dementia is the second most common type of dementia, accounting for around 15-20 % of dementia cases in Europe. The Commission has started work on an ambitious and robust EU cardiovascular health plan. It will draw inspiration from the success of Europe’s Beating Cancer plan. Like the cancer plan, we will look at addressing key issues like prevention, early detection and screening, and treatment and care. We see a key role for innovative and personalised tools, including the European health data space, as well as new technologies like digital technologies and artificial intelligence. The cardiovascular plan will also build on existing efforts, in particular the Healthcare Together initiative, which helps Member States and stakeholders take action on non-communicable diseases.

    The second leading cause of death in the EU is cancer. The cancer plan was adopted in 2021, backed by significant EU funding. We published a review of the cancer plan in February which showed that 90 % of its actions have either been concluded or are ongoing in the area of prevention. This includes the Council recommendation on vaccine‑preventable cancers. This aims to encourage higher uptake of vaccinations against HPV and hepatitis B.

    Moreover, the Council recommendation on smoke- and aerosol‑free environments is a step towards a tobacco‑free generation by 2040. To build on this, we will evaluate and revise the EU’s tobacco legislation to enable every cancer patient to access high quality diagnosis and treatment. Member States will this year set up an EU network of comprehensive cancer centres under a joint action funded with EUR 90 million.

    The European Health Union is also about tackling infectious diseases. Measles is a serious disease and highly contagious. The recent spike in measles cases in Europe has already caused several deaths in Romania this year, yet measles can be avoided through vaccination. The outbreaks experienced by some Member States over the last 12 months can be linked to vaccination coverage below recommended levels, so I encourage everyone to ensure that they and their families are protected against this life‑threatening disease. The Commission will continue to work with Member States to improve vaccination coverage. We will also promote robust vaccination programmes and secure supplies of vaccines in the EU.

    As we build our European Health Union, we should put innovation at its heart. One promising avenue is biotechnology. Biotechnology could help us to better identify diseases, step up prevention, develop new, increasingly personalised medicines and provide new ways to develop, test and administer treatments. But the EU is not yet making the most of biotech. EU companies are not competitive enough and face too many barriers when it comes to turning ideas into products. This is why the Commission will propose a European Biotech Act. It will help companies bring products from the lab to the factory and onto the market.

    The Biotech Act will complement the ongoing revision of the pharmaceutical legislation. This already includes many measures to streamline and modernise the regulatory framework for medicines, especially for breakthrough therapies. Innovation will be a driving principle of the upcoming targeted review of the Medical Devices Regulation. The new rules will be more fit for the purpose. They will deliver medical devices to the patients in a more timely manner, and will create a more competitive environment for our industries.

    On breakthrough technologies, we have adopted regulatory pathways to quickly reach patients, especially children and rare‑disease patients, without compromising safety. Europe is losing ground in the field of clinical trials. Therefore, we will carry out an assessment of the current legislation and amend it to provide for a more efficient framework to make Europe a world leader in medical research and innovation.

    Honourable Members, we are better able to face public health challenges if we act together. This is why the Commission is committed to building a strong and innovative European Health Union. Thank you for your attention and I look forward to receiving your views.

    		  
       

    		 

      Tomislav Sokol, u ime kluba PPE. – Poštovana predsjedavajuća, povjereniče, kolegice i kolege, Europska unija je kroz godine pokazala da zajedničkim djelovanjem može postići velike rezultate za zdravlje naših građana. Jedan od najvažnijih primjera je europski plan za borbu protiv raka koji predstavlja prvu sveobuhvatnu strategiju protiv ove opake bolesti, od prevencije i istraživanja preko liječenja do poboljšanja kvalitete života osoba koje su preboljele rak.

    Sljedeći korak je donošenje europskog plana za kardiovaskularne bolesti koje su vodeći uzrok smrtnosti u Europi. On mora imati jasno definirane ciljeve, konkretno financiranje i jasan vremenski okvir za provedbu. Samo tako možemo postići stvarni napredak i smanjiti teret koji ove bolesti predstavljaju za naše zdravstvene sustave, gospodarstvo i obitelj.

    Uz to, inzistiramo, kao što smo više puta rekli na ovoj govornici, na donošenju europskog plana za rijetke bolesti jer su oboljeli od rijetkih bolesti i njihove obitelji predugo bili na margini zdravstvenih politika, često prepušteni sami sebi, suočeni s nedostatkom dijagnoza, terapija i sustavne podrške. Za 95 % njih još uvijek ne postoji lijek i vrijeme je da se to promijeni.

    Na kraju, građani od nas s pravom očekuju konkretan europski plan za neurološke bolesti koji bi svakako trebao uključiti i mentalne bolesti koje su u dramatičnom porastu, osobito među mladima.

    Da bismo sve ovo ostvarili zdravstvo mora ostati prioritet i u okviru sljedećeg sedmogodišnjeg proračuna jer ulaganje u njega nije trošak, već jedna od najisplativijih investicija, što pokazuju brojne studije. Ne smijemo dopustiti da se zdravstvo utopi u različite proračunske programe jer bi to značilo da se vraćamo u vrijeme kad je ono predstavljalo marginalnu temu u EU institucijama.

    Kolegice i kolege, zdravstvo mora ostati prioritet u djelovanju EU‑a i pozivam na zajedničko djelovanje svih političkih grupacija da se to i ostvari.

    		  
       

    		 

      Vytenis Povilas Andriukaitis, on behalf of the S&D Group. – Madam President, dear Commissioner, colleagues, the rise of certain non‑communicable diseases in the European Union is increasingly concerning. If we fail to act and learn from past experiences, like the COVID‑19 pandemic, we risk facing new outbreaks and epidemics.

    Twenty years ago, the European Union made a commitment to eliminate measles – to be measles‑free. Yet we are still far from that goal. The situation is further aggravated by growing societal scepticism, fuelled by misinformation and spread of unproven claims. In 2024, measles cases in the EU surged dramatically with over 32 000 reported diagnoses. This sharp increase highlights serious gaps in vaccination coverage, as 86 % of those infected had not been vaccinated.

    In an age where measles is entirely preventable through vaccination, it is unacceptable that this disease continues to spread, especially knowing that measles is highly contagious and can lead to severe complications such as pneumonia, encephalitis, and even death. To prevent further outbreaks, it is essential to ensure that at least 95 % of the population is vaccinated.

    Unfortunately, vaccination rates remain insufficient in many European countries. Governments must prioritise strong vaccination campaigns and actively combat vaccine hesitancy to protect public health. The measles, mumps and rubella vaccine remains the most effective tool to prevent measles, and we must also work to harmonise vaccination schedules across Member States to ensure this.

    This is why it is crucial to foster collaboration among Member States, recognising that in the Schengen zone, where people can move freely across borders, disease can easily spread between countries. Additionally, the shortage of healthcare professionals, especially in regions with insufficient medical staff, particularly nurses, further contributes to lower vaccination rates. The recent outbreaks in Romania, along with nearly 20 preventable deaths, serve as a stark reminder to the urgency of this issue. These tragic losses highlight the need for immediate actions.

    HERA must also address the state of crisis preparedness and take steps to prevent the situation from escalating further. In a world where vaccines are widely available, measles should no longer be a threat. As cases continue to rise, collective action is urgently needed to protect vulnerable populations.

    		  
       

    		 

      Margarita de la Pisa Carrión, en nombre del Grupo PfE. – Señora presidente, señor comisario, señorías, Europa no puede mirar hacia otro lado cuando hablamos de excelencia en salud. Nuestra cultura ha estado siempre orientada al desarrollo de la ciencia y las humanidades. Hemos formado generaciones de investigadores y profesionales sanitarios con talento, guiados por el compromiso con el bien común.

    Tenemos una responsabilidad de liderazgo, no solo por capacidad, también por principios, para que la salud esté guiada por el deseo de sanar, de proteger la vida, de acompañar y aliviar el sufrimiento, para que esté al servicio de la persona, y no de intereses ajenos a ella.

    Es imprescindible recordar que el cáncer se cobra la vida de casi 1,3 millones de personas en la Unión Europea al año. Las enfermedades cardiovasculares siguen siendo la principal causa de muerte y los trastornos neurológicos afectan a más de siete millones de personas. Debemos, como Europa, avanzar conjuntamente, compartir buenas prácticas entre Estados miembros. Apostemos por una Europa de cooperación, que intercambie experiencias eficaces y que se apoye mutuamente, siempre teniendo en cuenta las particularidades y necesidades de cada país.

    Los próximos años pueden ser revolucionarios para la medicina. Las nuevas herramientas —como la biotecnología o la medicina personalizada— ya hacen posible que nos enfrentemos a enfermedades que antes eran intratables. Sin embargo, su potencial se ve limitado por un marco regulatorio que dificulta transformar la investigación en soluciones reales para los pacientes. Las pymes, que lideran la innovación, se ven especialmente afectadas, también por la falta de financiación en las primeras etapas del desarrollo. Si queremos que Europa avance en salud y en innovación, necesitamos un entorno coherente y favorable que facilite la inversión y acelere la llegada de nuevos tratamientos a los pacientes.

    Por supuesto, se exige también una apuesta igualmente clara por los cuidados. Tenemos la posibilidad de ofrecer opciones esperanzadoras a todos aquellos que sufren enfermedades, no solo en cuanto a diagnóstico y a tratamiento, sino también en cuanto a acompañamiento.

    No es casualidad que cuanto menos se valora la vida, más se deterioran los sistemas sanitarios. En España, tenemos problemas gravísimos: listas de espera interminables, falta de profesionales sanitarios —y los que hay tienen que hacer jornadas maratonianas de trabajo—, miles de personas que mueren esperando acceder a cuidados paliativos… Pero, claro, ¿quién va a querer invertir en salud si no valoramos la vida? Resulta espeluznante pensar que hay países —como España— en los que la única alternativa que se ofrece a las personas con enfermedades graves sea la muerte, sea la eutanasia. No podemos resignarnos a un modelo sanitario que mida su eficacia por costes o por ideologías, sino por su capacidad de cuidar, de sanar, de respetar profundamente la vida humana en todas sus etapas.

    Frente al sufrimiento, nuestra respuesta debe ser más humanidad, más compromiso, más inversión en salud, investigación y también cuidados paliativos. Si Europa quiere ser referente en innovación, también debe ser referente en el respeto a la dignidad de la persona.

    		  
       

    		 

      Aurelijus Veryga, ECR frakcijos vardu. – Kolegos. Sveikata yra ne viskas, bet be sveikatos viskas yra niekas. Deja, dažnu atveju tą suprantame pavėluotai. Gaila, kad ir šiandien plačios ir labai skirtingos sveikatos temos – infekcinės ir lėtinės neinfekcinės ligos, kurioms reikalingi labai skirtingi sprendimai, yra suplaktos į vieną diskusiją. Labai gerai, kad Europos Komisija turi ambiciją šioje kadencijoje išplėsti veiklą, įtraukiant ne tik onkologinių ligų, bet ir širdies kraujagyslių ligų įveikos planą. Ir šioje kadencijoje bus ne viena proga pademonstruoti mūsų rimtą nusiteikimą imtis šių sveikatos problemų sprendimo. Pradėkime nuo to, kad jokiomis aplinkybėmis nebegalima leisti pasikartoti, kad būtų sumažintas finansavimas sveikatos programų ir mokslinių tyrimų finansavimui. Norėčiau tikėti ir tikėtis, kad išlaidos sveikatai sekančiame MFF neliks paskutinėje vietoje, kaip ši diskusija plenarinėje sesijoje, nes visada atsiranda svarbesnių reikalų. O nuveikti reikia labai daug. Ir nors sveikata yra šalių narių kompetencija, tačiau yra sričių, kur bendras veikimas galėtų prisidėti prie visų šalių narių problemų sprendimo. Turėsime ieškoti sveikatos specialistų trūkumo problemos sprendimų. Iš siūlymų, kuriuos šiandien girdžiu, jie ne tik nespręstų problemas, bet jas gilintų. Labai džiaugiuosi Komisijos ambicija dėl ypatingos reikšmės vaisto akto, kuris gali ir turėtų sukurti galimybę vaistų gamintojams sugrįžti ir veikti Europos Sąjungoje, o bendri vaistų pirkimai gali pagreitinti inovatyvių vaistų prieinamumą valstybėse narėse, ypač mažosiose, kurios šiuo metu yra nepatrauklios kaip mažos rinkos. XXI amžiuje onkologiniai pacientai skirtingose šalyse turi skirtingas galimybes gauti gydymą ir pagalbą, o kai kurie yra priversti net bylinėtis, kad tokią pagalbą gautų. Tai yra nepriimtina. Šiandien daug ir pagrįstai kalbame apie gynybos pajėgumų didinimą ir saugumo stiprinimą. Tačiau realybė yra tokia, kad negebama užauginti sveikos jaunosios kartos. Ir nemaža dalis jų dėl sveikatos problemų yra netinkami karinei tarnybai. Šioje kadencijoje turėsime galimybę peržiūrėti Tabako produktų direktyvą, ir noriu tikėti, kad ją peržiūrint sveikata bus prioritetas ir kad užteks išminties tvarkytis su Europa užplūdusi naujais produktais, tokiais kaip elektroninės cigaretės, nes jau šiandien turime daugiau nei pakankamai duomenų, kad jos nesprendžia, o kuria naujas sveikatos problemas.

    		  
       

    		 

      Vlad Vasile-Voiculescu, în numele grupului Renew. – Doamnă președintă, de obicei nu avem timp de povești aici. O să încep astăzi cu o poveste: pe 21 septembrie 2016 eram ministrul sănătății în România. 2016! Institutul Național de Sănătate Publică m-a informat atunci despre o creștere de la 7 la 675 de cazuri de rujeolă confirmate în România. Din 21 septembrie 2016 am declarat epidemie de rujeolă în România. De atunci, epidemia de rujeolă din România nu s-a încheiat. Au urmat mai multe guverne conduse, culmea, de socialiști. Acei socialiști, aceiași socialiști care astăzi refuză să sprijine singurul candidat pro-european din cursa pentru prezidențiale. Iar astăzi, conform Organizației Mondiale a Sănătății, România conduce clasamentul cazurilor de rujeolă raportate în 2024 – peste 30 000. Următoarele state sunt Kazahstan, Federația Rusă, Azerbaidjan și Marea Britanie.

    Dacă Uniunea Europeană, doamnelor și domnilor, face ceva în domeniul sănătății, atunci una dintre priorități trebuie să fie bolile infecțioase. În țara mea, rata de vaccinare împotriva rujeolei cu prima doză este de 78 %, cu a doua este de 62 %. Doar patru țări din UE, din întreaga Uniune Europeană, ating pragul de recomandat de 95 %. Aceste țări merită felicitări și aceste țări sunt: Ungaria, Malta, Portugalia și Slovacia.

    Dar din totalul de cazuri de rujeolă în toată Uniunea Europeană, 87 % provin din România în 2024, 87 %!

    În Uniunea Europeană, doamnelor și domnilor, și în întreaga lume astăzi se duce o bătălie împotriva adevărului și împotriva științei. Am văzut în România, am văzut și în alte state de peste tot de pe glob cum adevărul științific este călcat în picioare de politicieni și de alte forțe din societate. Dacă vrem o Uniune Europeană care protejează cu adevărat cetățenii, atunci, doamnelor și domnilor, asta este bătălia pe care trebuie să o câștigăm. Forțele politice responsabile și societatea civilă onestă trebuie să acționeze ferm împotriva dezinformării criminale cu falsuri medicale, pentru că cele mai multe forțe extremiste de care vorbim astăzi, cele mai multe forțe politice care cresc pe minciună și dezinformare, forțe politice pe care le combatem și aici, și în țările noastre, haideți să fim onești, au crescut pe spinarea celui mai traumatic eveniment planetar din ultimul deceniu. Și acesta a fost, cu siguranță, pandemia.

    Dacă pierdem știința și adevărul ca bază fundamentală a realității, societatea în sine, toate societățile noastre nu vor putea supraviețui.

    		  
       

    		 

      Tilly Metz, on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group. – Madam President, dear Commissioner, when we speak about diseases like cancer, heart conditions, neurological disorders or measles, we don’t speak in abstract terms – we are speaking about our neighbours, our parents, our children. Every one of us has a story. Every one of us knows someone affected. That’s why our response must be human, bold and forward-looking.

    Let’s start with the obvious: prevention works, and yet it’s still the most neglected part of our health system. We spend billions on treatment, but far too little on stopping disease before it begins. We need to invest in the conditions that keep people healthy: clean air, clean water, affordable and healthy food, decent housing.

    That is why policies like the European Green Deal and the common agricultural policy play a crucial role. Those are not environmental luxuries; they are essential tools for protecting public health.

    We need also to address one of the elephants in the room: tobacco. It’s still one of the leading causes of preventable deaths in Europe. It’s time to stop dancing around this issue. We urgently need to revise the EU’s tobacco legislation, including tax rules. Recently, 16 Member States called for a revision – higher taxes, plain packaging, a total ban on advertising, including for newer products like heated tobacco or e-cigarettes. Our legislation must catch up with reality.

    Dear colleagues, prevention alone is not enough. We must guarantee affordable and timely access to effective treatment for all, regardless of income or geography. That means making pharmaceutical legislation and innovation conditional on affordability. It means demanding transparency on pricing and research and development costs. Yes, it also means redesigning the way we reward medical innovation so that public investment leads to public benefit.

    Finally, we need to stop only reacting to crises and start planning ahead. So Europe needs a comprehensive strategy on non-communicable diseases – we need to stop thinking in silos – that looks across health systems, environment, agriculture and education and social policy.

    Prevention and treatment must include protection also for women’s health. That is another aspect; a gender-sensitive approach is needed.

    So let’s act with courage, let’s act with care and let’s act now, because lives depend on it.

    		  
       

    		 

      Milan Mazurek, za skupinu ESN. – Vážená pani predsedajúca, myslíte, že ľudia zabudli, že vám skutočne ľudia odpustili a že si nepamätajú, čo Leyenovej Európska komisia urobila stovkám miliónov obyvateľov Európskej únie počas doby, ktorú ja nazývam doba korona-teroru? Myslíte, že zabudli, že to bola Európska komisia, ktorá vzala stovkám miliónov obyvateľov ľudské práva a rovnako ako v minulosti nacisti či komunisti rozdelila ľudí na hodných a nehodných, na tých, ktorí si mohli ľudské práva nechať, a tých, ktorým boli vzaté? Bol som jeden z tých, ktorý nemohol navštevovať ani telocvične, verejné podujatia a nemohol vychádzať z domu, pretože vaše projekty covidpasov vzali ľuďom práva a keď sa ľudia nezaočkovali, keď ľudia nepodstupovali nezmyselné testy, tak ste im jednoducho neumožňovali žiť normálny život. Spomeňte si na to, koľkým desiatkam miliónov ľudí ste zruinovali ich podnikanie, koľkým deťom ste vzali budúcnosť, koľko sociálnych samovrážd ľudí, ktorých ste dotlačili na dno, ste spôsobili? Koľko zla, násilia a nenávisti ste v spoločnosti napáchali? A to len preto, aby Európska komisia mohla do svojich rúk získať ďalšie práva, ďalšiu kontrolu nad životmi slobodných ľudí, obmedziť národné štáty a robiť si nechutný miliardový biznis cez esemesky prostredníctvom pani Leyenovej. Gigantický konflikt záujmov, ktorý v tomto pléne stále nebol vyšetrený, na ktorého vyšetrenie čakajú občania vo všetkých členských štátoch. Len vy kryjete zločinnosti tejto Európskej komisie. A potom, keď tu predstúpite a poviete, že vy chcete predchádzať chorobám, že vy chcete chrániť zdravie ľudí a hovoríte, že chcete podporovať napríklad fyzickú kondíciu? Vy, tí istí ľudia, ktorí zakazovali ľuďom športovať, ktorí prikazovali ľudí trestať len preto, že chceli ísť cvičiť, športovať či behať niekde na verejnosť. Kto vám má po tom všetkom ešte veriť? Každý zmýšľajúci občan už vidí, že kedykoľvek, keď Európska komisia začne hovoriť o tom, že by mala získať ďalšiu kontrolu, právomoci a možnosti pre to, aby chránila ľudí, tak je v skutočnosti presný opak pravdou. V skutočnosti chcete kompetencie a možnosti pre to, aby ste mohli opätovne robiť svoje biznisy. Aby opätovne niektorí vyvolení mohli rozkrádať peniaze daňových poplatníkov a chcete ďalšiu kontrolu a moc, aby ste ľuďom mohli vziať ich práva a uvrhnúť ich život do absolútnej totality, pretože to je skutočná podstata a charakter tejto Komisie. Museli by mi skutočne ruky dolámať, aby som hlasoval za ďalšie právomoci a kompetencie či rozpočet pre takúto Európsku komisiu.

    		  
       

    		 

      Seán Kelly (PPE). – A Uachtaráin, Commissioner, across Europe, millions of citizens are affected by diseases that could be prevented, treated earlier and managed better if we act together.

    That is why I fully support the EU’s stepped-up efforts on health, particularly in tackling cancer, cardiovascular and neurological diseases and preventing avoidable illnesses like measles. Cancer alone claims nearly 1.3 million lives in the EU each year, but through initiatives like Europe’s Beating Cancer Plan, we are finally taking a coordinated approach and investing in research, screening, early detection and better access to treatment across Member States.

    I am proud that Irish researchers, institutions and clinicians are playing a key role in this. Cardiovascular and neurological diseases are among the leading causes of disability and death in Europe. Yet too often, they do not get the attention they deserve.

    We need targeted strategies, strong support for cross-border research, and public-awareness campaigns that reach citizens in every region, including rural communities, like many in my own constituency in Ireland South.

    Let us be clear. The resurgence of measles in parts of Europe is both tragic and preventable. We must not allow misinformation to roll back decades of progress in public health. Vaccination saves lives. Full stop. We must ensure that no matter where you live in Europe, you have access to the care you need.

    		  
       

    		 

      Christophe Clergeau (S&D). – Madame la Présidente, Monsieur le Commissaire, la révolution que j’appelle de mes vœux, c’est la révolution de la prévention. Car soigner est indispensable et il faut le faire mieux, mais ce n’est pas une fin en soi. L’objectif, c’est de bien vivre et de bien vieillir, en bonne santé. Cela passe par la prévention, qui est le meilleur des investissements, tandis que la non-action, au contraire, se traduit par des millions de morts et par des milliards d’euros de dépenses inutiles.

    Alors oui, nous avons besoin des grands programmes de santé publique existants – comme celui contre le cancer – ou annoncés par la Commission. Pour nous, la priorité, c’est un grand programme pour la santé mentale et un grand programme pour la santé des femmes.

    Cependant, nous devons avant tout prévenir les maladies en agissant sur les déterminants de la santé. Agir contre la pauvreté, la précarité, le mal-logement, la précarité énergétique et alimentaire, le rationnement des soins. Agir contre le tabac et la malbouffe: ce sont des catastrophes sanitaires qui résultent de décennies de lobbying et de manipulation par les grands intérêts économiques. Il nous faut impérativement réviser la directive sur le tabac pour combattre les fausses alternatives à la cigarette, qui sont des dangers majeurs pour la santé publique. Nous avons aussi besoin d’un programme législatif concernant l’alimentation, pour combattre les pratiques et les produits dangereux, mieux informer les consommateurs et interdire – oui, interdire! – la publicité pour la malbouffe.

    Enfin, nous devons agir contre les effets cumulés de notre environnement sur nos organismes, cette cause émergente de l’explosion des maladies chroniques, des cancers, mais aussi des maladies dégénératives ou des maladies de la douleur. Alors oui, les pollutions, les pesticides, les produits chimiques, les PFAS sont un cocktail terrible qui ruine notre santé. Dans ce domaine, c’est la santé qui doit être la ligne directrice de notre action. Nous sommes à la veille de choix politiques drastiques: prévenir, prévenir et prévenir, c’est le seul choix possible pour le bien-être des Européens.

    		  
       

    		 

      Manuela Ripa (PPE). – Frau Präsidentin! Krebs und Herz-Kreislauf-Erkrankungen gehören zu den Gesundheitsgefahren unserer Zeit. Gut ist: Viele dieser Erkrankungen sind vermeidbar. Ein zentraler Hebel dabei ist gesunde Ernährung. Doch gesunde Ernährung darf kein Luxus sein. Wenn wir es ernst meinen mit der Vorsorge, dann müssen wir gesunde Lebensmittel günstiger machen, zum Beispiel durch die Senkung der Mehrwertsteuer auf Obst und Gemüse. Gleichzeitig müssen wir ungesunde, stark verarbeitete Produkte angehen. Denn sie belasten nicht nur unseren Körper, sondern auch unser Gesundheitssystem und damit die Allgemeinheit.

    Besonders schutzbedürftig sind unsere Kinder. Werbung für ungesunde Lebensmittel, die sich gezielt an sie richtet, muss nicht sein. Kinder sollen lernen, was ihrem Körper guttut, nicht, was sich am besten verkauft. Genauso wichtig ist der informierte Verbraucher. Wer gesund einkaufen will, braucht klar verständliche Nährwertkennzeichnungen.

    Doch wir müssen auch über psychische Erkrankungen sprechen und hier über den übermäßigen Konsum sozialer Medien, gerade bei Jugendlichen. Studien zeigen, dass ständiges Scrollen, Reizüberflutung und digitaler Stress das Risiko für Depressionen und Konzentrationsprobleme erhöhen können. Deshalb müssen wir auf europäischer Ebene dringend dafür sorgen, dass unsere Kinder besser geschützt werden. Dazu gehört Aufklärung in der Schule, aber auch Aufklärung der Eltern und eine stärkere Verantwortung der Plattformen. Süchtig machende Algorithmen ebnen den Weg zu einer neuen Volkskrankheit, und das schon in sehr jungen Jahren. Gesundheit ist mehr als die Abwesenheit von Krankheit. Sie beginnt mit Bildung, Schutz und den richtigen politischen Rahmenbedingungen für ein gesundes Europa.

    		  
       

    		 

      Laurent Castillo (PPE). – Madame la Présidente, Monsieur le Commissaire, chers collègues, tout le monde parle de prévention, mais trop peu la mettent en œuvre. Pourquoi? Parce que ses effets prennent du temps et trop d’élus préfèrent des résultats immédiats. Pourtant, c’est là que tout commence: mieux vivre, désengorger les hôpitaux, réduire les coûts. 1 euro investi en prévention, c’est jusqu’à 6 euros d’économies. Prévenir, c’est voir loin.

    Si certains États manquent de courage, alors soyons exemplaires à l’échelle européenne. Après le plan cancer, engageons-nous avec la même ambition contre les maladies cardiovasculaires. Lançons un vrai plan européen de lutte contre l’obésité. La santé des Européens n’est pas un slogan, c’est un combat. Et ce combat commence par la prévention.

    		  
       

       

    Zgłoszenia z sali

    		  
       

    		 

      András Tivadar Kulja (PPE). – Madam President, dear Commissioner, dear colleagues, I’m a bit disappointed to see so few of us here in person for this debate, especially as we are talking about diseases that pose an increasing burden on our ageing society across Europe.

    Cancer, cardiovascular diseases and neurological conditions cause the death of more than 3 million Europeans each year. In the case of cardiovascular diseases alone, 1.3 million of these deaths could be avoided with better prevention, early detection and access to modern, affordable healthcare.

    That’s why, along with the European Beating Cancer Plan, we also need strong support and funding for the European Cardiovascular Health Action Plan. To achieve our goals, we must have a truly holistic approach to recognise how physical, mental and brain health are deeply connected.

    We have a great responsibility: people are counting on us to act on healthcare, and we also see that where healthcare is declining, extremism is growing. Strengthening healthcare not only helps people, it also protects democracy.

    		  
       

    		 

      Lukas Sieper (NI). – Frau Präsidentin, liebe Menschen Europas, verehrter Herr Kommissar! Ich danke Ihnen und den ganzen Kollegen hier für die wichtige Arbeit. Ich möchte zum Abschluss noch einmal das Licht auf zwei Aspekte werfen, die auch angesprochen wurden: Das eine ist die Aufklärung, und das andere ist auch die psychologische Betreuung, die im Umfeld von Krankheiten relevant werden kann.

    Wir haben da gerade ein leuchtendes Beispiel gesehen bei der Rede des Kollegen Mazurek, der offensichtlich aufgrund mangelnder Aufklärung nicht den Mut hatte, eine wichtige Impfung vorzunehmen, und aufgrund dessen dann gezwungen war, über eine lange Zeit zu Hause zu bleiben, dem sozialen Leben entrissen war und bis heute sichtbar schwere Nachwirkungen davonträgt. Ich denke, wir müssen alle zusammenarbeiten, um den Menschen in Europa die Gesundheit zu geben, die sie verdienen, weil Gesundheit etwas ist, was uns alle angeht.

    		  
       

    		 

      Diana Iovanovici Şoşoacă (NI). – Doamnă președintă, da, îi acuzi pe alții că sunt bolnavi mintal dar tu nu te duci să te cauți.

    Este impardonabil că permiteți aici jignirea unui coleg, în condițiile în care numai dacă ești medic și numai dacă s-a consultat la tine ai posibilitatea să îți expui un punct de vedere. Din punctul meu de vedere, ca avocat, eu l-aș baga direct în închisoare pe domnul care a vorbit înainte de Mazurek. Este impardonabil ceea ce acceptați, aceste jigniri.

    Doi la mână, vorbiți de prevenție. Nu veți face niciodată prevenție, pentru că dumneavoastră aveți relații cu Big Pharma. Și acestea au reieșit foarte clar în cazul vaccinării anti-Covid, un vaccin experimental. Dacă vă interesa, în conformitate cu articolul 5 din Convenția de la Oviedo, toate vaccinurile erau experimentale. Eu însămi am luat informațiile de pe site-ul Pfizer și Modena și toate celelalte producătoare.

    Vreau să vă spun că, pe cât acuzați dumneavoastră Cuba de dictatură, Cuba a reușit să eradicheze rujeola, în timp ce în Europa este explozie de rujeolă. Foarte interesant. Da, dați cu bastonașul, că pe noi ne interziceți, iar pe ai dumneavoastră îi lăsați. E rușinos ce faceți cu afacerile cu vaccinuri.

    		  
       

       

    (Koniec zgłoszeń z sali)

    		  
       

    		 

      Costas Kadis, Member of the Commission. – Madam President, honourable Members, thank you. I will be very brief.

    First, let me thank you for your insight. It is obvious also from this discussion that diseases, both infectious and non-infectious, are a key public health challenge. During this mandate, the Commission will step up work on promoting health and preventing diseases. We will also ensure that innovation does not stay in the laboratory but can reach and help patients.

    To this end. As I mentioned in my introductory remarks, the Commission intends to propose a European Biotech Act. Together, we can work towards better policies, programs and initiatives that support patients.

    In turn, that will also reduce the social and economic costs of these diseases. And I’m sure our conversations on this important topics will continue.

    		  
       


    		 

      Przewodnicząca. – Zamykam debatę.

    		  

    11. Explanations of vote

    		 

      Przewodnicząca. – Kolejnym punktem porządku dziennego są wyjaśnienia dotyczące stanowiska zajętego w głosowaniu.

    		  

    11.1. Ninth report on economic and social cohesion (A10-0066/2025 – Jacek Protas)


    		 

      Seán Kelly (PPE). – Bhí áthas orm vótáil ar son an naoú tuarascáil ar chomhtháthú.

    This report reaffirms the vital role of EU cohesion policy in promoting balanced development, reducing regional disparities and building long term socioeconomic resilience across the Union.

    The report rightly highlights the policy’s positive impact on growth, productivity and employment, while stressing the importance of its core principles, such as the bottom-up approach and partnership model that underpin effective and inclusive governance.

    Importantly, it calls for greater flexibility to help cohesion policy respond to crises like pandemics, wars and climate change. It also addresses the ongoing challenges facing regions in transition, especially those affected by industrial decline or near the EU’s external borders.

    Simplifying administrative procedures is also key to improving access and reducing barriers.

    Tríd is tríd, is tuarascáil mhaith chiallmhar í seo agus bhíos sásta tacaíocht a thabhairt di.

    		  
       

    		 

      Lukas Sieper (NI). – Madam President, dear people of Europe, cohesion is not charity. It is a political promise that no region, no person is left behind.

    This report reminds us that the gaps between European regions are still real in innovation, in jobs, in future prospects, and that’s not acceptable. We need a cohesion policy that matches the challenges of our time, green transition, digital transition and demographic change.

    That means simpler access to EU funds, stronger roles for local and regional actors, and long-term thinking, not just emergency response.

    Because when we invest in cohesion, we don’t just invest in roads or statistics. We invest in dignity, in democracy and in equal chances all across Europe.

    		  

    11.2. The role of gas storage for securing gas supplies ahead of the winter season (A10-0079/2025 – Borys Budka)


    		 

      Seán Kelly (PPE). – A Uachtaráin, Arís bhí áthas orm vótáil ar son na tuarascála seo …

    Because it extends and revises the EU Gas Storage Regulation as it balances energy security with changing market conditions.

    Measures introduced during the 2022 gas crisis, especially mandatory storage targets, proved effective in stabilising supply and protecting citizens from price shocks. Extending them beyond 2025 is a smart step to prepare for future risks.

    I support the added flexibility, including the adjusted 83 % target and limited scope for Member State deviations in difficult conditions. These updates respect national contexts while maintaining a strong collective baseline.

    The proposal also advances EU goals by phasing out Russian fossil fuels and supporting a return to market-based mechanisms. By cutting red tape and reinforcing subsidiarity, it empowers Member States while ensuring effective oversight.

    Bhí bród orm vótáil ar son na tuarascála praiticiúla seo a thugann tacaíocht don Trasdul Glas.

    		  
       

    		 

      Lukas Sieper (NI). – Señora presidenta, queridos pueblos de Europa, el invierno en Europa puede ser duro: las familias necesitan calor, las empresas necesitan energía segura. Necesitamos reglas claras sobre el gas almacenado porque la energía es parte de la seguridad social y económica.

    Sí, el futuro es energía limpia y renovable, pero hoy necesitamos soluciones prácticas para proteger a las personas cuando hace frío y para evitar crisis. Más reglas no es más burocracia, es más seguridad para todos. Mientras cambiamos el sistema energético, necesitamos estabilidad.

    		  

    11.3. Competition policy – annual report 2024 (A10-0071/2025 – Lara Wolters)


    		 

      Seán Kelly (PPE). – A Uachtaráin, tacaím leis an rún seo toisc go gcuireann sé cur chuige straitéiseach agus cothrom chun cinn chun iomaíochas an Aontais a neartú i dtimpeallacht dhomhanda atá ag athrú go tapaidh. Cuireann sé béim ar chomh tábhachtach atá an iomaíocht chóir, ní hamháin chun an nuálaíocht a spreagadh ach chun tomhaltóirí a chosaint, ach chun athléimneacht eacnamaíochta fhadtéarmach a fhorbairt ar fud an Aontais freisin. Thar aon ní eile, ceanglaíonn sé tosaíochtaí comhshaoil agus digiteacha leis an gcreat iomaíochta. Trínár straitéis eacnamaíoch a ailíniú leis an gComhaontú Glas don Eoraip agus le Compás Digiteach 2030, cabhraímid leis an Eoraip a bheith ina ceannaire domhanda san aon bhunaíocht agus sa teicneolaíocht. Má thacaímid leis an rún seo, beimid ag seasamh an fhóid ar son fás inbhuanaithe, margaí cothroma, agus iomaíochas domhanda an Aontais.

    		  

    11.4. Old challenges and new commercial practices in the internal market (B10-0246/2025)


    		 

      Lukas Sieper (NI). – Signora Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, cari popoli d’Europa, il mercato unico è una delle cose migliori dell’Unione europea, ma il mercato deve essere giusto per tutti. Oggi ci sono nuove sfide: le piattaforme digitali, le pratiche sleali, le regole poco chiare.

    Questa risoluzione è importante. Serve per aiutare le piccole imprese, per proteggere i consumatori e per avere un mercato ben funzionante. Un mercato moderno deve essere anche trasparente e aperto a tutti, non solo ai grandi.

    		  

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

    		 

      Przewodnicząca. – Protokół dzisiejszego posiedzenia zostanie przedłożony Parlamentowi do zatwierdzenia na początku następnego posiedzenia.

    Jeśli nie wpłynie żaden sprzeciw, przekażę rezolucje przyjęte na dzisiejszym posiedzeniu osobom i organom w nich wymienionym.

    		  

    13. Dates of the next part-session

    		 

      Przewodnicząca. – Kolejna sesja miesięczna odbędzie się 21 i 22 maja 2025 roku w Brukseli.

    		  

    14. Closure of the sitting

       

    (Posiedzenie zostało zamknięte o godz. 15.50)

    		  

    15. Adjournment of the session

    		 

      Przewodnicząca. – Zamykam posiedzenie.

    Ogłaszam przerwę w obradach Parlamentu Europejskiego.

    Dziękuję bardzo. Do zobaczenia na następnym posiedzeniu.

    		  

    MIL OSI Europe News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Q&A: National Nurses Week

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Iowa Chuck Grassley
    Q: What is National Nurses Week?
    A: Efforts to honor and celebrate nurses in the United States first got underway during the Eisenhower administration. In 1974, President Nixon issued a proclamation to honor the expanding role nurses were taking on in the health care system, such as nurse practitioners and those specializing in pediatric, cardiac, oncology and geriatric care. In 1982, President Reagan signed a proclamation to mark “National Recognition Day for Nurses” that observed the indispensable role nurses have in patient care, from intensive care in trauma and burn units to community health and home care, nursing homes and schools. Since then, grassroots-led efforts expanded the observance to National Nurses Week that continues today during the week of Florence Nightingale’s birthday, who is celebrated as the founder of modern nursing. Since 1991, I’ve supported an annual joint resolution of Congress to reflect on the important contributions nurses make in our society. With an estimated 4.7 million registered nurses in the United States, nurses are on the front lines treating sick and injured patients, including during natural disasters and public health emergencies. During the COVID-19 pandemic, nurses put their own lives on the line to care for the sickest among us. The nursing profession continues to meet the moment in scientific inquiry, medical research and team-based delivery of care. With limited faculty and spots available for prospective nursing students across the country, I support efforts to strengthen workforce development and academic training programs. I value the feedback I get from Iowans to solve problems and improve the delivery of health care in communities across our state. I’m pleased the University of Northern Iowa last year launched a new Bachelor of Science in Nursing program that will help address the nursing shortage across the state, particularly in rural and underserved areas.
    Q: How do Iowa nursing professionals inform your work at the policymaking table?
    A: As former chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, I led efforts to ensure fairness for Medicare reimbursements that directly impact providers delivering essential health care in communities across our state. For example, requiring Medicare to directly reimburse nurse practitioners and other specialists is an important tool in rural areas to expand access to health care services. More recently, I’m pushing to improve advanced practice nurses and clinical nurse reimbursement for nurse practitioners in their diagnosis and treatment for diabetic patients. I’m also spearheading bipartisan efforts to provide rural hospitals with financial stability. My Rural Hospital Support Act would help prevent rural hospital closures by extending and modernizing critical Medicare programs for rural hospitals. Specifically, my bill would permanently extend the Medicare-Dependent Hospital (MDH) and the Low-Volume Hospital (LVH) programs. For many hospitals located in rural areas, costs often outpace their revenue. If hospitals can’t pay their bills and are forced to close their doors, nurses are out of work and patients would have to travel further for life-saving care. I’ve also led efforts to improve maternal and infant health across our state. At a roundtable discussion in Bettendorf in 2022, I heard first-hand accounts from health care professionals about the Maternal, Infant and Early Childhood Home Visiting Program. Home visits from a nurse and other health care professionals provide important support and resources to improve health outcomes for at-risk pregnant moms and families with children from birth to kindergarten. My advocacy for this home visiting program reflects my longstanding support for health care professionals in our communities who provide evidence-based services to improve childhood development, reduce post-partum depression and help families thrive.
    During National Nurses Week, I applaud the labor of love and patient-centered care that legions of nursing professionals provide around-the-clock, year-round to loved ones of all ages and all walks of life. Nurses are ranked among the most honest and ethical professions in society. I thank nurses for their tireless commitment to their vocation and encourage Iowans to celebrate those in your lives who have answered the call to this noble profession.
    National Nurses Week is May 6-12, 2025.

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI Russia: IMF Executive Board Concludes the 2025 Discussions on Common Policies of Member Countries of the Eastern Caribbean Currency Union

    Source: IMF – News in Russian

    May 8, 2025

    Washington, DC: The Executive Board of the International Monetary Fund (IMF) concluded the Article IV consultation[1] with member countries on common policies of the Eastern Caribbean Currency Union (ECCU). The Board considered and endorsed the staff appraisal without a meeting.[2]

    The currency union has provided a strong anchor for macroeconomic stability. In 2024, strong tourism performance and continued infrastructure investments have supported robust growth of 3.9 percent, and inflation moderated to below 2 percent in tune with global trends. This has facilitated a moderate reduction in the currency union’s fiscal and external imbalances, although public debt remains high at above 71 percent of GDP and the post-pandemic trend of narrowing of sizable current account deficits has stalled. The ECCB’s stable reserves underpin a strong currency backing ratio. The ECCU financial system has remained stable, though exhibiting legacy asset quality and credit condition weaknesses.

    The union’s recent growth momentum is projected to wane. Increasing constraints to tourism capacity and completion of major infrastructure projects are set to slow real GDP growth to around 2½ percent over the medium term. Modest growth prospects reflect weak productivity and local investment, as well as headwinds from ageing populations, a shrinking labor force, and constrained fiscal space for public investment in most union members. Fiscal and external imbalances are projected to narrow over the medium term, reflecting in part completion of import-intensive public investment projects.

    Risks to the outlook remain mostly on the downside amid a highly uncertain external environment. As reported in the April World Economic Outlook, the escalation of trade tensions and high levels of policy uncertainty are a major negative shock to global economic activity. For ECCU economies, increased global trade and geopolitical tensions could give rise to disruptions to tourism and FDI inflows and renewed inflationary pressures. High public debt, persistent current account deficits and weaknesses in the local financial system amplify vulnerability to recurrent ND shocks alongside the uncertain outlook for future citizenship-by-investment inflows.

    Executive Board Assessment[3]

    The ECCU has achieved a strong rebound from successive adverse shocks. Strong tourism performance and continued infrastructure investments have supported robust post‑pandemic growth, while inflation has moderated in tune with global trends. This has facilitated a moderate reduction in the currency union’s fiscal and external imbalances, although public debt levels and current account deficits remain high in several members. The ECCU’s external position is assessed as weaker than implied by fundamentals and desirable policies, but the current account deficits remain fully financed and the stability of the ECCB’s reserves underpin a strong currency backing ratio. The financial system has remained stable, albeit exhibiting continued asset quality and credit condition weaknesses. 

    Growth momentum is nonetheless projected to wane and risks to the outlook remain mostly on the downside. Increasing constraints to tourism capacity and completion of major infrastructure projects are set to slow growth to around 2½ percent over the medium term. This modest growth potential reflects weak productivity and local investment, as well as headwinds from ageing populations, a shrinking labor force, and constrained fiscal space for public investment in most union members. Downside risks to the outlook are significant amid a highly uncertain external environment, where increased trade and geopolitical tensions could give rise to renewed inflationary pressures and disruptions to tourism and FDI inflows. High public debt, persistent current account deficits, and weaknesses in the local financial system amplify vulnerability to recurrent natural disaster (ND) shocks alongside the uncertain outlook for future Citizenship-by-Investment (CBI) inflows.

    Achieving more robust, resilient, and inclusive long-term growth would support the currency union’s fiscal and external sustainability and raise living standards. To support this objective, common regional policies should be anchored in building economic, fiscal, and financial resilience and addressing supply bottlenecks that underpin the recent decades’ downward trend in the region’s growth potential.

    A key policy priority is alleviating the region’s structural growth impediments, which calls for a coordinated multipronged approach. Addressing frictions to employment and skills development requires a renewed effort to attune human capital to economic needs and development priorities through vocational training and modernized education systems, complemented by active labor market policies and improved access to child and elderly care. Common policies can also enhance the scale, resilience, and efficiency of the region’s capital stock by helping to accelerate energy transition to local renewables, optimize the CBI funding model, and increase ND preparedness. Substantial productivity gains may also be achieved through cooperative efforts to address bottlenecks to innovation and allocative efficiency, including by digitalizing key services, streamlining licensing and administrative processes, and strengthening financial intermediation.

    Fiscal policies should remain closely focused on rebuilding buffers, reducing public debt consistent with the regional debt anchor, and improving resilience to shocks. Region‑wide adoption of strong medium-term fiscal frameworks (MTFFs) embedded with well-designed fiscal rules and credible policy plans would support sustainability objectives and create policy space for growth-enhancing social and resilience investment. Comprehensive fiscal resilience strategies, including adequate disaster-financing frameworks, can help alleviate periodic ND disruptions to debt sustainability and support the region’s growth resilience. Strengthening fiscal management of uncertain CBI revenues can similarly alleviate risks and facilitate fiscal planning. These efforts can be supported by more institutionalized regional oversight and continued strengthening of national fiscal institutions.

    Enhancing financial system resilience and reducing persistent credit-frictions can support a more conducive environment for growth-supporting local investment. Regional policy priorities include reducing vulnerabilities from legacy bank balance sheet weaknesses, mitigating risks from rapid credit union expansion, building readiness to manage risks from high dependency on global reinsurance, and strengthening national AML/CFT frameworks. Common minimum NBFI regulatory standards under the planned Eastern Caribbean Financial Stability Board (ECFSB) will be an important step toward their more unified oversight, although a more centralized supervisory structure would better facilitate management of regional stability risks. Coordinated efforts to reduce institutional frictions in local credit markets and support small ECCU businesses’ bankability can help address structural challenges in financial intermediation, revive local credit and investment, and foster development of a more vibrant private sector.

    Strengthening economic data could significantly improve regional policy design and risk management. Priorities include addressing shortcomings in coverage, quality, and timeliness of key national and external accounts and reducing significant blind spots in areas such as the regional labor markets and CBI flows. Greater leveraging of synergies in regional data compilation and processing could help address persistent resource and capacity gaps.

    Table 1. ECCU: Selected Economic and Financial Indicators, 2020-2026 1/
       

    Est.

    Proj.

    2020

    2021

    2022

    2023

    2024

    2025

    2026

    (Annual percentage change) 

    Output and Prices

    Real GDP

    -17.6

    6.5

    11.8

    3.7

    3.9

    3.5

    2.7

    GDP deflator

    -2.2

    4.4

    4.1

    3.3

    2.7

    1.7

    2.1

    Consumer prices, average

    -0.6

    1.7

    5.6

    4.0

    2.3

    1.9

    2.0

    Monetary Sector

    Net foreign assets

    6.1

    16.5

    -0.7

    11.5

    4.8

    1.7

    4.1

      Central bank

    3.6

    11.6

    -4.8

    5.4

    12.3

    5.9

    4.4

      Commercial banks (net)

    8.5

    21.1

    2.8

    16.3

    -0.5

    -1.7

    3.7

    Net domestic assets

    -16.5

    1.2

    13.0

    -5.8

    7.9

    11.0

    6.1

      Of which: private sector credit

    -0.9

    1.5

    1.6

    3.6

    4.7

    5.1

    2.5

    Broad money (M2)

    -4.7

    10.1

    4.6

    4.3

    6.0

    5.3

    4.9

    (In percent of GDP, unless otherwise indicated)

    Public Finances

    Central government

    		          

      Total revenue and grants

    29.0

    30.5

    29.7

    30.0

    30.8

    28.3

    27.3

      Total expenditure and net lending

    35.8

    33.4

    32.5

    31.2

    32.2

    32.8

    27.8

    Overall balance 2/

    -6.8

    -2.9

    -2.7

    -1.3

    -1.4

    -4.5

    -0.5

      Of which: expected fiscal cost of natural disasters

    0.5

    0.4

    0.5

    0.7

    0.7

    0.7

    0.7

      Excl. Citizenship-by-Investment Programs

    -11.5

    -8.7

    -9.3

    -8.0

    -7.3

    -8.4

    -3.6

    Primary balance 2/

    -4.3

    -0.6

    -0.5

    0.9

    1.1

    -1.8

    1.7

    Total public sector debt

    89.2

    84.5

    76.2

    73.9

    71.2

    70.8

    69.9

    External Sector

    Current account balance

    -19.1

    -18.5

    -12.3

    -10.3

    -10.4

    -9.9

    -8.3

    Trade balance

    -29.5

    -30.1

    -33.3

    -32.0

    -34.2

    -34.1

    -32.7

      Exports, f.o.b. (annual percentage change)

    -28.5

    31.5

    40.5

    21.9

    -9.7

    13.9

    11.4

      Imports, f.o.b. (annual percentage change)

    -23.2

    15.2

    29.7

    5.3

    11.0

    5.8

    1.9

    Services, incomes and transfers

    10.4

    11.6

    20.9

    21.8

    23.9

    24.2

    24.5

      Of which: travel

    17.1

    20.5

    34.6

    39.8

    42.1

    42.2

    42.5

    External public debt

    47.9

    47.6

    42.6

    42.7

    42.1

    43.7

    44.8

    External debt service (percent of goods and nonfactor services)

    21.3

    14.8

    10.3

    9.0

    10.3

    9.1

    8.6

    International reserves

       In millions of U.S. dollars

    1,747

    1,952

    1,869

    1,972

    2,202

    2,332

    2,435

       In months of prospective year imports of goods and services

    5.7

    4.8

    4.0

    4.0

    4.2

    4.4

    4.4

       In percent of broad money

    28.1

    28.5

    26.1

    26.4

    27.8

    28.0

    27.9

    REER (average annual percentage change)

    		    

       Trade-weighted 3/

    -.07

    -2.8

    3.1

    -1.1

    -1.0

    …

    …

    Sources: Country authorities; and IMF staff estimates and projections.

    1/ Includes all eight ECCU members unless otherwise noted. ECCU consumer price aggregates are calculated as weighted averages of individual country data. Other ECCU aggregates are calculated by adding individual country data. The staff report projections are based on the information available as of March 31, 2025. It, therefore, does not reflect the impact of the escalation of trade tensions on and after April 2, 2025.

    2/ Projections include expected fiscal costs of natural disasters.

    3/ Excludes Anguilla and Montserrat.

    [1] Under Article IV of the IMF’s Articles of Agreement, the IMF holds bilateral discussions with members, usually every year. Staff hold separate annual discussions with the regional institutions responsible for common policies in four currency unions—the Euro Area, the Eastern Caribbean Currency Union, the Central African Economic and Monetary Union, and the West African Economic and Monetary Union. For each of the currency unions, staff teams visit the regional institutions responsible for common policies in the currency union, collects economic and financial information, and discusses with officials the currency union’s economic developments and policies. On return to headquarters, the staff prepares a report, which forms the basis of discussion by the Executive Board. Both staff’s discussions with the regional institutions and the Board discussion of the annual staff report will be considered an integral part of the Article IV consultation with each member.

    [2] The staff report reflects discussions with the authorities during January 8-16 and January 27-February 10, 2025, and is based on the information available as of March 31, 2025. It, therefore, does not reflect the impact of the escalation of trade tensions on and after April 2, 2025. Based on information available until April 29, 2025, and covered in the Staff Supplement, the thrust of the staff appraisal remains unchanged.

    [3] The Executive Board takes decisions under its lapse-of-time procedure when the Board agrees that a proposal can be considered without convening formal discussions.

    IMF Communications Department
    MEDIA RELATIONS

    PRESS OFFICER: Meera Louis

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

    https://www.imf.org/en/News/Articles/2025/05/08/pr-24135-caribbean-imf-concludes-2025-discussions-on-policies-of-east-carib-currency-union

    MIL OSI

    MIL OSI Russia News –

  • MIL-OSI: Guardian Capital Group Limited (TSX: GCG; GCG.A) Announces 2025 First Quarter Operating Results

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    TORONTO, May 08, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) —

    All per share figures disclosed below are stated on a diluted basis.

         
    For the three months ended March 31, 2025 2024
    ($ in thousands, except per share amounts)    
         
    Net revenue $ 95,161 $ 62,497
    Operating earnings   7,050   12,318
    Net gains (losses)   (15,723)   12,737
    Net earnings (loss)   (6,664)   21,441
         
         
    EBITDA(1) $ 15,920 $ 18,906
    Adjusted cash flow from operations(1)   13,038   15,209
         
         
    Attributable to shareholders:    
    Net earnings (loss) $ (7,052) $ 21,167
    EBITDA(1)   15,255   18,333
    Adjusted cash flow from operations(1)   12,460   14,695
    Per share, diluted:    
    Net earnings (loss) $ (0.30) $ 0.86
    EBITDA(1)   0.65   0.75
    Adjusted cash flow from operations(1)   0.53   0.60
         
         
           
    As at 2025 2024 2024
    ($ in millions, except per share amounts) March 31 December 31 March 31
           
           
    Total client assets $ 167,227 $ 168,979 $ 61,316
    Shareholders’ equity   1,304   1,318   1,255
    Securities, net   1,201   1,211   1,253
           
    Per share amounts (diluted):      
    Shareholders’ equity(1) $ 53.30 $ 53.76 $ 50.30
    Securities, net(1)   49.11   49.38   50.22
           
           

    The Company is reporting Total Client Assets (which includes assets under management and advisement) of $167.2 billion as at March 31, 2025. This is a 1% decrease from $169.0 billion as at December 31, 2024, and a 172.7% increase from $61.3 billion as at March 31, 2024. The decline during the current quarter is largely due to net client outflows year-to-date, partially offset by positive market performance, while the significant increase year over year is largely the result of approximately $109 billion contributed by Sterling, which was acquired on July 2, 2024.

    Net revenue for the current quarter was $95.2 million, compared to $62.5 million in the same quarter in the prior year, with $35.9 million being contributed by Sterling, which was partially offset by lower interest income.

    Operating earnings and EBITDA(1) were $7.1 million and $15.9 million, respectively, for the quarter ended March 31, 2025, compared to $12.3 million and $18.9 million, respectively, in the same quarter in the prior year. Dampening the current quarter’s results were $4.6 million of costs, associated with the acquisition and integration of Sterling.   

    Net losses in the current quarter were $15.7 million, compared to Net gains of $12.7 million in the same quarter in the prior year, which largely reflect the changes in fair values of Guardian’s Securities portfolio.

    Net losses attributable to shareholders were $7.1 million in the current quarter, compared to Net earnings of $21.2 million in the comparative period, resulting largely from the swing from Net gains to Net losses described above.

    Adjusted cash flow from operations attributable to shareholders(1) for the current quarter was $12.5 million, compared to $14.7 million in the comparative period. The decrease of $2.2 million was due largely to decrease in Operating earnings as described above.

    Shareholders’ equity as at March 31, 2025 was $1,304 million, or $53.30 per share(1), compared to $1,318 million, or $53.76 per share(1) as at December 31, 2024. Guardian’s Securities, net as at March 31, 2025 had a fair value of $1,201 million, or $49.11 per share(1), compared to $1,211 million, or $49.38 per share(1) as at December 31, 2024.

    The Board of Directors is pleased to have declared a quarterly eligible dividend of $0.39 per share, payable on July 18, 2025, to shareholders of record on July 11, 2025.

    The Company’s financial results for the past eight quarters are summarized in the following table.

                     
      Mar 31,
    2025    		 Dec 31,
    2024    		 Sep 30,
    2024    		 Jun 30,
    2024    		 Mar 31,
    2024    		 Dec 31,
    2023    		 Sep 30,
    2023    		 Jun 30,
    2023
                     
                     
    As at ($ in millions)                
    Total client assets $ 167,227 $ 168,979 $ 165,061 $ 58,628 $ 61,316 $ 58,774 $ 56,215 $ 56,527
                     
    For the three months ended ($ in thousands)            
    Net revenue $ 95,161 $ 98,614 $ 98,128 $ 64,164 $ 62,497 $ 62,245 $ 62,611 $ 61,833
    Operating earnings   7,050   7,385   4,790   14,333   12,318   13,097   18,474   17,038
    Net gains (losses)   (15,723)   64,476   39,392   (39,161)   12,737   60,747   (17,358)   (3,736)
    Net earnings (losses)   (6,664)   63,231   39,658   (22,730)   21,441   68,048   (2,270)   11,532
    Net earnings (loss) attributable to shareholders   (7,052)   62,849   39,222   (23,137)   21,167   67,087   (2,506)   11,145
                     
                     
    Per share amounts (in $)                
    Net earnings (loss) attributable to shareholders:            
    Basic $ (0.30) $ 2.72 $ 1.69 $ (0.99) $ 0.90 $ 2.85 $ (0.11) $ 0.47
    Diluted   (0.30)   2.58   1.60   (0.99)   0.86   2.68   (0.11)   0.45
                     
    Dividends paid $ 0.37 $ 0.37 $ 0.37 $ 0.37 $ 0.34 $ 0.34 $ 0.34 $ 0.34
                     
                     
    As at                
    Shareholders’ equity($ in millions) $ 1,304 $ 1,318 $ 1,245 $ 1,223 $ 1,255 $ 1,241 $ 1,201 $ 1,213
    Per share amounts(in $)                
    Basic $ 55.94 $ 56.54 $ 53.73 $ 52.59 $ 53.69 $ 52.87 $ 50.90 $ 51.11
    Diluted   53.30   53.76   50.38   49.34   50.30   49.39   47.54   47.63
                     
    Total Class A and Common shares outstanding(shares in thousands)   24,647   24,647   24,867   24,959   25,136   25,230   25,408   25,609
                     

    Guardian Capital Group Limited (Guardian) is a global investment management company servicing institutional, retail and private clients through its subsidiaries. It also manages a proprietary portfolio of securities. Founded in 1962, Guardian’s reputation for steady growth, long-term relationships and its core values of trustworthiness, integrity and stability have been key to its success over six decades. Its Common and Class A shares are listed on the Toronto Stock Exchange as GCG and GCG.A, respectively. To learn more about Guardian, visit www.guardiancapital.com.

    For further information, contact:
       
    Donald Yi George Mavroudis
    Chief Financial Officer  President and Chief Executive Officer
    (416) 350-3136 (416) 364-8341
       
    Investor Relations: investorrelations@guardiancapital.com.
       

    Caution Concerning Forward-Looking Information

    Certain information included in this press release constitutes forward-looking information within the meaning of applicable Canadian securities laws. All information other than statements of historical fact may be forward-looking information. Forward-looking information is often, but not always, identified by the use of forward-looking terminology such as “outlook”, “objective”, “may”, “will”, “would”, “expect”, “intend”, “estimate”, “anticipate”, “believe”, “should”, “plan”, “continue”, or similar expressions suggesting future outcomes or events or the negative thereof. Forward-looking information in this press release includes, but is not limited to, statements with respect to management’s beliefs, plans, estimates, and intentions, and similar statements concerning anticipated future events, results, circumstances, performance or expectations. Such forward-looking information reflects management’s beliefs and is based on information currently available. All forward-looking information in this press release is qualified by the following cautionary statements.

    Although the Company believes that the expectations reflected in such forward-looking information are reasonable, such information involves known and unknown risks and uncertainties which may cause Guardian’s actual performance and results in future periods to differ materially from any estimates or projections of future performance or results expressed or implied by such forward-looking information. Important factors that could cause actual results to differ materially include but are not limited to: general economic and market conditions, including interest rates, business competition, changes in government regulations, tax laws or tariffs, the duration and severity of pandemics, natural disasters, military conflicts in various parts of the world, as well as those risk factors discussed or referred to in the risk factors section and the other disclosure documents filed by the Company with the securities regulatory authorities in certain provinces of Canada and available at www.sedarplus.ca. The reader is cautioned to consider these factors, uncertainties and potential events carefully and not to put undue reliance on forward-looking information, as there can be no assurance that actual results will be consistent with such forward-looking information.

    The forward-looking information included in this press release is made as of the date of this press release and should not be relied upon as representing the Company’s views as of any date subsequent to the date of this press release.

    (1) Non IFRS Measures
    The Company’s management uses EBITDA, EBITDA attributable to shareholders, including the per share amount, Adjusted cash flows from operations, Adjusted cash flow from operations attributable to shareholders, including the per share amount, Shareholders’ equity per share and Securities per share to evaluate and assess the performance of its business. These measures do not have standardized measures under International Financial Reporting Standards (“IFRS”), and are therefore unlikely to be comparable to similar measures presented by other companies. However, management believes that most shareholders, creditors, other stakeholders and investment analysts prefer to include the use of these measures in analyzing the Company’s results. The Company defines EBITDA as net earnings before interest, income taxes, amortization, and stock-based compensation expenses, net gains or losses and net earnings from discontinued operations. EBITDA attributable shareholders as EBITDA less the amounts attributable to non-controlling interests. The Company defines Adjusted cash flow from operations as net cash from operating activities, net of changes in non-cash working capital items and cash flow from discontinued operations. Adjusted cash flow from operations attributable to shareholders as Adjusted cash flow from operations less the amounts attributable to non-controlling interests. A reconciliation between these measures and the most comparable IFRS measures are as follows:

         
    For the three months ended March 31, ($ in thousands) 2024 2023
         
    Net earnings (loss) $ (6,664) $ 21,441
    Add (deduct):    
    Income tax expense (recovery)   (2,009)   3,614
    Net gains   15,723   (12,737)
    Stock-based compensation   1,021   866
    Interest expense   2,150   2,449
    Amortization   5,699   3,273
    EBITDA   15,920   18,906
    Less attributable to non-controlling interests   (665)   (573)
    EBITDA attributable to shareholders $ 15,255 $ 18,333
         
         
    For the three months ended March 31, ($ in thousands)  2024   2023 
         
    Net cash from operating activities $ (46,073) $ (8,407)
    Add (deduct):    
    Net change in non-cash working capital items   59,111   23,616
    Adjusted cash flow from operations   13,038   15,209
    Less attributable to non-controlling interests   (578)   (514)
    Adjusted cash flow from operations attributable to shareholders $ 12,460 $ 14,695
         

    The per share amounts for EBITDA attributable to shareholders, Adjusted cash flow from operations attributable to shareholders and Shareholders’ equity are calculated by dividing the amounts by diluted shares, which is calculated in a manner similar to net earnings attributable to shareholders per share.

    Securities, net and Securities, net per share
    Securities, net and Securities, net per share are used by management to indicate the value available to shareholders created by the Company’s investment in securities, without the netting of debt or deferred income taxes associated with the unrealized gains. The most comparable IFRS measures are “Securities” & “Securities sold short”, which are disclosed in the Company’s Consolidated Balance Sheet. Securities, net defined as the net sum of Securities and Securities sold short. The per share amount is calculated by dividing the amounts by diluted shares, which is calculated in a manner similar to net earnings attributable to shareholders per share..

    More detailed descriptions of these non-IFRS measures are provided in the Company’s Management’s Discussion and Analysis.

    The MIL Network –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Governor Lamont Announces Office of Health Strategy Commissioner Deidre Gifford Planning To Retire

    Source: US State of Connecticut

    (HARTFORD, CT) – Governor Ned Lamont today announced that he has received notification from Connecticut Office of Health Strategy (OHS) Commissioner Deidre Gifford, MD, MPH, informing him of her intention to retire from state service next month.

    Commissioner Gifford has served as the head of OHS since the start of Governor Lamont’s second term in office in January 2023. In the governor’s first term, she served in several leadership positions, including as commissioner of the Connecticut Department of Social Services beginning in June 2019 and as acting commissioner of the Connecticut Department of Public Health beginning in May 2020, during which she was responsible for leading the administration’s response to the outbreak of COVID-19 and became the governor’s top advisor on the pandemic.

    In addition to her current position, for the last several years Commissioner Gifford has been tasked with serving as Governor Lamont’s senior advisor for health and human services. In this added role, she has been responsible for organizing a multi-agency approach among the state’s nine health and human service agencies to ensure that these agencies are operating in a coordinated manner and functioning optimally in areas where they may have overlapping responsibilities.

    She is an obstetrician and gynecologist trained in public health and health services, and her background includes healthcare quality improvement and payment reform initiatives in both the public and private sectors at the state and national levels.

    “For the last several years, Deidre has provided exceptional service to the people of Connecticut, most notably serving as our administration’s chief advisor on the COVID-19 pandemic and helping to formulate our policies and guidance to protect the health and wellbeing of our residents during that challenging time,” Governor Lamont said. “I firmly believe that she is one of the reasons why many people consider Connecticut’s response to this global virus to be among the best. She has been dedicated to developing policies and data-driven solutions that expand access to healthcare, improve disparities, and drive costs down. In addition to providing valuable public policy guidance, she has become a good friend, and I appreciate all that I have learned from her. I wish her nothing but the best on this well-earned retirement.”

    “Since June of 2019 it has been my privilege to work alongside Governor Lamont, his team, and an amazing group of commissioners to serve the people of Connecticut,” Commissioner Gifford said. “I will always be grateful to the governor for trusting me to be by his side during some of the most difficult days of the pandemic, and to serve as his advisor in the years since. As a physician, I am proud to have had the Lamont administration’s support of my work to expand access to healthcare and make sure every person has access to the care they need and deserve. As I move on to this next chapter, it is with immense gratitude to the staffs at DSS, DPH, and OHS, who have stood with me, taught me, and shown me by their examples the meaning of public service. Thank you to all my legislative colleagues for your partnership on our shared goals. And most importantly, thank you to the people of Connecticut for warmly welcoming me and my family and for your generosity throughout my time in government here.”

    Prior to joining Connecticut state government, Commissioner Gifford served from 2016 to 2019 as deputy director for the Center of Medicaid and CHIP Services at the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services in Washington, DC, where she oversaw the full scope of Medicaid functions at the federal agency. From 2012 to 2015, she served as Medicaid director in the Rhode Island Executive Office of Health and Human Services, and from 2005 to 2011 she was co-founder and project director of Rhode Island’ s multi-payer Medical Home demonstration, one of the nation’s first and most enduring multi-payer payment reform initiatives.

    OHS is the state agency responsible for implementing data-driven strategies that promote equal access to healthcare, improve the value of healthcare, contain costs, and ensure better healthcare systems for the state’s residents.

     

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Congressman Ivey Joins Maryland Delegation & Alsobrooks in Demanding Back Education Dollars Cut by Trump

    Source: United States House of Representatives – Congressman Glenn Ivey – Maryland (4th District)

    WASHINGTON, DC – As reported in The Washington Post, Senator Angela Alsobrooks (D-Md.) led the Maryland Democratic Delegation – U.S. Senator Chris Van Hollen and Representatives Steny Hoyer, Kweisi Mfume, Jamie Raskin, Glenn Ivey, Sarah Elfreth, April McClain Delaney, and Johnny Olszewski (all D-Md.) in demanding that the Trump Administration release the $98 million promised for education funding in the state and urging the Department to work with the delegation to ensure Maryland receives this vital funding. 

    “Earlier this year, [Secretary McMahon testified that the President] wants to ‘return education to the states where it belongs.’ We believe that approving Maryland’s application for late liquidation of relief funds would do just that. We appreciate your offer to conduct a thorough review of the ESSER funds rescinded from Maryland and look forward to reaching a resolution in the best interest of the more than 860,000 students in our state who are depending on these Congressionally appropriated funds,” said the lawmakers. 

    “We stand ready to partner with the Department in ensuring the disbursement of this key funding to Maryland,” continued the lawmakers. 

    You can read the full letter to Secretary McMahon here or below:

    Dear Secretary McMahon:

    We write with deep concern regarding the Department of Education’s (the Department) recent letter to State Chiefs of Education, which modified the time period for states to liquidate obligations under the Education Stabilization Fund. The loss of these dollars would be catastrophic for the state of Maryland and its students. We appreciate the fact that the Department did leave an opportunity open for collaboration with states, affording them the chance to appeal for an extension to the liquidation period on a project-specific basis. As such, the Maryland State Department of Education (MSDE) has applied for an extension. We strongly support MSDE’s application and urge the Department to approve MSDE’s requests for full reimbursement.

    As you know, on January 22, 2025 – after President Trump was sworn into office – the Department approved MDSE’s late liquidation plan for American Rescue Plan (ARP) funds through March 28, 2026. Similarly, on March 17, 2025, the Department approved a late liquidation plan for the Coronavirus Response and Relief Supplemental Appropriations Act (CRRSA) from MSDE through March 31, 2025. Yet on March 28, 2025, the MSDE received notice from the Department that the liquidation period for all pandemic recovery resources authorized in the Elementary and Secondary School Emergency Relief (ESSER) fund was rescinded. This sudden reversal has caused a great deal of confusion and would hinder Maryland’s efforts to address pandemic learning loss.

    The impact of this reversal by the Department will indeed be devastating for Maryland schools. Pandemic relief funds were set to go towards capital projects including school heating, ventilation, and air-conditioning repair and replacement that have been delayed because of supply chain and construction issues, as well as new curricula and instructional materials that Maryland Local Education Agencies (LEAs) are still awaiting.

    As such, Maryland has submitted a late liquidation request to the Department for $98,706,860, which includes $42 million spent by LEAs that have not been submitted to the State for reimbursement, as well as $56.7 million remaining to liquidate. The remaining funding is obligated toward projects to provide temporary housing and mental health support for students experiencing homelessness; community school mental health services; tutoring and technology for students; professional development for staff; Grow Your Own projects, including tuition reimbursement programs for staff to attain teacher certifications; the replacement of older and non-working windows and doors; restroom repairs; and security camera updates to keep students safe. 

    MSDE and the state’s LEAs have utilized ESSER funds to recover reading scores, sustainably address the teacher shortages exacerbated by the pandemic, support student mental and emotional health, and fortify other key ingredients in learning. The state’s reapplication in compliance with the Department’s guidance issued on March 28, 2025, also includes key details of our educational systems’ efforts to modernize classroom infrastructure to mitigate the threat of infectious diseases. 

    We proudly represent a state that places tremendous emphasis on high-quality education and MSDE’s implementation of federal funds is fundamental to that mission. We urge the Department to approve MSDE’s latest reapplication for late liquidation of this vital funding. Like students across the country, the COVID-19 pandemic set young Marylanders back substantially on key metrics of student achievement. As your office has noted, recent National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) results have revealed that “gaps are growing between higher-performing and lower-performing students.” Further, chronic absenteeism still is too high with the latest data indicating “a majority of students still attended schools with 20% or higher levels of chronic absence… in stark contrast to 2019, when slightly over a quarter of schools experienced such high levels of chronic absence.” Years after the COVID-19 pandemic, our schools and communities still have much work to do to help students recover.

    Again, we want to continue to be collaborative and work together to improve Maryland schools. As you noted in your testimony to the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee earlier this year, President Trump wants to “return education to the states where it belongs.” We believe that approving Maryland’s application for late liquidation of relief funds would do just that. We appreciate your offer to conduct a thorough review of the ESSER funds rescinded from Maryland and look forward to reaching a resolution in the best interest of the more than 860,000 students in our state who are depending on these Congressionally appropriated funds. 

    We welcome a further conversation between the Department and the Maryland Congressional delegation on this process and would be happy to help support engagements between the Department and MSDE. We stand ready to partner with the Department in ensuring the disbursement of this key funding to Maryland.

    Sincerely, 

     

    ###

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI: Lantronix Reports Results for Third Quarter of Fiscal 2025

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    • Third Quarter Net Revenue of $28.5 Million
    • Third Quarter GAAP EPS of ($0.10)
    • Third Quarter Non-GAAP EPS of $0.03

    IRVINE, Calif., May 08, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Lantronix Inc. (NASDAQ: LTRX), a global leader of compute and connectivity for the Internet of Things (IoT) solutions enabling Artificial Intelligence (AI) Edge Intelligence, today reported results for its third quarter of fiscal 2025.

    Despite a complex macroeconomic environment, Lantronix delivered revenue within guidance and continued executing its long-term strategy toward becoming a leader in intelligent edge computing.

    Lantronix continued its leadership in AI edge intelligence and industrial connectivity through several key initiatives in the last quarter. The company enabled Teledyne/FLIR’s AI-driven drone thermal camera, validating the performance and reliability of its Open-Q™ platform in mission-critical edge vision systems. Further expanding its AI-capable compute portfolio, Lantronix launched the Open-Q™ 8550CS SoM, built on Qualcomm’s advanced QCS8550 processor, which delivers premium AI/ML performance and is designed for next-generation industrial and robotics applications.

     Q3 FY2025 Financial Results

    • Net Revenue: $28.5 million, in range of $27.0 million to $31.0 million guidance
    • GAAP EPS: ($0.10), compared to ($0.01) in Q3 FY2024 and ($0.06) in Q2 FY2025
    • Non-GAAP EPS: $0.03, compared to $0.11 in Q3 FY2024 and $0.04 in Q2 FY2025

    “We’re positioning Lantronix to lead the next wave of industrial and enterprise transformation at the edge,” said Saleel Awsare, president and CEO of Lantronix. “This quarter reflects continued investment in high-growth areas — from AI-enabled gateways to 5G connectivity — while advancing our innovation roadmap, global partnerships and talent base.”

    Q4 FY2025 Business Outlook

    Lantronix expects the following results for the fourth fiscal quarter ending June 30, 2025:

    • Revenue: $26.5 million to $30.5 million
    • Non-GAAP EPS: $0.00 to $0.02

    Conference Call and Webcast

    Management will host an investor conference call and audio webcast on Thursday, May 8, 2025, at 1:30 p.m. Pacific Time (4:30 p.m. Eastern Time) to discuss its results for the third quarter of fiscal 2025 that ended March 31, 2025. To access the live conference call, investors should dial 1-844-802-2442 (U.S.) or 1-412-317-5135 (international) and indicate they are participating in the Lantronix fiscal 2025 third-quarter call.

    Investors can access a conference call replay starting at approximately 8:00 p.m. Pacific Time on May 8, 2025, on the Lantronix website. A telephonic replay will also be available through May 15, 2025, by dialing 1-877-344-7529 (US) or 1-412-317-0088 (international) or Canada Toll-Free 855-669-9658 and entering passcode 3110521.

    About Lantronix

    Lantronix Inc. is a global leader of compute and connectivity IoT solutions that target high-growth markets, including Smart Cities, Enterprise and Transportation. Lantronix’s products and services empower companies to succeed in the growing IoT markets by delivering customizable solutions that enable AI Edge Intelligence. Lantronix’s advanced solutions include Intelligent Substations infrastructure, Infotainment systems and Video Surveillance, supplemented with advanced Out-of-Band Management (OOB) for Cloud and Edge Computing.

    For more information, visit the Lantronix website.

    Discussion of Non-GAAP Financial Measures

    Lantronix believes that the presentation of non-GAAP financial information, when presented in conjunction with the corresponding GAAP measures, provides important supplemental information to management and investors regarding financial and business trends relating to the company’s financial condition and results of operations. Management uses the aforementioned non-GAAP measures to monitor and evaluate ongoing operating results and trends to gain an understanding of our comparative operating performance. The non-GAAP financial measures disclosed by the company should not be considered a substitute for, or superior to, financial measures calculated in accordance with GAAP, and the financial results calculated in accordance with GAAP and reconciliations of the non-GAAP financial measures to the financial measures calculated in accordance with GAAP should be carefully evaluated. The non-GAAP financial measures used by the company may be calculated differently from, and therefore may not be comparable to, similarly titled measures used by other companies. The company has provided reconciliations of the non-GAAP financial measures to the most directly comparable GAAP financial measures.

    Non-GAAP net loss consists of net loss excluding (i) share-based compensation and the employer portion of withholding taxes on stock grants, (ii) depreciation and amortization, (iii) interest income (expense), (iv) other income (expense), (v) income tax provision (benefit), (vi) restructuring, severance and related charges, (vii) acquisition related costs, (viii) impairment of long-lived assets, (ix) amortization of purchased intangibles, (x) amortization of manufacturing profit in acquired inventory, (xi) fair value remeasurement of earnout consideration, and (xii) loss on extinguishment of debt.

    Non-GAAP EPS is calculated by dividing non-GAAP net loss by non-GAAP weighted-average shares outstanding (diluted). For purposes of calculating non-GAAP EPS, the calculation of GAAP weighted-average shares outstanding (diluted) is adjusted to exclude share-based compensation, which for GAAP purposes is treated as proceeds assumed to be used to repurchase shares under the GAAP treasury stock method.

    Guidance on earnings per share growth is provided only on a non-GAAP basis due to the inherent difficulty of forecasting the timing or amount of certain items that have been excluded from the forward-looking non-GAAP measures, and a reconciliation to the comparable GAAP guidance has not been provided because certain factors that are materially significant to Lantronix’s ability to estimate the excluded items are not accessible or estimable on a forward-looking basis without unreasonable effort.

    Forward-Looking Statements

    This news release contains forward-looking statements, including statements concerning our revenue and earnings expectations for the fourth fiscal quarter of 2025, our positioning to capitalize on the next wave of industrial and enterprise transformation using edge computing, and our expectations regarding high-growth market areas. These forward-looking statements are intended to qualify for the safe harbor from liability established by the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. We have based our forward-looking statements on our current expectations and projections about trends affecting our business and industry and other future events. Although we do not make forward-looking statements unless we believe we have a reasonable basis for doing so, we cannot guarantee their accuracy. Forward-looking statements are subject to substantial risks and uncertainties that could cause our results or experiences, or future business, financial condition, results of operations or performance, to differ materially from our historical results or those expressed or implied in any forward-looking statement contained in this news release. Other factors which could have a material adverse effect on our operations and future prospects or which could cause actual results to differ materially from our expectations include, but are not limited to: the effects of negative or worsening regional and worldwide economic conditions or market instability on our business, including effects on purchasing decisions by our customers; our ability to mitigate any disruption in our and our suppliers’ and vendors’ supply chains due to changes in U.S. trade policy, including recently increased or future tariffs, a pandemic or similar outbreak, wars and recent conflicts in Europe, Asia and the Middle East, hostilities in the Red Sea, or other causes; our ability to successfully convert our backlog and current demand;  the impact of a pandemic or similar outbreak on our business, employees, customers, supply and distribution chains and the global economy; our ability to successfully implement our acquisition strategy or integrate acquired companies; uncertainty as to the future profitability of acquired businesses, and delays in the realization of, or the failure to realize, any accretion from acquisition transactions; acquiring, managing and integrating new operations, businesses or assets, and the associated diversion of management attention or other related costs or difficulties; our ability to continue to generate revenue from products sold into mature markets; our ability to develop, market, and sell new products; our ability to succeed with our new software offerings; our use of AI may result in reputational, competitive or financial harm and liability; fluctuations in our revenue due to the project-based timing of orders from certain customers; unpredictable timing of our revenues due to the lengthy sales cycle for our products and services and potential delays in customer completion of projects; our ability to accurately forecast future demand for our products; delays in qualifying revisions of existing products; constraints or delays in the supply of, or quality control issues with, certain materials or components; difficulties associated with the delivery, quality or cost of our products from our contract manufacturers or suppliers; risks related to the outsourcing of manufacturing and international operations; difficulties associated with our distributors or resellers; intense competition in our industry and resultant downward price pressure; rises in inventory levels and inventory obsolescence; undetected software or hardware errors or defects in our products; cybersecurity risks; our ability to obtain appropriate industry certifications or approvals from governmental regulatory bodies; changes in applicable U.S. and foreign government laws, regulations, and tariffs; our ability to protect patents and other proprietary rights and avoid infringement of others’ proprietary technology rights; issues relating to the stability of our financial and banking institutions and relationships; the level of our indebtedness, our ability to service our indebtedness and the restrictions in our debt agreements; the impact of rising interest rates; our ability to attract and retain qualified management; and any additional factors included in our Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2024, filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”) on Sept. 9, 2024, including in the section entitled “Risk Factors” in Item 1A of Part I of that report; in our Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the fiscal quarter ended March 31, 2025, expected to be filed with the SEC on or about May 9, 2025 including in the section entitled “Risk Factors” in Item 1A of Part II of such report; and in our other public filings with the SEC. In addition, actual results may differ as a result of additional risks and uncertainties of which we are currently unaware or which we do not currently view as material to our business. For these reasons, investors are cautioned not to place undue reliance on any forward-looking statements. The forward-looking statements we make speak only as of the date on which they are made. We expressly disclaim any intent or obligation to update any forward-looking statements after the date hereof to conform such statements to actual results or to changes in our opinions or expectations, except as required by applicable law or the rules of the Nasdaq Stock Market LLC. If we do update or correct any forward-looking statements, investors should not conclude that we will make additional updates or corrections.

    ©2025 Lantronix, Inc. All rights reserved. Lantronix is a registered trademark. Other trademarks and trade names are those of their respective owners.

    Lantronix Analyst and Investor Contact:        

    investors@lantronix.com

    LANTRONIX, INC.
    UNAUDITED CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS
    (In thousands)
           
      March 31,
    		   June 30,
      2025   2024
    Assets      
    Current assets:      
    Cash and cash equivalents $ 19,999     $ 26,237  
    Accounts receivable, net   23,648       31,279  
    Inventories, net   28,151       27,698  
    Contract manufacturers’ receivables   1,637       1,401  
    Prepaid expenses and other current assets   3,029       2,335  
    Total current assets   76,464       88,950  
    Property and equipment, net   2,768       4,016  
    Goodwill   31,089       27,824  
    Intangible assets, net   4,310       5,251  
    Lease right-of-use assets   8,974       9,567  
    Other assets   584       600  
    Total assets $ 124,189     $ 136,208  
           
    Liabilities and stockholders’ equity      
    Current liabilities:      
    Accounts payable $ 11,005     $ 10,347  
    Accrued payroll and related expenses   3,905       5,836  
    Current portion of long-term debt, net   3,063       3,002  
    Other current liabilities   10,594       10,971  
    Total current liabilities   28,567       30,156  
    Long-term debt, net   9,458       13,219  
    Other non-current liabilities   10,694       11,478  
    Total liabilities   48,719       54,853  
           
    Commitments and contingencies      
           
    Stockholders’ equity:      
    Common stock   4       4  
    Additional paid-in capital   306,858       304,001  
    Accumulated deficit   (231,763 )     (223,021 )
    Accumulated other comprehensive income   371       371  
    Total stockholders’ equity   75,470       81,355  
    Total liabilities and stockholders’ equity $ 124,189     $ 136,208  
           
    LANTRONIX, INC.  
    UNAUDITED CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS
    (In thousands, except per share data)
                                           
                                           
      Three Months Ended   Nine Months Ended
      March 31,
    		   December 31,
    		   March 31,
    		   March 31,
      2025
    		   2024
    		   2024
    		   2025
    		   2024
    Net revenue $ 28,500     $ 31,161     $ 41,183     $ 94,084     $ 111,252  
    Cost of revenue   16,097       17,877       24,679       53,922       65,620  
    Gross profit   12,403       13,284       16,504       40,162       45,632  
    Operating expenses:                                      
    Selling, general and administrative   8,959       8,811       9,753       27,237       29,147  
    Research and development   4,463       4,984       5,186       14,403       15,017  
    Restructuring, severance and related charges   1,581       193       350       2,674       900  
    Acquisition-related costs   100       208       –       337       –  
    Fair value remeasurement of earnout consideration   –       –       –       –       (9 )
    Amortization of intangible assets   879       1,248       1,310       3,378       4,004  
    Total operating expenses   15,982       15,444       16,599       48,029       49,059  
    Loss from operations   (3,579 )     (2,160 )     (95 )     (7,867 )     (3,427 )
    Interest expense, net   (159 )     (126 )     (171 )     (404 )     (741 )
    Other income (loss), net   (19 )     8       2       (48 )     (2 )
    Loss before income taxes   (3,757 )     (2,278 )     (264 )     (8,319 )     (4,170 )
    Provision for income taxes   111       94       159       423       732  
    Net loss $ (3,868 )   $ (2,372 )   $ (423 )   $ (8,742 )   $ (4,902 )
    Net loss per share – basic and diluted $ (0.10 )   $ (0.06 )   $ (0.01 )   $ (0.23 )   $ (0.13 )
    Weighted-average common shares – basic and diluted   38,820       38,631       37,509       38,493       37,283  
                                           
    LANTRONIX, INC.
    UNAUDITED RECONCILIATION OF NON-GAAP ADJUSTMENTS
    (In thousands, except per share data)
                       
      Three Months Ended    Nine Months Ended
      March 31,   December 31,
    		   March 31,    March 31, 
       2025     2024     2024     2025     2024 
                       
    GAAP net loss $ (3,868 )   $ (2,372 )   $ (423 )   $ (8,742 )   $ (4,902 )
    Non-GAAP adjustments:                  
    Cost of revenue:                  
    Share-based compensation   34       48       66       146       171  
    Employer portion of withholding taxes on stock grants   –       2       1       7       6  
    Amortization of manufacturing profit in acquired inventory   44       –       190       44       696  
    Depreciation and amortization   101       114       144       338       339  
    Total adjustments to cost of revenue   179       164       401       535       1,212  
    Selling, general and administrative:                  
    Share-based compensation   1,159       1,044       1,337       3,329       4,238  
    Employer portion of withholding taxes on stock grants   13       20       21       111       68  
    Depreciation and amortization   345       348       352       1,044       1,024  
    Total adjustments to selling, general and administrative   1,517       1,412       1,710       4,484       5,330  
    Research and development:                  
    Share-based compensation   324       421       469       1,155       1,381  
    Employer portion of withholding taxes on stock grants   4       2       9       25       27  
    Depreciation and amortization   56       111       76       236       236  
    Total adjustments to research and development   384       534       554       1,416       1,644  
    Restructuring, severance and related charges   1,581       193       350       2,674       900  
    Acquisition related costs   100       208       –       337       –  
    Fair value remeasurement of earnout consideration   –       –       –       –       (9 )
    Amortization of purchased intangible assets   879       1,248       1,310       3,378       4,004  
    Litigation settlement cost   –       158       –       198       –  
    Total non-GAAP adjustments to operating expenses   4,461       3,753       3,924       12,487       11,869  
    Interest expense, net   159       126       171       404       741  
    Other (income) expense, net   19       (8 )     (2 )     48       2  
    Provision for income taxes   111       94       159       423       732  
    Total non-GAAP adjustments   4,929       4,129       4,653       13,897       14,556  
    Non-GAAP net income $ 1,061     $ 1,757     $ 4,230     $ 5,155     $ 9,654  
                       
                       
    Non-GAAP net income per share – diluted $ 0.03     $ 0.04     $ 0.11     $ 0.13     $ 0.25  
                       
    Denominator for GAAP net income (loss) per share – diluted   38,820       38,631       37,509       38,493       37,283  
    Non-GAAP adjustment   1,300       953       1,674       1,034       1,021  
    Denominator for non-GAAP net income per share – diluted   40,120       39,584       39,183       39,527       38,304  
                       
    GAAP cost of revenue $ 16,097     $ 17,877     $ 24,679     $ 53,922     $ 65,620  
    Non-GAAP adjustments to cost of revenue   (179 )     (164 )     (401 )     (535 )     (1,212 )
    Non-GAAP cost of revenue   15,918       17,713       24,278       53,387       64,408  
    Non-GAAP gross profit $ 12,582     $ 13,448     $ 16,905     $ 40,697     $ 46,844  
    Non-GAAP gross margin   44.1 %     43.2 %     41.0 %     43.3 %     42.1 %
                       
    LANTRONIX, INC.
    UNAUDITED NET REVENUES BY PRODUCT LINE AND REGION
    (In thousands)
                       
      Three Months Ended   Nine Months Ended
      March 31,
    2025    		   December 31,
    2024    		   March 31,
    2024    		   March 31,
    2025    		   March 31,
    2024
    Embedded IoT Solutions $ 11,990   $ 10,784   $ 12,452   $ 36,161   $ 35,589
    IoT System Solutions   14,730     18,592     26,789     52,081     68,847
    Software & Services   1,780     1,785     1,942     5,842     6,816
      $ 28,500   $ 31,161   $ 41,183   $ 94,084   $ 111,252
                       
                       
      Three Months Ended   Nine Months Ended
      March 31,
    2025    		   December 31,
    2024    		   March 31,
    2024    		   March 31,
    2025    		   March 31,
    2024
    Americas $ 16,497   $ 16,386   $ 17,543   $ 50,303   $ 61,077
    EMEA   6,048     9,036     18,354     25,568     37,831
    Asia Pacific Japan   5,955     5,739     5,286     18,213     12,344
      $ 28,500   $ 31,161   $ 41,183   $ 94,084   $ 111,252
                       

    The MIL Network –

  • MIL-OSI: EverCommerce Announces First Quarter 2025 Financial Results

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    DENVER, May 08, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — EverCommerce Inc. (“EverCommerce” or the “Company”) (NASDAQ: EVCM), a leading service commerce platform, today announced financial results for the quarter ended March 31, 2025.

    First Quarter 2025 Financial Highlights

    • Revenue from continuing operations of $142.3 million, an increase of 3.2% compared to $137.9 million for the quarter ended March 31, 2024. Pro Forma Revenue, which excludes fitness, increased 7.4% to 142.3 million, compared to $132.4 million for the quarter ended March 31, 2024.
    • Subscription and transaction fees revenue from continuing operations of $137.8 million, an increase of 3.3% compared to $133.4 million for the quarter ended March 31, 2024. Pro Forma subscription and transaction fees revenue, which excludes fitness, increased 7.6% to $137.8 million, compared to $128.1 million for the quarter ended March 31, 2024.
    • Net income from continuing operations was $0.9 million, or $0.01 per basic and diluted share, for the quarter ended March 31, 2025, compared to net loss from continuing operations of $16.0 million, or $(0.09) per basic and diluted share, for the quarter ended March 31, 2024.
    • Adjusted EBITDA from continuing operations was $44.9 million for the quarter ended March 31, 2025, compared to $38.7 million for the quarter ended March 31, 2024.

    “EverCommerce’s first quarter results exceeded the top end of our guidance range for both Revenue and Adjusted EBITDA, driven by strong execution and continued active cost management,” said Eric Remer, EverCommerce’s Founder and CEO. “We continue to make solid progress with implementing our transformation and optimization initiatives, which include strategic investments in high margin areas of business such as payments monetization as well as artificial intelligence.”

    A reconciliation of GAAP to Non-GAAP measures has been provided in the financial statement tables included at the end of this press release. An explanation of these measures is also included below under the heading “Non-GAAP Financial Measures and Key Performance Metrics.”

    Share Repurchases

    On May 1, 2025, our Board of Directors approved a $50.0 million increase in the previously announced stock repurchase authorization and extended the authorization through December 31, 2026. The total authorization since the repurchase program began allows for the purchase up to $250.0 million in shares of the Company’s common stock.

    The Company repurchased and retired 1.1 million shares of common stock for approximately $11.2 million during the three months ended March 31, 2025. As of March 31, 2025, $21.6 million remained available under the Repurchase Program.

    Repurchases under the program may be made from time to time in the open market at prevailing market prices or in negotiated transactions off the market. Open market repurchases will be structured to occur within the pricing and volume requirements of Rule 10b-18. The Company may also, from time to time, enter into Rule 10b5-1 plans to facilitate repurchases of its shares under this authorization. This program does not obligate the Company to acquire any particular amount of common stock and the program may be extended, modified, suspended or discontinued at any time at the Company’s discretion. The Company expects to fund repurchases with cash on hand.

    Business Outlook

    Based on information as of today, May 8, 2025, the Company is issuing the following financial guidance for the second quarter 2025 and full year 2025 from continuing operations, which excludes discontinued operations related to our marketing technology solutions.

    Second Quarter 2025:

    • Revenue is expected to be in the range of $144.5 million to $147.5 million.
    • Adjusted EBITDA is expected to be in the range of $39.5 million to $41.5 million.

    Full Year 2025:

    • Revenue is expected to be in the range of $581million to $601 million.
    • Adjusted EBITDA is expected to be in the range of $167.5 million to $175.5 million.

    A reconciliation of Adjusted EBITDA to net income, the most directly comparable GAAP measure, is not available without unreasonable efforts on a forward-looking basis due to the high variability, complexity and low visibility with respect to certain charges excluded from this non-GAAP measure; in particular, the measures and efforts of stock-based compensation expense specific to equity compensation awards that are directly impacted by unpredictable fluctuations in our stock price. It is important to note that these charges could be material to EverCommerce’s results computed in accordance with GAAP.

    Conference Call Information

    EverCommerce’s management team will hold a conference call to discuss our first quarter 2025 results and outlook today, May 8, 2025, at 5:00 p.m. ET. Please visit the “Investor Relations” page of the Company’s website (https://investors.evercomerce.com) for both telephonic and webcast access to this call as well as a copy of the presentation materials used on the call. An archive replay will be available following the conclusion of the call.

    Investor Contact
    Brad Korch
    SVP and Head of Investor Relations
    720-796-7664
    IR@evercommerce.com

    Media Contact
    Jeanne Trogan
    VP of Communications
    737-465-2897
    Press@evercommerce.com

    About EverCommerce

    EverCommerce (Nasdaq: EVCM) is a leading service commerce platform, providing vertically-tailored, integrated SaaS solutions that help more than 740,000 global service-based businesses accelerate growth, streamline operations, and increase retention. Its modern digital and mobile applications create predictable, informed, and convenient experiences between customers and their service professionals. With its EverPro, EverHealth, and EverWell brands specializing in Home, Health, and Wellness service industries, EverCommerce provides end-to-end business management software, embedded payment acceptance, marketing technology, and customer experience applications. Learn more at EverCommerce.com.

    Forward-Looking Statements

    This press release contains forward-looking statements within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. All statements contained in this press release that do not relate to matters of historical fact should be considered forward-looking statements, including without limitation, statements regarding our future operations and financial results, cost savings initiatives, implementation of our transformation and optimization initiatives, any strategic alternatives involving our marketing technology solutions including an anticipated sale in 2025, our market opportunity, future stock repurchases, our potential for growth and our strategy. These statements are neither promises nor guarantees, but involve known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other important factors that may cause our actual results, performance or achievements to be materially different from any future results, performance or achievements expressed or implied by the forward-looking statements, including, but not limited to, our limited operating history and evolving business; our recent growth rates may not be sustainable or indicative of future growth; we have experienced net losses in the past and we may not achieve profitability in the future; we may continue to experience significant quarterly and annual fluctuations in our operating results due to a number of factors, which makes our future operating results difficult to predict; in order to support the growth of our business and our acquisition strategy, we may need to incur additional indebtedness or seek capital through new equity or debt financings; we may not be able to continue to expand our share of our existing vertical markets or expand into new vertical markets; we face intense competition in each of the industries in which we operate; the industries in which we operate are rapidly evolving and the market for technology-enabled services that empower SMBs is relatively immature and unproven; we are subject to economic and political risk, the business cycles of our clients and changes in the overall level of consumer and commercial spending, which could negatively impact our business, financial condition and results of operations; we are dependent on payment card networks, such as Visa and MasterCard, and payment processors, such as Worldpay and PayPal, and if we fail to comply with the applicable requirements of our payment networks or our payment processors, they can seek to fine us, suspend us or terminate our agreements and/or terminate our registrations through our bank sponsors; the inability to keep pace with rapid developments and changes in the electronic payments market or are unable to introduce, develop and market new and enhanced versions of our software solutions; real or perceived errors, failures or bugs in our solutions; unauthorized disclosure, destruction or modification of data, disruption of our software or services or cyber breaches; our use of artificial intelligence technologies and evolving regulatory framework governing the use of such technologies; our estimated total addressable market is subject to inherent challenges and uncertainties; failure to effectively develop and expand our sales and marketing capabilities; impairment in the value of our goodwill or intangible assets; our information technology systems and our third-party providers’ information technology systems, including Worldpay, PayPal and other payment processing partners, may fail or our third-party providers may discontinue providing their services or technology generally or to us specifically; our ability to improve our margin, in particular within Marketing Technology Solutions; the impact of a future pandemic, epidemic or outbreak of an infectious disease could impact, our business, financial condition and results of operations, as well as the business or operations of third parties with whom we conduct business; our success in achieving our objectives through acquisitions, divestitures or other strategic transactions; our revenues and profits generated through acquisitions may be less than anticipated, and we may fail to uncover all liabilities of acquisition targets; risks related to scrutiny on environmental sustainability and social initiatives; our ability to adequately protect or enforce our intellectual property and other proprietary rights; risk of patent, trademark and other intellectual property infringement claims; risks related to governmental regulation and other legal obligations, particularly related to privacy, data protection and information security, and our actual or perceived failure to comply with such obligations; risks related to our sponsor stockholders agreement and qualifying as a “controlled company” under the rules of The Nasdaq Stock Market; as well as the other factors described in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2024 and updated by our other filings with the SEC. These factors could cause actual results to differ materially from those indicated by the forward-looking statements made in this press release. Any such forward-looking statements represent management’s estimates as of the date of this press release. While we may elect to update such forward-looking statements at some point in the future, we disclaim any obligation to do so, even if subsequent events cause our views to change.

    Non-GAAP Financial Measures and Key Performance Metrics

    EverCommerce has provided in this press release financial information that has not been prepared in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles in the United States (“GAAP”). EverCommerce uses these non-GAAP financial measures internally in analyzing its financial results and believes that use of these non-GAAP financial measures is useful to investors as an additional tool to evaluate ongoing operating results and trends and in comparing EverCommerce’s financial results with other companies in its industry, many of which present similar non-GAAP financial measures. Unless otherwise indicated, all non-GAAP financial measures are presented on the basis of continuing operations only.

    Non-GAAP financial measures are not meant to be considered in isolation or as a substitute for comparable GAAP financial measures and should be read only in conjunction with EverCommerce’s consolidated financial statements prepared in accordance with GAAP. A reconciliation of EverCommerce’s historical non-GAAP financial measures to the most directly comparable GAAP measures has been provided in the financial statement tables included in this press release, and investors are encouraged to review the reconciliation.

    Pro Forma Revenue, Pro Forma Subscription and Transaction Fees Revenue, Pro Forma Revenue Growth Rate, Pro Forma Subscription and Transaction Fees Revenue Growth Rate. Pro Forma Revenue, Pro Forma Subscription and Transaction Fees Revenue, Pro Forma Revenue Growth Rate, and Pro Forma Subscription and Transaction Fees Revenue Growth Rate are key performance measures that our management uses to assess our consolidated operating performance from continuing operations over time. Management also uses these metrics for planning and forecasting purposes.

    Our year-over-year Pro Forma Revenue, Pro Forma Subscription and Transaction Fees Revenue, Pro Forma Revenue Growth Rate, and Pro Forma Subscription and Transaction Fees Revenue Growth Rate are calculated as though all acquisitions and divestitures completed as of the end of the latest period were completed as of the first day of the prior year period presented. In calculating Pro Forma Revenue, Pro Forma Subscription and Transaction Fees Revenue, Pro Forma Revenue Growth Rate, and Pro Forma Subscription and Transaction Fees Revenue Growth Rate, we add the revenue from acquisitions for the reporting periods prior to the date of acquisition (including estimated purchase accounting adjustments) and exclude revenue from divestitures for the reporting periods prior to the date of divestiture, and then, calculate our revenue growth rate between the two reported periods. As a result, these metrics include pro forma revenue from businesses acquired and excludes revenue from businesses divested of during the period, including revenue generated during periods when we did not yet own the acquired businesses and excludes revenue prior to the divestiture of the business. In including such pre-acquisition revenue and excluding pre-divestiture revenue, these metrics allow us to measure the underlying revenue growth of our business as it stands as of the end of the respective period, which we believe provides insight into our then-current operations. Pro Forma Revenue, Pro Forma Subscription and Transaction Fees Revenue, Pro Forma Revenue Growth Rate, and Pro Forma Subscription and Transaction Fees Revenue Growth Rate do not represent organic revenue generated by our business as it stood at the beginning of the respective period. Pro Forma Revenue, Pro Forma Subscription and Transaction Fees Revenue, Pro Forma Revenue Growth Rates, and Pro Forma Subscription and Transaction Fees Revenue Growth Rate are not necessarily indicative of either future results of operations or actual results that might have been achieved had the acquisitions and divestitures been consummated on the first day of the prior year period presented. We believe that these metrics are useful to investors in analyzing our financial and operational performance period over period and evaluating the growth of our business, normalizing for the impact of acquisitions and divestitures. These metrics are particularly useful to management due to the number of acquired entities.

    Adjusted Gross Profit. Adjusted Gross Profit is a key performance measure that our management uses to assess our operational performance, as it represents the results of revenues and direct costs, which are key components of our operations. We believe that this non-GAAP financial measure is useful to investors and other interested parties in analyzing our financial performance because it reflects the gross profitability of our operations, and excludes the indirect costs associated with our sales and marketing, product development, general and administrative activities, and depreciation and amortization, and the impact of our financing methods and income taxes.

    Gross profit is calculated as total revenues less cost of revenues (exclusive of depreciation and amortization), amortization of developed technology, amortization of capitalized software and depreciation expense (allocated to cost of revenues). We calculate Adjusted Gross Profit as gross profit adjusted to exclude depreciation and amortization allocated to cost of revenues. Adjusted Gross Profit should be viewed as a measure of operating performance that is a supplement to, and not a substitute for, operating income or loss, net earnings or loss and other GAAP measures of income (loss) or profitability.

    Adjusted EBITDA and Adjusted EBITDA margin. Adjusted EBITDA and Adjusted EBITDA margin are key performance measures that our management uses to assess our financial performance and is also used for internal planning and forecasting purposes. We believe that these non-GAAP financial measures are useful to investors and other interested parties in analyzing our financial performance because they provide a comparable overview of our operations across historical periods. In addition, we believe that providing Adjusted EBITDA, together with a reconciliation of net income (loss) to Adjusted EBITDA, helps investors make comparisons between our company and other companies that may have different capital structures, different tax rates, and/or different forms of employee compensation.

    Adjusted EBITDA and Adjusted EBITDA margin are used by our management team as additional measures of our performance for purposes of business decision-making, including managing expenditures, and evaluating potential acquisitions. Period-to-period comparisons of Adjusted EBITDA and Adjusted EBITDA margin help our management identify additional trends in our financial results that may not be shown solely by period-to-period comparisons of net income (loss) or income (loss) from continuing operations. In addition, we may use Adjusted EBITDA in the incentive compensation programs applicable to some of our employees. Our Management recognizes that Adjusted EBITDA has inherent limitations because of the excluded items, and may not be directly comparable to similarly titled metrics used by other companies.

    We calculate Adjusted EBITDA as net loss adjusted to exclude interest and other expense, net, income tax expense (benefit), depreciation and amortization, other amortization, stock-based compensation, and transaction-related and other non-recurring or unusual costs. Other amortization includes amortization for capitalized contract acquisition costs. Transaction-related costs are specific deal-related costs such as legal fees, financial and tax due diligence, consulting and escrow fees. Other non-recurring or unusual costs are expenses such as impairment charges, (gains) losses from divestitures, system implementation costs, executive separation costs, severance expense related to planned restructuring activities, and costs associated with integration and transformational improvements. Transaction-related and other non-recurring or unusual costs are excluded as they are not representative of our underlying operating performance. Adjusted EBITDA should be viewed as a measure of operating performance that is a supplement to, and not a substitute for, operating income or loss, net earnings or loss and other GAAP measures of income (loss).

    EverCommerce Inc.
    Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets
    (in thousands, except per share and share amounts)
    (unaudited)
           
      March 31,   December 31,
      2025   2024
           
    Assets      
    Current assets:      
    Cash and cash equivalents $ 148,408     $ 135,782  
    Accounts receivable, net of allowance for expected credit losses of $2.1 million and $2.3 million at March 31, 2025 and December 31, 2024, respectively   32,356       31,090  
    Contract assets   11,115       12,839  
    Assets held for sale   46,435       11,422  
    Prepaid expenses and other current assets   30,231       27,181  
    Total current assets   268,545       218,314  
    Property and equipment, net   5,907       6,129  
    Capitalized software, net   43,573       41,595  
    Other non-current assets   34,912       36,127  
    Non-current assets held for sale   —       44,779  
    Intangible assets, net   197,477       211,172  
    Goodwill   863,686       863,152  
    Total assets   1,414,100       1,421,268  
    Liabilities and Stockholders’ Equity      
    Current liabilities:      
    Accounts payable $ 7,533     $ 6,599  
    Accrued expenses and other   54,832       50,840  
    Deferred revenue   22,122       22,107  
    Customer deposits   11,857       11,382  
    Current maturities of long-term debt   5,500       5,500  
    Liabilities held for sale   15,626       14,298  
    Total current liabilities   117,470       110,726  
    Long-term debt, net of current maturities and deferred financing costs   521,364       522,442  
    Other non-current liabilities   35,697       36,301  
    Non-current liabilities held for sale   —       973  
    Total liabilities   674,531       670,442  
    Commitments and contingencies      
    Stockholders’ equity:      
    Preferred stock, $0.00001 par value, 50,000,000 shares authorized and no shares issued or outstanding as of March 31, 2025 and December 31, 2024   —       —  
    Common stock, $0.00001 par value, 2,000,000,000 shares authorized and 183,034,613 and 183,725,236 shares issued and outstanding at March 31, 2025 and December 31, 2024, respectively   2       2  
    Accumulated other comprehensive loss   (13,841 )     (14,318 )
    Additional paid-in capital   1,422,185       1,426,206  
    Accumulated deficit   (668,777 )     (661,064 )
    Total stockholders’ equity   739,569       750,826  
    Total liabilities and stockholders’ equity $ 1,414,100     $ 1,421,268  
                   
    EverCommerce Inc.
    Condensed Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Loss
    (in thousands, except per share and share amounts)
    (unaudited)
       
      Three months ended
    March 31,
      2025   2024
           
    Revenues:      
    Subscription and transaction fees $ 137,779     $ 133,382  
    Other   4,494       4,470  
    Total revenues   142,273       137,852  
    Operating expenses:      
    Cost of revenues (exclusive of depreciation and amortization presented separately below)   31,188       31,501  
    Sales and marketing   28,783       27,564  
    Product development   19,963       19,306  
    General and administrative   31,281       31,641  
    Depreciation and amortization   16,768       20,904  
    Loss on held for sale and impairments   85       11,232  
    Total operating expenses   128,068       142,148  
    Operating income (loss)   14,205       (4,296 )
    Interest and other expense, net   (12,759 )     (5,791 )
    Net income (loss) from continuing operations before income tax expense   1,446       (10,087 )
    Income tax expense   (512 )     (5,923 )
    Net income (loss) from continuing operations   934       (16,010 )
    Loss from discontinued operations, net of income tax   (8,647 )     (314 )
    Net loss   (7,713 )     (16,324 )
    Other comprehensive loss:      
    Foreign currency translation gain (loss), net   477       (3,535 )
    Comprehensive loss $ (7,236 )   $ (19,859 )
           
    Basic net income (loss) per share attributable to common stockholders:      
    Continuing operations $ 0.01     $ (0.09 )
    Discontinued operations   (0.05 )     —  
    Total $ (0.04 )   $ (0.09 )
           
    Diluted net income (loss) per share attributable to common stockholders:      
    Continuing operations $ 0.01     $ (0.09 )
    Discontinued operations   (0.05 )     —  
    Total $ (0.04 )   $ (0.09 )
           
    Weighted-average shares of common stock outstanding used in computing net income (loss) per share:      
    Basic   183,467,698       186,635,095  
    Diluted   185,222,240       186,635,095  
                   
    EverCommerce Inc.
    Condensed Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows
    (in thousands)
    (unaudited)
       
      Three months ended
    March 31,
      2025   2024
           
    Cash flows provided by operating activities:      
    Net loss $ (7,713 )   $ (16,324 )
    Adjustments to reconcile net loss to net cash provided by operating activities:      
    Depreciation and amortization   17,959       22,951  
    Stock-based compensation expense   6,940       5,576  
    Deferred taxes   (335 )     5,316  
    Amortization of deferred financing costs and non-cash interest   396       410  
    Loss on held for sale and impairments   9,518       11,231  
    Bad debt expense   832       1,010  
    Loss (gain) on interest rate swap valuation adjustments   3,856       (4,824 )
    Other non-cash items   1,270       216  
    Changes in operating assets and liabilities:      
    Accounts receivable, net   (3,123 )     (4,485 )
    Prepaid expenses and other current assets   (1,621 )     (3,087 )
    Other non-current assets   (340 )     93  
    Accounts payable   455       (233 )
    Accrued expenses and other   3,973       (6,094 )
    Deferred revenue   1,616       2,401  
    Other non-current liabilities   (3,005 )     (860 )
    Net cash provided by operating activities   30,678       13,297  
    Cash flows used in investing activities:      
    Purchases of property and equipment   (493 )     (402 )
    Capitalization of software costs   (5,065 )     (4,432 )
    Proceeds from disposition of fitness solutions, net of transaction costs, cash and restricted cash   (85 )     1,228  
    Net cash used in investing activities   (5,643 )     (3,606 )
    Cash flows used in financing activities:      
    Payments on long-term debt   (1,375 )     (1,375 )
    Exercise of stock options   1,385       1,072  
    Employee taxes paid for RSU withholdings   (1,182 )     —  
    Repurchase and retirement of common stock   (11,095 )     (12,068 )
    Net cash used in financing activities   (12,267 )     (12,371 )
    Effect of foreign currency exchange rate changes on cash   (142 )     (593 )
    Net increase (decrease) in cash, cash equivalents and restricted cash, including cash and restricted cash classified as held for sale   12,626       (3,273 )
    Cash, cash equivalents and restricted cash, including cash and restricted cash classified as held for sale:      
    Beginning of period   135,782       96,179  
    End of period $ 148,408     $ 92,906  
           
    Supplemental disclosures of cash flow information:   ​  
    Cash paid for interest $ 9,088     $ 11,095  
    Cash paid for income taxes $ 2,531     $ 1,654  
                   
    EverCommerce Inc.
    Non-GAAP Financial Measures and Key Performance Metrics
    (unaudited)
       
      Three months ended
    March 31,
      2025
    		   2024
      (in thousands)
           
    Pro Forma Revenue:      
    Revenue $ 142,273     $ 137,852  
    Plus acquisition revenue / less disposition revenue (1)   —       (5,403 )
    Pro Forma Revenue $ 142,273     $ 132,449  
     (1) Acquisition revenue includes the estimated revenue associated with Kickserv prior to the August 10, 2023 acquisition date while the disposition revenue adjustment excludes revenue associated with fitness solutions (see the Pro Forma Revenue and Pro Forma Revenue Growth Rate definition under Non-GAAP financial measures and Key Performance Metrics).
       
      Three months ended
    March 31,
      2025
    		   2024
      (in thousands)
           
    Pro Forma Subscription and Transaction Fees Revenue:      
    Subscription and transaction fees revenue $ 137,779     $ 133,382  
    Plus acquisition revenue / less disposition revenue (1)   —       (5,325 )
    Pro Forma Subscription and Transaction Fees Revenue $ 137,779     $ 128,057  
    (1) Acquisition revenue includes the estimated revenue associated with Kickserv prior to the August 10, 2023 acquisition date while the disposition revenue adjustment excludes revenue associated with fitness solutions (see the Pro Forma Subscription and Transaction Revenue and Pro Forma Subscription and Transaction Revenue Growth Rate definition under Non-GAAP financial measures and Key Performance Metrics).
       
      Three months ended
    March 31,
      2025
    		   2024
      (in thousands)
           
    Reconciliation from Gross Profit to Adjusted Gross Profit:      
    Gross profit from continuing operations $ 106,433     $ 100,884  
    Depreciation and amortization   4,652       5,467  
    Adjusted gross profit from continuing operations $ 111,085     $ 106,351  
                   
      Three months ended
    March 31,
      2025
    		   2024
      (in thousands)
           
    Reconciliation from Net loss to Adjusted EBITDA:      
    Net income (loss) from continuing operations $ 934     $ (16,010 )
    Adjusted to exclude the following:      
    Interest and other expense, net   12,759       5,791  
    Income tax expense   512       5,923  
    Depreciation and amortization   16,768       20,904  
    Other amortization   1,482       1,311  
    Stock-based compensation expense   6,755       5,410  
    Transaction-related and other non-recurring or unusual costs   5,735       15,321  
    Adjusted EBITDA from continuing operations $ 44,945     $ 38,650  
                   

    The MIL Network –