Category: Pandemic

MIL-OSI USA: Ranking Member Hoyer Remarks at U.S. Department of the Treasury Oversight Hearing

Source: United States House of Representatives – Congressman Steny H Hoyer (MD-05)

WASHINGTON, DC – Today, Congressman Steny Hoyer (MD-05), Ranking Member of the House Appropriations Subcommittee on Financial Services and General Government (FSGG), delivered the following remarks at the subcommittee’s oversight hearing on the Department of the Treasury:

Click here to watch a full video of his remarks.

“Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, and welcome, Mr. Secretary. This is our first substantive hearing dealing with the devastating actions that the Trump Administration has taken in the first three months of 2025 – actions planned and predicted by Project 2025. I look forward to having more such hearings with other agencies under our jurisdiction – especially the principals of DOGE, OMB, GSA, and OPM, which are having such a profoundly negative impact on our country.

“What we’ve seen in the first 100 days of this administration is unprecedented, and – so the polls tell us – disturbing to the American people. An irresponsible, incoherent tariff policy has plunged the Americans and global economies into chaos. These past three months, the American economy shrank for the first time since the final days of the pandemic. The stock market fell more in the first 100 days of the Trump Administration than in the first 100 days of any presidency in the past half century. Consumer confidence is [at its] lowest since May of 2020 – the height of Covid-19. That uncertainty has also rattled the bond market, with investors dangerously starting to doubt the full faith and credit of the United States.

“Most importantly, Americans are hurting. Families see their costs going up. Retirees watch their life savings losing value. Small business owners and farmers risk going under as they struggle to navigate ever-changing tariffs. Our economy is in chaos and so, I think, is our government.

“Donald Trump, Russell Vought, and Elon Musk are orchestrating an illegal purge of our federal employees. They clearly had a lot of ideas on how to remove these people and dismantle these programs as quickly as possible. Sadly, they had no clue, in my view, as to the devastating consequences of their actions on our country, our government, our allies, and the professionals we rely on to serve the American people.

“I am particularly concerned about the Internal Revenue Service, which has been severely understaffed and underfunded for decades. So far, the Trump Administration has forced the IRS to cut as many as 11,443 employees – or over 11 percent of its staff. That includes 6,700 workers who were fired at the height of this most recent tax season. Now, the administration is planning to reduce the IRS workforce, I understand, by another 40,000 jobs – or 40 percent. That includes up to half of IRS enforcement staff. Additionally, Trump’s 2026 budget cuts funding for the IRS by 20 percent. These actions at IRS, in my view, and every other government office, have bludgeoned morale, destroyed efficiency, and increased waste.

“Cutting back on IRS enforcement makes it easier for the wealthiest individuals and corporations to cheat on their taxes and get out of paying what they owe. That, of course, increases what others pay and explodes the deficit. As the President and Congressional Republicans undermine the ability to enforce our existing tax code, they are also pursuing massive tax cuts for the wealthiest among us.

“Furthermore, DOGE operatives are rifling through IRS databases that contain Americans’ sensitive information, including their financial history, Social Security numbers, immigration status, and more. The story is the same across the federal government. Americans are reeling from this uncertainty in their economy and in their government. They need answers. More than that, they need an adult in the room. That is the role, I hope, the Treasury Department plays – and Mr. Secretary, in particular, yourself.

“The economy and markets do not lie. We all depend on the Treasury Secretary to communicate clearly and transparently to the President, the Congress, the American people, and, indeed, the world. I’ve mentioned tariffs and the IRS, but I’m also eager to hear, Mr. Secretary from you about our economic approach to the Russian-Ukraine war – especially in light of last week’s mineral deal and recent questions about our sanctions regime on Russia.

“Former Secretary Mnuchin – whom I believe you know, sir – and I disagreed on some things, but we still found ways to work in a bipartisan fashion to inspire confidence in the economy. Mr. Secretary, I look forward to doing the same with you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.”

MIL OSI USA News –

May 8, 2025
MIL-OSI USA: Hoyer Joins Alsobrooks, Maryland Democratic Delegation in Demanding Back Education Dollars Cut by Trump

Source: United States House of Representatives – Congressman Steny H Hoyer (MD-05)

WASHINGTON, DC – As reported this week in The Washington Post, Congressman Steny H. Hoyer (MD-05) joined a letter led by Senator Angela Alsobrooks (D-MD) along with the Maryland Democratic Delegation – U.S. Senator Chris Van Hollen (D-MD) and U.S. Representatives Kweisi Mfume (MD-07), Jamie Raskin (MD-08), Glenn Ivey (MD-04), Sarah Elfreth (MD-03), April McClain Delaney (MD-06), and Johnny Olszewski (MD-02) to demand 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 –

May 8, 2025
MIL-OSI: The Herzfeld Caribbean Basin Fund, Inc. Announces Special Meeting of Stockholders to be Held on June 17, 2025
Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

MIAMI BEACH, Fla., May 07, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — The Herzfeld Caribbean Basin Fund, Inc. (NASDAQ: CUBA) (the “Fund”) today announced 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.

The Fund’s Board of Directors (“Board”) has fixed May 5, 2025, as the record date for determination of the Fund’s stockholders entitle to notice of and to vote at the Fund’s special meeting.

The Fund’s special meeting will be held at the Fund’s offices at 119 Washington Avenue, Suite 504, Miami Beach, Florida 33139, on June 17, 2025, at 10:00 a.m., Eastern Time.

There are three proposals to be considered by the Fund’s stockholders at the special meeting:
- Proposal 1 seeks approval of an amended and restated investment advisory agreement between the Fund and Thomas J. Herzfeld Advisors, Inc. (the “Adviser”) to permit the Adviser to receive a fee based on “managed assets” and an incentive fee.
- Proposal 2 seeks approval to revise the Fund’s investment objective from obtaining “long term capital appreciation” to a primary objective of “maximizing risk adjusted total returns” with a secondary objective of “generating high current income;” and to reclassify the Fund’s investment objective as non-fundamental.
- Proposal 3 seeks approval to amend the fundamental policies of the Fund related to borrowing, the issuance of senior securities, underwriting securities issued by other persons, industry concentration, the purchase or sale of real estate, the purchase or sale of commodities, and making loans to other persons.
The Investment Company Act of 1940, as amended (the “1940 Act”), requires any change to a fundamental policy and the entering into of the new investment management agreement be approved by “a majority of the outstanding voting securities” of the Fund (as defined under the 1940 Act).

The Proposals referred to above are discussed in detail in the Proxy Materials filed today with the SEC.

Additional Information about the Special Meeting

The Fund is filing today with the SEC its preliminary Proxy Materials (Filing Type: PRE 14A). The Fund’s definitive Proxy Statement currently is anticipated to be filed with the SEC late in May 2025 (Filing Type: DEF 14A). Stockholders can obtain these documents (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.

This press release is for informational purposes and is not intended to, and does not, solicit a proxy from any shareholder of the Fund. The solicitation of proxies to effect the proposed changes is only be made by a definitive Proxy Statement.

This press release references a preliminary Proxy Materials filed by the Fund. The definitive Proxy Statement has yet to be filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”). After the definitive Proxy Statement is filed with the SEC, it may be amended or withdrawn.

The Fund and its directors, officers and employees, and the Adviser, and its shareholders, officers and employees and other persons may be deemed to be participants in the solicitation of proxies with respect to the proposed fundamental policy changes and the proposed approval of the investment advisory agreement. Investors and shareholders may obtain more detailed information regarding the direct and indirect interests of the Fund’s directors, officers and employees, and Adviser and its stockholders, officers and employees and other persons by reading the definitive Proxy Statement when it is filed with the SEC. INVESTORS AND SECURITY HOLDERS OF THE FUND ARE URGED TO READ THE DEFINITIVE PROXY STATEMENT AND OTHER DOCUMENTS FILED WITH THE SEC CAREFULLY AND IN THEIR ENTIRETY WHEN THEY BECOME AVAILABLE BECAUSE THESE DOCUMENTS WILL CONTAIN IMPORTANT INFORMATION ABOUT THE PROPOSALS. INVESTORS SHOULD CONSIDER THE INVESTMENT OBJECTIVE, RISKS, CHARGES AND EXPENSES OF THE FUND CAREFULLY. THE DEFINITIVE PROXY STATEMENT WILL CONTAIN INFORMATION WITH RESPECT TO THE INVESTMENT OBJECTIVE, RISKS, CHARGES AND EXPENSES OF THE FUND.

The definitive Proxy Statement will not constitute an offer to buy or sell securities, in any state where such offer or sale is not permitted. Security holders may obtain free copies (when it becomes available) of the definitive Proxy Statement and other documents filed with the SEC at the SEC’s web site at www.sec.gov. 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

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.

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, 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.

TJHA has received certain nominations or awards by third-parties as reflected herein. Investors should review the criteria for each nomination or award as reflected on the third-party’s webpage. In addition, the nominations and awards reflect past performance of the nominee or award designee and may not reflect the current performance or status of any such firm or individual and may no longer be applicable. Morningstar award content presented with permission and licensing fee. Contact us for more information on how the ratings are apportioned and for full disclosures regarding third party news and awards.

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

The MIL Network –
May 8, 2025

MIL-OSI: SLR Investment Corp. Announces Quarter Ended March 31, 2025 Financial Results

Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

Net Investment Income of $0.41 Per Share for Q1 2025;

Declared Quarterly Distribution of $0.41 Per Share;

Stable NAV/Strong Credit Quality

NEW YORK, May 07, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — SLR Investment Corp. (NASDAQ: SLRC) (the “Company”, “SLRC”, “we”, “us”, or “our”) today reported net investment income (“NII”) of $22.1 million, or $0.41 per share, for the first quarter of 2025. On May 7, 2025, the Board declared a quarterly distribution of $0.41 per share payable on June 27, 2025, to holders of record as of June 13, 2025.

As of March 31, 2025, net asset value (“NAV”) was $18.16 per share, compared to $18.20 per share at December 31, 2024.

“We remain pleased with the composition, quality, and performance of our portfolio on an absolute and relative basis in the first quarter,” said Michael Gross, Co-CEO of SLR Investment Corp. “While the ultimate impact from tariffs remains highly uncertain, we are actively engaged with our portfolio companies and believe that our portfolio, which is heavily collateralized by working capital assets and focused on domestic services businesses, is well positioned for the current environment.”

“We are seeing a significant and growing pipeline of asset-based lending investment opportunities driven by both the market dislocation and the retreat of traditional bank lenders which allows us to remain selective while investing in structures that are designed to be more resilient in today’s uncertain environment,” said Bruce Spohler, Co-CEO of SLR Investment Corp. “With conservative portfolio net leverage near the low-end of our target range and available capital of over $800 million, SLRC is well positioned to take advantage of our attractive investment pipeline amidst continued market volatility.”

FINANCIAL HIGHLIGHTS FOR THE QUARTER ENDED MARCH 31, 2025:

At March 31, 2025:

Investment Portfolio fair value: $2.0 billion | Comprehensive Investment Portfolio⁽¹⁾ fair value: $3.1 billion
Non-accruals: 0.4% at fair value, 0.6% at cost of Investment Portfolio
Net assets: $990.5 million or $18.16 per share
Leverage: 1.04x net debt-to-equity

Operating Results for the Quarter Ended March 31, 2025:

Net investment income: $22.1 million or $0.41 per share
Net realized and unrealized losses: $2.2 million or $0.04 per share
Net increase in net assets from operations: $19.9 million or $0.37 per share

Comprehensive Investment Portfolio Activity⁽²⁾for the Quarter Ended March 31, 2025:

Investments made: $361.3 million
Investments prepaid and sold: $390.6 million

_{⁽¹⁾ The Comprehensive Investment Portfolio for the quarter ended March 31, 2025 is comprised of SLRC’s investment portfolio and SLR Credit Solutions’ (“SLR-CS”) portfolio, SLR Equipment Finance’s (“SLR-EF”) portfolio, Kingsbridge Holdings, LLC’s (“KBH”) portfolio, SLR Business Credit’s (“SLR-BC”) portfolio, SLR Healthcare ABL’s (“SLR-HC ABL”) portfolio owned by the Company (collectively, the Company’s “Commercial Finance Portfolio Companies”), and the senior secured loans held by the SLR Senior Lending Program LLC (“SSLP”) attributable to the Company, and excludes the Company’s fair value of the equity interests in SSLP and the Commercial Finance Portfolio Companies and also excludes SLRC’s loans to KBH, SLR-EF, and SLR HC ABL.}
_{⁽²⁾ Comprehensive Investment Portfolio activity for the quarter ended March 31, 2025, includes investment activity of the Commercial Finance Portfolio Companies and SSLP attributable to the Company.}

Comprehensive Investment Portfolio

Portfolio Activity

During the three months ended March 31, 2025, SLRC had Comprehensive Investment Portfolio originations of $361.3 million and repayments of $390.6 million across the Company’s four investment strategies:

For the Quarter Ended March 31, 2025 *($mm)*

Asset Class	Sponsor Finance⁽¹⁾	Asset-based Lending⁽²⁾	Equipment Finance⁽³⁾	Life Science Finance	Total Comprehensive Investment Portfolio Activity
Originations	$44.8	$163.8	$128.1	$24.6	$361.3
Repayments / Amortization	$73.0	$98.9	$173.5	$45.2	$390.6
Net Portfolio Activity	($28.2)	$64.9	$(45.4)	($20.6)	($ 29.3)

_{⁽¹⁾ Sponsor Finance refers to cash flow loans to sponsor-owned companies including cash flow loans held in SSLP attributable to the Company.}
_{⁽²⁾ Includes SLR-CS, SLR-BC and SLR-HC ABL’s portfolios, as well as asset-based loans on the Company’s balance sheet.}
_{⁽³⁾ Includes SLR-EF’s portfolio and equipment financings on the Company’s balance sheet and Kingsbridge Holdings’ (KBH) portfolio.}

Comprehensive Investment Portfolio Composition

The Comprehensive Investment Portfolio is diversified across approximately 940 unique issuers, operating in over 105 industries, and resulting in an average exposure of $3.2 million or 0.1% per issuer. As of March 31, 2025, 98.2% of the Company’s Comprehensive Investment Portfolio was invested in senior secured loans of which 96.4% was held in first lien senior secured loans. Second lien ABL exposure was 1.6% and second lien cash flow exposure was 0.2% of the Comprehensive Investment Portfolio as of March 31, 2025.

SLRC’s Comprehensive Investment Portfolio composition by asset class as of March 31, 2025 was as follows:

Comprehensive Investment Portfolio Composition (at fair value)	Amount				Weighted Average Asset Yield⁽⁵⁾
	($mm)		%		Weighted Average Asset Yield⁽⁵⁾
Senior Secured Investments
Cash Flow Loans (Sponsor Finance)⁽¹⁾	$	588.0	19.3	%	10.4	%
Asset-Based Loans⁽²⁾	$	1,121.3	36.7	%	13.8	%
Equipment Financings⁽³⁾	$	1,102.6	36.1	%	11.5	%
Life Science Loans	$	186.8	6.1	%	12.5	%
Total Senior Secured Investments	$	2,998.7	98.2	%	12.2	%
Equity and Equity-like Securities	$	54.2	1.8	%
Total Comprehensive Investment Portfolio	$	3,052.9	100.0	%
Floating Rate Investments⁽⁴⁾	$	1,872.7	61.8	%
First Lien Senior Secured Loans	$	2,942.9	96.4	%
Second Lien Senior Secured Asset-Based Loans	$	48.0	1.6	%
Second Lien Senior Secured Cash Flow Loans	$	7.8	0.2	%

_{⁽¹⁾ Includes cash flow loans held in the SSLP attributable to the Company and excludes the Company’s equity investment in SSLP.}
_{⁽²⁾ Includes SLR-CS, SLR-BC, and SLR-HC ABL’s portfolios, as well as asset-based loans on the Company’s balance sheet, and excludes the Company’s equity investments in each of SLR-CS, SLR-BC, and SLR-HC ABL.}
_{⁽³⁾ Includes SLR-EF’s portfolio and equipment financings on the Company’s balance sheet and Kingsbridge Holdings’ (KBH) portfolio. Excludes the Company’s equity and debt investments in each of SLR-EF and KBH.}
_{⁽⁴⁾ Floating rate investments are calculated as a percent of the Company’s income-producing Comprehensive Investment Portfolio. The majority of fixed rate loans are associated with SLR-EF and leases held by KBH. Additionally, SLR-EF and KBH seek to match-fund their fixed rate assets with fixed rate liabilities.}
_{⁽⁵⁾ The weighted average asset yield for income producing cash flow, asset-based and life science loans on balance sheet is based on a yield to maturity calculation. The weighted average asset yield calculation for Life Science loans includes the amortization of expected exit/success fees. The weighted average yield for on-balance sheet equipment financings is calculated based on the expected average life of the investments. The weighted average asset yield for SLR-CS asset-based loans is an Internal Rate of Return (IRR) calculated using actual cash flows received and the expected terminal value. The weighted average asset yield for SLR-BC and SLR-HC ABL represents total interest and fee income for the three-month period ended on March 31, 2025 against the average portfolio over the same fiscal period, annualized. The weighted average asset yield for SLR-EF represents total interest and fee income for the three-month period ended on March 31, 2025 compared to the portfolio as of March 31, 2025, annualized. The weighted average yield for the KBH equipment leasing portfolio represents the blended yield from the company’s 1^st lien loan on par value and the annualized dividend yield on the cost basis of the company’s equity investment as of March 31, 2025.}

SLR Investment Corp. Portfolio

Asset Quality

As of March 31, 2025, 99.6% of SLRC’s portfolio was performing on a fair value basis and 99.4% on a cost basis, with only one investment on non-accrual.

The Company puts its largest emphasis on risk control and credit performance. On a quarterly basis, or more frequently if deemed necessary, the Company formally rates each portfolio investment on a scale of one to four, with one representing the least amount of risk.

As of March 31, 2025, the composition of our investment portfolio, on a risk ratings basis, was as follows:

Internal Investment Rating	Investments at Fair Value ($mm)	% of Total Portfolio
1	$622.3	31.0%
2	$1,334.9	66.6%
3	$39.4	2.0%
4	$7.8	0.4%

Investment Income Contribution by Asset Class

*Investment Income Contribution by Asset Class⁽¹⁾ ($mm)*
For the Quarter Ended:	Sponsor Finance		Asset-based Lending		Equipment Finance		Life Science Finance		Total
3/31/2025	$17.0		$19.5		$9.7		$7.0		$53.2
% Contribution		32.0%		36.7%		18.2%		13.1%		100.0%

⁽¹⁾ Investment Income Contribution by Asset Class includes: interest income/fees from Sponsor Finance (cash flow) loans on balance sheet and distributions from SSLP; income/fees from asset-based loans on balance sheet and distributions from SLR-CS, SLR-BC, SLR-HC ABL; income/fees from equipment financings and distributions from SLR-EF and distributions from KBH; and income/fees from life science loans on balance sheet.

SLR Senior Lending Program LLC (SSLP)

As of March 31, 2025, the Company and its 50% partner, Sunstone Senior Credit L.P., had contributed combined equity capital of $95.8 million of a total $100 million equity commitment to the SSLP. At quarter end, SSLP had total commitments of $177.0 million at par and total funded portfolio investments of $165.6 million at fair value, consisting of floating rate senior secured loans to 31 different borrowers and an average investment of $5.3 million per borrower. This compares to funded portfolio investments of $178.7 million at fair value across 32 different borrowers at December 31, 2024. During the quarter ended March 31, 2025, SSLP invested $6.6 million in 6 portfolio companies and had $19.9 million of investments repaid.

In Q1 2025, the Company earned income of $1.9 million from its investment in the SSLP, representing an annualized yield of 15.7% on the cost basis of the Company’s investment, consistent with the annualized yield in Q4 2024.

SLR Investment Corp.’s Results of Operations Quarter Over Quarter

Investment Income

For the fiscal quarters ended March 31, 2025, and 2024, gross investment income totaled $53.2 million and $58.1 million, respectively. The decrease in gross investment income for the year over year three-month periods was primarily due to a decrease in the size of the income producing investment portfolio as well as a decrease in index rates.

Expenses

SLRC’s net expenses totaled $31.1 million and $34.2 million, respectively, for the fiscal quarters ended March 31, 2025, and 2024. The decrease in expenses for the year-over-year three-month periods was primarily due to lower interest expense from a decrease in average borrowings as well as a decrease in the index rates on borrowings.

SLRC’s investment adviser agreed to waive incentive fees resulting from income earned due to the accretion of the purchase price discount allocated to investments acquired in the Company’s merger with SLR Senior Investment Corp., which closed on April 1, 2022. For the fiscal quarters ended March 31, 2025 and 2024, $2 thousand and $46 thousand, respectively, of such performance-based incentive fees were waived.

Net Investment Income

SLRC’s net investment income totaled $22.1 million and $23.9 million, or $0.41 and $0.44, per average share, respectively, for the fiscal quarters ended March 31, 2025, and 2024.

Net Realized and Unrealized Loss

Net realized and unrealized gain (loss) for the fiscal quarters ended March 31, 2025 and 2024 totaled $(2.2) million and $4.0 million, respectively.

Net Increase in Net Assets Resulting from Operations

For the fiscal quarters ended March 31, 2025, and 2024, the Company had a net increase in net assets resulting from operations of $19.9 million and $27.9 million, respectively. For the same periods, earnings per average share were $0.37 and $0.51, respectively.

Capital and Liquidity

Credit Facilities

As of March 31, 2025, the Company had $549.3 million drawn on $970 million of total commitments available on its revolving credit facilities and $140 million of term loans outstanding.

Unsecured Debt

On February 18, 2025, the Company closed a private offering of $50.0 million of unsecured notes due 2028 with a fixed rate of interest of 6.14% and a maturity date of February 18, 2028. The issuance of notes in the first quarter followed the $49.0 million issuance of unsecured notes in the fourth quarter of 2024 with a maturity date of December 16, 2027. As of March 31, 2025, the Company had $359 million of unsecured notes outstanding and the company does not have any near-term refinancing obligations with the next maturity occurring in December 2026.

Leverage

As of March 31, 2025, the Company’s net debt-to-equity ratio was 1.04x compared to 1.03x at December 31, 2024 and 1.16x at March 31, 2024. The Company’s target range is 0.9x to 1.25x net debt-to-equity.

Available Capital

As of March 31, 2025, including anticipated available borrowing capacity at the SSLP and our specialty finance portfolio companies, subject to borrowing base limits, SLRC, SSLP and our specialty finance portfolio companies had over $800 million of available capital in the aggregate.

Unfunded Commitments

As of March 31, 2025, excluding commitments of $72.4 million to SLR-CS, SLR-BC, SLR-HC ABL, SLR Equipment Finance, and SSLP, over which the Company has discretion to fund, the Company had unfunded commitments of approximately $196.2 million.

Subsequent Events

On May 7, 2025, the Board declared a quarterly distribution of $0.41 per share payable on June 27, 2025, to holders of record as of June 13, 2025.

Conference Call and Webcast Information

The Company will host an earnings conference call and audio webcast at 10:00 a.m. (Eastern Time) on Thursday, May 8, 2025. All interested parties may participate in the conference call by dialing (800) 225-9448 approximately 5-10 minutes prior to the call, international callers should dial (203) 518-9708. Participants should reference SLR Investment Corp. and Conference ID: SLRC1Q25. A telephone replay will be available until May 22, 2025 and can be accessed by dialing (800) 925-9527. International callers should dial (402) 220-5388.

This conference call will also be broadcast live over the Internet and can be accessed by all interested parties from the Event Calendar within the “Investors” tab of SLR Investment Corp.’s website at https://slrinvestmentcorp.com/Investors/Event-Calendar. Please register online prior to the start of the call. For those who are not able to listen to the broadcast live, a replay of the webcast will be available soon after the call.

SLR INVESTMENT CORP. CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF ASSETS AND LIABILITIES (in thousands, except share and per share amounts)

Assets	March 31, 2025 (unaudited)		December31, 2024
Investments at fair value:
Companies less than 5% owned (cost: $1,015,960 and $1,019,357, respectively)	$	1,021,278		$	1,027,457
Companies 5% to 25% owned (cost: $105,224 and $103,655, respectively)		89,490			89,945
Companies more than 25% owned (cost: $918,904 and $916,554, respectively)		893,631			888,232
Cash		19,931			16,761
Cash equivalents (cost: $447,074 and $397,510, respectively)		447,074			397,510
Dividends receivable		17,423			15,375
Interest receivable		11,645			11,993
Receivable for investments sold		1,336			1,573
Prepaid expenses and other assets		1,164			571
Total assets	$	2,502,972		$	2,449,417
Liabilities
Debt ($1,048,260 and $1,041,093 face amounts, respectively, reported net of unamortized debt issuance costs of $8,848 and $9,399, respectively.	$	1,039,412		$	1,031,694
Payable for investments and cash equivalents purchased		447,074			397,510
Management fee payable		7,513			7,739
Performance-based incentive fee payable		5,523			5,920
Interest payable		6,040			7,836
Administrative services payable		4,084			3,332
Other liabilities and accrued expenses		2,841			2,460
Total liabilities	$	1,512,487		$	1,456,491

Net Assets
Common stock, par value $0.01 per share, 200,000,000 and 200,000,000 common shares
authorized, respectively, and 54,554,634 and 54,554,634 shares issued and
outstanding, respectively	$	546		$	546
Paid-in capital in excess of par		1,117,606			1,117,606
Accumulated distributable net loss		(127,667	)		(125,226	)
Total net assets	$	990,485		$	992,926
Net Asset Value Per Share	$	18.16		$	18.20

SLR INVESTMENT CORP. CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS (in thousands, except per share amounts)

	Three months ended
	March 31, 2025			March 31, 2024
INVESTMENT INCOME:
Interest:
Companies less than 5% owned	$	29,174		$	41,004
Companies 5% to 25% owned		1,224			831
Companies more than 25% owned		3,235			3,338
Dividends:
Companies 5% to 25% owned		770			—
Companies more than 25% owned		17,796			12,227
Other income:
Companies less than 5% owned		874			574
Companies more than 25% owned		105			125
Total investment income		53,178			58,099
EXPENSES:
Management fees		7,513			7,882
Performance-based incentive fees		5,526			5,952
Interest and other credit facility expenses		15,840			18,188
Administrative services expense		1,361			1,376
Other general and administrative expenses		835			895
Total expenses		31,075			34,293
Performance-based incentive fees waived		(2	)		(46	)
Net expenses		31,073			34,247
Net investment income	$	22,105		$	23,852
REALIZED AND UNREALIZED GAIN (LOSS) ON INVESTMENTS AND CASH EQUIVALENTS:
Net realized gain (loss) on investments and cash equivalents (companies less than 5% owned)	$	(422)		$	135
Net change in unrealized gain (loss) on investments and cash equivalents:
Companies less than 5% owned		(2,780	)		3,484
Companies 5% to 25% owned		(2,027	)		1
Companies more than 25% owned		3,050			399
Net change in unrealized gain (loss) on investments and cash equivalents		(1,757	)		3,884
Net realized and unrealized gain (loss) on investments and cash equivalents		(2,179	)		4,019
NET INCREASE IN NET ASSETS RESULTING FROM OPERATIONS	$	19,926		$	27,871
EARNINGS PER SHARE	$	0.37		$	0.51

About SLR Investment Corp.

SLR Investment Corp. is a closed-end investment company that has elected to be regulated as a business development company under the Investment Company Act of 1940. A specialty finance company with expertise in several niche markets, the Company primarily invests in leveraged, U.S. upper middle market companies in the form of cash flow, asset-based, and life sciences senior secured loans.

Forward-Looking Statements

Some of the statements in this press release constitute forward-looking statements because they relate to future events, future performance or financial condition. The forward-looking statements may include statements as to: the Company’s access to deal flow and its ability to take advantage of attractive investment opportunities; the market environment and its impact on the business prospects of SLRC and the prospects of SLRC’s portfolio companies; prospects for growth of SLRC’s investment pipeline and resiliency of investing structures; the quality of, and the impact on the performance of SLRC from the investments that SLRC has made and expects to make; and the anticipated availability of capital. In addition, words such as “anticipate,” “believe,” “expect,” “seek,” “plan,” “should,” “estimate,” “project” and “intend” indicate forward-looking statements, although not all forward-looking statements include these words. The forward-looking statements contained in this press release involve risks and uncertainties. Certain factors could cause actual results and conditions to differ materially from those projected, including the uncertainties associated with: (i) changes or potential disruptions in SLRC’s operations, the economy, financial markets and political environment, including those caused by tariffs and trade disputes with other countries, inflation and changing interest rates; (ii) risks associated with possible disruption in the operations of SLRC or the economy generally due to terrorism, war or other geopolitical conflicts, natural disasters, pandemics or cybersecurity incidents; (iii) future changes in laws or regulations (including the interpretation of these laws and regulations by regulatory authorities); (iv) conditions in SLRC’s operating areas, particularly with respect to business development companies or regulated investment companies; and (v) other considerations that may be disclosed from time to time in SLRC’s publicly disseminated documents and filings. SLRC has based the forward-looking statements included in this press release on information available to it on the date of this press release, and SLRC assumes no obligation to update any such forward-looking statements. Although SLRC undertakes no obligation to revise or update any forward-looking statements, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise, you are advised to consult any additional disclosures that it may make directly to you or through reports that SLRC in the future may file with the Securities and Exchange Commission, including annual reports on Form 10-K, quarterly reports on Form 10-Q and current reports on Form 8-K.

Contact
SLR Investment Corp.
Investor Relations
slrinvestorrelations@slrcp.com | (646) 308-8770

The MIL Network –

May 8, 2025

MIL-OSI: Silvaco Reports First Quarter 2025 Financial Results

Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

Achieved gross bookings of $13.7 million and revenue of $14.1 million in the first quarter 2025

Signed 9 new customers in the first quarter 2025 and expanded relationship with existing customers across key markets including AI, Photonics, and IoT

Expanded Product Portfolio with the Acquisition of Tech-X Corporation

SANTA CLARA, Calif., May 07, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Silvaco Group, Inc. (Nasdaq: SVCO) (“Silvaco” or the “Company”), a provider of TCAD, EDA software, and SIP solutions that enable innovative semiconductor design and digital twin modeling through AI software and automation, today announced its first quarter 2025 results.

“We are pleased to have completed our first acquisition since our IPO in the first quarter of 2025, and have since announced our second acquisition of 2025, advancing our inorganic growth strategy and expanding our product portfolio,” said Dr. Babak Taheri, Silvaco’s Chief Executive Officer. Dr. Taheri continued, “We believe our solid fundamentals and focus on innovation position us to sustain strong customer momentum and drive continued growth in our EDA and TCAD product lines through 2025. We are committed to defending shareholder value through performance, transparency, and responsible capital management. We believe the fundamentals of Silvaco are strong—and we’re taking clear, measurable steps to align our market presence with the long-term strength of our business.”

Commenting on the financial results and outlook, Keith Tainsky, Silvaco’s Interim Chief Financial Officer, added, “Given the current economic uncertainty, we have provided a broad guidance range for the second quarter of 2025. The company remains well positioned to deliver solid growth, supported by strong customer demand. We also updated our full-year guidance and remain confident in our ability to achieve our strategic and financial objectives.”

First Quarter 2025 and Recent Business Highlights

Acquired 9 new customers across key markets including AI infrastructure (Power, Memory, Foundry) Photonics, and IoT markets, which represented approximately 23% of gross bookings for the quarter. We also expanded opportunities with existing customers, which accounted for 38% of gross bookings.
Gained momentum with Power, Photonics, and Advanced CMOS customers as they expand adoption of the FTCO platform for their next-generation product development. We announced that Excelliance MOS adopted Silvaco DTCO Flow for next generation silicon carbide devices and our partnership with Korean Kyung Hee University’s Professor Jin Jang on FTCO for next generation display technologies.
Expanded SAM by an estimated $600 million with the acquisitions of Cadence’s PPC product line and Tech-X Corporation.
Faraday Technology selected Silvaco FlexCAN IP for advanced automotive ASIC design.
ProMOS adopted our Victory TCAD solution for the development of next generation silicon photonics devices.
On April 29, 2025, Silvaco closed the acquisition of Tech-X Corporation, expanding our product offerings into wafer-level and photonics digital twin modeling.
Beginning with this quarter, we will be providing a new performance metric called Annual Contract Value, or ACV. We use ACV internally as a supplemental measure to evaluate the performance of our customer agreements and the underlying momentum of the business. While not a measure calculated in accordance with GAAP, we believe ACV provides additional insight into the scale and timing of customer commitments, which may not be fully reflected in recognized revenue due to the timing of revenue recognition under ASC 606.

First Quarter 2025 Financial Results

GAAP Financial Results

Revenue of $14.1 million, down 11% year-over-year and down 21% quarter-over-quarter.
- TCAD revenue of $7.9 million, down 26% year-over-year, primarily due to earlier renewals last year.
- EDA revenue of $5.1 million, up 8% year-over-year, including the addition of PPC product revenue of $1.9 million.
- SIP revenue of $1.1 million, up 89% year-over-year, primarily driven by new bookings in automotive and IoT customers.
GAAP gross profit and GAAP gross margin were $11.1 million and 79%, respectively, which includes the impact of $0.2 million in stock-based compensation expense, and $0.2 million in amortization of acquired intangible assets, down from $13.9 million and 88% in Q1 2024.
GAAP net loss of $19.3 million, compared to a GAAP net income of $1.4 million in Q1 2024.
GAAP basic net loss per share of $(0.67), compared to GAAP basic and diluted net income per share of $0.07 in Q1 2024.
As of March 31, 2025, cash and cash equivalents and marketable securities totaled $74.5 million.

Key Operating Indicators and Non-GAAP Financial Results:

Gross bookings were $13.7 million, down 15% year-over-year.
As of March 31, 2025, the remaining performance obligation balance of $33.7 million, 45% of which is expected to be recognized as revenue in the next 12 months.
Non-GAAP gross profit and non-GAAP gross margin were $11.5 million and 82%, respectively, down from $13.9 million and 88% in Q1 2024.
Non-GAAP net loss of $1.9 million, compared to non-GAAP net income of $2.4 million in Q1 2024.
Non-GAAP diluted net loss per share of $(0.07), compared to non-GAAP diluted net income per share of $0.12 in Q1 2024.
On a trailing-twelve-month (TTM) basis ACV was $52.3 million for the first quarter, up 21% year-over-year. This increase was driven by the amount of growth in organic growth of term-based licenses and renewals, as well as the acquisition of PPC. While quarterly revenue may fluctuate, core annual recurring revenue from new bookings has shown consistent annual growth.

For a discussion of the non-GAAP metrics presented in this press release, as well as a reconciliation of non-GAAP metrics to the nearest comparable GAAP metric, see “Discussion of Non-GAAP Financial Measures and Other Key Business Metrics” and “GAAP to Non-GAAP Reconciliation” in the accompanying tables below.

Supplementary materials to this press release, including first quarter 2025 financial results, can be found at https://investors.silvaco.com/financial-information/quarterly-results.

Second Quarter and Full Year 2025 Financial Outlook

As of May 7, 2025, Silvaco is providing updated guidance for its second quarter of 2025 and its full-year 2025, which represents Silvaco’s current estimates on its operations and financial results. The financial information below represents forward-looking financial information and in some instances forward-looking, non-GAAP financial information, including estimates of non-GAAP gross margin, non-GAAP operating income (loss) and non-GAAP diluted net income (loss) per share. GAAP gross margin is the most comparable GAAP measure to non-GAAP gross margin and GAAP operating income (loss) is the most comparable GAAP measure to non-GAAP operating income (loss). GAAP diluted net income (loss) per share is the most comparable GAAP measure to non-GAAP diluted net income (loss) per share. Non-GAAP gross margin differs from GAAP gross margin in that it excludes items such as stock-based compensation expense, amortization of acquired intangible assets, and acquisition-related professional fees and retention bonuses. Non-GAAP operating income (loss) differs from GAAP operating income (loss) in that it excludes items such as acquisition-related estimated litigation claim and legal costs, stock-based compensation expense, amortization of acquired intangible assets, acquisition-related professional fees and retention bonuses and IPO preparation costs. Non-GAAP diluted net income (loss) per share differs from GAAP diluted net income (loss) per share in that it excludes certain costs, including IPO preparation costs, acquisition-related estimated litigation claim and legal costs, stock-based compensation expense, amortization of acquired intangible assets, acquisition-related professional fees and retention bonuses, change in fair value of contingent consideration, foreign exchange (gain) loss, and the income tax effect on non-GAAP items. Silvaco is unable to predict with reasonable certainty the ultimate outcome of these exclusions without unreasonable effort. Therefore, Silvaco has not provided guidance for GAAP gross margin, GAAP operating income or GAAP diluted net income (loss) per share or a reconciliation of the forward-looking non-GAAP gross margin or non-GAAP operating income or non-GAAP diluted net income (loss) per share guidance to GAAP gross margin or GAAP operating income or GAAP diluted net income (loss) per share, respectively. However, it is important to note that these excluded items could be material to our results computed in accordance with GAAP in future periods.

Based on current business trends and conditions, the Company expects for second quarter 2025 the following:

Gross bookings in the range of $14.0 million to $18.0 million, which would compare to $19.5 million in the second quarter of 2024.
Revenue in the range of $12.0 million to $16.0 million, which would compare to $15.0 million in the second quarter of 2024.
Non-GAAP gross margin in the range of 80% to 83%, which would compare to 86% in the second quarter of 2024.
Non-GAAP operating loss in the range of ($4.0) million to ($2.0) million, compared to non-GAAP operating income of $1.7 million in the second quarter of 2024.
Non-GAAP diluted net loss per share in the range of ($0.10) to ($0.03), compared to net income per share of $0.07 in the second quarter of 2024.

Based on current business trends and conditions, the Company expects for full year 2025, the following:

Gross bookings in the range of $67.0 million to $74.0 million, which would represent a 2% to 13% increase from $65.8 million in 2024.
Revenue in the range of $64.0 million to $70.0 million, which would represent a 7% to 17% increase from $59.7 million in 2024.
Non-GAAP gross margin in the range of 83% to 86%, which would compare to 86% in 2024.
Non-GAAP operating (loss) income in the range of ($2.0) million loss to $1.0 million income, which would compare to $5.5 million income in 2024.
Non-GAAP diluted net (loss) income per share in the range of ($0.07) net loss per share to $0.03 net income per share, compared to $0.25 net income per share in 2024.

Q1 2025 Conference Call Details

A press release highlighting the Company’s results along with supplemental financial results will be available at https://investors.silvaco.com/ along with an earnings presentation to accompany management’s prepared remarks. An archived replay of the conference call will be available on this website for a limited time after the call. Participants who want to join the call and ask a question may register for the call here to receive the dial-in numbers and unique PIN.

Date: Wednesday, May 7, 2025
Time: 5:00 p.m. Eastern time
Webcast: Here (live and replay)

About Silvaco

Silvaco is a provider of TCAD, EDA software, and SIP solutions that enable semiconductor design and digital twin modeling through AI software and innovation. Silvaco’s solutions are used for semiconductor and photonics processes, devices, and systems development across display, power devices, automotive, memory, high performance compute, foundries, photonics, internet of things, and 5G/6G mobile markets for complex SoC design. Silvaco is headquartered in Santa Clara, California, and has a global presence with offices located in North America, Europe, Brazil, China, Japan, Korea, Singapore, and Taiwan.

Safe Harbor Statement

This press release contains forward-looking statements based on Silvaco’s current expectations. The words “believe”, “estimate”, “expect”, “intend”, “anticipate”, “plan”, “project”, “will”, and similar phrases as they relate to Silvaco are intended to identify such forward-looking statements. These forward-looking statements reflect the current views and assumptions of Silvaco and are subject to various risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ materially from expectations.

These forward-looking statements include but are not limited to, statements regarding our future operating results, financial position, and guidance, our business strategy and plans, our objectives for future operations, our development or delivery of new or enhanced products, and anticipated results of those products for our customers, our competitive positioning, projected costs, technological capabilities, and plans, and macroeconomic trends.

A variety of risks and factors that are beyond our control could cause actual results to differ materially from those in the forward-looking statements including, without limitation, the following: (a) market conditions; (b) anticipated trends, challenges and growth in our business and the markets in which we operate; (c) our ability to appropriately respond to changing technologies on a timely and cost-effective basis; (d) the size and growth potential of the markets for our software solutions, and our ability to serve those markets; (e) our expectations regarding competition in our existing and new markets; (f) the level of demand in our customers’ end markets; (g) regulatory developments in the United States and foreign countries; (h) changes in trade policies, including the imposition of tariffs; (i) proposed new software solutions, services or developments; (j) our ability to attract and retain key management personnel; (k) our customer relationships and our ability to retain and expand our customer relationships; (l) our ability to diversify our customer base and develop relationships in new markets; (m) the strategies, prospects, plans, expectations, and objectives of management for future operations; (n) public health crises, pandemics, and epidemics and their effects on our business and our customers’ businesses; (o) the impact of the current conflicts between Ukraine and Russia and Israel and Hamas and the ongoing trade disputes among the United States and China on our business, financial condition or prospects, including extreme volatility in the global capital markets making debt or equity financing more difficult to obtain, more costly or more dilutive, delays and disruptions of the global supply chains and the business activities of our suppliers, distributors, customers and other business partners; (p) changes in general economic or business conditions or economic or demographic trends in the United States and foreign countries including changes in tariffs, interest rates and inflation; (q) our ability to raise additional capital; (r) our ability to accurately forecast demand for our software solutions; (s) our expectations regarding the outcome of any ongoing litigation; (t) our ability to successfully integrate recent acquisitions; (u) our expectations regarding the period during which we qualify as an emerging growth company under the JOBS Act and as a smaller reporting company under the Exchange Act; (v) our expectations regarding our ability to obtain, maintain, protect and enforce intellectual property protection for our technology; (w) our status as a controlled company; and (x) our use of the net proceeds from our initial public offering.

It is not possible for us to predict all risks, nor can we assess the impact of all factors on our business or the extent to which any factor, or combination of factors, may cause actual results or outcomes to differ materially from those contained in any forward-looking statements we may make. Accordingly, you should not rely on any of the forward-looking statements. Additional information relating to the uncertainty affecting Silvaco’s business is contained in Silvaco’s filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission. These documents are available on the SEC Filings section of the Investor Relations section of Silvaco’s website at http://investors.silvaco.com/. These forward-looking statements represent Silvaco’s expectations as of the date of this press release. Subsequent events may cause these expectations to change, and Silvaco disclaims any obligation to update or alter these forward-looking statements in the future, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise.

Discussion of Non-GAAP Financial Measures and Other Key Business Metrics

We use certain non-GAAP financial measures to supplement the performance measures in our consolidated financial statements, which are presented in accordance with GAAP. These non-GAAP financial measures include non-GAAP gross profit, non-GAAP gross margin, non-GAAP operating income (loss), non-GAAP net income (loss), and non-GAAP diluted net income (loss) per share. We use these non-GAAP financial measures for financial and operational decision-making and as a means to assist us in evaluating period-to-period comparisons.

We define non-GAAP gross profit and non-GAAP gross margin as our GAAP gross profit and GAAP gross margin adjusted to exclude certain costs, including stock-based compensation expense, amortization of acquired intangible assets and acquisition-related professional fees and retention bonuses. We define non-GAAP operating income (loss), as our GAAP operating income (loss) adjusted to exclude certain costs, including IPO preparation costs, acquisition-related estimated litigation claim and legal costs, stock-based compensation expense, amortization of acquired intangible assets, and acquisition-related professional fees and retention bonuses. We define non-GAAP net income (loss) as our GAAP net income (loss) adjusted to exclude certain costs, including IPO preparation costs, acquisition-related estimated litigation claim and legal costs, stock-based compensation expense, amortization of acquired intangible assets, acquisition-related professional fees and retention bonuses, change in fair value of contingent consideration, foreign exchange (gain) loss, and the income tax effect on non-GAAP items. Our non-GAAP diluted net income (loss) per share is calculated in the same way as our non-GAAP net income (loss), but on a per share basis. We monitor non-GAAP gross profit, non-GAAP gross margin, non-GAAP operating income (loss), non-GAAP net income (loss) and non-GAAP diluted net income (loss) per share as non-GAAP financial measures to supplement the financial information we present in accordance with GAAP to provide investors with additional information regarding our financial results.

Certain items are excluded from our non-GAAP gross profit, non-GAAP gross margin, non-GAAP operating income (loss), non-GAAP net income (loss) and non-GAAP diluted net income (loss) per share because these items are non-cash in nature or are not indicative of our core operating performance and render comparisons with prior periods and competitors less meaningful. We adjust GAAP gross profit, GAAP gross margin, GAAP operating income (loss), GAAP net income (loss), and GAAP diluted net income (loss) per share for these items to arrive at non-GAAP gross profit, non-GAAP gross margin, non-GAAP operating income (loss), non-GAAP net income (loss), and non-GAAP diluted net income (loss) per share because these amounts can vary substantially from company to company within our industry depending upon accounting methods and book values of assets, capital structure and the method by which the assets were acquired. By excluding certain items that may not be indicative of our recurring core operating results, we believe that non-GAAP gross profit, non-GAAP gross margin, non-GAAP operating income (loss), non-GAAP net income (loss) and non-GAAP diluted net income (loss) per share provide meaningful supplemental information regarding our performance.

We believe these non-GAAP financial measures are useful to investors and others because they allow for additional information with respect to financial measures used by management in its financial and operational decision-making and they may be used by our institutional investors and the analyst community to help them analyze our financial performance and the health of our business. However, there are a number of limitations related to the use of non-GAAP financial measures, and these non-GAAP measures should be considered in addition to, not as a substitute for or in isolation from, our financial results prepared in accordance with GAAP. Other companies, including companies in our industry, may calculate these non-GAAP financial measures differently or not at all, which reduces their usefulness as comparative measures.

Annual Contract Value (“ACV”) is a key performance metric for Silvaco and is useful to investors in assessing the strength and trajectory of the business. ACV is a supplemental metric to help evaluate the annual performance of the business. Over the life of the contract, ACV equals the total value realized from a customer. ACV is not impacted by the timing of license revenue recognition. ACV is used by management in financial and operational decision-making. ACV is not a replacement for, and should be viewed independently of, GAAP revenue and deferred revenue, as ACV is a performance metric and is not intended to be combined with any of these items. There is no GAAP measure comparable to ACV.

ACV is composed of the following: (i) the annualized value of term based software licenses with start dates or anniversary dates during the period, plus; (ii) the value of perpetual license contracts with start dates during the period, plus; (iii) the annualized value of maintenance & support as well as any fixed-term services contracts with start dates or anniversary dates during the period, plus; (iv) the value of fixed-deliverable services contracts. Silvaco and the Silvaco logo are registered trademarks of Silvaco Group, Inc. All other trademarks and service marks are the property of their respective owners.

SILVACO GROUP, INC.
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS
(Unaudited, in thousands except share and par value amounts)

	March 31, 2025			December 31, 2024
ASSETS
Current assets:
Cash and cash equivalents	$	29,489		$	19,606
Current marketable securities		45,048			63,071
Accounts receivable, net		5,783			9,211
Contract assets, net		15,102			11,932
Prepaid expenses and other current assets		4,500			3,460
Total current assets		99,922			107,280
Non-current assets:
Non-current marketable securities		—			4,785
Property and equipment, net		890			865
Operating lease right-of-use assets, net		1,534			1,711
Intangible assets, net		9,997			4,369
Goodwill		14,337			9,026
Non-current portion of contract assets		9,860			12,611
Other assets		1,595			1,698
Total non-current assets		38,213			35,065
Total assets	$	138,135		$	142,345
LIABILITIES AND STOCKHOLDERS’ EQUITY
Current liabilities:
Accounts payable	$	2,137		$	3,316
Accrued expenses and other current liabilities		32,426			19,801
Accrued income taxes		1,728			1,668
Deferred revenue, current		8,618			7,497
Operating lease liabilities, current		644			744
Vendor financing obligation, current		1,191			1,462
Total current liabilities		46,744			34,488
Non-current liabilities:
Deferred revenue, non-current		3,604			3,593
Operating lease liabilities, non-current		866			946
Vendor financing obligation, non-current		2,995			2,928
Other non-current liabilities		333			307
Total liabilities		54,542			42,262
Stockholders’ equity:
Preferred stock, $0.0001 par value; 10,000,000 shares authorized, no shares issued and outstanding as of March 31, 2025 and December 31, 2024 , respectively		—			—
Common stock, $0.0001 par value; 500,000,000 shares authorized; 28,805,280 and 28,526,615 shares issued and outstanding as of March 31, 2025 and December 31, 2024, respectively		3			3
Additional paid-in capital		132,937			130,360
Accumulated deficit		(47,285	)		(28,012	)
Accumulated other comprehensive loss		(2,062	)		(2,268	)
Total stockholders’ equity		83,593			100,083
Total liabilities and stockholders’ equity	$	138,135		$	142,345

SILVACO GROUP, INC.
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF (LOSS) INCOME
(Unaudited, in thousands except share and par value amounts)

	Three Months Ended March 31,
		2025			2024
Revenue:
Software license revenue	$	10,009		$	12,258
Maintenance and service		4,083			3,631
Total revenue		14,092			15,889
Cost of revenue		3,016			1,973
Gross profit		11,076			13,916
Operating expenses:
Research and development		4,800			3,616
Selling and marketing		4,719			3,312
General and administrative		8,120			4,600
Estimated litigation claim		13,069			—
Total operating expenses		30,708			11,528
Operating (loss) income		(19,632	)		2,388
Interest income		863			—
Interest and other expense, net		(291	)		(205	)
(Loss) income before income tax provision		(19,060	)		2,183
Income tax provision		213			805
Net (loss) income	$	(19,273	)	$	1,378
Net (loss) income per share:
Basic and diluted	$	(0.67	)	$	0.07
Weighted average shares used in computing per share amounts:
Basic and diluted		28,694,295			20,000,000

SILVACO GROUP, INC.
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
(Unaudited, in thousands)

	Three Months Ended March 31,
		2025			2024
Cash flows from operating activities:
Net (loss) income	$	(19,273	)	$	1,378
Adjustments to reconcile net (loss) income to net cash (used in) provided by operating activities:
Depreciation and amortization		438			120
Stock-based compensation expense		2,277			—
Provision for credit losses		10			222
Estimated litigation claim		13,069			—
Accretion of discount on marketable securities, net		(261	)		—
Change in fair value of contingent consideration		35			(8	)
Changes in operating assets and liabilities:
Accounts receivable		3,520			(1,844	)
Contract assets		440			(3,679	)
Prepaid expenses and other current assets		(1,026	)		788
Other assets		119			(274	)
Accounts payable		(1,183	)		877
Accrued expenses and other current liabilities		55			(729	)
Accrued income taxes		58			574
Deferred revenue		567			(21	)
Other non-current liabilities		20			24
Net cash used in operating activities		(1,135	)		(2,572	)
Cash flows from investing activities:
Maturities of marketable securities		23,000			—
Acquisition of Process Proximity Compensation		(11,500	)		—
Purchases of property and equipment		(96	)		(10	)
Net cash provided by (used in) investing activities		11,404			(10	)
Cash flows from financing activities:
Proceeds from loan facility		—			4,250
Deferred transaction costs		—			(364	)
Payroll taxes related to shares withheld from employees		(252	)		—
Contingent consideration		(46	)		(13	)
Payments of vendor financing obligation		(205	)		—
Net cash (used in) provided by financing activities		(503	)		3,873
Effect of exchange rate fluctuations on cash and cash equivalents		117			27
Net increase in cash and cash equivalents		9,883			1,318
Cash and cash equivalents, beginning of period		19,606			4,421
Cash and cash equivalents, end of period	$	29,489		$	5,739

SILVACO GROUP, INC.
REVENUE
(Unaudited)
	2024										2025
	Q1		Q2		Q3		Q4		Year		Q1
Revenue by Region:
Americas	27	%	51	%	31	%	40	%	38	%	20	%
APAC	62	%	41	%	58	%	52	%	53	%	66	%
EMEA	11	%	8	%	11	%	8	%	9	%	14	%
Total revenue	100	%	100	%	100	%	100	%	100	%	100	%

Revenue by Product Line:
TCAD	66	%	69	%	59	%	71	%	68	%	56	%
EDA	30	%	20	%	24	%	24	%	24	%	36	%
SIP	4	%	11	%	17	%	5	%	8	%	8	%
Total revenue	100	%	100	%	100	%	100	%	100	%	100	%

Revenue Item Category:
Software license revenue	77	%	74	%	62	%	78	%	74	%	71	%
Maintenance and service	23	%	26	%	38	%	22	%	26	%	29	%
Total revenue	100	%	100	%	100	%	100	%	100	%	100	%

Revenue by Country:
United States	26	%	50	%	30	%	39	%	37	%	20	%
China	11	%	17	%	25	%	23	%	18	%	14	%
Other	63	%	33	%	45	%	38	%	45	%	66	%
Total revenue	100	%	100	%	100	%	100	%	100	%	100	%

SILVACO GROUP, INC.
GAAP to Non-GAAP Reconciliation
(Unaudited, in thousands except per share amounts)

	Three Months Ended
	3/31/2025			3/31/2024

GAAP Cost of revenue	$	3,016		$	1,973
Less: Stock-based compensation expense		(199	)		—
Less: Amortization of acquired intangible assets		(249	)		—
Less: Acquisition-related professional fees and retention bonus		(8	)		—
Non-GAAP Cost of revenue	$	2,560		$	1,973
GAAP Gross profit	$	11,076		$	13,916
Add: Stock-based compensation expense		199			—
Add: Amortization of acquired intangible assets		249			—
Add: Acquisition-related professional fees and retention bonus		8			—
Non-GAAP Gross profit	$	11,532		$	13,916
GAAP Research and development	$	4,800		$	3,616
Less: Stock-based compensation expense		(244	)		—
Less: Acquisition-related professional fees and retention bonus		(18	)		—
Less: Amortization of acquired intangible assets		(51	)		(70	)
Non-GAAP Research and development	$	4,487		$	3,546
GAAP Selling and marketing	$	4,719		$	3,312
Less: Stock-based compensation expense		(323	)		—
Less: IPO preparation costs		—			-127
Non-GAAP Selling and marketing	$	4,396		$	3,185
GAAP General and administrative	$	8,120		$	4,600
Less: Stock-based compensation expense		(1,511	)		—
Less: Acquisition-related estimated litigation claim and legal costs		(726	)		(594	)
Less: Acquisition-related professional fees and retention bonus		(677	)		—
Less: Amortization of acquired intangible assets		(62	)		—
Less: IPO preparation costs		—			(139	)
Non-GAAP General and administrative	$	5,144		$	3,867
GAAP Estimated litigation claim	$	13,069		$	—
Less: Acquisition-related estimated litigation claim and legal costs		(13,069	)		—
Non-GAAP Estimated litigation claim	$	—		$	—
GAAP Operating expenses	$	30,708		$	11,528
Less: Stock-based compensation expense		(2,078	)		—
Less: Acquisition-related estimated litigation claim and legal costs		(13,795	)		(594	)
Less: Acquisition-related professional fees and retention bonus		(695	)		—
Less: IPO preparation costs		—			(266	)
Less: Amortization of acquired intangible assets		(113	)		(70	)
Non-GAAP Operating expenses	$	14,027		$	10,598
GAAP Operating (loss) income	$	(19,632	)	$	2,388
Add: Stock-based compensation expense		2,277			—
Add: Acquisition-related estimated litigation claim and legal costs		13,795			594
Add: Acquisition-related professional fees and retention bonus		703			—
Add: IPO preparation costs		—			266
Add: Amortization of acquired intangible assets		362			70
Non-GAAP Operating (loss) income	$	(2,495	)	$	3,318
GAAP Net (loss) income	$	(19,273	)	$	1,378
Add: Stock-based compensation expense		2,277			—
Add: Acquisition-related estimated litigation claim and legal costs		13,795			594
Add: Acquisition-related professional fees and retention bonus		703			—
Add: IPO preparation costs		—			266
Add: Amortization of acquired intangible assets		362			70
Add (Less): Change in fair value of contingent consideration		35			(8	)
Add (Less): Foreign exchange (gain) loss		205			130
Add (Less): Income tax effect of non-GAAP adjustment		(5	)		(33	)
Non-GAAP Net (loss) income	$	(1,901	)	$	2,397
GAAP Net income (loss) per share:
Basic and diluted:	$	(0.67	)	$	0.07
Non-GAAP Net income (loss) per share:
Basic and diluted	$	(0.07	)	$	0.12
Weighted average shares used in GAAP and non-GAAP net income (loss) per share:
Basic and diluted		28,694,295			20,000,000

Investor Contact:
Greg McNiff
investors@silvaco.com

Media Contact:
Farhad Hayat
press@silvaco.com

The MIL Network –

May 8, 2025

MIL-OSI: Cerence Announces Second Quarter Fiscal 2025 Results; Revenue and Profitability Exceed High End of Guidance

Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

Headlines

Revenue of $78M; free cash flow of $13.1M marks fourth consecutive positive quarter
Company reiterates full-year guidance for revenue and raises full-year guidance for profitability and cash flow
Continued innovation and customer momentum for Cerence xUI, the company’s next-gen platform

BURLINGTON, Mass., May 07, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Cerence Inc. (NASDAQ: CRNC) (“Cerence AI”), a global leader pioneering conversational AI-powered user experiences, today reported its second quarter fiscal year 2025 results for the quarter ended March 31, 2025.

Results Summary ^(1,2)
(in millions, except per share data)

	Three Months Ended						Six Months Ended
	March 31,						March 31,
	2025			2024			2025			2024
GAAP revenue ⁽⁴⁾	$	78.0		$	67.8		$	128.9		$	206.2
GAAP gross margin		77.1	%		69.2	%		72.3	%		77.1	%
GAAP total operating expenses ⁽³⁾	$	42.8		$	311.3		$	92.8		$	364.7
Non-GAAP total operating expenses	$	34.1		$	50.0		$	68.2		$	94.4
GAAP net income (loss) ⁽³⁾	$	21.7		$	(278.0	)	$	(2.6	)	$	(254.1	)
Adjusted EBITDA	$	29.5		$	(0.3	)	$	30.8		$	70.1
Free cash flow	$	13.1		$	(0.8	)	$	21.0		$	(4.5	)
GAAP net income (loss) per share – diluted ⁽³⁾	$	0.46		$	(6.66	)	$	(0.06	)	$	(6.13	)

(1) As previously disclosed, for the six months ended March 31, 2024, revenue includes the non-cash revenue associated with the Toyota “Legacy” contract and related impacts totaling $86.6M. (2) Please refer to the “Discussion of Non-GAAP Financial Measures” and “Reconciliations of GAAP Financial Measures to Non-GAAP Financial Measures” included elsewhere in this release for more information regarding our use of non-GAAP financial measures. (3) As previously disclosed, for the six months ended March 31, 2024, operating expenses include a Goodwill impairment charge of $252M. (4) Q2FY25 and Q2FY24 revenue include $21.5 million and $10.4 million of revenue from fixed license contracts, respectively.

“I’m incredibly proud of what our team has accomplished. We surpassed the high end of our revenue and adjusted EBITDA guidance and posted our fourth consecutive quarter of positive free cash flow, demonstrating the high value we provide to the world’s leading automakers as they work through the ongoing macro uncertainties and complexities facing the industry today,” said Brian Krzanich, CEO, Cerence AI. “As we look to the future and based on currently available information, we believe we are well-positioned to continue supporting our customers as they work to bring an enhanced experience to their drivers. With Cerence xUI, we are partnering with OEMs as they contemplate and build their future infotainment platforms, as well as delivering enhanced user experiences via over-the-air updates as automakers upgrade their current systems to deliver next-gen features and capabilities to their drivers today.”

Cerence Key Performance Indicators
To help investors gain further insight into Cerence’s business and its performance, management provides a set of key performance indicators that includes:

Key Performance Indicator¹	Q2FY25
Percent of worldwide auto production with Cerence Technology (trailing twelve months (“TTM”))	51	%
Change in number of Cerence connected cars shipped (TTM over prior year TTM)²	10	%
Change in Adjusted Total Billings (TTM over prior year TTM)³	0	%

(1) Please refer to the “Key Performance Indicators” section included elsewhere in this release for more information regarding the definitions and our use of key performance indicators. (2) Based on IHS Markit data, global auto production decreased 1%, calculated TTM over prior year TTM. (3) Adjusted Total Billings excludes professional services and prepay contracts and is adjusted for prepay consumption. Change in Adjusted Total Billings is calculated TTM over prior year TTM.

Third Quarter and Full Year Fiscal 2025 Outlook
For the fiscal quarter ending June 30, 2025, revenue is expected to be in the range of $52 million to $56 million, where no material Fixed License revenue contracts are expected to be signed during the quarter. Gross margins are projected between 66% and 68% and net loss is projected in the range of $13 million to $10 million. Adjusted EBITDA is expected to be in the range of $1 million to $4 million. The adjusted EBITDA guidance excludes amortization of acquired intangible assets, stock-based compensation, restructuring and other costs.

Revenue guidance for the full fiscal year ending September 30, 2025 remains unchanged; however, net loss is now projected in the range of $35 million to $29 million, adjusted EBITDA is now expected to be in the range of $28 million to $34 million, net cash provided by operating activities is projected in the range of $39 million to $45 million, and free cash flow is expected in the range of $25 million to $35 million.

Additional details regarding guidance will be provided during the company’s earnings call.

Cerence Conference Call and Webcast
The company will host a live conference call and webcast with slides to discuss its results today at 5:00pm Eastern Time / 2:00pm Pacific Time. Interested investors and analysts are invited to dial into the conference call by registering here.

Webcast access also will be available on the Investor section of the company’s website at https://www.cerence.com/investors/events-and-resources.

A replay of the webcast can be accessed by visiting the company’s website 90 minutes following the conference call at https://www.cerence.com/investors/events-and-resources.

Forward Looking Statements
Statements in this press release regarding: Cerence’s future performance, results and financial condition; expected growth and profitability; outlook and momentum; transformation plans and cost efficiency initiatives; strategy; opportunities; business, industry and market trends; strategy regarding fixed contracts and its impact on financial results; backlog; revenue visibility; revenue timing and mix; demand for Cerence products; innovation and new product offerings, including AI technology; expected benefits of technology partnerships; and management’s future expectations, anticipations, intentions, estimates, assumptions, beliefs, goals, objectives, targets, plans, outlook or prospects constitute forward-looking statements within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Any statements that are not statements of historical fact (including statements containing the words “believes,” “plans,” “goal,” “objective,” “anticipates,” “projects,” “forecasts,” “expects,” “intends,” “continues,” “will,” “may,” or “estimates” or similar expressions) should also be considered to be forward-looking statements. Although we believe forward-looking statements are based upon reasonable assumptions as of the date of this press release, such statements involve known and unknown risk, uncertainties and other factors, which may cause actual results or performance of the company to be materially different from any future results or performance expressed or implied by such forward-looking statements including but not limited to: the highly competitive and rapidly changing market in which we operate; adverse conditions in the automotive industry or the global economy more generally; volatility in the political, legal and regulatory environment in which we operate, including trade, tariffs and other policies implemented by the new administration in the United States or actions taken by other countries in response; automotive production curtailment or delays; changes in customer forecasts; the impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on our and our customers’ businesses; the ongoing conflicts in Ukraine and the Middle East; our inability to control and successfully manage our expenses and cash position; our inability to deliver improved financial results from process optimization efforts and cost reduction actions; escalating pricing pressures from our customers; the impact on our business of the transition to a lower level of fixed contracts, including the failure to achieve such a transition; our failure to win, renew or implement service contracts; the cancellation or postponement of existing contracts; the loss of business from any of our largest customers; effects of customer defaults; a decrease in the level of professional service projects; our inability to successfully introduce new products, applications and services; our strategies to increase cloud offerings and deploy generative AI and large language models (LLMs); the inability to expand into adjacent markets; the inability to recruit and retain qualified personnel; disruptions arising from transitions in management personnel; cybersecurity and data privacy incidents; failure to protect our intellectual property; adverse developments related to our intellectual property enforcement litigation, the outcome of such litigation, or remedies that could be awarded in connection with such litigation; defects or interruptions in service with respect to our products; fluctuating currency rates and interest rates; inflation; financial and credit market volatility; restrictions on our current and future operations under the terms of our debt, the use of cash to service or repay our debt; and our inability to generate sufficient cash from our operations; and the other factors discussed in our most recent Annual Report on Form 10-K, quarterly reports on Form 10-Q, and other filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission. We disclaim any obligation to update any forward-looking statements as a result of developments occurring after the date of this document.

Discussion of Non-GAAP Financial Measures
We believe that providing the non-GAAP information, in addition to the GAAP presentation, allows investors to view the financial results in the way management views the operating results. We further believe that providing this information allows investors to not only better understand our financial performance, but more importantly, to evaluate the efficacy of the methodology and information used by management to evaluate and measure such performance. The non-GAAP information should not be considered superior to, or a substitute for, financial statements prepared in accordance with GAAP.

We utilize a number of different financial measures, both GAAP and non-GAAP, in analyzing and assessing the overall performance of the business, for making operating decisions and for forecasting and planning for future periods. While our management uses these non-GAAP financial measures as a tool to enhance their understanding of certain aspects of our financial performance, our management does not consider these measures to be a substitute for, or superior to, the information provided by GAAP financial statements.

Consistent with this approach, we believe that disclosing non-GAAP financial measures to the readers of our financial statements provides such readers with useful supplemental data that, while not a substitute for GAAP financial statements, allows for greater transparency in the review of our financial and operational performance. In assessing the overall health of the business during the three months ended March 31, 2025 and 2024, our management has either included or excluded the following items in general categories, each of which is described below.

Adjusted EBITDA.
Adjusted EBITDA is defined as net income attributable to Cerence Inc. before net income (loss) attributable to income tax (benefit) expense, other income (expense) items, net, depreciation and amortization expense, and excluding amortization of acquired intangible assets, stock-based compensation, and restructuring and other costs, net and impairment charges related to fixed and intangible assets and gains or losses on the sale of long-lived assets, if any. From time to time we may exclude from Adjusted EBITDA the impact of events, gains, losses or other charges (such as significant legal settlements) that affect the period-to-period comparability of our operating performance. Other income (expense) items, net include interest expense, interest income, and other income (expense), net (as stated in our Condensed Consolidated Statement of Operations). Our management and Board of Directors use this financial measure to evaluate our operating performance. It is also a significant performance measure in our annual incentive compensation programs.

Restructuring and other costs, net.
Restructuring and other costs, net include restructuring expenses as well as other charges that are unusual in nature, are the result of unplanned events, and arise outside the ordinary course of our business such as employee severance costs, consulting costs relating to our transformation initiatives, and costs for consolidating duplicate facilities.

Amortization of acquired intangible assets.
We exclude the amortization of acquired intangible assets from non-GAAP expense and income measures. These amounts are inconsistent in amount and frequency and are significantly impacted by the timing and size of acquisitions. Providing a supplemental measure which excludes these charges allows management and investors to evaluate results “as-if” the acquired intangible assets had been developed internally rather than acquired and, therefore, provides a supplemental measure of performance in which our acquired intellectual property is treated in a comparable manner to our internally developed intellectual property. Although we exclude amortization of acquired intangible assets from our non-GAAP expenses, we believe that it is important for investors to understand that such intangible assets contribute to revenue generation. Amortization of intangible assets that relate to past acquisitions will recur in future periods until such intangible assets have been fully amortized. Future acquisitions may result in the amortization of additional intangible assets.

Stock-based compensation.
Because of varying valuation methodologies, subjective assumptions and the variety of award types, we exclude stock-based compensation from our operating results. We evaluate performance both with and without these measures because compensation expense related to stock-based compensation is typically non-cash and awards granted are influenced by the Company’s stock price and other factors such as volatility that are beyond our control. The expense related to stock-based awards is generally not controllable in the short-term and can vary significantly based on the timing, size and nature of awards granted. As such, we do not include such charges in operating plans. Stock-based compensation will continue in future periods.

Other expenses.
We exclude certain other expenses that result from unplanned events outside the ordinary course of continuing operations, in order to measure operating performance and current and future liquidity both with and without these expenses. By providing this information, we believe management and the users of the financial statements are better able to understand the financial results of what we consider to be our organic, continuing operations. Included in these expenses are items such as other charges (credits), net, (gains) losses from extinguishment of debt, and changes in indemnification assets corresponding with the release of pre-spin liabilities for uncertain tax positions.

Key Performance Indicators
We believe that providing key performance indicators (“KPIs”) allows investors to gain insight into the way management views the performance of the business. We further believe that providing KPIs allows investors to better understand information used by management to evaluate and measure such performance. KPIs should not be considered superior to, or a substitute for, operating results prepared in accordance with GAAP. In assessing the performance of the business during the three months ended March 31, 2025, our management has reviewed the following KPIs, each of which is described below:

Percent of worldwide auto production with Cerence Technology (TTM): The number of Cerence enabled cars shipped as compared to IHS Markit car production data.
Change in number of Cerence connected cars shipped: The year-over-year change in the number of cars shipped with Cerence connected solutions. Amounts calculated on a TTM basis.
Change in Adjusted total billings YoY (TTM): The year over year change in total billings excluding Professional Services, prepay billings and adjusted for prepay consumption. TTM over prior year TTM.

See the tables at the end of this press release for non-GAAP reconciliations to the most directly comparable GAAP measures.

To learn more about Cerence AI, visit www.cerence.ai, and follow the company on LinkedIn.

About Cerence Inc.
Cerence Inc. (NASDAQ: CRNC) is a global industry leader in creating intuitive, seamless, AI-powered experiences across automotive and transportation. Leveraging decades of innovation and expertise in voice, generative AI, and large language models, Cerence powers integrated experiences that create safer, more connected, and more enjoyable journeys for drivers and passengers alike. With more than 500 million cars shipped with Cerence technology, the company partners with leading automakers, transportation OEMs, and technology companies to advance the next generation of user experiences. Cerence is headquartered in Burlington, Massachusetts, with operations globally and a worldwide team dedicated to pushing the boundaries of AI innovation. For more information, visit www.cerence.ai.

CERENCE INC.
Condensed Consolidated Statements of Operations
(in thousands, except per share data)
(unaudited)

	Three Months Ended						Six Months Ended
	March 31,						March 31,
	2025			2024			2025			2024
Revenues:
License	$	51,460		$	35,527		$	74,185		$	56,350
Connected services		12,648			13,597			26,355			110,417
Professional services		13,902			18,701			28,366			39,393
Total revenues		78,010			67,825			128,906			206,160
Cost of revenues:
License		2,432			1,404			4,214			3,008
Connected services		4,979			5,359			11,290			12,662
Professional services		10,418			14,119			20,149			31,444
Amortization of intangible assets		—			—			—			103
Total cost of revenues		17,829			20,882			35,653			47,217
Gross profit		60,181			46,943			93,253			158,943
Operating expenses:
Research and development		23,332			31,846			44,201			65,152
Sales and marketing		4,930			5,619			9,696			11,690
General and administrative		11,199			16,659			23,953			29,452
Amortization of intangible assets		536			555			1,090			1,100
Restructuring and other costs, net		2,832			4,551			13,894			5,256
Goodwill impairment		—			252,096			—			252,096
Total operating expenses		42,829			311,326			92,834			364,746
Income (loss) from operations		17,352			(264,383	)		419			(205,803	)
Interest income		918			1,190			2,355			2,622
Interest expense		(2,716	)		(3,111	)		(6,109	)		(6,347	)
Other income (expense), net		499			(25	)		771			1,397
Income (loss) before income taxes		16,053			(266,329	)		(2,564	)		(208,131	)
(Benefit from) provision for income taxes		(5,603	)		11,647			68			45,988
Net income (loss)	$	21,656		$	(277,976	)	$	(2,632	)	$	(254,119	)
Net income (loss) per share:
Basic	$	0.50		$	(6.66	)	$	(0.06	)	$	(6.13	)
Diluted	$	0.46		$	(6.66	)	$	(0.06	)	$	(6.13	)
Weighted-average common share outstanding:
Basic		43,223			41,724			43,059			41,452
Diluted		51,530			41,724			43,059			41,452

CERENCE INC.
Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets
(in thousands, except per share amounts)

	March 31,			September 30,
	2025			2024
	(Unaudited)
ASSETS
Current assets:
Cash and cash equivalents	$	117,368			121,485
Marketable securities		5,413			5,502
Accounts receivable, net of allowances of $54 and $1,613		65,018			62,755
Deferred costs		4,737			5,286
Prepaid expenses and other current assets		39,633			70,481
Total current assets		232,169			265,509
Long-term marketable securities		–			3,453
Property and equipment, net		29,412			30,139
Deferred costs		15,960			18,051
Operating lease right of use assets		17,989			12,879
Goodwill		293,357			296,858
Intangible assets, net		551			1,706
Deferred tax assets		55,248			51,398
Other assets		20,860			22,365
Total assets	$	665,546		$	702,358
LIABILITIES AND STOCKHOLDERS’ EQUITY
Current liabilities:
Accounts payable	$	6,634		$	3,959
Deferred revenue		49,740			52,822
Short-term operating lease liabilities		3,958			4,528
Short-term debt		60,056			87,094
Accrued expenses and other current liabilities		37,506			68,405
Total current liabilities		157,894			216,808
Long-term debt		197,593			194,812
Deferred revenue, net of current portion		119,954			114,354
Long-term operating lease liabilities		14,557			8,803
Other liabilities		26,279			26,484
Total liabilities		516,277			561,261
Stockholders’ Equity:
Common stock, $0.01 par value, 560,000 shares authorized; 43,254 and 41,924 shares issued and outstanding, respectively		433			419
Accumulated other comprehensive loss		(28,814	)		(25,912	)
Additional paid-in capital		1,102,022			1,088,330
Accumulated deficit		(924,372	)		(921,740	)
Total stockholders’ equity		149,269			141,097
Total liabilities and stockholders’ equity	$	665,546		$	702,358

CERENCE INC.
Condensed Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows
(in thousands)
(unaudited)

	Six Months Ended
	March 31,
	2025			2024
Cash flows from operating activities:
Net loss	$	(2,632	)	$	(254,119	)
Adjustments to reconcile net loss to net cash provided by (used in) operations:
Depreciation and amortization		5,793			5,384
Provision for credit loss reserve		208			6,065
Stock-based compensation		13,702			13,125
Non-cash interest expense		3,348			2,939
Loss on debt extinguishment		(327	)		–
Deferred tax (benefit) provision		(4,271	)		40,949
Goodwill impairment		–			252,096
Unrealized foreign currency transaction losses (gains)		345			(262	)
Other, net		(33	)		474
Changes in operating assets and liabilities:
Accounts receivable		(8,029	)		(75	)
Prepaid expenses and other assets		25,250			5,854
Deferred costs		2,041			3,423
Accounts payable		2,492			(292	)
Accrued expenses and other liabilities		(23,532	)		(1,673	)
Deferred revenue		10,365			(75,659	)
Net cash provided by (used in) operating activities		24,720			(1,771	)
Cash flows from investing activities:
Capital expenditures		(3,703	)		(2,776	)
Purchases of marketable securities		–			–
Sale and maturities of marketable securities		3,493			3,912
Other investing activities		(716	)		(891	)
Net cash (used in) provided by investing activities		(926	)		245
Cash flows from financing activities:
Proceeds from revolving credit facility		–			–
Proceeds from long-term debt, net of discount		–			–
Payments for long-term debt issuance costs		–			–
Principal payments of short-term debt		(26,964	)		–
Common stock repurchases for tax withholdings for net settlement of equity awards		(2,171	)		(9,744	)
Principal payment of lease liabilities arising from a finance lease		(229	)		(202	)
Proceeds from the issuance of common stock		2,175			10,461
Net cash (used in) provided by financing activities		(27,189	)		515
Effects of exchange rate changes on cash and cash equivalents		(722	)		(967	)
Net change in cash and cash equivalents		(4,117	)		(1,978	)
Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of period		121,485			101,154
Cash and cash equivalents at end of period	$	117,368		$	99,176

CERENCE INC.
Reconciliations of GAAP Financial Measures to Non-GAAP Financial Measures
(unaudited – in thousands)

	Three Months Ended						Six Months Ended
	March 31,						March 31,
	2025			2024			2025			2024
GAAP revenue	$	78,010		$	67,825		$	128,906		$	206,160

GAAP gross profit	$	60,181		$	46,943		$	93,253		$	158,943
GAAP gross margin		77.1	%		69.2	%		72.3	%		77.1	%

GAAP total operating expenses	$	42,829		$	311,326		$	92,834		$	364,746
Stock-based compensation		5,374			4,079			9,692			11,818
Amortization of intangible assets		536			555			1,090			1,203
Restructuring and other costs, net		2,832			4,551			13,894			5,256
Goodwill impairment		–			252,096			–			252,096
Non-GAAP total operating expenses	$	34,087		$	50,045		$	68,158		$	94,373

GAAP net income (loss)	$	21,656		$	(277,976	)	$	(2,632	)	$	(254,119	)
Stock-based compensation*		5,931			4,745			10,739			13,125
Amortization of intangible assets		536			555			1,090			1,203
Restructuring and other costs, net*		2,832			4,551			13,894			5,256
Goodwill impairment		–			252,096			–			252,096
Depreciation		2,812			2,143			4,703			4,181
Total other expense, net		1,299			1,946			2,983			2,328
(Benefit from) provision for income taxes		(5,603	)		11,647			68			45,988
Adjusted EBITDA	$	29,463		$	(293	)	$	30,845		$	70,058

GAAP net cash provided by (used in) operating activities	$	15,466		$	1,044		$	24,720		$	(1,771	)
Capital expenditures		(2,343	)		(1,845	)		(3,703	)		(2,776	)
Free cash flow	$	13,123		$	(801	)	$	21,017		$	(4,547	)
* – $3.0 million in stock-based compensation is included in Restructuring and other costs, net for the six months ended March 31, 2025.

The MIL Network –

May 8, 2025

MIL-OSI Russia: Steering through the Fog: The Art and Science of Monetary Policy in Emerging Markets

Source: IMF – News in Russian

(As prepared for delivery)

May 7, 2025

Good afternoon. It is a pleasure to be with you here at this critical juncture for the global economy. Since early April, the US effective tariff rate has increased to levels last seen over a hundred years ago, and the uncertainty surrounding trade policy and geopolitics has surged.

The economic effects of these developments are expected to be sizeable. Our World Economic Outlook ‘reference scenario’ projects that tariffs will reduce both global and emerging market (EM) output growth by roughly 0.5 percentage points relative to our forecast prior to the April tariffs. Countries imposing high tariffs, or those that are heavily dependent on trade with those countries, will be hit the hardest. But no country is likely to emerge unscathed: we have downgraded our forecasts for 127 countries that account for 86 percent of global GDP.

The impact on inflation is more varied. For countries facing higher tariffs on their exports, the tariffs are expected to mainly operate as a negative demand shock and exert mild downward pressure on inflation. For countries imposing much higher tariffs, notably the United States, the tariffs will likely act more as an adverse supply shock, boosting inflation while lowering growth.

There are several reasons why economic outcomes could be much worse than our WEO reference scenario. As of now financial conditions have not tightened much, including in emerging markets, and many EM currencies have remained surprisingly resilient against the dollar. If, however, trade policy discussions do not yield lower tariffs soon, financial conditions could tighten abruptly, with major effects on capital flows to EMs. Knightian uncertainty abounds as the global economic order transforms. How should central banks in emerging markets steer through this fog? I will address this question in today’s lecture.

EM central banks have developed much stronger monetary policy frameworks since the late 1990s, often in the context of adopting inflation targeting. They have benefited from major improvements in governance, with clear mandates focused on price stability. Their operational independence has also increased substantially — both de jure and de facto — and they have strengthened their public accountability, as well as transparency. These advancements were invaluable in helping them respond quickly both to COVID and to the subsequent inflation surge, raising interest rates sharply in the latter case to contain inflation and keep inflation expectations anchored.

Even so, significant differences remain between EMs and AEs, especially regarding the strength of the exchange rate channel and the degree to which global factors influence monetary transmission. Several features deserve particular attention:

Transmission of policy actions and shocks differs in EMs

First, monetary policy transmission appears noticeably weaker in EMs than in AEs, and dependent both on global financial conditions and on the reliance of EM banks on external financing. In advanced economies, an easing of policy rates quickly translates into lower market rates — which is what matters for the borrowing decisions of households and firms — and this boosts the economy.

By contrast, my research with Sebnem Kalemli-Özcan and Pierre De Leo (De Leo, Gopinath and Kalemli-Özcan, 2024) shows that when EM central banks loosen policy, the transmission to short-term market rates depends critically on what happens to global financial conditions. If global financial conditions tighten enough – as often follows a surprise tightening in US monetary policy – then domestic market rates may even rise when the EM central bank lowers policy rates. The implicit rise in the risk spread facing borrowers clearly blunts the effectiveness of monetary policy and makes it harder for EMs to cushion the effects of shocks. This is particularly relevant at the current juncture where trade shocks could play out as negative demand shocks in many EMs, calling for looser monetary policy. At the same time, they could play out as negative supply shocks in the US and call for tighter US monetary policy.

The changing mix of EM external financing also raises new vulnerabilities. EMs have become more dependent on external financing from foreign nonbank financial institutions, including insurance companies and investment funds, with their share of external portfolio financing growing to about 40 percent. While nonbanks help diversify emerging market funding sources and reduce borrowing costs, these types of capital flows are also very sensitive to the global financial cycle.[1] At times of financial stress, investment funds—such as exchange traded funds and open-end mutual funds in particular—are more susceptible to investors withdrawing their money, which in turn causes investment funds to withdraw from the riskiest markets. Consequently, the volume and speed of exit of capital flows have increased over time, as was evident at the start of Covid-19.

This sensitivity of EMs to global stress may also increase given that crypto assets are playing a larger role in cross-border financial intermediation and payments, often spurred by the desire to achieve cost-efficiencies, but also to circumvent capital flow restrictions in some cases. In most EMs, crypto asset use doesn’t yet appear high enough to present imminent systemic risks. Even so, crypto assets are growing rapidly in many EMs, and overall usage has become a noticeable share of GDP in some EMs with high inflation and lower macroeconomic stability. For example, Cerutti, Chen and Hengge (2024) find that several EMs in Latin America and Eastern Europe fall in the upper quartile of countries in terms of the magnitude of their bitcoin inflows as a share of GDP, with monthly inflows in the range of 0.1 to 0.8% of GDP. Focusing on a wider set of crypto assets, Cardozo, Fernández, Jiang and Rojas (2024) find that cross-border crypto outflows have reached as much as a quarter of gross portfolio outflows in Brazil.

Use of crypto requires a careful understanding of the risks. Crypto may increase capital flow volatility and exacerbate financial stress, including by allowing investors to easily shift their deposits out of domestic banks into foreign exchange-denominated stablecoins. If crypto flows grow large enough, such disintermediation from the banking system and associated capital outflows could cause financial conditions to tighten and the exchange rate to weaken, and potentially spur a significant economic downturn.

Weaker policy credibility complicates monetary policy trade-offs

A second difference between AEs and EMs is the relatively weaker credibility of EM monetary policy to deliver low inflation. While EMs have improved their frameworks substantially, inflation expectations still tend to be less well-anchored than in AEs. Consequently, there is a higher passthrough of cost shocks to inflation, as they feed through much more into inflation expectations as well as through other channels such as wage indexation. Oil price shocks tend to impact core inflation more than twice as strongly in a sample of emerging market economies, relative to advanced ones.[2] This high passthrough makes dealing with external shocks particularly difficult for EM central banks, as second-round effects could be sizeable, including from ongoing shocks to trade policy that could disrupt supply chains and raise input costs.

Inflation expectations also tend to be more sensitive to fiscal policy and debt in EMs. This likely reflects increased risks of fiscal dominance and political interference in central bank decisions, which can undermine the public’s confidence in the central bank’s ability to fight inflation. A surprise increase in government debt tends to boost medium-term expected inflation in EMs significantly, while having little effect in advanced economies.[3]

Exchange rates have a much larger imprint on price and financial stability

A third critical distinction between EMs and AEs is that the exchange rate has a much larger imprint on price and financial stability in EMs. While passthrough of exchange rate changes to inflation has declined considerably for many EMs, it remains significantly higher than in advanced economies. A 10 percent depreciation of EM currencies against the dollar causes EM price levels to rise by about 2 percent, several times larger than in advanced economies.[4]

The presence of foreign exchange mismatches increases the financial stability risks from exchange rate depreciation. While many EMs have reduced FX mismatches – or lowered the risk through the development of derivatives markets that allow for better hedging — reliance on dollar funding within the financial system remains an important source of fragility for some EMs. This weakens monetary transmission, as lowering interest rates causes the balance sheets of corporates with unhedged FX liabilities to deteriorate and financial conditions to tighten, which offsets some of the stimulus from easing. EMs that have shifted to relying more on local currency financing also can experience sharp increases in currency premia and local borrowing costs when foreign investors exit these shallow markets. This makes it harder for EMs to deal with an environment of bigger external shocks: even if a tariff abroad would look like a demand shock from the standpoint of an AE economy, the exchange rate depreciation it induces raises risk spreads and makes it harder for the EM central bank to cushion the impact on the economy.

Steering through the fog: How should policy respond?

Having outlined some of the unique challenges emerging market central banks face in the current global context, I will next lay out some broad principles that can help steer through the fog. EMs clearly will differ in how they respond to the shocks and the uncertainty depending on their cyclical conditions and on structural features such as the extent of their exposure to trade and financial disruptions.

This said, and despite the fog, EM central banks should respond forcefully to upside inflation risks if they materialize to ensure that high inflation does not get embedded into inflation expectations. While I’ve noted that we see the current configuration of tariffs as likely to be slightly disinflationary for many EMs in our reference scenario, there is a significant risk that inflationary pressures could emerge — from supply chain disruptions and higher input cost pressures in a fragmenting world or from exchange rate depreciations.

Given the high passthrough of both exchange rate changes and cost shocks to inflation in EMs, a major risk is large and persistent second round effects, especially if inflation has been running persistently above target and the fiscal position is weak. History has shown that once inflation becomes embedded in expectations—often through wage and price indexation mechanisms—it becomes significantly more difficult to reverse. If the risk materializes, timely and firm action is critical to keep inflation expectations anchored and reassure the public of the central bank’s unwavering commitment to sound monetary policy and price stability.

Foreign exchange intervention should be used prudently

Second, in a more turbulent external environment, foreign exchange intervention (FXI) can help address disorderly market conditions that undermine financial stability. The Fund’s Integrated Policy Framework is helpful in identifying conditions when it may be possible to improve tradeoffs facing central banks using FXI and other tools (IMF, 2023; Basu, Boz, Gopinath, Roch and Unsal, 2023).

Notably, central banks can reduce exchange rate pressures by selling FX during episodes of capital flight when FX markets are shallow, allowing central banks not to have to hike policy rates sharply. This can improve macroeconomic outcomes as well as lower financial stability risks.

However, it is important that FXI is not used to reduce exchange rate volatility per se, or to target a particular level of the exchange rate, as such misuse could easily weaken confidence in the central bank’s commitment to stabilizing inflation. Moreover, given the finite level of reserves, the bar for FXI should be high to ensure that FX liquidity can be provided when it is really needed. As of now financial conditions have tightened in an orderly manner, which means that when it comes to FXI the advice is to keep the powder dry.

Build financial and fiscal resilience

Third, efforts to build financial resilience through strengthening prudential policies are also desirable. As I have emphasized, EM financial systems remain quite exposed to geopolitical shocks and face growing risks from heightened external finance from foreign nonbanks and potentially crypto. Prudential policies can help them build adequate buffers as well as reduce vulnerabilities arising from high leverage, volatile capital flows, and FX mismatches. On the crypto side, it will be important to develop comprehensive legal, regulatory and supervisory frameworks for crypto assets, including through cooperative global efforts given their cross-border nature (IMF, 2023b). The authorities should also ensure that capital flow management measures, when appropriate, remain effective and not undermined by the use of crypto. And EMs should continue to strengthen macroeconomic frameworks to reduce the risk of currency and asset substitution into crypto assets (often called “cryptoization”).

Fiscal policy also plays a critical role in helping ensure macroeconomic stability. Uncertainty shocks have much bigger effects on sovereign spreads when EM debt servicing costs are relatively high. Ensuring that tax and spending policies adjust to keep debt on a sustainable path helps provide buffers to respond to downturns and lowers financial stability risks.

Improve central bank communication, governance, and policy strategy

Lastly, there is a high premium on further strengthening policy frameworks to continue building resilience in a more shock-prone environment.

Clarity of communication has become more critical than ever. Effective communication about the central bank’s reaction function –in qualitative terms – is likely to be useful in helping better anchor inflation expectations and thus improve tradeoffs.

Improved governance – including to strengthen central bank independence – can increase public confidence that the central bank will have latitude to achieve its objectives. Central banks will inevitably make mistakes—no forecast is perfect. But what must be clear is that any deviation from target is the result of uncertainty, not political interference.

EM central banks, as for their AE counterparts, must also adapt their policy strategies to focus more on the distribution of outcomes rather than the modal outlook, and to take more account of risk management considerations. Monetary policy must navigate a world shaped by a multiplicity of shocks—some persistent, some temporary, and some with offsetting effects on inflation where it is difficult to assess the net impact.

Accordingly, many central banks should continue to take steps to revise their frameworks to move away from excessive reliance on central forecasts. This can be facilitated by increasing use of scenario analysis in decision-making.

Conclusion

To conclude, EMs have made major strides in improving their monetary policy frameworks, and this has enabled several of them to respond effectively to unprecedented shocks like the pandemic. They are now being tested again as the global economic order is reset and Knightian uncertainty prevails. This uncertainty does not, however, imply gradualism in all matters. If inflation pressures rise, EM central banks will need to respond quickly using policy rates to prevent higher inflation from getting entrenched as they did during COVID. We must recognize that the road ahead may have many unforeseen turns, which calls for further strengthening financial and fiscal resilience and navigating with monetary policy clarity, credibility, and discipline.

References

Baba, C., and J. Lee. 2022. “Second-round effects of oil price shocks – implications for Europe’s inflation outlook”. IMF Working Paper no. 2022/173.

Basu, S.S., Boz, E., Gopinath, G., Roch, F., and F.D. Unsal. 2023. “Integrated monetary and financial policies for small open economies”. IMF Working Paper no. 2023/161.

Brandão-Marques, L., Casiraghi, M., Gelos, G., Harrison, O., and G. Kamber. 2024. “Is high debt constraining monetary policy? Evidence from inflation expectations”. Journal of International Money and Finance 149(C).

Brandão-Marques, L., Górnicka, L., and G. Kamber. 2023. “Exchange rate fluctuations in advanced and emerging economies: Same shocks, different outcomes”, in Shocks and Capital Flows, edited by Gaston Gelos and Ratna Sahay, IMF.

Cardozo, P., Fernández, A., Jiang, J., and F.D. Rojas. 2024. “On cross-border crypto flows: Measurement, drivers, and policy implications“. IMF Working Paper no. 2024/261.

Cerutti, E.M., Chen, J., and M. Hengge. 2024. “A primer on Bitcoin cross-border flows: Measurement and drivers“. IMF Working Paper no. 2024/85.

Chari, A. 2023. “Global risk, non-bank financial intermediation, and emerging market vulnerabilities”. Annual Review of Economics 15: 549-572.

De Leo, P., Gopinath, G., and S. Kalemli-Özcan. 2024. “Monetary policy and the short-rate disconnect in emerging economies”. NBER Working Paper no. 30458.

IMF. 2023. “Integrated Policy Framework – Principles for use of foreign exchange interventions”. IMF Policy Paper no. 2023/061.

IMF. 2023b. “Elements of effective policies for crypto assets”. IMF Policy Paper no. 2023/004.

https://www.imf.org/en/News/Articles/2025/05/07/sp050725-science-of-monetary-policy-in-emerging-markets-gita-gopinath

MIL OSI

MIL OSI Russia News –

May 8, 2025
MIL-OSI Global: MAGA’s ‘war on empathy’ might not be original, but it is dangerous

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Michael Cameron, PhD Candidate of English, Dalhousie University

During his most recent appearance on Joe Rogan’s podcast, Elon Musk levelled a critique at empathy, calling it “the fundamental weakness of western civilization.”

If your first instinct is to brush this off as another example of Musk’s awkwardness, we suggest you think again. As journalist Julia Carrie Wong noted in The Guardian in April, Musk’s comments have appeared “amid a growing wave of opposition to empathy from across the American right.”

A diverse coalition of figures have taken up this “war on empathy,” including pastor Joe Rigney, conservative podcaster Allie Beth Stuckey and marketing professor Gad Saad.

Each has coined their own meme-able phrase: “The Sin of Empathy,” “Toxic Empathy” and “Suicidal Empathy,” respectively.

You may find a war on empathy perplexing — even downright dangerous — given that our contemporary global historical moment is one marked by climate-induced migration, rising political authoritarianism and a “relentless opposition” against LGBTQIA+ rights.

Doesn’t this moment call out for more empathy rather than less?

What is empathy anyway?

But first, we need to know what we are talking about.

Some recent criticisms of empathy have been premised on bad definitions. For instance, Albert Mohler, the president of the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, recently claimed that empathy is “destructive” for immigration policy because “empathy means never having to say no.” This definition is not accurate.

Though a precise definition of empathy still eludes us, empathy is simply the ability to feel what someone else might be feeling. “Imagining yourself in another’s place,” writes neurologist Richard E. Cytowic, “is the basis of empathy.” Coming from a different angle, literary scholar Suzanne Keen defines empathy as “a vicarious, spontaneous sharing of affect” that “can be provoked… even by reading.”

The word “empathy” was coined in 1909. Previously, what we today call “empathy” fell under the name “sympathy.” For instance, writing in the 18th century, Scottish economist and philosopher Adam Smith described sympathy as the imaginative capacity to “enter as it were into [another’s] body, and become in some measure the same person.”

With the discovery of “mirror neurons,” modern neuroscience has in a sense validated Smith’s theories. As neuroscientist Christian Keysers explains: “The mirror system builds a bridge between the minds of two people,” showing that our brains are not only “deeply social” but also “magically connected to each other.”

Put simply, we are hardwired for empathy.

Sympathy and social contagion

In our research, we have explored literary depictions of self-destructive, suicidal and monstrous sympathies. We recognize some parallels between MAGA’s war on empathy and conceptual debates of the past, parallels at times interesting and worrisome.

During his appearance on Rogan’s podcast, Saad criticized Bishop Mariann Edgar Budde’s appeal to Trump for mercy on behalf of undocumented immigrants and those in the LGBTQIA+ community, suggesting it was indicative of the “parasitic idea” of open borders and an example of “suicidal empathy.”

A few months later, Canadian pop-psychologist Jordan Peterson echoed Saad and told Rogan that today’s political left is vulnerable to those who “parasitize empathy.”

This association between empathy and parasitic contagion is not at all new.

As literary scholar Mary Fairclough explains, in the 18th and 19th centuries, sympathy was “understood as a disruptive social phenomenon which functioned to spread disorder and unrest between individuals and even across nations like a ‘contagion.’”

As an example, Fairclough quotes the author Thomas De Quincey, who opined that “many a man has been drawn, by the contagion of sympathy with his own class acting as a mob, into outrages of destruction.”

The writer Mary Shelley literalized this notion of contagious sympathy in her 1826 novel The Last Man, which depicts a (perhaps uncomfortably familiar) plague pandemic. The novel paints sympathy as a method of mass control and societal dissolution just as contagious as the plague.

But unlike De Quincey, Shelley also celebrates sympathy as our most valuable and effective collective resource in times of crisis. This celebration is most notable in the character of Adrian, who devotes his life to “bring[ing] patience, and sympathy, and such aid as art affords, to the bed of disease.’”

The uses and abuses of empathy

Much as Shelley suggests for sympathy, research shows that empathy must be properly channelled so it isn’t used to divide and manipulate.

For example, research shows that empathy is not impartial. People tend to empathize more easily with those who share their racial or social background, and less with those who are perceived as different. In other words, racial prejudices may bias our instinctive empathetic responses.

At the same time, empathy has been linked to problematic practices like racial impersonation and colonial appropriation, where members of dominant groups claim to identify with marginalized people in ways that often reinforce power imbalances rather than dismantle them.

But MAGA’s approach to empathy is less a well-meaning critique than an all-out war and comes at the issues with a far less benevolent set of assumptions and goals. As Wong noted: “We are witnessing the construction of the ideological architecture to excuse violence and suffering on a mass scale.”

Consider what Musk said to Rogan regarding immigration:

“I believe in empathy, like I think you should care about other people, but you need to have empathy for civilization as a whole and not commit to a civilizational suicide.”

This comment is strikingly similar to the idea of “racial suicide” endorsed by eugenicist thinkers in the 19th and early 20th centuries. Racial suicide was a concept rooted in the xenophobic fear that one’s own ethnic population would be replaced by another racialized population that happened to have a higher birth rate.

As the historian Rob Boddice notes, “eugenic morality” was “to be guided by sympathy construed as sympathy for the whole of society” rather than towards individuals. For the eugenicists, this ideology justified extreme measures, such as forced sterilizations and racial segregation. The horrors of eugenics and its influence on the Nazi Holocaust are well documented.

Despite these history lessons, Musk and his ilk, however, seem unperturbed and even enthusiastic about repeating history.

Much can be said about empathy’s potential limitations alongside its many virtues. But while MAGA supporters may have balked at her speech and her call for empathy, we would do well to remember the words of Bishop Budde:

“We should be merciful to the stranger, for we were once strangers in this land.”

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

– ref. MAGA’s ‘war on empathy’ might not be original, but it is dangerous – https://theconversation.com/magas-war-on-empathy-might-not-be-original-but-it-is-dangerous-255300

MIL OSI – Global Reports –

May 8, 2025
MIL-OSI Global: Why south-east Asia must lead the fight against neglected tropical diseases

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Tuck Seng Wong, Professor of Biomanufacturing, School of Chemical, Materials and Biological Engineering, University of Sheffield

Village health Volunteers in Thailand survey mosquito breeding sites as part of dengue prevention campaign Deere Kumphaitoon/Shutterstock

Neglected tropical diseases (NTDs) are a persistent public health threat, and tackling them is not just a moral obligation, but a smart investment.

NTDs are a group of infectious diseases that mainly affect poor people in tropical and subtropical regions. These diseases are called “neglected” because they have received less attention and fewer resources than other major health issues, despite affecting over a billion people worldwide.

NTDs disproportionately affect the poorest communities in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) where they lock people in cycles of poverty by hindering physical and cognitive development, reducing school attendance and limiting economic productivity.

Wealthier nations experience far lower rates of these diseases. Yet it’s in LMICs that cost-effective interventions like improved water, sanitation, hygiene and vector control – methods used to limit or eliminate insects that spread diseases to humans – can deliver the greatest return. According to the World Health Organization (WHO), every dollar invested in controlling and eliminating NTDs can yield up to US$25 (£19) in economic and health benefits, through lower healthcare costs, increased productivity and improved education outcomes.

While vaccines are one of the most powerful tools for disease prevention, there are still no vaccines for most NTD. Progress has been slow, largely due to fragmented funding and limited investment in research. This gap continues to leave millions vulnerable.

To address this, we helped establish the UK–South East Asia Vaccine Manufacturing Research Hub (UK-SEA Vax Hub) in 2023 to reduce the burden of infectious diseases in LMICs, with a special focus on south-east Asia. Its mission is to strengthen regional capacity in vaccine research, development and manufacturing. Dengue and rabies – both persistent NTDs – are among its priorities.

The urgency of this work is underscored by the growing threat of dengue. Between 2015 and 2019, dengue cases rose by 46% in south-east Asia. Countries like Indonesia, Myanmar and Thailand are among the most affected globally. This region accounts for more than half of the world’s dengue cases.

Dengue is hard to diagnose. Its symptoms – fever, rash and joint pain – overlap with other illnesses like chikungunya, Zika, malaria and typhoid. Misdiagnoses are common and no specific antiviral treatment exists.

While vaccines are available, their use is limited by strict eligibility criteria based on age, infection history and local disease patterns. This leaves many people without protection.

What’s urgently needed are more effective, affordable and widely accessible vaccines. But vaccines alone won’t solve the problem. Combatting dengue and other NTDs requires an integrated strategy, particularly in poor countries with limited health infrastructure.

To stop the spread of diseases like dengue, it’s not enough to just treat people or use vaccines. You also need to control the insects that carry and spread the disease – in this case, mosquitoes.

That includes actions like removing standing water where mosquitoes breed, using insecticides, or installing window screens and bed nets. These steps are essential to reducing infection rates and protecting communities. These interventions, driven by local action, are just as essential as biomedical advances. Together, they build a more sustainable and resilient defence against mosquito-borne diseases.

For decades, public health initiatives in low-income countries were largely funded by wealthy countries – through development aid, international donors and philanthropic foundations. But with shifting global priorities and tightening budgets, it’s increasingly clear that this model is no longer sustainable.

Long-term health security must be led from within. That means a shift in mindset. Low-income countries must see themselves not just as aid recipients, but as innovators, implementers and investors in their own health futures.

This transition is already underway. The UK-SEA Vax Hub has evolved beyond its original research remit. By embedding its work within the broader regional health agenda, the hub is promoting government ownership and regional collaboration: critical steps in building stronger, more self-reliant health systems.

While progress is promising, major challenges remain. One of the most pressing is the need to develop a new generation of public health leaders across south-east Asia – people who can lead research and development, champion vaccine production and help shape policy based on local needs. These leaders will be essential for ensuring that south-east Asia becomes not just a regional health player, but a global one.

Another key challenge is regulatory. In a diverse region like south-east Asia, varying national policies can slow innovation and emergency responses. Streamlining and harmonising these systems is essential for responding quickly and effectively during future outbreaks or pandemics.

South-east Asia has the potential to become a global hub for vaccine manufacturing. The region benefits from growing scientific and industrial capacity, relative political stability and a shared interest in tackling shared health threats. It also has a strong case to lead the fight against NTDs, which continue to disproportionately affect its populations.

South-east Asia stands at a critical juncture. With strategic investment, regional leadership and cross-border collaboration, the region can protect its people, drive innovation and shape the future of global health.

The fight against NTDs is more than a public health challenge – it’s a chance for south-east Asia to lead by example and redefine its role on the world stage.

Tuck Seng Wong receives funding from the Department of Health and Social Care (DHSC) and the Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (EPSRC) for the UK-SEA Vax Hub.

Kang Lan Tee receives funding from the Department of Health and Social Care (DHSC) and the Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (EPSRC) for the UK-SEA Vax Hub.

– ref. Why south-east Asia must lead the fight against neglected tropical diseases – https://theconversation.com/why-south-east-asia-must-lead-the-fight-against-neglected-tropical-diseases-255640

MIL OSI – Global Reports –

May 8, 2025
MIL-OSI Global: Culture wars, political polarization and deepening inequality: the roots of Trumpism

Source: The Conversation – France – By Jérôme Viala-Gaudefroy, Spécialiste de la politique américaine, Sciences Po

More than 100 days into his return to the White House, the conclusion is stark: Donald Trump is no longer the same president he was during his first term. His familiar nationalist and populist rhetoric is now openly paired with an authoritarian turn – one without precedent in US history. He has adopted a neo-imperial view of the economy, treating the global order as a zero-sum contest of winners and losers. In this worldview, cooperation gives way to domination: what matters is power and the accumulation of wealth.

Having withstood two impeachment procedures, numerous lawsuits and at least one assassination attempt, Trump now governs with what can appear to be unchecked authority. To his followers, he has become a hero, a martyr – almost a messianic figure. He no longer sees democracy as a framework to be honoured, but as a tool to legitimize his hold on power. His decisive electoral victory now serves as a mandate to cast aside institutional limits.

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

Three key features define his style of governance: a radical centralization of executive power grounded in the theory of the “unitary executive”; the politicization of the Department of Justice, used as a weapon against rivals; and the manipulation of federal authority to target cultural, media and educational institutions. His playbook is chaos: unsettle opponents, dominate the media narrative and blur the boundaries of democratic norms. Impulsive and reactionary, Trump often governs in response to Fox News segments or trending posts on Truth Social. Instability has become a strategic tool.

But Trump is not a historical anomaly. While his 2016 victory may have seemed unlikely, his re-election reflects a deeper, long-term transformation rooted in the post-Cold War era.

From an external to an internal enemy

The collapse of the USSR – a structuring external enemy – redirected political confrontation toward the designation of an internal enemy. The culture war has become the dominant ideological battleground, driven by two closely linked forces. On one side, a religious radicalization led by nationalist Christian movements – such as the New Apostolic Reformation – seeks to roll back social progress and promote the vision of an outright theocracy. On the other, growing racial anxiety is fueled by fears of white demographic decline and resistance to civil rights gains.

The commentator Pat Buchanan saw it coming as early as the 1990s. Speaking at the 1992 Republican National Convention, he warned: “There is a cultural war going on for the soul of America… as critical as the Cold War itself.” Too radical for his time, Buchanan championed a white, Christian, conservative US hostile to cosmopolitan elites. Though marginalized then, his ideas laid the groundwork for what would become Trumpism.

Newt Gingrich, who served as Speaker of the House from 1995 to 1999, played a pivotal role in reshaping both the Republican party and US politics. A Republican group he chaired famously distributed a pamphlet to Republican candidates titled “Language: A Key Mechanism of Control”, advising them to use uplifting language to describe themselves, and inflammatory terms like “corrupt”, “immoral” and “traitor” to describe their opponents. This aggressive rhetoric redefined political rivals as enemies to be defeated – helping pave the way for a right-wing politics in which winning trumps democratic norms.

At the same time, the rise of a new conservative media ecosystem intensified polarization. The launch of Fox News in 1996, the growth of right-wing talk radio shows like Rush Limbaugh’s and the later explosion of social media gave the US right powerful tools to shape and radicalize public opinion. Today, algorithm-driven information bubbles trap citizens in alternate realities, where misinformation and outrage drown out reasoned debate. This has deepened polarization and fractured society as a whole.

Channeling anger

This ideological and media realignment has unfolded alongside a broader crisis: the unraveling of the post-Cold War neoliberal consensus. Promises of shared prosperity have been replaced by deindustrialization, deepening inequality and widespread resentment. Successive traumas – from 9/11 and the 2008 financial crash to the Covid-19 pandemic – and foreign wars without real victories have eroded public trust in the establishment.

Trump channels this anger. He offers a vision of a restored and idealized America, a rollback of recent social gains, and a reassertion of national identity grounded in religion and race. His populism is not a coherent ideology but an emotional response – born of perceived injustice, humiliation and loss.

Trump is more than a symptom of America’s democratic crisis: he is its most vivid manifestation. He embodies the legacy of the 1990s – a foundational decade of identity grievance, culture wars and media deregulation. Viewed as a political outsider, he has never been judged as a traditional politician, but rather embraced, by some, as the archetypal “self-made man” – a successful businessman and reality TV celebrity.

His rhetoric – transgressive, provocative and often cruel – gives voice to what had been repressed. The humiliation of opponents becomes part of the performance. For his supporters, it’s exhilarating. It breaks taboos, flouts political correctness and feeds the fantasy of reclaiming a lost America.

And he’s no longer alone. With the vocal support of economic and tech elites like Elon Musk – now a central figure in the radicalized right on X – Trumpism has entered a new phase. Together, they’ve outlined a new kind of authoritarian, cultural and digital power, where influence matters more than institutions.

The US re-elected not just a man, but a style, an era and a worldview built on dominance, disruption and disdain for rules. Still, history is unwritten: intoxicated by hubris and undermined by incompetence, Trumpism may yet crash into the wall of reality – with consequences far beyond America’s borders.

Jérôme Viala-Gaudefroy ne travaille pas, ne conseille pas, ne possède pas de parts, ne reçoit pas de fonds d’une organisation qui pourrait tirer profit de cet article, et n’a déclaré aucune autre affiliation que son organisme de recherche.

– ref. Culture wars, political polarization and deepening inequality: the roots of Trumpism – https://theconversation.com/culture-wars-political-polarization-and-deepening-inequality-the-roots-of-trumpism-255778

MIL OSI – Global Reports –

May 8, 2025
MIL-OSI USA: Scott Statement on April Jobs Report

Source: {United States House of Representatives – Congressman Bobby Scott (3rd District of Virginia)

Headline: Scott Statement on April Jobs Report

As originally released by the Committee on Education and Workforce, Democrats

WASHINGTON – Ranking Member Robert C. “Bobby” Scott (VA-03) released the following statement after theBureau of Labor Statisticsannounced that the economy added 177,000 jobs in April, and the unemployment rate remained the same at 4.2 percent. During President Biden’s first 100 days in office, the economy created 1.7 million jobs.  In President Trump’s first 100 days in office, he created less than half a million jobs, and the economy shrank at a rate of 0.3 percent. Under President Biden, the economy added 16.1 million jobs in total and did not have a single month of seasonally adjusted job loss during his entire term.

“Within the first 100 days of President Trump’s return to the White House, he has managed to destabilize a thriving economy that he inherited to an extent not seen since the height of the COVID-19 pandemic.  The country’s strong economic recovery out of the pandemic was not guaranteed; it was a result of smart policy decisions made by Congressional Democrats and the Biden-Harris Administration that invested in workers and their families.

“Trump has demonstrated a disregard for the privacy and welfare of workers across the country, ushering in Elon Musk to fire tens of thousands of federal workers and harvest Americans’ private data.  Trump’s so-called ‘Liberation Day’ imposed arbitrary and extreme tariffs on nearly every country in the world, including uninhabited islands.  Americans watched as their investments and retirement savings drained out of their bank and retirement accounts while the stock market fluctuated wildly.  The price of eggs continues to skyrocket, and many Americans are now relying on‘buy now, pay later’ loans at their weekly grocery trip to keep food on the table.

“The first 100 days of this administration serve as a warning sign of the real consequences of Trump’s disastrous economic policies and Congressional Republicans’ failure to act.  This week, Committee Republicans advanced a budget that would put the cost of attending college even further out of reach for millions of working families.  Meanwhile, House Republicans in other committees are working to cut nutrition and health care programs for millions of Americans, further jeopardizing the well-being of families.  The economic uncertainty we are seeing has been brought about solely by Trump’s economic decisions.”

MIL OSI USA News –

May 8, 2025
MIL-OSI Africa: Digital government can benefit citizens: how South Africa can reduce the risks and get it right
Source: The Conversation – Africa – By Busani Ngcaweni, Visiting Adjunct Professor, Wits School of Governance, University of the Witwatersrand

The digital revolution is reshaping governance worldwide. From the electronic filing of taxes to digital visa applications, technology is making government services more accessible, efficient and transparent.

South Africa is making progress in its digital journey. In 2024 it climbed to 40th place out of 193 countries, from 65th place in 2022, in the United Nations e-Government Index. This improvement makes the country one of Africa’s digital leaders, surpassing Mauritius and Tunisia.

South Africa has identified more than 255 government services for digitisation. Already, 134 are available on the National e-Government Portal. This achievement is remarkable. Nevertheless, the shift to digitisation comes with challenges and risks.

Some countries have weakened the state’s role by rapidly outsourcing key government functions. But South Africa has the opportunity to build a model of digital transformation that strengthens public institutions rather than diminishes them.

New technologies must bring tangible benefits for citizens. Digital transformation can improve public administration. But, if mismanaged, it could burden taxpayers with costs.

Benefits

Digital transformation comes at a cost. This is particularly true if the state fails to use its procurement power to negotiate reasonable prices. Infrastructure upgrades, cybersecurity measures, software licensing and system maintenance require substantial financial investment.

The question is whether these expenses are a necessary step towards a more efficient and accessible government.

Two South African examples illustrate that digital transformation can save money and enhance service delivery quality.

The first is the South African Revenue Service. Its goal is to ensure that taxpayers and tax advisers can use the service from anywhere and at any time. The changes made more than a decade ago show that digital systems can yield substantial financial gains. After introducing e-filing in 2006, the revenue service streamlined tax processes, reduced inefficiencies and led to higher compliance rates. Ultimately this led to improved revenue collection.

Similarly, digitising social grant payments has had a number of positive effects. In a chapter of a recent edited volume on public governance, my colleagues and I wrote a case study about how the South African Social Security Agency used basic technologies and platforms like WhatsApp and email to process a grant during the COVID pandemic. It allowed over 14 million people to apply, paid grants to over 6 million beneficiaries during the first phase of the project.

South African Social Security Agency annual reports show that over 95% of grant beneficiaries receive their payouts electronically through debit cards, instead of going to cash points. This improves security and lets beneficiaries decide when to get and spend their money.

There are fears that automation could result in massive job losses. But global experience has shown that digitalisation does not necessarily lead to large-scale retrenchments. Instead it can shift the nature of work to other responsibilities.

The South African Social Security Agency provides a compelling case. Its transition to digital grant payments did not lead to job losses. Similarly, the expansion of e-filing at the revenue service has not resulted in workforce reductions. In both cases efficiencies improved.

These cases highlight that digital transformation is reshaping roles rather than displacing employees. Public servants are moving into areas such as cybersecurity, data analysis and AI-driven decision-making.

Shortcomings and pitfalls

A number of inefficiencies are at play in government services.

Firstly, most government digital operations still work with outdated paper-based systems. The lack of a uniform digital identity creates bureaucratic inefficiencies and delays.

Secondly, fragmented procurement of equipment in government has led to duplicated efforts, increased costs and fruitless expenditure.

Thirdly, different departments often use isolated and incompatible digital systems. This reduce the mutual benefits of digital transformation. The State IT Agency has been blamed for inefficiencies, procurement failures and questionable spending.

Fourthly, South Africa’s public service remains fragmented. Citizens still struggle to access government services seamlessly. They often move between departments to complete what should be a single transaction.

Without a centralised system, departments operate in isolation, duplicating efforts, increasing costs and eroding public trust.

Read more: South Africa’s civil servants are missing skills, especially when it comes to technology – report

Fifth, a lack of skills. Increasing reliance on digital tools requires expertise in data analytics, cloud computing and automation. Many public servants lack the training to take on these new roles. The National Digital and Future Skills Strategy was introduced in September 2020 to bridge this gap, but its effectiveness depends on its implementation.

Introducing it in 2020 at the height of the COVID-19 pandemic forced government to make digital leaps which otherwise might have taken longer. To sustain services, technology had to be rapidly adopted, including basic things like holding Cabinet meetings online, using a system rapidly developed by the State Information Technology Agency.

Sixth, security concerns complicate the transformation. As government systems become digital, they become vulnerable to cyberattacks. South Africa must put in place cybersecurity infrastructure to prevent identity theft, data breaches and service disruptions. A cyberattack on one department could affect the entire public sector.

What needs to be done

Government must streamline procurement, improve coordination and eliminate inefficiencies to ensure interdepartmental collaboration.

A single, integrated e-government platform would:
- cut red tape
- reduce queues
- increase efficiency.
Government needs to upskill civil servants and improve their digital literacy.

Government must create a seamless e-government system that connects services while protecting citizens’ personal information. The success of digitalisation depends on technological advancements as well as the level of trust citizens have in government systems. Without strong security measures, transparency and accountability, even the most sophisticated digital tools will fail to gain public confidence.

South Africa has the chance to demonstrate that a strong, capable state can successfully integrate technology while safeguarding public interests. It should take full advantage of offers by Microsoft, Amazon and Huawei to support digital skills training in the public sector in a way that does not advantage one company’s technologies over others. Choices of technology must be user-centric, not based on preferences of accounting officers and chief information officers. Leaders of public institutions must be measured on their ability to digitally transform their organisations.

– Digital government can benefit citizens: how South Africa can reduce the risks and get it right
– https://theconversation.com/digital-government-can-benefit-citizens-how-south-africa-can-reduce-the-risks-and-get-it-right-254089

MIL OSI Africa –
May 8, 2025
MIL-OSI Global: Digital government can benefit citizens: how South Africa can reduce the risks and get it right
Source: The Conversation – Africa – By Busani Ngcaweni, Visiting Adjunct Professor, Wits School of Governance, University of the Witwatersrand

The digital revolution is reshaping governance worldwide. From the electronic filing of taxes to digital visa applications, technology is making government services more accessible, efficient and transparent.

South Africa is making progress in its digital journey. In 2024 it climbed to 40th place out of 193 countries, from 65th place in 2022, in the United Nations e-Government Index. This improvement makes the country one of Africa’s digital leaders, surpassing Mauritius and Tunisia.

South Africa has identified more than 255 government services for digitisation. Already, 134 are available on the National e-Government Portal. This achievement is remarkable. Nevertheless, the shift to digitisation comes with challenges and risks.

Some countries have weakened the state’s role by rapidly outsourcing key government functions. But South Africa has the opportunity to build a model of digital transformation that strengthens public institutions rather than diminishes them.

New technologies must bring tangible benefits for citizens. Digital transformation can improve public administration. But, if mismanaged, it could burden taxpayers with costs.

Benefits

Digital transformation comes at a cost. This is particularly true if the state fails to use its procurement power to negotiate reasonable prices. Infrastructure upgrades, cybersecurity measures, software licensing and system maintenance require substantial financial investment.

The question is whether these expenses are a necessary step towards a more efficient and accessible government.

Two South African examples illustrate that digital transformation can save money and enhance service delivery quality.

The first is the South African Revenue Service. Its goal is to ensure that taxpayers and tax advisers can use the service from anywhere and at any time. The changes made more than a decade ago show that digital systems can yield substantial financial gains. After introducing e-filing in 2006, the revenue service streamlined tax processes, reduced inefficiencies and led to higher compliance rates. Ultimately this led to improved revenue collection.

Similarly, digitising social grant payments has had a number of positive effects. In a chapter of a recent edited volume on public governance, my colleagues and I wrote a case study about how the South African Social Security Agency used basic technologies and platforms like WhatsApp and email to process a grant during the COVID pandemic. It allowed over 14 million people to apply, paid grants to over 6 million beneficiaries during the first phase of the project.

South African Social Security Agency annual reports show that over 95% of grant beneficiaries receive their payouts electronically through debit cards, instead of going to cash points. This improves security and lets beneficiaries decide when to get and spend their money.

There are fears that automation could result in massive job losses. But global experience has shown that digitalisation does not necessarily lead to large-scale retrenchments. Instead it can shift the nature of work to other responsibilities.

The South African Social Security Agency provides a compelling case. Its transition to digital grant payments did not lead to job losses. Similarly, the expansion of e-filing at the revenue service has not resulted in workforce reductions. In both cases efficiencies improved.

These cases highlight that digital transformation is reshaping roles rather than displacing employees. Public servants are moving into areas such as cybersecurity, data analysis and AI-driven decision-making.

Shortcomings and pitfalls

A number of inefficiencies are at play in government services.

Firstly, most government digital operations still work with outdated paper-based systems. The lack of a uniform digital identity creates bureaucratic inefficiencies and delays.

Secondly, fragmented procurement of equipment in government has led to duplicated efforts, increased costs and fruitless expenditure.

Thirdly, different departments often use isolated and incompatible digital systems. This reduce the mutual benefits of digital transformation. The State IT Agency has been blamed for inefficiencies, procurement failures and questionable spending.

Fourthly, South Africa’s public service remains fragmented. Citizens still struggle to access government services seamlessly. They often move between departments to complete what should be a single transaction.

Without a centralised system, departments operate in isolation, duplicating efforts, increasing costs and eroding public trust.

Read more:
South Africa’s civil servants are missing skills, especially when it comes to technology – report

Fifth, a lack of skills. Increasing reliance on digital tools requires expertise in data analytics, cloud computing and automation. Many public servants lack the training to take on these new roles. The National Digital and Future Skills Strategy was introduced in September 2020 to bridge this gap, but its effectiveness depends on its implementation.

Introducing it in 2020 at the height of the COVID-19 pandemic forced government to make digital leaps which otherwise might have taken longer. To sustain services, technology had to be rapidly adopted, including basic things like holding Cabinet meetings online, using a system rapidly developed by the State Information Technology Agency.

Sixth, security concerns complicate the transformation. As government systems become digital, they become vulnerable to cyberattacks. South Africa must put in place cybersecurity infrastructure to prevent identity theft, data breaches and service disruptions. A cyberattack on one department could affect the entire public sector.

What needs to be done

Government must streamline procurement, improve coordination and eliminate inefficiencies to ensure interdepartmental collaboration.

A single, integrated e-government platform would:
- cut red tape
- reduce queues
- increase efficiency.
Government needs to upskill civil servants and improve their digital literacy.

Government must create a seamless e-government system that connects services while protecting citizens’ personal information. The success of digitalisation depends on technological advancements as well as the level of trust citizens have in government systems. Without strong security measures, transparency and accountability, even the most sophisticated digital tools will fail to gain public confidence.

South Africa has the chance to demonstrate that a strong, capable state can successfully integrate technology while safeguarding public interests. It should take full advantage of offers by Microsoft, Amazon and Huawei to support digital skills training in the public sector in a way that does not advantage one company’s technologies over others. Choices of technology must be user-centric, not based on preferences of accounting officers and chief information officers. Leaders of public institutions must be measured on their ability to digitally transform their organisations.

Busani Ngcaweni is affiliated with the National School of Government, Wits and Johannesburg Universities.

– ref. Digital government can benefit citizens: how South Africa can reduce the risks and get it right – https://theconversation.com/digital-government-can-benefit-citizens-how-south-africa-can-reduce-the-risks-and-get-it-right-254089
MIL OSI – Global Reports –
May 8, 2025
MIL-OSI Africa: Tourism key to youth jobs and economic growth

Source: South Africa News Agency

Tourism isn’t just about breath-taking landscapes and unforgettable experiences — it’s also a powerful engine for job creation and economic growth.

This was the message from Tourism Minister Patricia de Lille at the opening of the Middle East Africa (MEA) Future Leaders Challenge South Africa, held this week in Johannesburg.

“Tourism plays a significant role in our economy and has the potential to create many more jobs,” de Lille told attendees, which comprised tourism entrepreneurs, students, and industry experts.

“But to truly unlock that potential, we need a skilled, adaptable workforce, especially among our youth,” the Minister said.

De Lille believes a big part of the solution to youth unemployment lies in bridging the skills gap through targeted education and innovation.

“We must develop and harness critical skills like digital literacy, AI-driven customer service, digital marketing, data analytics, and sustainability. These are no longer optional; they are essential,” she said.

The event, which brought together rising stars from 18 tourism and hospitality schools, is part of the G20 Tourism Hackathon, aimed at finding creative, tech-forward solutions for the tourism industry. According to De Lille, initiatives like these are vital to preparing the next generation of tourism leaders.

“We must empower our youth not just with skills, but with mentorship and real leadership opportunities. Let’s transform our young people into the job creators of tomorrow.”

The Department of Tourism is currently reviewing training and development strategies in line with the National Tourism Sector Strategy and other national growth frameworks. A key focus is ensuring that education aligns with industry needs, particularly in a post-pandemic world where digital nomadism and remote work are reshaping global travel trends.

“South Africa must learn from countries like the UAE, Brazil, Ethiopia, and India, who are embracing Digital Nomad Tourism. We need reliable infrastructure—think seamless mobility, fast internet, and remote work hubs. These are deal-breakers for modern travellers,” De Lille explained.

She emphasized that this transformation cannot happen in isolation.

“Public-private partnerships are vital. We need businesses, universities, and government to collaborate, invest in skills training, and create jobs. This isn’t just about tourism; it’s about our future.”

With the rise of experiential travel and the global shift toward working while exploring, South Africa has a golden opportunity to position itself as a top destination for digital nomads and skilled young professionals alike.

“The world is changing. Let’s ensure our youth are ready to lead that change,” said De Lille. – SAnews.gov.za

MIL OSI Africa –

May 8, 2025
MIL-OSI Global: Measles could again become widespread as cases surge worldwide

Source: The Conversation – USA – By Rebecca Schein, Assistant Professor of Infectious Disease Pediatrics, Michigan State University

Measles is one of the most infectious diseases on the planet. Kateryna Kon/Science Photo Library via Getty Images

Globally, measles is on the rise across the U.S., Canada, Mexico, South America and parts of Europe. In 2025, North and South America saw 11 times more cases than during the same period last year. In Europe, measles rates are at their highest point in 25 years.

In the U.S., as of May 2, 2025, health authorities have confirmed 935 cases of measles affecting 30 states. This is a huge surge compared with the 285 cases reported in 2024. A large measles outbreak is happening in Canada, too, with over 1,000 cases.

The Conversation asked Rebecca Schein, a specialist in pediatric infectious diseases, to explain what this spike at home and abroad might mean for a disease that was declared eliminated from the U.S. in 2000.

How do measles cases this year compare with previous years?

From 2000 to 2010, less than 100 measles cases were reported each year in the U.S. Since 2010, there have been isolated outbreaks, mainly in unvaccinated communities, with approximately 200 to 300 cases a year. The latest major outbreak in the U.S. was in 2019, with 1,274 cases, primarily in the New York City metropolitan area and parts of New Jersey.

Cases fell in 2020 to 2023 during the COVID-19 pandemic, returning to prepandemic levels in 2024. Currently, most U.S. cases are coming from an epidemic in Texas, with 702 confirmed cases as of May 6. Of these, 91 people were hospitalized and three people, two of them children, died. Measles cases are still being reported. Texas is one of 12 measles outbreaks documented in the U.S. in 2025 to date.

The World Health Organization has declared both North and South America to be at high risk for measles. Canada reported a total of 1,177 cases as of April 19, with 951 of them linked to an outbreak that began in New Brunswick in October 2024 and spread to seven provinces. In 2023, there were 12 measles cases in all of Canada.

Mexico reported 421 confirmed measles cases as of April 18, and another 384 cases are under investigation. There are also small measles outbreaks in South America, with Belize reporting its first two cases since 1991. Brazil reported five cases, and in Argentina there are 21 confirmed cases of measles, mainly in the capital city of Buenos Aires.

U.S. exports these days include measles.

In Europe, measles cases rose tenfold, hitting 35,212 in 2024, according to the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control.

How did the US eliminate measles?

Measles is one of the most contagious infections ever identified. One person with measles can spread the infection to 12 to 18 others. That number, which epidemiologists call R0, is 1 to 4 for the flu and 2 to 5 for COVID-19.

In 1912, measles became a nationally reportable disease tracked by all the health departments in the U.S. At that time, there were about 3 million to 4 million cases and 6,000 deaths each year in the country. Medical care improved and the death rate decreased, but cases spiked to epidemic levels every two to three years.

It was not until 1963, when the first measles vaccine became widely available, that cases dropped dramatically. The current measles vaccine, which is called the MMR vaccine because it also includes vaccines against mumps and rubella, was released in 1971. In 1977, the U.S. government launched the National Childhood Immunization Initiative to ensure that school children received vaccination against polio, diphtheria, pertussis, tetanus, mumps, rubella and measles. Vaccination rates in children starting elementary school rose to 96% by 1981. Beginning in 1993, the Vaccines for Children program helped ensure that every child could receive vaccinations regardless of ability to pay.

Vaccination programs were a resounding success. By 2000, measles cases arising in the U.S. had fallen to zero, with infections occurring only in people who traveled abroad. That year, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention declared that measles was eliminated in the country.

Why are rising measles rates so worrisome?

Measles is a virus, like the common cold. Unlike bacterial infections, which can be treated with antibiotics, viral infections are typically not treatable but can often be prevented through vaccination programs.

Vaccination stimulates the body’s immune system to make antibodies to fight a specific infection. For most people, just one dose of the measles vaccine protects them from infection. The second dose helps ensure long-term protection. Measles is so infectious that 95% of the population must be vaccinated to protect the community, a concept called herd immunity.

A man holds a sign at a rally for science in St. Paul, Minn., on March 7, 2025.
Universal Images Group via Getty Images

During the past 20 years, however, vaccination rates are decreasing globally, with an especially sharp drop during the pandemic from limited exposure to medical care. Aligned with this trend, measles cases in the U.S. have been rising. As a result, some infectious disease experts worry that measles is heading toward becoming a common infection again.

What happens if measles rates continue to rise?

Public health officials define endemic infections as being consistently present within a region. For example, the common cold and now COVID-19 are endemic in the U.S.

A higher-than-normal number of cases in an area is termed an outbreak. For measles, an outbreak is defined as more than three cases in a county or local area. When cases from an outbreak spread outside the local area, that is an epidemic, and if an epidemic spreads into many countries across the world, it becomes a pandemic.

The measles outbreak in Texas started in January 2025 as an outbreak in six counties and quickly reached epidemic levels, hitting a total of 29 counties and a count of 702 cases as of May 6.

A 2022 study used a computer algorithm to model the trajectory of measles cases in the U.S. given the drop in vaccination rates during the pandemic. If children who missed vaccines due to the pandemic do not receive catch-up vaccinations, and vaccine hesitancy continues at current rates, the study found, then 21% of U.S. children – about 15 million – will be vulnerable to measles over the following five years. That is well below the number needed to prevent measles outbreaks.

A study using a similar approach published in April 2025 found that measles is likely to become endemic again in the U.S. and predicted that the country could experience 850,000 cases over the next 25 years if vaccination rates remain the same. If vaccine rates decrease further, the study found, case numbers could increase to 11 million over the next 25 years.

What would it take to reverse the rise in measles?

Reversing this trend will require steadily increasing community vaccination rates. The April 2025 study found that boosting community vaccination rates by 5% would tamp down the increase in cases to between 3,000 and 19,000 over the next 25 years.

Another epidemiological model that estimates measles spread, published in February, predicted that by intervening early in an outbreak with local health department support, measles outbreaks can be contained as long as 85% of the population is vaccinated against the disease.

That, of course, requires ensured ongoing access to free and accessible childhood vaccinations and restoration of the public’s trust in measles vaccines.

Rebecca Schein does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. Measles could again become widespread as cases surge worldwide – https://theconversation.com/measles-could-again-become-widespread-as-cases-surge-worldwide-255501

MIL OSI – Global Reports –

May 8, 2025
MIL-OSI Global: Contaminated milk from one plant in Illinois sickened thousands with ‘Salmonella’ in 1985 − as outbreaks rise in the US, lessons from this one remain true

Source: The Conversation – USA – By Michael Petros, Clinical Assistant Professor of Environmental and Occupational Health Sciences, University of Illinois Chicago

A valve that mixed raw milk with pasteurized milk at Hillfarm Dairy may have been the source of contamination. This was the milk processing area of the plant. AP Photo/Mark Elias

In 1985, contaminated milk in Illinois led to a Salmonella outbreak that infected hundreds of thousands of people across the United States and caused at least 12 deaths. At the time, it was the largest single outbreak of foodborne illness in the U.S. and remains the worst outbreak of Salmonella food poisoning in American history.

Many questions circulated during the outbreak. How could this contamination occur in a modern dairy farm? Was it caused by a flaw in engineering or processing, or was this the result of deliberate sabotage? What roles, if any, did politics and failed leadership play?

From my 50 years of working in public health, I’ve found that reflecting on the past can help researchers and officials prepare for future challenges. Revisiting this investigation and its outcome provides lessons on how food safety inspections go hand in hand with consumer protection and public health, especially as hospitalizations and deaths from foodborne illnesses rise.

Contamination, investigation and intrigue

The Illinois Department of Public Health and the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention led the investigation into the outbreak. The public health laboratories of the city of Chicago and state of Illinois were also closely involved in testing milk samples.

Investigators and epidemiologists from local, state and federal public health agencies found that specific lots of milk with expiration dates up to April 17, 1985, were contaminated with Salmonella. The outbreak may have been caused by a valve at a processing plant that allowed pasteurized milk to mix with raw milk, which can carry several harmful microorganisms, including Salmonella.

Overall, labs and hospitals in Illinois and five other Midwest states – Indiana, Iowa, Michigan, Minnesota and Wisconsin – reported over 16,100 cases of suspected Salmonella poisoning to health officials.

To make dairy products, skimmed milk is usually separated from cream, then blended back together in different levels to achieve the desired fat content. While most dairies pasteurize their products after blending, Hillfarm Dairy in Melrose Park, Illinois, pasteurized the milk first before blending it into various products such as skim milk and 2% milk.

Subsequent examination of the production process suggested that Salmonella may have grown in the threads of a screw-on cap used to seal an end of a mixing pipe. Investigators also found this strain of Salmonella 10 months earlier in a much smaller outbreak in the Chicago area.

Salmonella is a common cause of food poisoning.
Volker Brinkmann/Max Planck Institute for Infection Biology via PLoS One, CC BY-SA

Finding the source

The contaminated milk was produced at Hillfarm Dairy in Melrose Park, which was operated at the time by Jewel Companies Inc. During an April 3 inspection of the company’s plant, the Food and Drug Administration found 13 health and safety violations.

The legal fallout of the outbreak expanded when the Illinois attorney general filed suit against Jewel Companies Inc., alleging that employees at as many as 18 stores in the grocery chain violated water pollution laws when they dumped potentially contaminated milk into storm sewers. Later, a Cook County judge found Jewel Companies Inc. in violation of the court order to preserve milk products suspected of contamination and maintain a record of what happened to milk returned to the Hillfarm Dairy.

Political fallout also ensued. The Illinois governor at the time, James Thompson, fired the director of the Illinois Public Health Department when it was discovered that he was vacationing in Mexico at the onset of the outbreak and failed to return to Illinois. Notably, the health director at the time of the outbreak was not a health professional. Following this episode, the governor appointed public health professional and medical doctor Bernard Turnock as director of the Illinois Department of Public Health.

In 1987, after a nine-month trial, a jury determined that Jewel officials did not act recklessly when Salmonella-tainted milk caused one of the largest food poisoning outbreaks in U.S. history. No punitive damages were awarded to victims, and the Illinois Appellate Court later upheld the jury’s decision.

Raw milk is linked to many foodborne illnesses.

Lessons learned

History teaches more than facts, figures and incidents. It provides an opportunity to reflect on how to learn from past mistakes in order to adapt to future challenges. The largest Salmonella outbreak in the U.S. to date provides several lessons.

For one, disease surveillance is indispensable to preventing outbreaks, both then and now. People remain vulnerable to ubiquitous microorganisms such as Salmonella and E. coli, and early detection of an outbreak could stop it from spreading and getting worse.

Additionally, food production facilities can maintain a safe food supply with careful design and monitoring. Revisiting consumer protections can help regulators keep pace with new threats from new or unfamiliar pathogens.

Finally, there is no substitute for professional public health leadership with the competence and expertise to respond effectively to an emergency.

Michael Petros does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. Contaminated milk from one plant in Illinois sickened thousands with ‘Salmonella’ in 1985 − as outbreaks rise in the US, lessons from this one remain true – https://theconversation.com/contaminated-milk-from-one-plant-in-illinois-sickened-thousands-with-salmonella-in-1985-as-outbreaks-rise-in-the-us-lessons-from-this-one-remain-true-254036

MIL OSI – Global Reports –

May 8, 2025
MIL-OSI Global: Italy’s areas of wartime fascist resistance remain less susceptible to the far right today

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Juan Masullo, Assistant Professor, Institute of Political Science, Leiden University

Across Europe, far-right parties are making unforeseen breakthroughs – from local councils to national and supranational parliaments. As their presence becomes normalised, these parties promote nationalist rhetoric, challenge democratic institutions, and attempt to reshape a political present rooted in hard-won struggles against authoritarianism.

Yet, not all communities are equally permeable to these growing forces. Some actively resist, mobilising to block authoritarian ideologies and defend democratic values.

Our recent research in Italy offers one explanation as to why some communities are less easily enticed into far-right politics than others. Local histories of wartime resistance continue to shape political cultures in ways that, even generations later, inspire people to push back against the resurgence of fascist and neo-fascist ideologies.

In areas where anti-fascist resistance movements were active during the second world war, civic engagement to defend democratic values is stronger. In these communities, support for far-right parties is weaker.

Get your news from actual experts, straight to your inbox. Sign up to our daily newsletter to receive all The Conversation UK’s latest coverage of news and research, from politics and business to the arts and sciences. Join The Conversation for free today.

These legacies aren’t accidental. They are cultivated, reinforced, and passed on through intensive and continuous local memory work.

During Italy’s civil war (1943–1945), students, workers, farmers and clergy mobilised into bands of resistance to fight the Nazi-fascist regime. Their efforts were central to Italy’s liberation and the establishment of its democratic republic. While this story is often told at the national level, our research examines its enduring local consequences.

Using an original dataset mapping resistance activity across about 8,000 Italian municipalities, we compared places with strong partisan mobilisation to those without. Even today, eight decades later, residents of areas with a resistance past are more likely to support initiatives that counter far-right ideologies.

This was especially evident in the response to a recent initiative. In 2020 and 2021, a grassroots campaign proposed a law to ban the public glorification of fascism. To bring it for discussion before parliament, the campaign needed 50,000 signatures.

Despite the pandemic, it collected over 240,000 within a few months. While support was widespread, municipalities with strong resistance histories were significantly more likely to participate. Our estimates show roughly 40% more signatures in these places.

These patterns suggest that wartime resistance can leave legacies that translate into contemporary political behaviour. But data alone can’t explain how these legacies endure. That’s where our fieldwork comes in.

We have been closely studying towns with deep resistance roots and strong support for the 2021 initiative to see how they keep these legacies alive and who is involved.

We have followed (and participated in) memorialisation efforts in the Cuneo region, one of the main centres of wartime resistance, and in areas deeply affected by Nazi violence and known for creating some of the strongest partisan brigades. These include villages around Stazzema in Tuscany and Marzabotto in Emilia.

The main insight is that remembrance isn’t just ceremonial – it’s part of daily life. Schools, hiking clubs, cultural associations, and city halls all contribute to preserving and activating the memory of resistance.

One public elementary school in the rural hills around Bologna, for example, created a “memory garden” to honour local residents who died fighting fascism. Through interviews, art and storytelling, students have engaged directly with their community’s past, creating not only a commemorative space but a living bridge between generations.

The memorial garden planted by students in.
J Masullo, CC BY-ND

Similarly, local Alpine clubs in Emilia Romagna and Piedmont restored partisan trails through the mountains, now used for memory treks. These hikes attract people who might not otherwise engage politically but who, by walking the paths of wartime partisans, connect with stories of sacrifice and solidarity. What begins as recreation becomes an encounter with democratic values.

These deeply localised memory efforts – anchored in the names, stories and spaces of the community – often intensify during democratic threats. The 2021 campaign emerged amid growing support for parties like Lega and Fratelli d’Italia (Brothers of Italy).

Related studies show that when exclusionary welfare policies gain ground, local communities sometime organise in defence of vulnerable groups. In towns with a resistance past, local “memory entrepreneurs” doubled their efforts in response to far-right victories.

Memory as a political battle

This is not just an Italian phenomenon. Across Europe, historical memory is a political battleground. In Germany, the Stolpersteine – brass plaques in sidewalks commemorating Nazi victims – serve as grassroots reminders that shape civic attitudes. In Hungary, activists have created “living memorials” to Holocaust victims, directly contesting government efforts to whitewash fascist collaboration.

These commemorations also have measurable political effects. In Berlin, neighbourhoods where one or more Stolpersteine was placed before an election saw fewer votes for the far-right AfD (a 0.96%-point decrease) compared to those with no Stolpersteine. This happened across federal, state and EU elections between 2013 and 2021.

A stolperstein in Berlin.
Wikipedia/Drrcs15, CC BY-SA

What unites these efforts is a belief that remembering the past matters – not only to honour it, but to shape the future. Local narratives of wartime resistance and victimisation help instil democratic values and inoculate communities against authoritarianism.

But this doesn’t happen automatically. It requires effort. Teachers, students, parents, associations, and local councils all play a role in keeping memory alive and politically meaningful.

Recognising this is especially vital today, when the meaning of anti-fascism itself is a polarising subject. Far-right leaders, including those in office, downplay and discredit the resistance’s legacy, replacing it with revisionist myths.

A local cycling club marks liberation day with a tour of monuments dedicated to partisans.
J Masullo, CC BY-ND

When communities take ownership of their histories, they are more likely to uphold democratic principles not only in ceremonies, but at the ballot box and in everyday actions. The past is never just the past. The legacies of wartime resistance continue to shape how people view democracy, justice, and belonging. In times like these, remembering the resistance is more than homage – it is civic defence.

Juan Masullo has received funding for this research from UNUWIDER and Leiden University.

He is affiliated with the University of Milan.

Simone Cremaschi has received funding for this research from UNUWIDER, the European Research Council (grant number 864687), and Leiden University.

– ref. Italy’s areas of wartime fascist resistance remain less susceptible to the far right today – https://theconversation.com/italys-areas-of-wartime-fascist-resistance-remain-less-susceptible-to-the-far-right-today-255859

MIL OSI – Global Reports –

May 8, 2025
MIL-OSI USA: Sen. Banks, Rep. Mrvan Urge Treasury to Preserve U.S. Owned and Operated Steel Industry

Source: United States House of Representatives – Congressman Frank J. Mrvan (IN)

Washington, DC – Senator Jim Banks (R-Ind.) and Representative Frank Mrvan (IN-01) sent a bipartisan letter to Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent urging the Department to consider national security when reviewing foreign takeovers of U.S. steel companies. They warned that foreign control puts our defense and supply chains at risk and stressed the need to keep American steel strong. They also backed President Trump’s push to rebuild the U.S. steel industry and stop unfair trade practices.

In part, the letter reads: “We share President Trump’s goal to revitalize the American steel industry so it can compete head-to-head with any country in the world by cracking down on illegal dumping and negotiating fair treatment for U.S. exports. We have confidence that you will conduct all foreign direct investment reviews with integrity, fairness, and in accordance with the law while protecting this critical supply chain, national security, and our workers’ interests.”

The full text of the letter is below and a pdf is available here.

We write to express our belief that a strong, domestically owned and operated American steel industry is vital to our national security. If American steel production does not remain robust in peacetime, we risk unreliable supplies of critical steel products to the military in wartime. We urge you to consider this as the Department of Treasury (Treasury) assesses the national security risks in any review of foreign direct investment.

We also encourage you to consider the interrelationship between defense supply chains and domestic industrial supply chains in any such review. A strong American defense industrial base is impossible without a strong U.S. manufacturing base, and considering the sectors in isolation is outmoded and myopic. We disagree with those who have suggested that the strength of the U.S. steel industry is unimportant to supplying the military’s needs, because the Defense Department only consumes a small fraction of national steel output and steel can be procured from abroad in a crisis.

Permitting foreign ownership or control of our steel industry risks ceding critical supply chains to foreign companies whose commercial interests may not always align with our national security interests. We should not entrust companies that have repeatedly circumvented our trade laws and have dumped large volumes of steel onto our shores with sustaining U.S. steel production capacity and rigorously defending U.S. trade remedy law.

Recent supply disruptions in other industries including electronics, automotive, medical, and semiconductors demonstrate how brittle elements of the U.S. industrial base have become. While the Treasury and the Department of Defense have extensive legal authorities to prioritize production for national defense, the experiences during the Tohoku earthquake and tsunami and the COVID-19 pandemic demonstrate the difficulties of requisitioning products that are unavailable and the protracted delays involved in starting up new production lines amid a crisis. In other words, once manufacturing capacity is gone, it is very hard to get back.

Temporary restrictions or mandates to place U.S. citizens on boards of directors on a term-limited basis are insufficient. Guarantees to maintain plants and production that contain exceptions do not assure the long-term sustainability of a critical domestic steel industry.

We share President Trump’s goal to revitalize the American steel industry so it can compete head-to-head with any country in the world by cracking down on illegal dumping and negotiating fair treatment for U.S. exports. We have confidence that you will conduct all foreign direct investment reviews with integrity, fairness, and in accordance with the law while protecting this critical supply chain, national security, and our workers’ interests.

Thank you for your attention to this important matter.

###

MIL OSI USA News –

May 7, 2025

MIL-OSI Economics: W&T Offshore Announces First Quarter 2025 Results and Declares Dividend for Second Quarter of 2025

Source: W & T Offshore Inc

Headline: W&T Offshore Announces First Quarter 2025 Results and Declares Dividend for Second Quarter of 2025

HOUSTON, May 06, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — W&T Offshore, Inc. (NYSE: WTI) (“W&T,” the “Company,” “we” or “us”) today reported operational and financial results for the first quarter of 2025 and declared a second quarter 2025 dividend of $0.01 per share.

This press release includes non-GAAP financial measures, including Adjusted Net Loss, Adjusted EBITDA, Free Cash Flow and Net Debt, which are described and reconciled to the most comparable GAAP measures in the accompanying tables to this press release under “Non-GAAP Information.”

Key highlights for the first quarter of 2025 and through the date of this press release include:

Produced 30.5 thousand barrels of oil equivalent per day (“MBoe/d”) (52% liquids), towards the high end of guidance;
- Announced that the West Delta 73 and Main Pass 108/98 fields were placed into production towards the end of March/early April with production expected to ramp up over the course of the second quarter of 2025;
Incurred lease operating expenses (“LOE”) of $71.0 million, below the low end of guidance;
Reported net loss of $30.6 million, or $(0.21) per diluted share;
- Adjusted Net Loss totaled $19.1 million, or $(0.13) per diluted share, which primarily excludes the loss on extinguishment of debt and net unrealized gain on outstanding derivative contracts and the related tax effects;
Generated Adjusted EBITDA of $32.2 million, an increase of 2% over the fourth quarter of 2024;
Produced Free Cash Flow of $10.5 million;
Successfully refinanced, in January 2025, the Company’s $275.0 million 11.75% Senior Second Lien Notes due 2026 (the “11.75% Notes”) and $114.2 million outstanding amount under the term loan provided by Munich Re Risk Financing, Inc., as lender (the “MRE Term Loan”) with proceeds from the issuance of $350.0 million of 10.75% Senior Second Lien Notes due 2029 (the “10.75% Notes”) and available cash on hand;
- Paid down and effectively reduced gross debt by approximately $39.0 million;
- Enhanced liquidity by eliminating principal payments under the MRE Term Loan of $27.6 million in 2025, $25.4 million in 2026, $22.9 million in 2027 and $38.3 million in 2028;
- Lowered interest rate on the Senior Second Lien Notes by 100 basis points;
Entered into a new $50.0 million revolving credit facility which matures in July 2028, and is undrawn, and the previous credit facility provided by Calculus Lending, LLC was concurrently terminated, with all outstanding obligations paid in full in connection with the termination;
Sold a non-core interest in Garden Banks Blocks 385 and 386 in January 2025, which included latest net production of approximately 195 barrels of oil equivalent per day (“Boe/d”) (72% oil) for $11.9 million, or over $60,000 per flowing barrel, after customary closing adjustments;
Received $58.5 million in cash for an insurance settlement related to the Mobile Bay 78-1 well, which further bolstered W&T’s balance sheet;
Reported unrestricted cash and cash equivalents of $105.9 million and Net Debt of $244.1 million at March 31, 2025;
Added natural gas costless collar hedges for 2025 including:
- 50,000 million British Thermal Units per day (“MMBtu/d”) for March 2025, with a floor price of $3.88 per MMBtu and ceiling price of $5.13 per MMBtu;
- 70,000 MMBtu/d for April to December 2025, with a volume-weighted average floor price and ceiling price of $4.02 per MMBtu and $5.32 per MMBtu, respectively;
Paid sixth consecutive quarterly dividend of $0.01 per common share in March 2025; and
- Declared second quarter 2025 dividend of $0.01 per share, which will be payable on May 27, 2025 to stockholders of record on May 20, 2025.

Tracy W. Krohn, W&T’s Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer, commented, “We continue to successfully execute our strategic vision and have delivered another quarter of strong results in line with or above our guidance. We reported production at the high end of our guidance range and, more importantly, we have brought online the remaining two fields from the Cox acquisition, which we expect will meaningfully increase production for the remainder of 2025, as you can see from our second quarter and full year guidance. Acquisitions remain a key component of our success, and it is our ability to integrate and enhance the assets that we acquire that has allowed us to successfully operate for over 40 years. We generated solid Free Cash Flow and Adjusted EBITDA and we recorded lease operating expenses below the low end of our guidance. We will continue to focus on increasing our production, particularly our oil production, and managing our operating costs.”

“Our balance sheet was strengthened in the first quarter of 2025 due to several key accomplishments. We successfully closed the issuance of new 10.75% Notes, entered into a new revolving credit facility and added material cash through a non-core disposition and an insurance settlement. The new 10.75% Notes have an interest rate 100 basis points lower than our 11.75% Notes and received improved credit ratings from S&P and Moody’s. We also received a $58.5 million cash insurance settlement payment related to a well impairment event. Finally, we sold a non-core interest in Garden Banks 385 and 386 for $11.9 million, after customary closing adjustments, at a value of over $60,000 per flowing barrel, which is highly accretive to W&T. We have over $100 million in cash on our balance sheet and remain prepared to take advantage of potential acquisitions. With the change in administration and the White House’s directives to Unleash American Energy, we also see promising developments in the regulatory environment for oil and gas companies. We are well positioned to continue to enhance our portfolio through additional accretive acquisition opportunities and are committed to enhancing shareholder value while returning value to our shareholders through the quarterly dividend program.”

Production, Prices and Revenue: Production for the first quarter of 2025 was 30.5 MBoe/d, towards the high end of the Company’s first quarter guidance but down compared with 32.1 MBoe/d for the fourth quarter of 2024 and 35.1 MBoe/d for the corresponding period in 2024. The first quarter 2025 production decrease was due to freezing conditions that caused shut-ins during January 2025; however production has since recovered. First quarter 2025 production was comprised of 13.7 thousand barrels per day (“MBbl/d”) of oil (45%), 2.2 MBbl/d of natural gas liquids (“NGLs”) (7%), and 87.6 million cubic feet per day (“MMcf/d”) of natural gas (48%).

W&T’s average realized price per Boe before realized derivative settlements was $46.50 per Boe in the first quarter of 2025, an increase of 17% from $39.86 per Boe in the fourth quarter of 2024 and an increase of 9% from $42.55 per Boe in the first quarter of 2024. First quarter 2025 oil, NGL and natural gas prices before realized derivative settlements were $71.31 per barrel of oil, $23.86 per barrel of NGL and $4.45 per Mcf of natural gas.

Revenues for the first quarter of 2025 were $129.9 million, which was 8% higher than fourth quarter of 2024 revenues of $120.3 million due to higher realized prices, which was partially offset by lower production volumes. First quarter 2025 revenues were lower by 8% compared to $140.8 million of revenues in the first quarter of 2024 due to lower production volumes, partially offset by higher realized natural gas and NGL prices.

Lease Operating Expenses: LOE, which includes base lease operating expenses, insurance premiums, workovers and facilities maintenance expenses, was $71.0 million in the first quarter of 2025, which was below the low end of the guidance range of $72.5 to $80.5 million. LOE came in lower than expected due to a combination of lower repair and maintenance costs, lower facility expenses and lower workover expense. LOE for the first quarter of 2025 was approximately 11% higher compared to $64.3 million in the fourth quarter of 2024. Lower LOE in the fourth quarter of 2024 was primarily driven by favorable audit adjustments and lower maintenance and repair work performed. LOE for the first quarter of 2025 was slightly higher than the $70.8 million for the corresponding period in 2024. On a component basis for the first quarter of 2025, base LOE and insurance premiums were $57.6 million, workovers were $2.0 million, and facilities maintenance and other expenses were $11.4 million. On a unit of production basis, LOE was $25.88 per Boe in the first quarter of 2025. This compares to $21.76 per Boe for the fourth quarter of 2024 and $22.14 per Boe for the corresponding period in 2024, reflecting a decrease in production in the period due to freezing conditions in January 2025.

Gathering, Transportation Costs and Production Taxes: Gathering, transportation costs and production taxes totaled $5.7 million ($2.06 per Boe) in the first quarter of 2025, compared to $5.9 million ($2.00 per Boe) in the fourth quarter of 2024 and $7.5 million ($2.36 per Boe) in the first quarter of 2024. Gathering, transportation costs and production taxes decreased in the first quarter of 2025 from the prior quarters due to lower production volumes.

Depreciation, Depletion and Amortization (“DD&A”): DD&A was $11.99 per Boe in the first quarter of 2025. This compares to $12.94 per Boe and $10.61 per Boe for the fourth quarter of 2024 and the first quarter of 2024, respectively.

Asset Retirement Obligations Accretion: Asset retirement obligations accretion was $3.06 per Boe in the first quarter of 2025. This compares to $2.76 per Boe and $2.49 per Boe for the fourth quarter of 2024 and the first quarter of 2024, respectively.

General & Administrative Expenses (“G&A”): G&A was $20.2 million for the first quarter of 2025, which decreased from $20.8 million in the fourth quarter of 2024 and $20.5 million in the first quarter of 2024 primarily due to decreases of share-based compensation and employee benefit costs partially offset by an increase in legal fees due to ongoing sureties litigation. On a unit of production basis, G&A was $7.35 per Boe in the first quarter of 2025 compared to $7.04 per Boe in the fourth quarter of 2024 and $6.41 per Boe in the corresponding period of 2024. These increases, on a per Boe basis, are related to lower production, as the absolute G&A costs were lower.

Derivative Loss (Gain), net: In the first quarter of 2025, W&T recorded a net loss of $2.7 million with commodity derivative contracts comprised of $3.6 million of realized losses and $0.9 million of unrealized gains related to the increase in fair value of open contracts. W&T recognized a net loss of $2.1 million in the fourth quarter of 2024 and a net gain of $4.9 million in the first quarter of 2024 related to commodity derivative activities.

To take advantage of the recent uptick in natural gas prices, W&T added costless collar hedges for March 2025 of 50,000 MMBtu/d with a floor price of $3.88 per MMBtu and ceiling price of $5.13 per MMBtu. For April to December 2025, the Company added similar costless collar hedges of 70,000 MMBtu/d with a volume-weighted average floor price and ceiling price of $4.02 per MMBtu and $5.32 per MMBtu, respectively.

A summary of the Company’s outstanding derivative positions is provided in the investor presentation posted on W&T’s website.

Interest Expense: Net interest expense in the first quarter of 2025 was $9.5 million compared to $10.2 million in the fourth quarter of 2024 and $10.1 million in the first quarter of 2024. These decreases reflect the impact of the Company’s debt refinancing in January 2025, which lowered overall debt by around $39 million and reduced the Senior Second Lien Notes’ coupon rate by 100 basis points.

Income Tax (Benefit) Expense: W&T recognized an income tax benefit of $4.6 million in the first quarter of 2025. This compares to the recognition of an income tax benefit of $1.8 million in the fourth quarter of 2024 and an income tax expense of $1.0 million in the first quarter of 2024.

Capital Expenditures and Asset Retirement Settlements: Capital expenditures on an accrual basis in the first quarter of 2025 were $8.5 million, and asset retirement settlement costs totaled $3.8 million. The Company continues to expect its full year capital expenditure budget to be between $34 million and $42 million, which excludes potential acquisition opportunities.

Balance Sheet and Liquidity: As of March 31, 2025, W&T had available liquidity of $155.9 million comprised of $105.9 million in unrestricted cash and cash equivalents and $50.0 million of borrowing availability under W&T’s new revolving credit facility. As of March 31, 2025, the Company had total debt of $350.0 million and Net Debt of $244.1 million. As of March 31, 2025, Net Debt to trailing twelve months (“TTM”) Adjusted EBITDA was 1.8x.

Debt Refinance: On January 28, 2025 W&T closed an offering of the 10.75% Notes at par in a private offering that was exempt from registration under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended. The Company used a portion of the proceeds from the 10.75% Notes offering, along with cash on hand to (i) purchase for cash pursuant to a tender offer, such of the Company’s outstanding 11.75% Notes that were validly tendered pursuant to the terms thereof; (ii) repay $114.2 million outstanding under the MRE Term Loan; (iii) fund the full redemption amount for an August 1, 2025 redemption of the remaining 11.75% Notes not validly tendered and accepted for purchase in the tender offer; and (iv) pay premiums, fees and expenses related to these transactions. On the closing date of the offering of the 10.75% Notes, the Company completed all actions necessary to satisfy and discharge the indenture governing the 11.75% Notes.

In conjunction with the issuance of the 10.75% Notes, the Company entered into a new credit agreement which provides the Company with a revolving credit and letter of credit facility, with initial lending commitments of $50 million and with a letter of credit sublimit of $10 million. The credit facility matures on July 28, 2028.

Concurrently with the debt refinance, W&T recorded a $15.0 million loss on the extinguishment of debt in the first quarter of 2025.

Non-Core Asset Disposition

In early 2025, W&T closed the sale of a non-core interest in Garden Banks Blocks 385 and 386, which included net production of approximately 195 Boe/d, for $11.9 million after normal purchase price adjustments. The effective date of the sale was December 1, 2024, and the transaction closed in January 2025. The impact to W&T’s reserves for year-end 2024 were minimal at about 0.12 MMBoe.

Regulatory Update

The change of Presidential administration in the early part of 2025 saw promising developments in the oil and natural gas regulatory environment. On January 20, 2025, President Trump issued Executive Order 14154, Unleashing American Energy. Section 3 of that Order directed heads of agencies to review existing regulations to identify agency actions that impose an undue burden on the identification, development, or use of domestic energy resources. The Trump administration also issued Executive Order 14156, Declaring a National Energy Emergency, stating that the United States’ insufficient energy production, transportation, refining, and generation constituted an unusual and extraordinary threat to the nation’s economy, national security, and foreign policy. Furthermore, on February 3, 2025, Secretary Burgum issued Secretarial Order 3418, Unleashing American Energy. Section 4(b) of that Order directed agency officials to prepare an action plan that will include steps to suspend, revise, or rescind certain regulations.

As it pertains to W&T, on April 8, 2025, pursuant to the above directives from the Trump administration, the Department of Interior, through a joint filing in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Louisiana (Case no. 2:24-cv-00820), indicated that it will not seek supplemental financial assurance in the Gulf of America except in the case of (a) sole liability properties and (b) certain non-sole liability properties that do not have a financially strong co-owner or predecessor in title and meet other conditions.

In addition, the Trump administration has issued a number of executive orders aimed at streamlining regulations and reducing the regulatory burden on oil and natural gas companies, increasing federal oil and natural gas leasing, including in the Gulf of America, and expediting U.S. natural resource development.

Cash Dividend Policy

The Company paid its first quarter 2025 dividend of $0.01 per share on March 24, 2025 to stockholders of record on March 17, 2025.

The Board of Directors declared a second quarter 2025 dividend of $0.01 per share which is to be paid on May 27, 2025 to stockholders of record on May 20, 2025.

OPERATIONS UPDATE

Well Recompletions and Workovers

During the first quarter of 2025, the Company performed five workovers that positively impacted production for the quarter. W&T plans to continue performing these low cost and low risk short payout operations that impact both production and revenue.

Second Quarter and Full Year 2025 Production and Expense Guidance

The guidance for the second quarter and full year 2025 in the table below represents the Company’s current expectations. Please refer to the section entitled “Forward-Looking and Cautionary Statements” below for risk factors that could impact guidance.


Production	Second Quarter 2025	Full Year 2025
Oil (MBbl)	1,295 – 1,435	5,150 – 5,690
NGLs (MBbl)	210 – 235	1,020 – 1,140
Natural gas (MMcf)	8,830 – 9,750	34,880 – 38,560
Total equivalents (MBoe)	2,977 – 3,295	11,983 – 13,257
Average daily equivalents (MBoe/d)	32.7 – 36.2	32.8 – 36.3
Expenses	Second Quarter 2025	Full Year 2025
Lease operating expense ($MM)	71.3 – 78.9	280.0 – 310.0
Gathering, transportation & production taxes ($MM)	6.6 – 7.4	27.1 – 30.1
General & administrative – cash ($MM)	14.5 – 16.1	62.0 – 69.0
General & administrative – non-cash ($MM)	2.4 – 2.8	10.1 – 11.3
DD&A ($ per Boe)		13.40 – 14.90

W&T expects substantially all income taxes in 2025 to be deferred.

Conference Call Information: W&T will hold a conference call to discuss its financial and operational results on Wednesday, May 7, 2025 at 11:00 a.m. Central Time (12:00 p.m. Eastern Time). Interested parties may dial 1-844-739-3797. International parties may dial 1-412-317-5713. Participants should request to connect to the “W&T Offshore Conference Call.” This call will also be webcast and available on W&T’s website at www.wtoffshore.com under “Investors.” An audio replay will be available on the Company’s website following the call.

About W&T Offshore

W&T Offshore, Inc. is an independent oil and natural gas producer with operations offshore in the Gulf of America and has grown through acquisitions, exploration and development. As of March 31, 2025, the Company had working interests in 52 fields in federal and state waters (which include 45 fields in federal waters and seven in state waters). The Company has under lease approximately 634,700 gross acres (496,900 net acres) spanning across the outer continental shelf off the coasts of Louisiana, Texas, Mississippi and Alabama, with approximately 487,200 gross acres on the conventional shelf, approximately 141,900 gross acres in the deepwater and 5,600 gross acres in Alabama state waters. A majority of the Company’s daily production is derived from wells it operates. For more information on W&T, please visit the Company’s website at www.wtoffshore.com.

Forward-Looking and Cautionary Statements

This press release contains forward-looking statements within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended. All statements other than statements of historical facts included in this release, including those regarding the Company’s financial position, operating and financial performance, business strategy, plans and objectives of management for future operations, projected costs, industry conditions, potential acquisitions, sustainability initiatives, the impact of and integration of acquired assets, and indebtedness are forward-looking statements. When used in this release, forward-looking statements are generally accompanied by terms or phrases such as “estimate,” “project,” “predict,” “believe,” “expect,” “continue,” “anticipate,” “target,” “could,” “plan,” “intend,” “seek,” “goal,” “will,” “should,” “may” or other words and similar expressions that convey the uncertainty of future events or outcomes, although not all forward-looking statements contain such identifying words. Items contemplating or making assumptions about actual or potential future production and sales, prices, market size, and trends or operating results also constitute such forward-looking statements.

These forward-looking statements are based on the Company’s current expectations and assumptions about future events and speak only as of the date of this release. While management considers these expectations and assumptions to be reasonable, they are inherently subject to significant business, economic, competitive, regulatory and other risks, contingencies and uncertainties, most of which are difficult to predict and many of which are beyond the Company’s control. Accordingly, you are cautioned not to place undue reliance on these forward-looking statements, as results actually achieved may differ materially from expected results described in these statements. The Company does not undertake, and specifically disclaims, any obligation to update any forward-looking statements to reflect events or circumstances occurring after the date of such statements, unless required by law.

Forward-looking statements are subject to risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ including, among other things, the regulatory environment, including availability or timing of, and conditions imposed on, obtaining and/or maintaining permits and approvals, including those necessary for drilling and/or development projects; the impact of current, pending and/or future laws and regulations, and of legislative and regulatory changes and other government activities, including those related to permitting, drilling, completion, well stimulation, operation, maintenance or abandonment of wells or facilities, managing energy, water, land, greenhouse gases or other emissions, protection of health, safety and the environment, or transportation, marketing and sale of the Company’s products; inflation levels; global economic trends, geopolitical risks and general economic and industry conditions, such as the global supply chain disruptions and the government interventions into the financial markets and economy in response to inflation levels and world health events; volatility of oil, NGL and natural gas prices; the global energy future, including the factors and trends that are expected to shape it, such as concerns about climate change and other air quality issues, the transition to a low-emission economy and the expected role of different energy sources; supply of and demand for oil, NGLs and natural gas, including due to the actions of foreign producers, importantly including OPEC and other major oil producing companies (“OPEC+”) and change in OPEC+’s production levels; disruptions to, capacity constraints in, or other limitations on the pipeline systems that deliver the Company’s oil and natural gas and other processing and transportation considerations; inability to generate sufficient cash flow from operations or to obtain adequate financing to fund capital expenditures, meet the Company’s working capital requirements or fund planned investments; price fluctuations and availability of natural gas and electricity; the Company’s ability to use derivative instruments to manage commodity price risk; the Company’s ability to meet the Company’s planned drilling schedule, including due to the Company’s ability to obtain permits on a timely basis or at all, and to successfully drill wells that produce oil and natural gas in commercially viable quantities; uncertainties associated with estimating proved reserves and related future cash flows; the Company’s ability to replace the Company’s reserves through exploration and development activities; drilling and production results, lower–than–expected production, reserves or resources from development projects or higher–than–expected decline rates; the Company’s ability to obtain timely and available drilling and completion equipment and crew availability and access to necessary resources for drilling, completing and operating wells; changes in tax laws; effects of competition; uncertainties and liabilities associated with acquired and divested assets; the Company’s ability to make acquisitions and successfully integrate any acquired businesses; asset impairments from commodity price declines; large or multiple customer defaults on contractual obligations, including defaults resulting from actual or potential insolvencies; geographical concentration of the Company’s operations; the creditworthiness and performance of the Company’s counterparties with respect to its hedges; impact of derivatives legislation affecting the Company’s ability to hedge; failure of risk management and ineffectiveness of internal controls; catastrophic events, including tropical storms, hurricanes, earthquakes, pandemics and other world health events; environmental risks and liabilities under U.S. federal, state, tribal and local laws and regulations (including remedial actions); potential liability resulting from pending or future litigation; the Company’s ability to recruit and/or retain key members of the Company’s senior management and key technical employees; information technology failures or cyberattacks; and governmental actions and political conditions, as well as the actions by other third parties that are beyond the Company’s control, and other factors discussed in W&T Offshore’s most recent Annual Report on Form 10-K and subsequent Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q found at www.sec.gov or at the Company’s website at www.wtoffshore.com under the Investor Relations section.


W&T OFFSHORE, INC.
Condensed Consolidated Statements of Operations
(In thousands, except per share data)
(Unaudited)

	Three Months Ended
	March 31,			December 31,			March 31,
	2025			2024			2024
Revenues:
Oil	$	87,716		$	86,778		$	107,015
NGLs		4,772			6,713			7,469
Natural gas		35,109			24,203			21,616
Other		2,270			2,651			4,687
Total revenues		129,867			120,345			140,787

Operating expenses:
Lease operating expenses		71,012			64,259			70,830
Gathering, transportation and production taxes		5,659			5,912			7,540
Depreciation, depletion, and amortization		32,891			38,208			33,937
Asset retirement obligations accretion		8,392			8,157			7,969
General and administrative expenses		20,157			20,799			20,515
Total operating expenses		138,111			137,335			140,791

Operating loss		(8,244	)		(16,990	)		(4	)

Interest expense, net		9,492			10,226			10,072
Loss on extinguishment of debt		15,015			—			—
Derivative loss (gain), net		2,757			2,113			(4,877	)
Other (income) expense, net		(316	)		(4,118	)		5,230
Loss before income taxes		(35,192	)		(25,211	)		(10,429	)
Income tax (benefit) expense		(4,615	)		(1,849	)		1,045
Net loss	$	(30,577	)	$	(23,362	)	$	(11,474	)

Net loss per common share (basic and diluted)	$	(0.21	)	$	(0.16	)	$	(0.08	)

Weighted average common shares outstanding (basic and diluted)		147,598			147,365			146,857


W&T OFFSHORE, INC.
Condensed Operating Data
(Unaudited)

	Three Months Ended
	March 31,		December 31,		March 31,
	2025		2024		2024
Net sales volumes:
Oil (MBbls)		1,230		1,263		1,400
NGLs (MBbls)		200		273		343
Natural gas (MMcf)		7,884		8,505		8,733
Total oil and natural gas (MBoe) ⁽¹⁾		2,744		2,953		3,199

Average daily equivalent sales (MBoe/d)		30.5		32.1		35.1

Average realized sales prices (before the impact of derivative settlements):
Oil ($/Bbl)	$	71.31	$	68.71	$	76.44
NGLs ($/Bbl)		23.86		24.59		21.78
Natural gas ($/Mcf)		4.45		2.85		2.48
Barrel of oil equivalent ($/Boe)		46.50		39.86		42.55

Average operating expenses per Boe ($/Boe):
Lease operating expenses	$	25.88	$	21.76	$	22.14
Gathering, transportation and production taxes		2.06		2.00		2.36
Depreciation, depletion, and amortization		11.99		12.94		10.61
Asset retirement obligations accretion		3.06		2.76		2.49
General and administrative expenses		7.35		7.04		6.41

(1)

MBoe is determined using the ratio of six Mcf of natural gas to one Bbl of crude oil, condensate or NGLs (totals may not compute due to rounding). The conversion ratio does not assume price equivalency and the price on an equivalent basis for oil, NGLs and natural gas may differ significantly. The realized prices presented above are volume-weighted for production in the respective period.


W&T OFFSHORE, INC.
Consolidated Balance Sheets
(In thousands)
(Unaudited)

	March 31,			December 31,
	2025			2024
Assets
Current assets:
Cash and cash equivalents	$	105,933		$	109,003
Restricted cash		1,552			1,552
Receivables:
Oil and natural gas sales		64,991			63,558
Joint interest, net		26,884			25,841
Prepaid expenses and other assets		22,570			18,504
Total current assets		221,930			218,458

Oil and natural gas properties and other, net		691,788			777,741
Restricted deposits for asset retirement obligations		22,892			22,730
Deferred income taxes		54,332			48,808
Other assets		34,004			31,193
Total assets	$	1,024,946		$	1,098,930

Liabilities and Shareholders’ Deficit
Current liabilities:
Accounts payable	$	77,978		$	83,625
Accrued liabilities		19,210			33,271
Undistributed oil and natural gas proceeds		58,647			53,131
Advances from joint interest partners		2,432			2,443
Current portion of asset retirement obligations		29,098			46,326
Current portion of long-term debt, net		566			27,288
Total current liabilities		187,931			246,084

Asset retirement obligations		532,753			502,506
Long-term debt, net		349,481			365,935
Other liabilities		17,381			16,182

Commitments and contingencies		20,196			20,800

Shareholders’ deficit:
Preferred stock		—			—
Common stock		2			2
Additional paid-in capital		597,271			595,407
Retained deficit		(655,902	)		(623,819	)
Treasury stock		(24,167	)		(24,167	)
Total shareholders’ deficit		(82,796	)		(52,577	)
Total liabilities and shareholders’ deficit	$	1,024,946		$	1,098,930


W&T OFFSHORE, INC.
Condensed Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows
(In thousands)
(Unaudited)

	Three Months Ended
	March 31,			December 31,			March 31,
	2025			2024			2024
Operating activities:
Net loss	$	(30,577	)	$	(23,362	)	$	(11,474	)
Adjustments to reconcile net loss to net cash (used in) provided by operating activities:
Depreciation, depletion, amortization and accretion		41,283			46,365			41,906
Share-based compensation		2,087			3,818			3,032
Amortization and write off of debt issuance costs		1,099			1,117			1,292
Loss on extinguishment of debt		15,015			—			—
Derivative loss (gain), net		2,757			2,113			(4,877	)
Derivative cash (settlements) receipts, net		(5,326	)		(1,638	)		2,599
Deferred income (benefit) taxes		(5,517	)		(1,941	)		733
Changes in operating assets and liabilities:
Accounts receivable		(1,935	)		(17,064	)		(17,362	)
Prepaid expenses and other current assets		547			1,792			433
Accounts payable, accrued liabilities and other		(18,858	)		3,831			(852	)
Asset retirement obligation settlements		(3,771	)		(19,348	)		(3,788	)
Net cash (used in) provided by operating activities		(3,196	)		(4,317	)		11,642

Investing activities:
Investment in oil and natural gas properties and equipment		(6,665	)		(14,124	)		(7,080	)
Acquisition of property interests		(400	)		—			(80,515	)
Proceeds from sale of oil and natural gas properties		11,935			—			—
Insurance proceeds		58,500			—			—
Purchases of furniture, fixtures and other		(103	)		(19	)		(24	)
Net cash provided by (used in) investing activities		63,267			(14,143	)		(87,619	)

Financing activities:
Proceeds from issuance of long-term debt		350,000			—			—
Repayments of long-term debt		(384,264	)		(275	)		(275	)
Purchase of government securities in connection with legal defeasance of 11.75% Senior Second Lien Notes		(5,889	)		—			—
Premium and debt extinguishment costs		(10,230	)		—			—
Debt issuance costs		(11,042	)		(183	)		(312	)
Payment of dividends		(1,493	)		(1,475	)		(1,469	)
Other		(223	)		(13	)		(483	)
Net cash used in financing activities		(63,141	)		(1,946	)		(2,539	)
Change in cash, cash equivalents and restricted cash		(3,070	)		(20,406	)		(78,516	)
Cash, cash equivalents and restricted cash, beginning of period		110,555			130,961			177,755
Cash, cash equivalents and restricted cash, end of period	$	107,485		$	110,555		$	99,239

W&T OFFSHORE, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Non-GAAP Information

Certain financial information included in W&T’s financial results are not measures of financial performance recognized by accounting principles generally accepted in the United States, or GAAP. These non-GAAP financial measures are “Net Debt,” “Adjusted Net Loss,” “Adjusted EBITDA” and “Free Cash Flow” or are derivable from a combination of these measures. Management uses these non-GAAP financial measures in its analysis of performance. These disclosures may not be viewed as a substitute for results determined in accordance with GAAP and are not necessarily comparable to non-GAAP performance measures which may be reported by other companies. Prior period amounts have been conformed to the methodology and presentation of the current period.

We calculate Net Debt as total debt (current and long-term portions), less cash and cash equivalents. Management uses Net Debt to evaluate the Company’s financial position, including its ability to service its debt obligations.

Reconciliation of Net Loss to Adjusted Net Loss

Adjusted Net Loss adjusts for certain items that the Company believes affect comparability of operating results, including items that are generally non-recurring in nature or whose timing and/or amount cannot be reasonably estimated. These items include loss on extinguishment of debt, unrealized commodity derivative gain, net, allowance for credit losses, non-recurring legal and IT-related costs, non-ARO P&A costs, and other which are then tax effected using the Federal Statutory Rate. Company management believes that this presentation is relevant and useful because it helps investors to understand the net loss of the Company without the effects of certain non-recurring or unusual expenses and certain income or loss that is not realized by the Company.


	Three Months Ended
	March 31,			December 31,			March 31,
	2025			2024			2024
		(in thousands)
		(Unaudited)
Net loss	$	(30,577	)	$	(23,362	)	$	(11,474	)
Loss on extinguishment of debt		15,015			—			—
Unrealized commodity derivative gain, net		(882	)		(497	)		(1,122	)
Allowance for credit losses		155			118			84
Non-recurring legal and IT-related costs		528			860			758
Non-ARO P&A costs		(197	)		(2,763	)		5,352
Other		(71	)		(1,302	)		(214	)
Tax effect of selected items ⁽¹⁾		(3,055	)		753			(1,020	)
Adjusted net loss	$	(19,084	)	$	(26,193	)	$	(7,636	)

Adjusted net loss per common share (basic and diluted)	$	(0.13	)	$	(0.18	)	$	(0.05	)

Weighted average shares outstanding (basic and diluted)		147,598			147,365			146,857

⁽¹⁾ Selected items were tax effected with the Federal Statutory Rate of 21% for each respective period.

W&T OFFSHORE, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Non-GAAP Information

Adjusted EBITDA/ Free Cash Flow Reconciliations

The Company also presents non-GAAP financial measures of Adjusted EBITDA and Free Cash Flow. The Company defines Adjusted EBITDA as net loss plus net interest expense, loss on extinguishment of debt, income tax (benefit) expense, depreciation, depletion and amortization, ARO accretion, excluding the unrealized commodity derivative gain, allowance for credit losses, non-cash incentive compensation, non-recurring legal and IT-related costs, non-ARO P&A costs, and other. Company management believes this presentation is relevant and useful because it helps investors understand W&T’s operating performance and makes it easier to compare its results with those of other companies that have different financing, capital and tax structures. Adjusted EBITDA should not be considered in isolation from or as a substitute for net income, as an indication of operating performance or cash flows from operating activities or as a measure of liquidity. Adjusted EBITDA, as W&T calculates it, may not be comparable to Adjusted EBITDA measures reported by other companies. In addition, Adjusted EBITDA does not represent funds available for discretionary use.

The Company defines Free Cash Flow as Adjusted EBITDA (defined above), less capital expenditures, P&A costs and net interest expense (all on an accrual basis). For this purpose, the Company’s definition of capital expenditures includes costs incurred related to oil and natural gas properties (such as drilling and infrastructure costs and the lease maintenance costs) and equipment but excludes acquisition costs of oil and gas properties from third parties that are not included in the Company’s capital expenditures guidance provided to investors. Company management believes that Free Cash Flow is an important financial performance measure for use in evaluating the performance and efficiency of its current operating activities after the impact of accrued capital expenditures, P&A costs and net interest expense and without being impacted by items such as changes associated with working capital, which can vary substantially from one period to another. There is no commonly accepted definition of Free Cash Flow within the industry. Accordingly, Free Cash Flow, as defined and calculated by the Company, may not be comparable to Free Cash Flow or other similarly named non-GAAP measures reported by other companies. While the Company includes net interest expense in the calculation of Free Cash Flow, other mandatory debt service requirements of future payments of principal at maturity (if such debt is not refinanced) are excluded from the calculation of Free Cash Flow. These and other non-discretionary expenditures that are not deducted from Free Cash Flow would reduce cash available for other uses.

The following table presents a reconciliation of the Company’s net loss income, a GAAP measure, to Adjusted EBITDA and Free Cash Flow, as such terms are defined by the Company:


	Three Months Ended
	March 31,			December 31,			March 31,
	2025			2024			2024
	(in thousands)
	(Unaudited)
Net loss	$	(30,577	)	$	(23,362	)	$	(11,474	)
Interest expense, net		9,492			10,226			10,072
Loss on extinguishment of debt		15,015			—			—
Income tax (benefit) expense		(4,615	)		(1,849	)		1,045
Depreciation, depletion and amortization		32,891			38,208			33,937
Asset retirement obligations accretion		8,392			8,157			7,969
Unrealized commodity derivative gain, net		(882	)		(497	)		(1,122	)
Allowance for credit losses		155			118			84
Non-cash incentive compensation		2,087			3,818			3,032
Non-recurring legal and IT-related costs		528			860			758
Non-ARO P&A costs		(197	)		(2,763	)		5,352
Other		(71	)		(1,302	)		(214	)
Adjusted EBITDA	$	32,218		$	31,614		$	49,439

Capital expenditures, accrual basis ⁽¹⁾	$	(8,472	)	$	(12,228	)	$	(3,156	)
Asset retirement obligation settlements		(3,771	)		(19,348	)		(3,788	)
Interest expense, net		(9,492	)		(10,226	)		(10,072	)
Free Cash Flow	$	10,483		$	(10,188	)	$	32,423

⁽¹⁾ A reconciliation of the adjustment used to calculate Free Cash Flow to the Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements is included below:


Capital expenditures, accrual basis reconciliation
Investment in oil and natural gas properties and equipment	$	(6,665	)	$	(14,124	)	$	(7,080	)
Less: change in accrual for capital expenditures		1,807			(1,896	)		(3,924	)
Capital expenditures, accrual basis	$	(8,472	)	$	(12,228	)	$	(3,156	)

The following table presents a reconciliation of cash flow from operating activities, a GAAP measure, to Free Cash Flow, as defined by the Company:


	Three Months Ended
	March 31,			December 31,			March 31,
	2025			2024			2024
	(in thousands)
	(Unaudited)
Net cash (used in) provided by operating activities	$	(3,196	)	$	(4,317	)	$	11,642
Allowance for credit losses		155			118			84
Amortization of debt items		(1,099	)		(1,117	)		(1,292	)
Non-recurring legal and IT-related costs		528			860			758
Current tax (benefit) expense ⁽¹⁾		902			92			312
Change in derivatives receivable (payable) ⁽¹⁾		1,687			(972	)		1,156
Non-ARO P&A costs		(197	)		(2,763	)		5,352
Changes in operating assets and liabilities, excluding asset retirement obligation settlements		20,246			11,441			17,781
Capital expenditures, accrual basis		(8,472	)		(12,228	)		(3,156	)
Other		(71	)		(1,302	)		(214	)
Free Cash Flow	$	10,483		$	(10,188	)	$	32,423

⁽¹⁾ A reconciliation of the adjustments used to calculate Free Cash Flow to the Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements is included below:


Current tax (benefit) expense:
Income tax (benefit) expense	$	(4,615	)	$	(1,849	)	$	1,045
Less: Deferred income (benefit) taxes		(5,517	)		(1,941	)		733
Current tax expense	$	902		$	92		$	312

Changes in derivatives receivable (payable)
Derivatives receivable (payable), end of period	$	310		$	(1,377	)	$	1,427
Derivatives payable (receivable), beginning of period		1,377			405			(271	)
Change in derivatives receivable (payable)	$	1,687		$	(972	)	$	1,156


CONTACT:	Al Petrie	Sameer Parasnis
	Investor Relations Coordinator	Executive VP and CFO
	investorrelations@wtoffshore.com	sparasnis@wtoffshore.com
	713-297-8024	713-513-8654

Source: W&T Offshore, Inc.

Released May 6, 2025

MIL OSI Economics –

May 7, 2025

MIL-Evening Report: COVID is still around and a risk to vulnerable people. What are the symptoms in 2025? And how long does it last?

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Meru Sheel, Associate Professor and Epidemiologist, Infectious Diseases, Immunisation and Emergencies (IDIE) Group, Sydney School of Public Health, University of Sydney

Five years ago, COVID was all we could think about. Today, we’d rather forget about lockdowns, testing queues and social distancing. But the virus that sparked the pandemic, SARS-CoV-2, is still circulating.

Most people who get COVID today will experience only a mild illness. But some people are still at risk of severe illness and are more likely to be hospitalised with COVID. This includes older people, those who are immunocompromised by conditions such as cancer, and people with other health conditions such as diabetes.

Outcomes also tend to be more severe in those who experience social inequities such as homelessness. In the United Kingdom, people living in the 20% most deprived areas have double chance of being hospitalised from infectious diseases than those in the least deprived areas.

How many cases and hospitalisations?

In Australia, 58,000 COVID cases have been reported so far in 2025. However, testing rates have declined and not all positive cases are reported to the government, so case numbers in the community are likely much higher.

Latest data from FluCan, a network of 14 hospitals, found 781 people were hospitalised for COVID complications in the first three months of the year. This “sentinel surveillance” data gives a snapshot from a handful of hospitals, so the actual number of hospitalisations across Australia is expected to be much higher.

While deaths are lower than previous years, 289 people died from COVID-related respiratory infections in the first two months of the year.

What can we expect as we head into winter?

We often see an increase in respiratory infections in winter.

However, COVID peaks aren’t just necessarily seasonal. Over the past few years, peaks have tended to appear around every six months.

What are the most common COVID symptoms?

Typical early symptoms of COVID included fever, cough, sore throat, runny nose and shortness of breath. These have remained the most common COVID symptoms across the multiple variant waves.

Early in the pandemic, we realised COVID caused a unique symptom called anosmia – the changed sense of taste or smell. Anosmia lasts about a week and in some cases can last longer.
Anosmia was more frequently reported from infections due to the ancestral, Gamma, and Delta variants but not for the Omicron variant, which emerged in 2021.

However, loss of smell still seems to be associated with some newer variants. A recent French study found anosmia was more frequently reported in people with JN.1.

But the researchers didn’t find any differences for other COVID symptoms between older and newer variants.

Should you bother doing a test?

Yes. Testing is particularly important if you experience COVID-like symptoms or were recently exposed to someone with COVID and are at high-risk of severe COVID. You might require timely treatment.

If you are at risk of severe COVID, you can see a doctor or visit a clinic with point-of-care testing services to access confirmatory PCR (polymerase chain reaction) testing.

Rapid antigen tests (RATs) approved by Australia’s regulator are also still available for personal use.

But a negative RAT doesn’t mean that you don’t have COVID – especially if you are symptomatic.

Read more:
COVID-19 rapid tests still work against new variants – researchers keep ‘testing the tests,’ and they pass

If you do test positive, while you don’t have to isolate, it’s best to stay at home.

If you do leave the house while experiencing COVID symptoms, minimise the spread to others by wearing a well-fitted mask, avoiding public places such as hospitals and avoiding contact with those at higher risk of severe COVID.

How long does COVID last these days?

In most people with mild to moderate COVID, it can last 7–10 days.

Symptomatic people can spread the infection to others from about 48 hours before you develop symptoms to about ten days after developing symptoms. Few people are infectious beyond that.

But symptoms can persist in more severe cases for longer.

A UK study which tracked the persistence of symptoms in 5,000 health-care workers found symptoms were less likely to last for more than 12 weeks in subsequent infections.

General fatigue, for example, was reported in 17.3% of people after the first infection compared with 12.8% after the second infection and 10.8% following the third infection.

Unvaccinated people also had more persistent symptoms.

Read more:
How long are you infectious when you have coronavirus?

Vaccinated people who catch COVID tend to present with milder disease and recover faster. This may be because vaccination prevents over-activation of the innate immune response.

Vaccination remains the best way to prevent COVID

Vaccination against COVID continues to be one of the most effective ways to prevent COVID and protect against it. Data from Europe’s most recent winter, which is yet to be peer reviewed, reports COVID vaccines were 66% effective at preventing symptomatic, confirmed COVID cases.

Most people in Australia have had at least one dose of the COVID vaccine. But if you haven’t, people over 18 years of age are recommended to have a COVID vaccine.

Boosters are available for adults over 18 years of age. If you don’t have any underlying immune issues, you’re eligible to receive a funded dose every 12 months.

Boosters are recommended for adults 65–74 years every 12 months and for those over 75 years every six months.

Adults over 18 years who are at higher risk because of weaker immune systems are recommended to get a COVID vaccine every 12 months and are eligible every six months.

Check your status and eligibility using this booster eligibility tool and you can access your vaccine history here.

A new review of more than 4,300 studies found full vaccination before a SARS-CoV-2 infection could reduce the risk of long COVID by 27% relative to no vaccination for the general adult population.

With ongoing circulation of COVID, hybrid immunity from natural infection supplemented with booster vaccination can help prevent large-scale COVID waves.

Meru Sheel receives funding from National Health and Medical Research Council and Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade. She serves on WHO’s Immunization and Vaccines Related Implementation Research Advisory Committee (IVIR-AC)

– ref. COVID is still around and a risk to vulnerable people. What are the symptoms in 2025? And how long does it last? – https://theconversation.com/covid-is-still-around-and-a-risk-to-vulnerable-people-what-are-the-symptoms-in-2025-and-how-long-does-it-last-253840

MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

May 7, 2025
MIL-Evening Report: How do you put a tariff on movies? Here’s what Trump’s plan could mean for Australia

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Mark David Ryan, Professor, Film, Screen, Animation, Queensland University of Technology

Kirk Wester/Shutterstock

US President Donald Trump’s recent announcement of a plan to impose a 100% tariff on movies “produced in foreign lands” could have a massive impact on the global entertainment industry.

Film and television production is increasingly part of an interconnected global system. Hollywood’s major studios and global streaming giants use a diverse range of locations around the world, sometimes working across multiple countries for a single project.

Doing so allows them to leverage production incentives and tax shelters offered by different countries, take advantage of exchange rates to lower their production costs, and more.

They also film offshore, for example in China, as strategic co-productions and feature iconic locations and local actors to appeal to audiences in that specific national market.

Many countries have become important hubs in this global system of production. Australia is a significant player. So, how exactly might Trump’s tariffs work? And why is so much Hollywood film made internationally in the first place?

‘Movies made in America’

Trump made the announcement in a post on the social media network Truth Social. But his original statement is vague and lacks crucial detail.

Based on his post, this proposal could include any foreign movie imported into the United States. More likely, though, it refers to US movies filmed (in part or wholly) overseas.

Trump’s statement only singles out movies. He doesn’t mention television series for broadcasters, or specifically film and television programs made for streaming platforms.

This suggests a focus on movies made by Hollywood studios. It may or may not include content made by streamers such as Netflix.

Tariffs on tickets?

Movies are a kind of intellectual property. They’re intangible products or services, not physical goods. If a tariff was applied to movies, they’d become the first service in the current trade war to receive one.

So what tariffs or regulations could be applied?

One option would be a levy on distributors releasing US movies made overseas. Another option would be to adapt the French TSA model, which levies a tax on all cinema tickets. In France, this money is reinvested into the local industry. The US could impose such a tax on tickets for films with production components overseas.

Both options would pass the costs on to consumers. A drop in already fragile cinema attendance or revenues could simply cause studios to reduce the number of movies made for theatrical release.

Studios might instead concentrate on making movies and television series for their own streaming platforms, such as Disney+ and Paramount+.

One option could be to impose a tax directly on tickets for US cinemagoers.
bbernard/Shutterstock

Taxing production

Could the tax be imposed in other ways? Many US studio movies, and television programs, are at least partly, if not wholly, filmed internationally. But they are still US-controlled movies and still dominate the box office in many countries worldwide.

Could the revenue of Godzilla x Kong: The New Empire (2024), filmed on the Gold Coast in Australia, specifically be targeted and taxed for being made overseas, in contrast to a Hollywood movie made completely at home?

Would there be a sliding scale based on how much of a film is shot overseas? Would the tax apply to post-production or only production? The process of reviewing and enforcing this would be complex.

Another option may be taxing the portion of a movie’s production budget obtained from foreign tax incentives.

Major blockbusters filming in Australia are eligible for tax rebates and incentives, which can equate to almost half, or more, of the money they spend in Australia. But exactly how the US would review and regulate such a tax is again unclear.

Many of the major film studios now have their own dedicated streaming platforms.
Tada Images/Shutterstock

Australia’s film industry

International film and television production expenditure in Australia now averages A$880 million each year. International movies alone account for about half of that figure.

And the number of movies and television series being filmed in Australia has increased dramatically since the outbreak of COVID.

Production expenditure here on both local and international productions jumped from just over $1 billion in 2019–20 to about $2.4 billion in 2022–23.

There are numerous reasons for this. Australia became a more popular international production hub after serving as a “production bubble” during the pandemic, as restrictions forced filming to shut down in many other countries. Relationships were forged between local producers, crews, film agencies and studios.

The reputation of places like the Gold Coast, known for talented crews and stunning filming locations, has also played an important role in continually luring studios back.

The biggest draw card

But the major reason is the strong pull of Australia’s tax incentives for filming content here.

In Australia, international film and television programs are eligible for a 30% “location offset” on eligible production expenditures. If a project qualifies, producers will receive a provisional certificate, and they can claim a fixed 30% rebate for expenses in an income tax return for the relevant year.

There’s also a 30% offset on eligible post-production and visual effects work. And these incentives can be “stacked” on top of an extra 10–15% in incentives from state screen agencies (such as Screen QLD).

Some combined federal and state-based production offsets amount to rebates of 50%, or more, of a project’s production spend in Australia.

Why Australia is worried

International productions, which are quite different to local film and television programs, generate employment for many local actors and technical professionals. The loss of this film production would dramatically reduce employment for local professionals.

If these levies are imposed only on movies that screen theatrically, then television series and streaming films and series could continue to film in Australia unaffected. That would lessen the impact on local industries. If the definition includes both, the impact could be dramatic.

Mark David Ryan has received funding from the Gold Coast Film Commission. He is affiliated with the National Institute of Dramatic Art (NIDA).

– ref. How do you put a tariff on movies? Here’s what Trump’s plan could mean for Australia – https://theconversation.com/how-do-you-put-a-tariff-on-movies-heres-what-trumps-plan-could-mean-for-australia-255948

MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

May 7, 2025

MIL-OSI Europe: Debates – Monday, 5 May 2025 – Strasbourg – Revised edition

Source: European Parliament

Verbatim report of proceedings

430k

594k

Monday, 5 May 2025 – Strasbourg

IN THE CHAIR: ROBERTA METSOLA
President

1. Resumption of the session

President. – I declare resumed the session of the European Parliament adjourned on 3 April 2025.

2. Opening of the sitting

(The sitting opened at 17:01)

3. Passing of Pope Francis – Statement by the President

President. – On 26 April the world came together to mourn the passing of His Holiness Pope Francis. Together with a number of you, we represented this House at the Pope’s funeral in Rome, where hundreds of thousands gathered to commemorate his life and honour his legacy.

Pope Francis will be remembered for his inspirational leadership, his moral authority and his kindness, taking every opportunity to speak up for a more humane, more peaceful and unified world. In 2014, His Holiness addressed this Plenary and he called for every Member to ’work to make Europe rediscover the best of itself.’

E proprio in occasione della sua visita Papa, Francesco scrisse un messaggio, nel libro che raccoglie le firme e i pensieri delle più alte personalità che hanno visitato l’Istituzione nel corso della sua storia, e io desidero condividere con voi le parole che ha voluto dedicarci:

“Auguro che il Parlamento europeo sia sempre più la sede dove ogni suo membro concorra a far sì che l’Europa, consapevole del suo passato, guardi con fiducia al futuro per vivere con speranza il presente.”

Whilst this House grieves his loss, we also remember his call to action and work together every day for a better, more compassionate and more courageous Europe.

I invite you now to join me in a moment of silence.

(The House rose and observed a minute’s silence)

We will now have a round of Group speakers to pay tribute to His Holiness Pope Francis.

Manfred Weber, on behalf of the PPE Group. – Madam President, dear colleagues, for me personally, meeting Pope Francis and speaking with him was a lifetime honour and he remains, for me and for us as the EPP Group, a profound source of inspiration. His hope, his wisdom, his faith still speak to all of us. It was a moment of deep sadness when we learned about his passing away and we will miss him.

Above everything, as our President already said, it was always the person, the human being he put at the centre. He never spoke about migrants, he spoke about human beings and not about a prisoner, about a human being, not about homeless people, about human beings. Christianity at its best: everybody is important, recognised by God, and also has a perspective beyond our life on earth.

In November 2014, when he was here speaking in this European Parliament 11 years ago, he spoke about the deep Christian identity of our continent. Europe without Christian roots is simply unthinkable.

However, Christian values never were pure Christian symbolism. He did not look at the questions of what divides us in Europe, he was always committed to what unites us. Not race, not religion, and not social status are allowed to divide us. And that was also his red line to all extremists who were misusing Christianity for their egoistic interests.

His Christian view on a human approach of a society was also for dignified work, for a society where everybody feels involved, and an economy which also serves the people’s interests. And that’s why our model of a social market economy was deeply rooted also in his Christian thinking.

And finally, on this Christian democratic tradition – like my party is representing it – I also want to underline that he himself, and all his predecessors in the 20th and 21st century, was committed to European integration. He was always arguing in favour of a united Europe, not as a functional entity, not as a cash machine, not as a huge market, but as a community with shared identity, united in the European way of life.

In a letter addressed to the European People’s Party group, Pope Francis wrote to us that, and I quote, ‘To build Europe, it takes a strong inspiration, a soul. It takes dreams, it takes values and a high political vision. Ordinary management, good, normal administration is not enough.’ That is what Pope Francis told us. And this is his legacy. This is his job description for us as the European People’s Party, also as a European Parliament. He rightly saw the European way of life as a path to a bright future, and also our offer to the rest of the world. That’s why, thank you to Pope Francis.

Iratxe García Pérez, en nombre del Grupo S&D. – Señora presidenta, hoy alzamos la voz en esta Cámara para rendir tributo al papa Francisco, un hombre de fe profunda y coraje inmenso que supo estar a la altura de los tiempos. Fue el papa de los pobres, de los marginados y de los que se encuentran en las periferias de la sociedad.

Tuve el honor de encontrarme con el papa Francisco. Con su voz clara y su mirada compasiva, nos recordó que la justicia social no es solo una opción, sino una exigencia irrenunciable.

Señorías, la mejor manera de rendir tributo al papa Francisco no es solo recordar sus palabras, sino cumplir con ellas. El 25 de noviembre de 2014, en este mismo Parlamento, nos pidió que construyéramos Europa sobre la piedra angular de la dignidad. Nos interpeló con preguntas que hoy siguen doliendo: «¿qué dignidad es posible sin un marco jurídico claro que limite el dominio de la fuerza y haga prevalecer la ley sobre la tiranía del poder?», «¿qué dignidad puede tener un hombre o una mujer cuando es objeto de todo tipo de discriminación?», «¿qué dignidad podrá encontrar una persona que no tiene qué comer o el mínimo necesario para vivir o, todavía peor, que no tiene el trabajo que le otorga dignidad?».

También nos exigió con firmeza cuidar la tierra, al decir que Europa ha estado siempre en primera línea de un loable compromiso en favor de la ecología.

Al hablar de migración, nos suplicó no mirar hacia otro lado: «no se puede tolerar que el mar Mediterráneo se convierta en un gran cementerio».

Y en su último mensaje urbi et orbi, levantó la voz por una paz justa y duradera en Ucrania y en Tierra Santa. Hoy hemos conocido su último deseo, y es que el papamóvil se pueda convertir en un hospital infantil para los niños en Gaza. Gran signo y gran deseo.

Señorías, si queremos estar a la altura del legado, hagamos nuestras sus palabras: «abandonar la idea de una Europa atemorizada y replegada sobre sí misma para suscitar y promover una Europa protagonista y transmisora de valores humanos; la Europa que camina sobre la tierra segura y firme, precioso punto de referencia para toda la humanidad».

Esa es la Europa que el papa Francisco soñó; que sea también la Europa que entre todos sigamos construyendo.

Jordan Bardella, au nom du groupe PfE. – Madame la Présidente, mes chers collègues, c’est avec gravité et recueillement que je prends la parole à mon tour pour saluer la mémoire du pape François. Parce qu’il est une figure universelle, sa disparition aura ému, au-delà des 1,4 milliard de catholiques dans le monde.

Homme de foi, homme de dialogue et de paix, autorité morale rare dans un monde en perte de repères, le pape François le fut incontestablement. Son pontificat fut celui d’une attention constante portée aux plus fragiles et aux plus démunis. Que l’on partage ou non ses opinions politiques, ses prises de position – elles ont été nombreuses et multiples –, le respect solennel dû aux morts nous oblige.

En ce moment solennel, je veux redire avec fierté que la France, fille aînée de l’Église, n’oublie ni ses racines chrétiennes, ni le lien millénaire qui l’unit à la foi et à l’Église catholique. Ce lien historique et précieux fonde une part inestimable de notre identité, de notre civilisation, de nos valeurs et, pour beaucoup, de notre espérance. Que le pape François repose en paix.

Nicola Procaccini, on behalf of the ECR Group. – Madam President, ‘a Church that goes out’ is how Pope Francis summed up the mission of his pontificate, a Church that doesn’t remain confined within its physical spaces, but instead opens itself spiritually to the world, a Church that reaches out to people, cares for them – even physically – wherever they may be.

I’ve shared many of Pope Francis’s messages, even those considered ‘politically incorrect’, but I would be hypocritical if I didn’t also admit some different points of view, particularly regarding the governance of migration. I think that for some here it’s quite the opposite. Yet despite our differences, Christianity represents all of us. It’s the only cultural bond that still holds us together. It’s the common root of Europe, even if the European Union denies it every day.

In October 2020, Pope Francis wrote to us:

‘Europe, find yourself again! Rediscover your ideals, which have deep roots. Be yourself. Don’t be afraid of your millennia‑old history, which is more a window to the future than to the past’.

Addio, Papa Francesco.

Billy Kelleher, on behalf of the Renew Group. – Madam President, sadly, Pope Francis’s death did not come as a shock to most of us. Unfortunately, his health had been waning, and while we had all hoped for the best, it was clear that his time was coming to an end.

His time, however, as supreme pontiff was different, to say the very least. His recommitment to the church being a ‘church of the poor’ was profound and real. And while he could not make all the changes he wanted, he has, I believe, changed the Catholic Church for the better. His pontificate will be known as one committed to decency, human dignity, social justice and the raising of those on the margins of society. On behalf of the Renew Europe group. I want to extend my deepest sympathies to the 1.4 billion Catholics across the globe who are mourning over the loss – not just of their spiritual leader, but also of a man who lived each day committed to the service of the poor, the marginalised and the vulnerable.

In 2018, the people of Europe welcomed Pope Francis to our shores as we hosted the World Meeting of Families. Pope Francis was welcomed with open arms and with deep respect by my fellow citizens. To everyone elected in this Parliament and to parliaments across the world who claim to profess the Christian faith: I would urge you to listen to Pope Francis’s words and his teachings. There is nothing Christian about cheering when migrants drown in the seas. There is nothing Christian about making those in the margins fear for their safety just because they are different to us. Pope Francis’s death is a loss to us all. Whether we are Catholic, another kind of Christian, practice another religion or indeed are non-believers – his humanity transcended denominations. Society has lost a great leader and a great teacher with his passing. Ar dheis Dé go raibh a anam dílis.

Martin Schirdewan, on behalf of The Left Group. – Madam President, Christianity and socialism might not share the closest link at first glance, but Pope Francis used his mandate to advance the Christian social doctrine that is also deeply rooted in socialist politics. The fight for social justice and against poverty – one of the cornerstones of Francis’s pontificate – remains a central responsibility for both the progressive Left and the progressive Church.

Pope Francis has all my respect for always taking sides for the vulnerable and for defending humanity and human rights for all, regardless of origin, status, colour or belief. And, in an increasingly hostile world, Pope Francis’s voice has constantly been one of peace. Relentlessly, he called for an end of the wars in Ukraine and in Gaza. Every single day, he cared for the Palestinian civilians whose unjust suffering he felt painfully.

Let us make his prayers for justice and peace a reality. Let’s the end politics of injustice and division. And I wish his successor all possible success in transforming the Catholic Church into a Church for the 21st century.

I’d like to conclude, in a rather secular way – I’m sure he would have understood – farewell, Francis.

René Aust, im Namen der ESN-Fraktion. – Frau Präsidentin, sehr geehrte Damen und Herren! Im Jahre 2013 suchten die Herren Kardinäle einen neuen Papst, und sie fanden ihn, wie er selbst sagte, am anderen Ende der Welt. Sie fanden einen streitbaren Hirten, einen Papst, der seine Kirche reformieren wollte und der wusste, dass echte Erneuerung im Herzen der Menschen beginnt. Über bestimmte Aspekte wie seinen Ansatz zum Synodalen Weg wird noch lange diskutiert werden. Doch dies ist nicht der Moment für Bewertungen – heute halten wir fest: Die Welt hat einen guten Menschen verloren – einen, der als Bischof von Rom diente, der nicht thronte, sondern tröstete.

Sein Pontifikat war geprägt von seinen Erfahrungen als Seelsorger, von Bescheidenheit und dem Blick auf die Ärmsten. Möge Papst Franziskus in Frieden ruhen. Auch deshalb habe ich in der vergangenen Woche in der wunderschönen Kirche in Paris in Saint-Sulpice für ihn eine Kerze angezündet. Und mögen die Kardinäle im bevorstehenden Konklave eine weise Wahl treffen. Ich wünsche ihnen dabei Gottes Segen.

4. Approval of the minutes of the previous sitting

President. – The minutes and the texts adopted of the sitting of 3 April are available. Are there any comments?

I see that is not the case. Therefore they are approved.

5. Announcement by the President (Rule 138(2))

Ilhan Kyuchyuk (Renew). – Madam President, dear colleagues, on 19 March this year, the Commission put forward the SAFE regulation proposal and based it on Article 122 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, JURI considered the use of Article 122 of TFEU as the basis of the SAFE regulation proposal under Rule 138(2) of the Rules of Procedure.

On 23 April, the committee unanimously decided that Article 122 was not the appropriate legal basis for the proposed regulation. JURI came to this conclusion after having considered the aim of the SAFE proposal and in the absence of proper justification by the Commission of the choice of the legal basis. JURI also observed that Article 122 contains two paragraphs, and each of those confers on the Council a distinct competence to adopt legal acts subject to specific conditions. However, the SAFE proposal is based on Article 122, and it entirely hangs on both paragraphs. The Commission fails to explain why both paragraphs should be relied upon as the legal basis. There is also no justification why other possible legal bases under the TFEU were discarded, in particular in the context of Article 122(1), which can only apply ‘without prejudice to any other procedures provided for in the treaties’.

At the same time, although JURI discussed and analysed alternative legal bases which appear appropriate, such as Article 173(3) of the TFEU, it decided at this stage not to pronounce itself conclusively. It is enough to say at this point that JURI does consider that another legal basis under the treaties could be used, and therefore that the Union’s competence to act under a legal basis other than in Article 122 TFEU does exist.

President. – Thank you very much, Mr Kyuchyuk. So I will write, in accordance with your argumentation, to the presidents of the Council and Commission to inform them of the procedure.

6. Announcement by the President

President. – This Wednesday at 10:30, there will be a wreath-laying ceremony on the Parvis Louise Weiss to commemorate the 80th anniversary of the end of the Second World War in Europe. Then, at 11:30, there will be a further ceremony in this Chamber to mark this solemn occasion with a number of veterans.

I invite you attend both of these events, and I truly count on your presence.

7. Composition of Parliament

President. – The competent authorities of Germany have notified me of the election of Volker Schnurrbusch to the European Parliament replacing Maximilian Krah with effect from 4 April 2025. I wish to welcome our new colleague and recall that he takes his seat in Parliament and on its bodies in full enjoyment of his rights pending the verification of his credentials.

8. Request for waiver of immunity

President. – I have received a request from the competent authorities in Hungary for the parliamentary immunity of Péter Magyar to be waived. The request is referred to the Committee on Legal Affairs.

9. Request for the waiver of parliamentary immunity – closure of procedure

President. – I have received a letter from the competent authorities in Belgium withdrawing the request for the waiver of the parliamentary immunity of Jaak Madison. The procedure is therefore closed.

10. Composition of political groups

President. – Malika Sorel is no longer a member of the PfE Group and sits with the non‑attached Members as of 19 April 2025.

11. Composition of committees and delegations

President. – The EPP and PfE groups have notified me of decisions relating to changes to appointments within committees and delegations. The decisions will be set out in the minutes of today’s sitting and take effect on the date of this announcement.

12. Negotiations ahead of Parliament’s first reading (Rule 72)

President. – The LIBE, PECH and – jointly – the SEDE and ITRE committees have decided to enter into interinstitutional negotiations pursuant to Rule 72(1) of the Rules of Procedure. The reports, which constitute the mandates for the negotiations, are available on the plenary webpage and their titles will be published in the minutes of the sitting.

Pursuant to Rule 72(2), Members or political groups reaching at least the medium threshold may request in writing by tomorrow, Tuesday 6 May at midnight, that the decisions be put to the vote. If no request for a vote in Parliament is made before the expiry of that deadline, the committees may start the negotiations.

13. Negotiations ahead of Council’s first reading (Rule 73)

President. – The ENVI Committee has decided to enter into interinstitutional negotiations ahead of the Council’s first reading, pursuant to Rule 73 of the Rules of Procedure. The position adopted by Parliament at first reading, which constitutes the mandate for those negotiations, is available on the plenary webpage, and its title will be published in the minutes of the sitting.

14. Proposals for Union acts

President. – I would like to announce that, pursuant to Rule 47(2) of the Rules of Procedure, I have declared admissible a proposal for a Union act repealing Directive 2003/87/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 October 2003 establishing a scheme for greenhouse gas emission allowance trading within the Community and amending Council Directive 96/61/EC. This proposal is referred to the Committee on the Environment, Climate and Food Safety, as the committee responsible, and to the Committee on Industry, Research and Energy, for an opinion.

15. Signature of acts adopted in accordance with the ordinary legislative procedure (Rule 81)

President. – I would like to inform you that, since the adjournment of Parliament’s session on 3 April, I have signed, together with the President of the Council, three acts adopted under the ordinary legislative procedure in accordance with Rule 81 of Parliament’s Rules of Procedure.

I would also like to inform you that on Wednesday, I shall sign, together with the President of the Council, another three acts adopted under the ordinary legislative procedure.

The titles of the acts will be published in the minutes of this sitting.

16. Order of business

President. – I would like to inform you that I have received the following requests for urgent procedure pursuant to Rule 170(6):

– from the ECR Group, and jointly from the EPP, S&D and Renew groups, on the following legislative file: CO2 emission performance standards for new passenger cars and new light commercial vehicles for 2025 to 2027;

– from the ENVI Committee on the following legislative file: The protection status of the wolf (Canis lupus);

– from the ECON Committee: amendments to the Capital Requirements Regulation as regards securities financing transactions under the net stable funding ratio.

The vote on these requests will be taken tomorrow.

Now I would like to inform the House that I have received requests for points of order. I will start by giving the floor to Bas Eickhout.

⁂

Katrin Langensiepen (Verts/ALE). – Frau Präsidentin, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Heute ist der Europäische Protesttag zur Gleichstellung von Menschen mit Behinderung, und hier reden wir über 100 Millionen Menschen mit Behinderungen in der Europäischen Union. Da habe ich eine schlechte und eine gute Nachricht: Alle Mitgliedstaaten haben bei der Umsetzung der UN-Behindertenrechtskonvention komplett versagt. Noch immer haben Menschen mit Behinderungen keinen gleichberechtigten Zugang zum Wahllokal, zum Recht auf Wahl, zu selbstbestimmtem Leben, gleichberechtigter Teilhabe, wenn es um Bildung, Arbeit und Entlohnung geht.

Das habe nicht ich mir ausgedacht, das hat sich die UNO ausgedacht, und die UNO hat es festgehalten und hat die EU dafür massiv gerügt. Wir sind immer noch nicht gut, wenn es um die Umsetzung der UN-Behindertenrechtskonvention geht. Aber ich habe auch eine gute Nachricht: Wir können es besser machen. Heute ist der Europäische Protesttag von 100 Millionen Menschen mit Behinderungen – Frauen, Kindern, Geflüchteten, Menschen, die queere Personen sind, die intersektional betroffen sind. Da ist es ein Menschenrecht – ich weiß, Menschenrechte sind gerade nicht der heiße Scheiß in diesem Haus –, aber wir müssen uns endlich um die Menschenrechte kümmern, wenn wir Wettbewerbsfähigkeit halten wollen und gleichberechtigt teilhaben wollen.

Hilde Vautmans (Renew). – Madam President, colleagues, I would like to make this point of order, because 25 April marked the ninth anniversary since Swedish-Iranian academic Ahmad Reza Djalali was arrested in Iran.

In October 2017, he was sentenced to death after a grossly unfair trial. He is currently, colleagues, the longest standing EU citizen held hostage by the Iranian authorities, and as a consequence of years in prison, malnutrition, not being given the medical care he needed and torture, his situation is really serious. He said in a video: ‘I am at my breaking point’.

So, colleagues, on this heartbreaking anniversary, I call on you, Madam President, and all my colleagues to take action and repeat our call: we ask for the immediate and unconditional release of Professor Djalali, just like we voted for here in this House.

Özlem Demirel, im Namen der Fraktion The Left. – Frau Präsidentin! Am 2. Mai wurde das Schiff der NGO Freedom Flotilla in internationalen Gewässern in der Nähe Maltas von zwei Kriegsdrohnen mehrfach angegriffen. An Bord des Schiffes befanden sich 30 Aktivistinnen und Aktivisten und humanitäre Helfer. Mit ihnen dabei Lebensmittel, Medikamente, Hilfsgüter für das von Israels Krieg gebeutelte Volk in Gaza. Der Angriff löste ein Feuer an Bord aus. Die Besatzung sendete einen Notruf. Doch der nahe gelegene Inselstaat Malta ignorierte dies zunächst einmal und reagierte nicht sofort.

Kolleginnen und Kollegen, was hier passiert ist, ist ein äußerst schwerwiegender, inakzeptabler Vorfall! Sowohl der militärische Angriff auf ein ziviles Schiff als auch die Missachtung des internationalen Rechts ist inakzeptabel. Deshalb beantragen wir eine Debatte dazu, und wir fordern auch die Kommission zu einer Stellungnahme zu diesem Vorgang auf. Kolleginnen und Kollegen, zu Beginn der Debatte haben Sie den Papst Franziskus gewürdigt. Wenn Sie gleich abstimmen, denken Sie bitte daran, wie der Papst jetzt abstimmen würde.

President. – I will give the floor to any colleague who would like to speak against. I see no one does, so we will vote by roll call.

(Parliament rejected the request)

So the agenda is unchanged.

Also for Wednesday, the Greens Group has requested that a Commission statement on ‘EU response to the Israeli Government’s plan to seize the Gaza strip and promote the so-called “voluntary departure” of Gazans’ be added in the afternoon before the debates under Rule 150. As a consequence, the sitting would be extended until 23:00.

I give the floor to Mounir Satouri to move the request on behalf of the Greens Group.

Mounir Satouri, au nom du groupe Verts/ALE. – Madame la Présidente, cette nuit, le cabinet de sécurité israélien a approuvé un plan offensif. Il vise à s’emparer de toute la bande de Gaza et à s’y installer indéfiniment. Ce plan vise aussi à organiser des départs soi-disant volontaires de la population de Gaza. Ce sont en réalité des déplacements forcés de population.

Sur le plan politique, nous avons, c’est vrai, des divergences. Mais nous sommes une majorité, ici, à être attachés à la solution à deux États. Cette décision du gouvernement israélien remet en cause de manière définitive la perspective de cette solution à deux États. L’accaparement du territoire est inacceptable. Cela viole toutes les règles du droit international. Notre Parlement ne peut rester muet.

Je demande un débat sans résolution qui porte le titre «Déclaration de la haute représentante/vice-présidente sur la réponse de l’UE au projet du gouvernement israélien de s’emparer de la bande de Gaza et de promouvoir le soi-disant départ volontaire des Gazaouis».

Chers collègues, avec cette proposition, ce Parlement a pour une fois la capacité d’être dans le bon timing et d’être au rendez-vous pour rappeler son attachement au droit international.

Iratxe García Pérez (S&D). – Madam President, only one question: I would like to ask, please, the services to give the group leaders and the groups all the information, very clearly, about this from the beginning, because if we have information that, for example, this debate will be for the May II plenary, and we decide as a group to support it in May II, it’s so difficult now to take a decision about this time. Only to clarify, we as the S&D Group wanted this debate for May II.

Γεάδης Γεάδη, εξ ονόματος της ομάδας ECR. – Κυρία Πρόεδρε, με βάση το Πρωτόκολλο 10 της Συνθήκης Προσχώρησης της Κυπριακής Δημοκρατίας, αυτή εντάχθηκε εδαφικά στην ολότητά της στην Ευρωπαϊκή Ένωση, με αναστολή της εφαρμογής του κεκτημένου στις περιοχές όπου δεν ασκεί αποτελεσματικό έλεγχο, συνεπεία της τουρκικής εισβολής και συνεχιζόμενης παράνομης κατοχής.

Δυστυχώς, το περασμένο Σάββατο αφίχθηκε στην παράνομη αποσχιστική οντότητα στην Κύπρο —στο ψευδοκράτος, ο Tayyip Erdoğan, στέλνοντας μήνυμα εδραίωσης της κατοχής, βάζοντας —όπως δήλωσε— «μία ακόμη σφραγίδα της Τουρκίας στο νησί».

Η στάση του Τούρκου προέδρου όχι μόνο δεν δείχνει τον απαιτούμενο σεβασμό απέναντι στις αρχές και τις αξίες που πρεσβεύει η Ευρωπαϊκή Ένωση, αλλά δείχνει και απαξίωση σε ολόκληρη την ευρωπαϊκή οικογένεια, αφού αποτελεί ξεκάθαρη πρόκληση, παραβίαση του διεθνούς δικαίου και της διεθνούς νομιμότητας. Το Ευρωπαϊκό Κοινοβούλιο επιβάλλεται να αντιδράσει, καταδικάζοντας με τον πιο έντονο τρόπο.

Ως εκ τούτου, παρακαλώ όπως γίνει αποδεκτό το αίτημα για εγγραφή του θέματος με τίτλο «Η παράνομη επίσκεψη του προέδρου Erdoğan στις κατεχόμενες περιοχές της Κύπρου και οι κλιμακούμενες απειλές ενάντια στην Κυπριακή Δημοκρατία».

President. – OK, so let me get this clear. We’re going to vote on the debate with the title as amended by the S&D Group which was accepted by the ECR Group. What is not clear to me is whether the S&D would want the debate on Wednesday or on Thursday. You say Wednesday? OK, Wednesday. Fine. We’ll do it on Wednesday. We just add to our debates on Wednesday.

So we vote first by roll call on adding the statements.

(Parliament approved the request)

Now we vote by roll call on whether we will have a resolution.

(Parliament rejected the request)

We will see with Mr Mavrides what he meant and how we can do it.

Thank you very much. The agenda is adopted. Have a good week.

(The sitting was briefly suspended)

PRESIDENZA: ANTONELLA SBERNA
Vicepresidente

17. Resumption of the sitting

(La seduta è ripresa alle 17:52)

18. Preparation of the EU-UK summit (debate)

Adam Szłapka, President-in-Office of the Council. – Madam President, honourable Members, Mr Commissioner, with European security being the top priority of the Polish Presidency, we are striving to exploit the full potential of the EU’s relations with the United Kingdom.

Last March, the Council exchanged views on the state of play. The upcoming first EU‑UK summit will provide a unique opportunity to strengthen our relationship. We are like‑minded partners, allies and good neighbours. Therefore, we are very much welcoming the EU governments’ approach, seeking to further strengthen our relations.

We work together from sanctions against Russia to support for Ukraine through security summits and joint diplomatic efforts. The ongoing Russian aggression against Ukraine, and our joint support for Ukraine, is a strong reminder of why our unity matters more than ever.

At the summit, we will seek to reaffirm our mutual commitment to the full, faithful and timely implementation of our agreements, including rights of our citizens. At the same time, there is still untapped potential and room for improvement in our relations. Ahead of the upcoming EU‑UK summit, the Council presidencies work closely with the Commission to identify and explore areas for deepening our cooperation.

A whole range of areas will be discussed with our British hosts during the summit: security and defence; sanitary and phytosanitary rules for agricultural products; stronger cooperation on energy; access to waters for EU fishermen; and opportunities for young people to live, work and study across the border. Together we are working on a package in key areas that will bring tangible benefits to citizens and businesses on both sides of the Channel. Let me stress that our partnership is about more than just trade flows: it’s about people.

Madam President, honourable Members, Commissioner, we should not forget about some challenges that remain. The situation in Northern Ireland requires careful monitoring, as does the situation of Union citizens that live in the United Kingdom.

In the relations with the UK, we are following the principles, among which there are the indivisibility of our four freedoms, safeguarding the integrity of our single market and customs union, and protecting the autonomy of the Union’s decision‑making. These guiding principles remain relevant. We will carry them forward, united and speaking with one voice.

At the same time, the Government of the United Kingdom reaffirmed its position of not rejoining the single market, the customs union and on the free movement of people. Within these parameters, leaders will engage pragmatically and respectfully at the summit. We are confident to achieve solid results for moving ahead with the strengthening of our relations with the United Kingdom.

A final word on the parliamentary dimension of EU‑UK relations. To underline the importance that the Council attaches to the input of this House in this process, achieving a mutually beneficial partnership between the EU and our British partners is a shared goal of the EU institutions. Let us continue to exchange on how to make this partnership stronger.

Maroš Šefčovič, Member of the Commission. – Madam President, Honourable Minister, Honourable Members of the European Parliament, I am happy to participate in today’s plenary debate on the preparation of the EU‑UK summit. As you will be aware, we have been working intensely with our UK partners to prepare for the summit on 19 May. As you well know, this will be the first such summit at leaders‑level since the UK left the EU, and it marks an important milestone in our post-Brexit relationship.

President von der Leyen has met with UK Prime Minister Starmer on several occasions over the last few months, including most recently in London on 24 April. They have agreed that the summit offers an opportunity to strengthen EU‑UK cooperation across a number of areas, and it is clear that both sides want to deliver a positive summit. Exploratory discussions with the United Kingdom on a broad range of issues have taken place over the past weeks. This is part of an ongoing process which will further take shape at the summit and beyond.

The EU and the UK are like‑minded partners, and in recent times we have worked closely together on shared challenges, notably in response to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. Given that we live in an increasingly uncertain and complex geopolitical environment, it is all the more important that we continue to cooperate in this manner. For our part, we see three broad areas where there is scope to further develop the EU‑UK relationship.

Firstly, security and resilience. This includes deeper and more structured cooperation between the EU and the UK as close partners and like‑minded allies in the face of unprecedented geopolitical challenges in our neighbourhood. This means defence and security will likely be a focus of the summit.

Secondly, something very important to this House: people‑to‑people contacts, which includes rebuilding bridges for our young people. This reflects our long‑standing policy of putting citizens at the heart of EU‑UK relations.

Thirdly, the protection of our planet and its resources. We aim to consolidate and advance cooperation on sanitary and phytosanitary matters, sustainable fisheries, climate and energy. We are working with our United Kingdom partners in pursuit of a balanced package that delivers tangible benefits to citizens across the EU and the United Kingdom.

Madam President, Honourable Members, while we are committed to strengthening our relations with the United Kingdom, we continue to insist on the full, timely and faithful implementation of our existing agreements – the Withdrawal Agreement, including the Windsor Framework, and the Trade and Cooperation Agreement. These agreements are the cornerstone of our bilateral relations and form a solid foundation for our cooperation. As regards the Withdrawal Agreement, last week, I co-chaired a meeting of the Joint Committee in London with my UK counterpart, Nick Thomas-Symonds. This was an important step on the road to the summit. Together, we expressed a clear commitment to the full, timely and faithful implementation of the agreement in all its parts. We welcomed the important progress made in the areas of citizens rights as regards the true and extra cohort, and on the Windsor Framework as regards parcels and customs arrangements.

Nevertheless, further work remains to be done on the other systemic citizens’ rights issues and on the Windsor Framework, for example on SPS. As regards the Trade and Cooperation Agreement, it remains the most ambitious free trade agreement the EU has concluded with any third country, and it responds to the UK Government’s red lines, which remain in place. But this does not mean that we cannot more fully exploit the potential of the Trade and Cooperation Agreement and look at what more it has to offer. It does not mean that we cannot further develop our cooperation in the areas I mentioned previously. On the contrary, there is much we can still do together to strengthen our relationship.

The first EU‑UK summit will therefore be an important moment to do just that. I am looking forward to hearing your views during this debate, and of course I will be very happy to answer your questions. Thank you very much, Madam President.

Nina Carberry, on behalf of the PPE Group. – Madam President, Commissioner, since arriving in Parliament, I’ve been struck by an assumption often made here that Brexit is a settled matter. In reality, its consequences continue to shape political and economic life in Ireland, the UK and across Europe. Anticipation is building ahead of the upcoming EU‑UK summit on 19 May, and in a world where economic stability, security and trade openness matter more than ever, the EU and the UK have everything to gain from resetting relations.

Although the TCA lays a crucial foundation, the world has changed considerably since its signing four years ago. It remains a framework that can and should be built upon. A comprehensive veterinary agreement would be an immediate and impactful step forward, unlocking significant opportunities for farmers and agri‑food businesses. Progress on mutual recognition for professional qualifications would have major benefits. In the same way, bringing the UK closer to Erasmus+ would be an undeniable win for students and apprentices.

In an era where tackling climate change requires coordinated global efforts, closer alignment on emissions trading schemes would be a logical step to prevent carbon leakage. Closer integration of electricity markets and fully harnessing the North Sea’s potential would enhance energy security, reduce consumer costs, increase resilience to external shocks and support progress towards net zero.

Stabilising the EU‑UK relationship will bolster both peace and prosperity in Northern Ireland. As 19 May draws near, we are presented with a historic opportunity, one that should serve as a foundation for an ambitious and forward‑looking agenda. This is our moment to reshape a new chapter in EU‑UK relations.

Aodhán Ó Ríordáin, on behalf of the S&D Group. – Madam President, as the world feels more fragile than ever, the upcoming UK‑EU summit cannot be a photo opportunity. It is a chance to show what kind of Europe and what kind of world we want to build. Trump’s foreign policy is rooted in egomania. As the US steps back, Europe and the UK must step forward; we must stand in solidarity with Ukraine and in defence of freedom and democracy. But our values mean nothing if we apply them selectively. In Gaza, international law is being torn apart as children are bombed and starved. Their blood drips from the hands of EU and UK leaders. We should know better.

For decades, the UK and the EU worked as one to build a fairer, better and more peaceful Europe. Nowhere was that more true than in Northern Ireland. Brexit took the people of the North out of the EU against their will. Northern Ireland needs an enhanced voice in the EU, given its unique citizenship rights, its automatic right to re‑accede, and its obligations under EU law. The UK Government needs to seize the opportunity of a new EU relationship, not cower in the face of Farage’s fads army. Failure is not an option.

Matthieu Valet, au nom du groupe PfE. – Madame la Présidente, Monsieur le Ministre, Monsieur le Commissaire, mes chers collègues, ici, nous devons être concrets, donc je vais vous parler de manière concrète du pays dont je suis élu, la France, et de ma région de France. Mes compatriotes de Calais, de Boulogne-sur-Mer et de Dunkerque n’en peuvent plus. Enfant du Nord, je ne reconnais plus ce si beau littoral du Pas-de-Calais transformé en Alcatraz pour lutter contre l’immigration irrégulière et les clandestins. N’en déplaise à l’extrême gauche, les passeurs sont des mafieux et des assassins. En 2024, 82 migrants sont morts dans la Manche pour avoir voulu rejoindre la Grande-Bretagne.

Que dire des accords du Touquet? C’est un fiasco! La France dépense un demi-milliard d’euros par an pour protéger une frontière qui n’est pas la sienne. Policiers, CRS, gendarmes mobiles sont engagés sur le littoral: autant d’effectifs en moins pour lutter dans nos villes, dans nos campagnes, contre l’ensauvagement, contre les narcotrafiquants qui gangrènent mon pays.

Lors du prochain sommet, l’Europe doit être courageuse aux côtés de la France, face aux Britanniques. Dites à la Grande-Bretagne: «Tu es une grande fille, tu ne dois plus délocaliser ta frontière en France et, comme une grande, tu dois gérer, comme tous les grands pays du monde, tes migrations, tes problèmes et ta frontière.» Je dis donc à ce grand pays ami: «Non, la France ne peut pas accueillir et gérer toute la misère du monde, elle a déjà fort à faire avec les siens.»

Je compte sur la Commission et sur la Pologne pour aider notre grand pays à lutter contre ces migrations, notamment en affirmant que la Grande-Bretagne doit gérer aujourd’hui seule ces problèmes puisque la France n’y arrive plus.

Kris Van Dijck, namens de ECR-Fractie. – Voorzitter, ik blijf een sterke voorstander van nauwe, pragmatische en op wederzijds respect gebaseerde betrekkingen tussen de Europese Unie en het Verenigd Koninkrijk. Mijn delegatie heeft zich in het verleden altijd consequent verzet tegen elke vorm van strafmaatregel jegens het Verenigd Koninkrijk, nadat het land de soevereine keuze maakte om de EU te verlaten. We betreuren evenwel de Brexit.

Ik verwelkom het aangekondigde streven van de Britse regering naar een reset van de relatie met de EU. Hoewel ik het jammer vind dat het Verenigd Koninkrijk hierdoor niet naar onze interne markt of naar onze douane-unie zal terugkeren, geloof ik dat het van cruciaal belang is om onze samenwerking te versterken en enkele struikelblokken weg te werken.

Ik pleit specifiek voor een nieuwe veiligheidsovereenkomst waarmee onze samenwerking op het gebied van defensie, cyberveiligheid en het delen van inlichtingen wordt versterkt. Ten tweede moeten we een overeenkomst sluiten om de sanitaire en fytosanitaire controles aan de grenzen efficiënter te maken. Dit zou een concrete win-winsituatie opleveren voor onze landbouwers, bedrijven en consumenten. Ten derde hoop ik dat het Verenigd Koninkrijk zich opnieuw bij het Erasmusprogramma zal aansluiten. Ten vierde moet het positieve momentum worden benut om de samenwerking op het gebied van energie, visserij en kernfusieonderzoek te versterken. Dit geldt ook voor mijn eerdere pleidooi om de JET-kernfusiereactor (Joint European Torus) te behouden. Tot slot moeten we de mobiliteit van artiesten en inwoners van beide regio’s vergemakkelijken. Het is van groot belang dat onze burgers, jongeren maar ook ouderen, weer gemakkelijk kunnen reizen.

Laat deze top het begin zijn van een volwassen partnerschap tussen twee gelijkwaardige bondgenoten, gebaseerd op gedeelde belangen, wederzijds vertrouwen en een gezamenlijk engagement voor vrijheid en veiligheid.

Sandro Gozi, au nom du groupe Renew. – Madame la Présidente, Monsieur le Ministre, Monsieur le Commissaire, cher Maroš, le sommet UE-Royaume-Uni du 19 mai doit être un tournant. Les événements à Kiev, Washington ou Gaza ont déjà changé le monde et nous voyons dans plusieurs pays surgir des acteurs extrémistes qui se pensent comme des Churchill, alors qu’ils agissent comme des nouveaux Chamberlain.

Face à ces bouleversements et ces dangers, un nouveau partenariat stratégique euro-britannique s’impose. Mais, pour avancer, il faut avant tout une base solide, la confiance: construire la confiance, respecter pleinement les accords existants et les enrichir avec de nouvelles opportunités pour la défense et la jeunesse, l’intelligence artificielle et le climat, et, surtout, trouver des solutions concrètes sur les dossiers encore ouverts, comme la pêche et l’énergie.

C’est ce que nous avons demandé dans la recommandation votée lors de l’Assemblée parlementaire UE-Royaume-Uni, en mars, en vue de ce sommet. Sur cette base, nous devons repenser l’architecture de sécurité en Europe et travailler ensemble sur la scène globale pour une nouvelle alliance des démocraties.

Pär Holmgren, on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group. – Madam President, this upcoming EU‑UK summit of course offers an opportunity to rebuild bridges and strengthen cooperation, which is really crucial given the current turbulent times. But it’s also highly beneficial from a long‑term strategic perspective. We, as Greens, recognise the mutual benefit of knowledge‑sharing and research collaboration, and we warmly welcome the UK’s re-entry into Horizon Europe. However, we would also like to see similar developments in Erasmus+, to give young people a chance to study and work on either side of the channel. We therefore call on the Commission and the UK Government to be proactive in restoring and strengthening such programmes.

We would also like to see a better regulatory dynamic between the EU and the UK, for example, the better alignment of biosecurity border controls and the emissions trading schemes to endorse sustainability practices and to facilitate trade.

Last but not least, as you all know, there is a war on European soil. Geopolitical tensions are growing in many, many corners of the world, and humanity is threatened by an escalating climate crisis. We cannot be wasting time and resources conducting parallel research on both sides of the channel, and we cannot be wasting an opportunity to foster a sense of unity among the future generations of Europe. So let this summit be a starting point for a deepening relationship between the EU and the UK for the benefit of all.

David McAllister (PPE). – Madam President, dear Commissioner, dear colleagues, as previous speakers have already mentioned, the upcoming EU‑UK summit marks a pivotal moment to recalibrate our partnership. Ever since the Windsor Framework, agreed in March 2023, we have seen greater political stability in our relations. The much anticipated EU Security and Defence Pact could be a real milestone. Enhanced cooperation in military mobility, joint research and development, and cyber resilience – this is all urgently needed. The EU and the UK should rise to the occasion and ensure an agreement that also fosters deeper cooperation on intelligence sharing, sanctions coordination as well as foreign information manipulation and interference.

Yet, a mature partnership should go beyond security and defence. The Commission has put substantial proposals on the table on everything from energy to youth mobility. We should deepen cooperation in further key sectors: energy interconnectivity and offshore renewables in the North Sea, financial services through regulatory equivalence, and a pragmatic sustainable fisheries arrangement for the time after 2026. As for the Trade and Cooperation Agreement, the TCA is due for review next year. Long‑term stability in our relations is more important than ever. Commissioner Šefčovič, we look forward to discussing the outcome of this summit with you in the Foreign Affairs Committee.

Γιάννης Μανιάτης (S&D). – Κυρία Πρόεδρε, η εκλογή Trump στις Ηνωμένες Πολιτείες έχει αλλάξει τις παγκόσμιες ισορροπίες. Για να μπορέσει να αντεπεξέλθει η Ευρώπη στις γεωπολιτικές προκλήσεις, όπως είναι ο πόλεμος στην Ουκρανία, η κρίση στη Μέση Ανατολή και η εξάλειψη των αμερικανικών εγγυήσεων ασφαλείας για την ήπειρό μας, πρέπει να ενισχύσει τις σχέσεις της με εταίρους με τους οποίους έχει κοινές αρχές και αξίες, όπως είναι το Ηνωμένο Βασίλειο, ο Καναδάς, η Αυστραλία, η Ιαπωνία.

Εννέα χρόνια μετά το δημοψήφισμα για το Brexit και την καταστροφική διακυβέρνηση των Συντηρητικών, η εκλογή των Εργατικών δημιουργεί μια νέα ευκαιρία. Η επικείμενη σύνοδος Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης – Ηνωμένου Βασιλείου μπορεί να αποτελέσει το πρώτο βήμα για την εξεύρεση ενός θεσμικού πλαισίου που θα επιτρέψει την εμβάθυνση της συνεργασίας μας, ιδιαίτερα σε τομείς όπως είναι η ασφάλεια, η άμυνα, το εμπόριο, η κλιματική αλλαγή και η ενέργεια, όπως και οι ευκαιρίες για τους νέους μας. Σε αυτή την κατεύθυνση πρέπει να κινηθούμε.

Ernő Schaller-Baross (PfE). – Elnök Asszony! A közelgő londoni EU-Egyesült Királyság csúcstalálkozó rendkívüli lehetőséget kínál számunkra, hogy kapcsolatainkat új, erősebb alapokra helyezzük. Sajnálatos módon az elmúlt időszakban nem tudtuk maradéktalanul kihasználni a rendelkezésünkre álló lehetőséget, és úgy tűnt, hogy az EU inkább büntetni próbálta a briteket döntésükért, mintsem konstruktív párbeszédet folytatott volna velük.

Most azonban elérkezett az idő, hogy pragmatikus, hatékony alapokra helyezzük az együttműködésünket. Közösen dolgozunk ki olyan egyezményeket, amelyek valóban a jövőnket formálják. Fontos hangsúlyozni, hogy a briteken kívül az amerikai partnereinkkel is folyamatosan tárgyalnunk kell, és olyan megoldásokra van szükség, amelyek minden fél számára előnyösek és tartósak. Az együttműködés kulcsa a kölcsönös tiszteleten és közös érdekeken alapuló partnerség, amely hosszútávon biztosíthatja Európa stabilitását és sikerét. A következő hónapok döntőek lesznek abban, hogy hogyan alakítjuk közösen a jövőnket.

Jadwiga Wiśniewska (ECR). – Madam President, dear colleagues, Mr Commissioner, the upcoming first EU-United Kingdom summit after Brexit is an opportunity to open a new chapter in rebuilding our relationship. The most important issue to be addressed is, above all, cooperation in the field of defence. European defence policy is not possible without the United Kingdom.

In the face of global threats, we need a joint response to hybrid challenges, cybersecurity and the protection of our borders. Our key topics include a mobility programme for young people, trade issues, as well as the fight against illegal immigration. One of the most troubling consequences of Brexit for young people was the UK’s withdrawal from the Erasmus+ programme. I therefore welcome plans for new solutions regarding youth mobility.

Brexit has changed the formal framework of our relationship, but it has not broken the bonds between us. We must do everything we can to make everyday life easier – we cannot allow political or bureaucratic obstacles to make it harder. We need cooperation based on trust and concrete solutions, cooperation with a response to take needs of people on both sides of the English Channel.

Barry Cowen (Renew). – Madam President, colleagues, as we look ahead to the upcoming summit, I want to commend the Commission for its ongoing efforts to strengthen our relationship with the UK. Despite the challenges posed by Brexit, the UK remains a valued and like‑minded partner of the EU in the face of global challenges. In light of the recent tariff decisions by the US, it is more important than ever to deepen our engagement with our British neighbours. I urge the Commission to be ambitious in our dialogue with the UK, to work to align our trade regulations and enhance cooperation on energy, particularly on offshore wind and grid infrastructure, and, of course, to preserve the Common Travel Area.

Above all, our united and unwavering support for Ukraine must remain a central priority. With that said, any lasting partnership must begin with the full implementation of existing agreements, including the Windsor Framework. The unique status of Northern Ireland must be protected in all future negotiations, and the peace and stability secured by the Good Friday Agreement must never, ever be taken for granted. Only through trust, cooperation and mutual respect can we secure a prosperous future for both EU and UK citizens alike.

Malika Sorel (PfE). – Madame la Présidente, chers collègues, les crises actuelles le démontrent, l’histoire ne s’efface pas d’un trait de plume. Le Royaume-Uni a quitté l’Union européenne, mais il demeure européen. Washington menace de se distancer de l’Europe, aussitôt la France et le Royaume-Uni se retrouvent et prennent la tête d’un engagement pour la sécurité européenne.

En matière de coopération, beaucoup de progrès ont été faits, mais certains domaines restent en suspens, tels que la mobilité des citoyens, en particulier des jeunes. Plutôt que l’approche purement comptable, le Royaume-Uni doit considérer la richesse humaine et culturelle que permet Erasmus. C’est le vœu de nos collègues britanniques que nous avions reçus récemment ici, dans notre Parlement.

Pour notre compétitivité, nous devons intégrer, dans nos alliances, les universités britanniques de sciences et technologie.

Concernant l’intelligence artificielle, les Britanniques sont pragmatiques et souhaitent avancer très vite en unissant nos efforts. Nous devons tempérer notre obsession réglementaire en la matière.

Dernier point: l’immigration. Plusieurs pays de l’Union subissent les conséquences d’un appel d’air créé par le laxisme d’employeurs britanniques. Ce sujet doit être traité.

Chers collègues, œuvrons à une relation confiante, équilibrée, tournée vers l’avenir.

Francisco José Millán Mon (PPE). – Señora presidenta, el nuevo contexto internacional —con inclusión de la guerra de agresión rusa contra Ucrania y el cambio de la Administración en Washington— hace muy conveniente reforzar la cooperación en política exterior y de defensa con el Reino Unido. Necesitamos un marco profundo e institucionalizado de cooperación en este ámbito.

Fue una lástima que, por negativa de los conservadores británicos, este capítulo quedase fuera del Acuerdo de Comercio y Cooperación. Yo espero que la cumbre del día 19 produzca avances sustanciales en este sentido, y también en otros temas de mutuo interés como, por ejemplo, la movilidad de los jóvenes, la energía, la mayor agilización de los intercambios comerciales y la pesca.

Me detengo brevemente en este último punto: el llamado «periodo de ajuste» de los últimos cinco años ha supuesto un importante recorte de capturas para la flota europea. A partir de 2026 no deben producirse nuevos cambios. Necesitamos previsibilidad y estabilidad para la flota europea. Quiero recordar una vez más que, aunque es verdad que barcos europeos pescan en aguas británicas, también es cierto que el mercado europeo es el que recibe la gran mayoría de las exportaciones británicas de productos del mar.

Termino con una pregunta: señor comisario, ¿puede decirnos algo sobre en qué situación se encuentran las larguísimas negociaciones con el Reino Unido respecto de Gibraltar?

Nathalie Loiseau (Renew). – Madam President, dear British friends. The EU-UK summit gives us the historic opportunity to repair our relationship. There are thousands of good reasons to do it, whereas there was none to damage old ties in the first place.

We share the same aspirations and face the same challenges on both sides of the channel. All leaders have expressed political will to work more and better together. Now is the time to turn words into deeds.

A credible European defence must partner with the UK as a priority, building on the coalition of the willing for Ukraine. Let’s make it happen.

Let’s also prioritise the young generations in our decisions. Since Brexit, London deprives itself of talented young Europeans for no reason. Let’s build a youth mobility scheme.

Every side has to make efforts. We must be more welcoming towards British touring artists. You, dear British friends, must be more welcoming towards European fishermen. Because in both cases, it would make only winners and no losers.

Dear British friends, it is time to get out of splendid isolation and to enjoy again a European entente cordiale.

Thijs Reuten (S&D). – Madam President, colleagues, Commissioner, Council, in today’s geopolitical reality, we need to stand together with our best friends, and the EU and the UK are each other’s best friends. We have to join forces to preserve our freedom, democracy and security – these core values, which were re‑established with the UK’s strong involvement also 80 years ago. As today we celebrate Liberation Day in the Netherlands, I want to thank our British liberators for their incredible contribution in this regard.

A united Europe is needed more than ever to face today’s challenges. Being a member of the EU or not should be insignificant in this. We cannot be driven apart. The upcoming summit is an excellent opportunity to turn the page and to reshape our future and relationship for our citizens, for Europe. This should start with a new formal security and defence partnership to protect our people, strengthen our deterrence and ensure stability in Europe. Let’s get this done together.

Elisabeth Dieringer (PfE). – Frau Präsidentin, sehr geehrte Kolleginnen und Kollegen, geschätzte Bürger! Ich begrüße es ausdrücklich, dass die Vertreter der Europäischen Union sich nun anders verhalten als in der letzten Zeit, ja vielleicht – bildlich gesprochen – auch von ihrem hohen Ross herabsteigen und auch persönliche Befindlichkeiten hintanstellen. Man erkennt wohl nun, dass Großbritannien auch nach dem EU-Austritt keineswegs so geschwächt dasteht, wie man es sich vielleicht auch erhofft hat, und dass europäische Unternehmen sowie besonders junge EU‑Bürger weiterhin nach England streben. Ein Grund dafür: Vier der zehn besten Universitäten der Welt stehen im Vereinigten Königreich, keine einzige davon in der EU. Für EU‑Bürger sind die Studiengebühren dort inzwischen zwei- bis dreimal so hoch wie vor dem Brexit, und in der EU gibt es kaum gleichwertige Alternativen.

Doch es geht nicht nur um Studienplätze. Junge Menschen aus Europa möchten im Vereinigten Königreich leben, lernen, arbeiten – und stoßen auf Visapflicht, Sponsorship‑Systeme und einen Dschungel aus Bürokratie. Die EU hat hier einen wesentlichen Teil ihrer Jugendpolitik preisgegeben. Es gilt daher nun, den Brexit als Realität anzusehen, als demokratische Realität. Unsere Antworten sollten daher nicht in der Vergangenheit sein, sondern auf die Zukunft ausgerichtet.

Barry Andrews (Renew). – Madam President, Commissioner, colleagues, I made my very first speech in the hemicycle in February 2020, and I called on the Commission to treat the UK not as a rival but as a partner. Given that we had two more years of Boris Johnson to deal with, that was probably a tall order. But, I believe, together with the voices of so many Members today in this debate, that we need to go even beyond partnership and talk about a like-minded strategic ally.

I believe the time has long passed to continue to punish the UK for Brexit, or to make an example of the UK, to discourage them. I believe that way of thinking is long over, and I believe it’s a very much a minority view among in the European Commission.

So, we need to approach the TCA review from a position of maximum ambition, including, obviously, SPS, the emissions trading scheme and youth mobility. We need to widen the scope to include finance, given the questions raised about the role of the US.

I believe it is in our towering mutual interest to work together to make our respective economies as strong as possible.

Željana Zovko (PPE). – Madam President, dear Commissioner, dear colleagues, the summit of 19 May represents a unique opportunity to deepen our cooperation with the UK in areas such as defence, trade, foreign affairs and energy. We urgently need to enhance our partnership with the UK on security and strategic questions. However, in our dialogue with the UK, we must take into account the problems of every Member States, and notably the interest of coastal countries. We must make clear that the strengthening of our relations with the UK must lead to a win‑win outcome. Moreover, the UK Government must understand that for relations to be solid, it needs to be transparent. In this regard, we need clarification on the reasons why the UK Government is not willing to cooperate more with the European Union in the Western Balkans. Only by having in mind this transparent and mutually beneficial approach will we be able to take momentum of a reset in our relations.

Ana Catarina Mendes (S&D). – Senhora Presidente, Senhor Comissário, Senhor Ministro, eu sou das otimistas que acreditam que o Reino Unido ainda voltará a fazer parte da União Europeia. É por isso que vejo com muito bons olhos a próxima parceria, e sobretudo a próxima parceria porque deve ser uma parceria estratégica e o reforço das relações entre a União Europeia e o Reino Unido.

Se é verdade que já avançámos muito no Acordo de Parceria Económica, que tem sido absolutamente essencial para reforçar os nossos laços económicos, não é menos verdade que o Reino Unido tem dado sinais, neste momento de instabilidade, sinais muito fortes de presença na definição da política de defesa e segurança na Europa. E é absolutamente essencial que mantenhamos esta relação com o Reino Unido — ela é estratégica, ela é antiga, ela é absolutamente essencial.

Mas, se é verdade que estamos perante as novas ameaças, e estes são dois sinais muito bons, não é menos verdade, Senhor Comissário, que aquilo que peço aqui hoje, neste plenário, é que voltemos a trazer os jovens para o programa Erasmus. Façamos da cultura uma prioridade também na nossa relação com o Reino Unido, fazendo derrubar as barreiras que ainda existem na mobilidade dos nossos artistas.

Uma Europa de valores é uma Europa que partilha também a educação e a cultura — é isto que peço à Comissão neste momento.

Michał Szczerba (PPE). – Pani Przewodnicząca! Wysoka Izbo! Wspólna odpowiedzialność za bezpieczeństwo kontynentu wyznacza kierunek naszych relacji z Wielką Brytanią. Szczyt Unii Europejskiej i Wielkiej Brytanii, zaplanowany na 19 maja, musi być impulsem do sformalizowania strategicznej współpracy w dziedzinie obronności, produkcji uzbrojenia, bezpieczeństwa energetycznego i ochrony infrastruktury krytycznej. Stawiając na nowe partnerstwa, Unia Europejska realizuje cele polskiej prezydencji. Zmieniamy Unię Europejską poprzez wprowadzenie bezpieczeństwa w główny nurt naszych prac. Kompas strategiczny to narzędzie, którym dysponuje Unia Europejska do budowy strategicznych partnerstw. I Unia dostrzega konieczność zacieśniania współpracy z krajami trzecimi. Cieszymy się z dotychczasowych partnerstw z takimi krajami jak Norwegia, Japonia, Korea Południowa, Mołdawia, Macedonia Północna i Albania, ale mówimy: chcemy więcej. Chcemy więcej współpracy, chcemy więcej sojuszy, chcemy więcej partnerstw i więcej bezpieczeństwa.

Procedura “catch-the-eye”

Billy Kelleher (Renew). – Madam President, thank you very much. I do really welcome the reset of EU-UK relations, and I do look forward to a positive outcome in the summit. And there’s just a few points I want to allude to, Commissioner, in terms of the important issues: one being the issue of the Erasmus programme. It has been spoken about a lot, but it really is hugely fundamental to the concept of young people being able to travel, to live, to learn, to love in other cultures. And it would be a shame if over the next number of years, we were unable to see another generation of UK citizens travelling to Europe and European citizens travelling to the UK.

From my perspective, sharing a jurisdiction on the island of Ireland, it is critically important that we have that continual building of personal relationships, and universities and third-level institutions are a great way to do that.

The other key areas where I believe we have to make a lot of progress – again, I look at it from the context of Ireland being offshore – offshore in terms of wind energy and the distribution of electricity from Ireland through the UK and onwards into Europe. I believe we have to have a full and open and honest debate with the UK around that particular issue to ensure the simplification of the export and import of electricity via the UK itself. Otherwise, our ability to export the large sums of wind energy that will hopefully be generated in the years ahead would be significantly challenged, because there will have to be interconnectors directly from Ireland to France otherwise.

Lukas Sieper (NI). – Frau Präsidentin, liebe Menschen Europas! Ich hatte vor drei Wochen die große Freude, mit britischen Kollegen aus dem House of Commons und dem House of Lords Syrien zu besuchen. Und dort, am Ende der zivilisierten Welt, in einem Land, gebeutelt von Bürgerkrieg und Unterdrückung, da findet man zusammen mit den Menschen, die einen begleiten. Genauso kam ich zusammen mit meinen britischen Kollegen. Und ich habe gespürt: Während nicht alle von ihnen erkennen, dass der Brexit ein Fehler war, so sehnen sich doch alle von ihnen nach Europa. Und deswegen denke ich, dass dieser anstehende Gipfel eine wichtige Gelegenheit ist, die Probleme aus dem Weg zu räumen, die wir in der Vergangenheit schon hatten.

Ein großes Thema ist der Handel, und ein kleines Thema in diesem großen Thema ist die Fischerei. Wir werden uns alle daran erinnern, dass die Fischerei und die rechtlichen Fragen hinsichtlich dieses Problems einer der Gründe waren, der der Brexit-Bewegung damals erlaubt hat, Fahrt aufzunehmen. Ich möchte daher alle Vertreter der Europäischen Union aufrufen, insbesondere bei diesem Thema eine gute Lösung mit unseren britischen Freunden zu finden.

Diana Iovanovici Şoşoacă (NI). – Doamnă președintă, atunci când veți vorbi cu Marea Britanie, o să vă rog frumos să apărați și interesele românilor care muncesc în Marea Britanie. Avem foarte mulți români acolo, este una dintre cele mai importante grupări de cetățeni români pe care o avem în afara granițelor țării.

Din păcate, este discriminată total. Nu există săptămână să nu fiu anunțată că un copil este luat din rândul familiilor române. Nu este zi să nu fiu anunțată că un copil a fost atacat și înjunghiat de către alți britanici, și unii copii au murit.

Mă adresez ambasadei Marii Britanii la București, dar și aici, dar și pe lângă Comisia Europeană – nu vor să ne primească, nu vor să vorbească cu noi. Nu-i interesează situația românilor din Marea Britanie și vă întreb: românii care muncesc în Europa, în Marea Britanie, în Uniunea Europeană, sunt chiar de clasa a șaptea a populațiilor lumii? Chiar așa, trebuie să ne batem joc de ei, iar copilul unui român nu contează absolut deloc și nimeni nu îi apără?

Solicit Comisiei Europene, solicit Parlamentului European să ne apere și nouă copiii românilor din Marea Britanie care sunt discriminați și omorâți ca niște animale pe străzi.

(Fine della procedura “catch the eye”)

Maroš Šefčovič, Member of the Commission. – Madam President, my dear colleague, Honourable Minister, Honourable Members of the European Parliament, first and foremost, thank you very much for all your contributions. I would like to start by showing my appreciation, in particular, for the interventions of Mr McAllister, Madam Loiseau, Mr Gozi and Mr Andrews, because they have been with the file on EU‑UK cooperation from the very beginning, since the first moment of Brexit. They can see the change, they can feel the difference, and they can also judge the progress which we are achieving. I totally agree with them that, on both sides, on the side of the United Kingdom and on the on the side of the EU, we see the upcoming summit as a very important turning point, as a pivotal moment. Therefore, we are putting in all our efforts and we are very much focused on delivering tangible results, because we believe that this would clearly contribute to the strengthening of EU‑UK relations.

I absolutely agree with Mr Maniatis and Mr Reuten, who are highlighting the fact that we are now living in a different world. Indeed, the geopolitical landscape has changed dramatically and, therefore, you need to forge new partnerships, new friendships, and you have to work on the relationships you have, especially with important and close neighbours. Therefore, it’s very important for all of us for the EU and UK to work closely together and to make sure that, in all aspects of what is currently being discussed on the geopolitical level, we behave like like‑minded parties, exactly like Madam Mendes and Mr Cowen highlighted.

If you allow me to just bring you a little bit more detail of my visit to London last week, on top of a very well prepared joint committee, where we went through the entire inventory of issues linked to the Windsor Framework, with the Withdrawal Agreement and with the citizens’ rights. I want to expressly say here how much was achieved, how much we focused on this area, how much we fight for the rights of every single EU citizen in the United Kingdom, and how much we work with our Member States to make sure that British nationals who live in the EU also have also the rights which belong to them under the Withdrawal Agreement. I want to reassure everyone that this is a top priority for us. We are really taking care of every person here because we know that we are talking about families, we are talking about children, and we are talking about the fair treatment of our citizens in the UK and British nationals in the EU.

On top of the joint committee session, in one day I had very productive sessions with four ministers, with Minister Nick Thomas-Symonds, with Secretary of State Jonathan Reynolds, with whom we discussed trade, with Mr Hilary Benn, where we delved into the issue of Northern Ireland and our cooperation over the Northern Ireland Protocol, and with Mr David Lammy, where we managed not only to discuss geopolitics, but also our good and positive cooperation on the issues linked with Gibraltar. This is also reflecting the new wave of partnership and positive atmosphere between EU and UK.

Coming back to the more concrete points the Honourable Members have made. Indeed, on security and defence, it’s very clear that we can do more to strengthen our cooperation in this area. The points of Madam Zovko and Mr Van Dijck are very well taken, and we are working with this clearly in our minds. I am sure that if you look at the White Paper on the future of European defence already there, we are making it very clear that the UK is an essential European ally, and we are stating that cooperation should be enhanced in our mutual interest. Therefore, I can confirm that we want to be ambitious in this area, and we see it as a core part of a renewed EU‑UK agenda.

Many Honourable Members have been referring to the importance of the area of people‑to‑people contacts. I can assure you that not only for our Member States, which I’m sure Minister Szłapka can confirm, but also for the Commission, very clearly, this is one of the top priorities. We want, again, to build bridges. We want to give our youth the experience of talking to British peers, of having these exchange programmes. Of course, we will be very happy if we can manage to find a solution on Erasmus+ and other other areas of cooperation, as Madam Wiśniewska and Mr Holmgren have been calling for. Therefore for us, in this particular regard, it is very important not to look at each other’s citizens as mere statistics, but as future bridge‑builders, as people who would remember that experience for the rest of their lives. Of course, therefore, in this regard, we want the summit to bring tangible benefits to the people on both sides. For us, clearly, the ambition in this area is an indispensable part of the renewed EU‑UK agenda.

Honourable Members have been referring, among other areas, to the importance of fisheries, and I would like to reassure all of you that this is clearly a priority for us, as it was raised by Mr Millán Mon and Mr Ruissen. The current arrangements for reciprocal access to waters expires in the middle of next year, so it is essential for us to reach an early agreement that protects the rights of our fishers and provides them with certainty and predictability. We have also been open to an SPS agreement with the UK, as Madam Carberry was calling for. We do that because we are convinced that this would further facilitate the flow of SPS goods between Great Britain and Northern Ireland, beyond what has already been achieved with the Windsor Framework.

On top of this, the ideas mentioned by Mr Andrews, like linking the emissions trading system or strengthening cooperation in the field of energy, as was called for by Mr Kelleher and Mr Cowen – all these are areas we are currently looking at where I believe we can progress further. When you follow the statement of Commission President von der Leyen, she was very clear on this as well. So there is more that the EU and UK can do together to exploit our potential in this area, and we will be using every single remaining day to achieve this result.

Mr Millán Mon was asking about Gibraltar. I will partially respond to this: I have to underline at this stage that we are progressing in a positive direction, and I really would like to thank both Foreign Minister Alvarez and Mr Lammy for their exemplary cooperation and for understanding the position of all sides, because this will help us to advance on these very complex and difficult discussions. We will be working on this at the top level. I believe that we will be successful in that result as well.

Madam President, Honourable Members, my dear colleague, Minister Szłapka, I would like to conclude by thanking you once again, not only for the exchange we had this afternoon, but also for the very vigilant eye and constructive spirit this house has always demonstrated towards the development of EU‑UK relations. We’ve been working very closely on these issues throughout the years, and I believe that the progress which we can see right now is also thanks to your vigilance, to your support and to your to your constructive ideas. Once again, thank you very much, and I’m also looking forward to this constructive cooperation in the future. Thank you, Madam President.

Adam Szłapka, President-in-Office of the Council. – Madam President, thank you very much, honourable Members, Commissioner, the European Union and the United Kingdom are more than neighbours, we are like-minded democracies that share a deep commitment to the rule of law, human rights, market economy and the international order. We are united by a set of values that underpin stability in a world that has become increasingly uncertain.

Our relationship with the UK is about being close partners in peace, prosperity, democracy and about global leadership. We will reaffirm our commitment to this relationship at the summit in pursuit of our shared strategic interests and for the benefit of our citizens.

Presidente. – Dichiaro chiusa la discussione.

19. Protection of the European Union’s financial interests – combating fraud – annual report 2023 (debate)

Gilles Boyer, rapporteur. – Madame la Présidente, mes chers collègues, Monsieur le Commissaire, le rapport annuel sur la protection des intérêts financiers de notre Union est bien plus qu’un exercice administratif. C’est le miroir de notre capacité collective à défendre notre budget contre les attaques dont il fait l’objet. Notre Parlement accorde une attention toute particulière aux résultats de ce rapport de la Commission, car ils mettent en lumière les failles, les risques, mais aussi les progrès qui sont réalisés dans la lutte contre la fraude. Grâce à notre architecture anti-fraude, le rapport est désormais enrichi des données du Parquet européen, d’Europol et d’autres acteurs-clés.

Nous devons cependant aller plus loin. L’architecture actuelle doit être modernisée, consolidée et surtout rendue pleinement opérationnelle. Avec la création du Parquet européen, nous avons franchi une étape. Il est maintenant temps de renforcer les synergies entre les différentes branches de notre architecture.

En parallèle, nous faisons face à une mutation rapide des menaces. L’intelligence artificielle est désormais utilisée par les organisations criminelles pour détourner des fonds européens. Notre riposte doit donc être aussi technologique. Nous devons mettre à jour nos outils: IMS, Arachne, EDES. Nous devons aussi investir massivement dans des outils numériques avancés et renforcer notre capacité d’analyse des risques, sinon nous aurons toujours un temps de retard sur les criminels.

Les chiffres sont clairs: les actions menées par les entités luttant contre la fraude ont un véritable impact financier. Les recouvrements de paiements indus par l’OLAF et la restitution au budget de l’Union des fonds confisqués grâce au Parquet européen doivent devenir des priorités stratégiques. Les montants détournés doivent être récupérés rapidement; ils doivent l’être au niveau européen et être réaffectés aux politiques communes.

Nous faisons également face à des défis structurels. Les systèmes nationaux restent trop fragmentés. Les capacités de certaines autorités anti-fraude demeurent insuffisantes. Nous devons donc poursuivre l’harmonisation de nos législations, renforcer la coopération transfrontalière et protéger celles et ceux qui ont le courage d’alerter.

Les trois grandes menaces que nous avons identifiées cette année – le crime organisé, la corruption et les conflits d’intérêts – sapent l’intégrité de la dépense publique et détournent nos fonds communs. Ces menaces ne sont pas des fatalités, mais elles appellent une réponse ferme, coordonnée, technologique, éthique et résolument européenne.

Je souligne aussi dans mon rapport l’importance du règlement sur la conditionnalité qui permet de faire le lien entre l’état de droit et la protection des intérêts financiers de l’Union. Il rappelle que l’accès aux fonds européens exige des garanties solides en matière d’indépendance de la justice et de prévention des conflits d’intérêts. Nous ne pouvons pas tolérer que des fonds européens financent des systèmes qui sapent l’état de droit.

Monsieur le Commissaire, chers collègues, nous avons la volonté. Il faut désormais nous donner pleinement les moyens de passer à l’action. Je compte sur vous pour que le prochain cadre financier pluriannuel prenne pleinement en compte nos priorités communes de lutte contre la fraude et contre le crime organisé, ainsi que l’application rigoureuse du principe de conditionnalité. Le budget européen ne peut rester vulnérable face à des réseaux criminels et à la complaisance de certains États ou à la technicité de la fraude moderne.

Piotr Serafin, Member of the Commission. – Madam President, honourable Members, first of all, I would like to thank the rapporteur, Mr Boyer, and the members of the Committee on Budgetary Control for their report, which is balanced, forward-looking and that we not only appreciate, but we share most of the observations that have already been made.

The European Parliament has always supported and, I would say even more, inspired the European Commission to make the anti-fraud architecture more effective and up to the task – for that, I would like to thank you also today. Because of the time constraints, I will concentrate only on a few most prominent aspects of the report that have been already mentioned by the rapporteur.

First, the review of the anti-fraud architecture – this is one of the tasks for this Commission. As the rapporteur has mentioned we have new actors already in place, we might have even more, and it will be absolutely necessary to look and see for the synergies and to facilitate cooperation between the actors. So, from our perspective, to achieve efficient and effective cooperation among all anti-fraud actors will be the priority of the review of the anti-fraud architecture. That is also the precondition for effective and swift recovery of EU funds.

We have already started this process in the Commission. We had consultations with the main actors, including EPPO, OLAF, European Court of Auditors, Eurojust and Europol with a view to drawing up an action plan. I stand ready to inform the European Parliament about the progress and I will also count on the support of this House for the future implementation.

I can only echo what was said by the rapporteur on the conditionality regulation – this is clearly progress and very welcome developments, and the one that, looking ahead in view of the next Multiannual Financial Framework, we will keep in place. We would also like to build on the experience to ensure that the EU budget can be used to promote reforms that strengthen the rule of law in Member States. Therefore, there should not be any doubt – respect for the rule of law is a must for EU funds and even more in the future MFF.

Thirdly, the digitalisation and integration of data. The rapporteur has already referred to a few systems that we have in place – I will talk about them later. But what I want to say is that we are fully aware that digitalisation, interoperability of databases and integration of AI tools for fraud detection and prevention are already present in the revised action plan that accompanies the Commission anti-fraud strategy. We are progressing on its implementation, despite the challenges, and we will report about these developments in the next PIF report.

However, at the heart of any significant development in this direction lies the issue of data quality, without which any technical solution will remain fruitless. We are significantly investing in this by providing detailed guidance to national authorities and engaging in structured dialogue with those that need additional assistance.

Fourthly, refining our tools – IMS, which has been mentioned several times in your report, received an important upgrade at the end of last year to make it technologically ready for other significant developments that will follow. When it comes to Arachne – the tool already supports control and audit and helps protect the Union’s financial interests, and we will continue to strengthen it in line with financial regulation. A Member States expert group, in which the European Parliament sits as an observer, formalises the cooperation towards the development of the future system. We will also be happy to continue to update you on the progress in this project.

When it comes to the early detection and exclusion system, it is currently applicable in direct and indirect management modes as of 2028. Its scope will be extended to short management and direct management with Member States and that is something for which the European Parliament can also take credit.

Let me also mention whistleblower protection that is supporting the prevention and detection of fraud. To strengthen the culture of ethics and maintain a high level of awareness about fraud, corruption or other serious wrongdoing, the Commission will provide updated guidance to its staff on whistleblowing procedures and protection, in light of the EU standards of protection in this area.

And finally, our attention is already set on the future and on the design of the next Multiannual Financial Framework, drawing from good practices and lessons learned during the current MFF. We will need to make sure, in particular, that the legal provisions underlying the future MFF ensure transparency of fund recipients and meaningful and mandatory reporting of quality data about detected irregularities and fraud, and a strong anti-fraud architecture to ensure adequate protection of the EU budget. When the moment of the negotiations of the legislative package for the future MFF comes, the Commission will count once more on your support to ensure that the resulting legal framework will be up to the challenges we are confronted with. I thank you again for your attention and look forward to the constructive debate.

PREȘEDINȚIA: NICOLAE ŞTEFĂNUȚĂ
Vicepreședinte

Caterina Chinnici, a nome del gruppo PPE. – Signor Presidente, Signor Commissario, onorevoli colleghi, io voglio innanzitutto ringraziare il relatore, l’onorevole Boyer, e gli altri relatori ombra per il lavoro che insieme abbiamo svolto su questa importante relazione. Importante perché tutelare gli interessi finanziari dell’Unione e contrastare le frodi significa non solo proteggere il bilancio ma anche la stessa sicurezza interna dell’Unione.

Infatti, come la Procura europea ed Europol costantemente ci segnalano e come ricorda anche la relazione, dietro le frodi e gli altri reati che ledono gli interessi finanziari dell’Unione ci sono sempre più spesso – direi ormai sistematicamente – le organizzazioni criminali, le stesse responsabili anche dei crimini più violenti.

E allora, a fronte dell’aumento dei casi di frode e irregolarità nel quinquennio 2019-2023, occorre rafforzare la cooperazione e lo scambio di informazioni a tutti i livelli, intensificare digitalizzazione e trasparenza, consolidare i sistemi di gestione e controllo, in particolare nell’ambito dell’RRF, dove, secondo la Corte dei conti europea, permangono carenze preoccupanti.

Ma soprattutto, e più in generale, dobbiamo rafforzare l’architettura antifrode dell’Unione, migliorando il coordinamento tra le componenti, sia a livello orizzontale degli organismi dell’Unione, sia a livello verticale di rapporti UE-autorità nazionali degli Stati membri, che devono adottare un approccio sempre più proattivo in tale settore.

Ed è necessario, sempre in quest’ottica, procedere alla revisione dei mandati dei due attori chiave nella lotta alla criminalità economico-finanziaria: EPPO ad Europol, già prevista negli ordinamenti della Commissione, e questo non solo per rafforzarne ulteriormente il ruolo, ma anche per rendere la cooperazione fra di loro ancora più strutturale e sistematica.

Prevenzione, individuazione, indagini e repressione delle frodi non solo per un ritorno in termini economici ma per tutelare opportunità, diritti e sicurezza dei cittadini europei.

Eero Heinäluoma, on behalf of the S&D Group. – Mr President, Commissioner, colleagues, I also would like to thank our rapporteur and the shadows for excellent cooperation in preparing this report.

Combating fraud is about protecting the EU budget. Equally much, it is about protecting European citizens and businesses.

Through European cooperation, we have managed to combat trade in faulty protection equipment during the pandemic, prevented unsafe toys from reaching our children and hindered dangerous food products from ending up on our plates.

Together, we are able to better ensure that EU financial support benefits businesses that live up to our common rules and objectives, instead of those undermining European policies of fair competition on the single market.

To be successful, however, we need all of our society to participate. A zero-tolerance culture against fraud begins with public authorities, including national governments, leading by example and condemning fraud and corruption wherever they occur.

We need an open democratic society with media and civil society free from political pressure or attempts to restrict their participation in public dialogue.

Here, the Commission has a key responsibility in ensuring that our safeguards are robust enough to meet a growing volume of EU funds and an ever more challenging fraud landscape, as our rapporteur told us. Reality shows the need for strengthened safeguards for protecting the EU budget against misuse, be it fraud or violations of the rule of law, not least in view of the upcoming MFF.

Ultimately, we need to ensure that every euro is spent to the benefit of European citizens and businesses.

Virginie Joron, au nom du groupe PfE. – Monsieur le Président, chers collègues, Monsieur le Commissaire, ce rapport sur la protection des intérêts financiers de l’Union est trop clément. En effet, à l’exception du lobbying des ONG vertes financées par Bruxelles, la plupart des scandales majeurs ne figurent ni dans le rapport ni dans les statistiques présentées.

Comment excuser l’inaction du Parquet européen dans l’affaire Pfizer-Von der Leyen? Aucune enquête n’a été menée sur d’éventuels conflits d’intérêts et sur les erreurs systématiques dans la négociation des contrats, sur les 71 milliards d’euros gaspillés en vaccins contre la COVID, sur les doses annulées de Pfizer à 10 € la dose, sur l’achat de plus de 1 milliard d’euros pour le Remdesivir du laboratoire Gilead – traitement pourtant jugé inefficace contre la COVID –, ou encore sur l’emprunt géant post-COVID à taux variable.

Il y a de grandes spoliations et il y a des décisions inexcusables de la Commission qui ne figurent dans aucun rapport. Comment autoriser le pantouflage de Thierry Breton à la Bank of America? Ou confier à BlackRock le soin d’imaginer notre futur bancaire? Laisser sans conséquences majeures le directeur général de la DG MOVE voyager aux frais du Qatar? Confier le recrutement des fonctionnaires européens à une entreprise américaine? Ou encore le blanchiment présumé de 1 million d’euros par le commissaire à la justice via des tickets de loto achetés dans une station-service? De quelle crédibilité la Commission peut-elle se targuer quand elle ne respecte pas ses propres principes?

Cette Commission «VDL II» veut aujourd’hui contrôler les urnes, car les citoyens refusent cette mauvaise gestion. C’est ça, la solution?

Lucia Yar, za skupinu Renew. – Vážený pán predsedajúci, pán eurokomisár, kolegovia, kolegyne, dnes presne dnes, keď tu diskutujeme o ochrane európskych peňazí, sa v krajine, z ktorej pochádzam, na Slovensku, vo veľkom diskutuje o okrádaní bežných ľudí na úkor oligarchov. Tí si z eurofondov, dámy a páni, stavajú na Slovensku haciendy. Eurofondy na podporu vidieka a turizmu opakovane končia v rukách vyvolených s prepojením na premiéra Fica a jeho vládnu moc. Už pred rokmi na tieto schémy s dotáciami upozorňoval zavraždený novinár Ján Kuciak. Od jeho smrti ubehlo sedem rokov, no podvodné praktiky pretrvávajú. Presne tieto prípady ukazujú, prečo je potrebné, aby sme na úrovni Európskej únie dôsledne chránili naše financie. A presne k tomu nabáda aj táto správa. Je dôležité, a to nielen pre krajiny, ktoré najviac prispievajú do európskeho rozpočtu, ale je to dôležité aj pre obyvateľov krajín ako Slovensko, ktorí vedia vďaka eurofondom dobiehať západ a vďaka tomu aj dobiehajú. My tu v europarlamente musíme urobiť všetko pre to, aby európske peniaze slúžili tam, kde sú potrebné, a najviac ľuďom v najmenej rozvinutých regiónoch.

Daniel Freund, on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group. – Mr President, 228 bottles of champagne, turning a former royal palace into a private golf club, yachts, private jets, Ferraris, vacations in the Maldives – dear colleagues, these are all things that have been purchased by the French Rassemblement National and by the Hungarian Fidesz with money that they stole from the European Union. EU funds that were meant to improve the lives of ordinary Europeans have instead been misused for the luxury lives of a few individuals from the extreme right.

The Rassemblement National and Fidesz – it’s a match made in extremist heaven, and together they form the most corrupt group in this European Parliament: PfE. And while they’re giving their hate and lie-filled speeches – and we just heard it here a couple of seconds ago – blaming people’s problems on Soros, on Eurocrats, on trans people, on NGOs, on refugees, whatever is the matter of the day, they just can’t hide the fact that Viktor Orbán and Marine Le Pen are ultimately the biggest risk to EU taxpayers’ money.

And while Marine Le Pen, who has defrauded this Parliament of EUR 4.6 million, has been rightfully convicted and is not allowed to run for election for five years, Viktor Orbán remains yet unpunished. But it is time that he gets punished for the EUR 14 billion that he and his cronies have stolen from EU taxpayers.

Commissioner, we need to do something about this. We cannot keep sending billions of euros to what is the biggest financial risk in this Union. It’s the corrupt system of Viktor Orbán. So, the best thing we can actually do to protect the EU’s financial interests from fraud, from embezzlement, from corruption, is that we stop paying the corrupt autocrat in Budapest.

Rudi Kennes, namens de The Left-Fractie. – Voorzitter, het vertrouwen in de Europese Unie heeft een dieptepunt bereikt. Het is onze verantwoordelijkheid ervoor te zorgen dat overheidsgeld niet wordt verspild of verduisterd. Het verslag benadrukt hoe veel er nog moet gebeuren om de capaciteit van de fraudebestrijdingsarchitectuur te versterken. De opsporing en de melding van fraude blijven ontoereikend, hoewel er aanzienlijke aantallen onregelmatigheden zijn gemeld.

We moeten de rol van ngo’s en journalisten erkennen bij het blootleggen van misbruik van EU-middelen; we moeten respect opbrengen voor hun werk en hun moed.

Digitalisering is van cruciaal belang om de besteding van overheidsgeld te kunnen volgen; de systemen en het personeel voor grensoverschrijdende onderzoeken moeten toereikend zijn. Wanneer criminelen zich geld toe‑eigenen, moet dat geld snel worden teruggevonden.

Een belangrijk deel van het verslag houdt ook verband met sancties. Persoonlijk vind ik het verkeerd om hele bevolkingsgroepen sancties op te leggen. Ten eerste werken sancties niet. Ten tweede zijn sancties enkel nadelig voor de gewone mensen.

Tot slot stel ik met teleurstelling de gebruikelijke dubbele standaarden vast bij het aan de kaak stellen van corruptie, crimineel gedrag en schendingen van de mensenrechten. Ik zou willen dat de Europese Unie zich met evenveel toewijding voor de rechtsstaat in het Midden-Oosten inzet als ze dat voor Oekraïne doet.

Arno Bausemer, im Namen der ESN-Fraktion. – Herr Präsident, meine sehr verehrten Damen und Herren! Der vorliegende Bericht konstatiert für das Kalenderjahr 2023 einen historischen Höchststand der Korruptions- und Betrugsfälle in der Europäischen Union: 13 563 Fälle von Betrug und Unregelmäßigkeiten wurden von den Behörden der EU und der Mitgliedstaaten gemeldet. Die betroffenen Mittel belaufen sich auf 1,9 Milliarden EUR.

Nun sind wir als Abgeordnete dieses Hauses hier verantwortlich für den Umgang mit den Mitteln der Steuerzahler – für den verantwortungsbewussten Umgang. Aber wie soll dieses Ziel erreicht werden, wenn wir mit Ursula von der Leyen eine Kommissionspräsidentin haben, deren Handeln sehr viele Fragen aufwirft? Die Ermittlungen der EU-Staatsanwaltschaft zur Beschaffung von zig Millionen Corona-Impfdosen sind offensichtlich mittlerweile eingeschlafen, denn davon hat man seit dem Sommer letzten Jahres nicht mehr viel gehört. Trotz Aufforderung der EU-Ombudsfrau hat Frau von der Leyen bis heute ihre damaligen Chatverläufe mit dem CEO von Pfizer nicht öffentlich gemacht.

Schaffen Sie, Frau von der Leyen, bitte endlich die notwendige Transparenz, denn Sie stehen nicht über dem Recht und können hier machen, was Sie wollen. Denn Ihnen fehlt im Gegensatz zu uns allen – uns 720 Abgeordneten – nicht nur die demokratische Legitimation, sondern offensichtlich auch jeglicher Anstand. Werte Frau von der Leyen – Sie sind ja nicht da, vielleicht kommen Sie irgendwann mal wieder –, denken Sie daran, dass die Opposition von heute die Regierung von morgen ist. Denken Sie daran, dass man eine Opposition vielleicht kurzfristig behindern kann, aber dass man einen demokratischen Wandel und den damit verbundenen Willen der Bevölkerung niemals aufhalten kann. Und denken Sie daran, dass in der Geschichte schon der eine oder andere Machthaber in seinem Elfenbeinturm eingeschlafen und im Gefängnis wieder aufgewacht ist.

José Cepeda (S&D). – Señor presidente, señor comisario Serafin, muchas gracias por este trabajo. Es un trabajo importante que, de verdad, nos tomamos —como muy bien decía mi colega del PPE— muy en serio, porque hay algo que nos preocupa de una forma muy especial, y es el incremento del fraude.

Hemos visto que en este presupuesto de 2023 se investigaron 13 563 casos, con un impacto financiero de 1 900 millones de euros. Es verdad que, además, estamos evaluando una sofisticación cada vez más creciente. La utilización de las nuevas tecnologías va en aumento, como la de la inteligencia artificial, sin lugar a dudas, para suplantar identidad, desarrollar clonaciones de bots o llevar a cabo ataques cibernéticos.

Yo creo que la Comisión todo esto se lo tiene que tomar muy en serio. Desde luego, yo quiero apostar muy fuerte por las nuevas tecnologías y la implementación de la inteligencia artificial, pero tenemos también que saber proteger. Tenemos que dar formación también a los trabajadores de la Comisión y de nuestras instituciones. En definitiva, es muy importante que desarrollemos muchas capacidades, pero sobre todo que sepamos cada vez protegernos mejor.

Julien Sanchez (PfE). – Monsieur le Président, ce rapport confirme que les intérêts financiers de l’Union ne sont pas protégés. En 2023, les fraudes et irrégularités ont atteint un record historique: 13 563 cas et 1,90 milliard d’euros détournés de leur objectif, et ce ne sont que les chiffres officiels.

Vu le peu de contrôles effectués dans les dépenses, ici, c’est en réalité bien davantage. Pire, 233 enquêtes du Parquet européen sont en cours sur les fonds de la FRR avec 1,86 milliard d’euros en jeu. Et cela ne fait que commencer, car vous confiez le contrôle de la FRR à ceux qui en perçoivent les fonds: c’est affligeant d’amateurisme!

J’étais en mission en Lettonie en avril et la Cour des comptes locale n’a pu répondre à aucune de mes questions sur le sujet. Un scandale! Si je peux me rendre compte de cela, moi, vous, vous ne le pouvez pas? Vous préférez faire l’autruche?

En tant qu’ancien maire, je suis dégoûté par ce que je vois ici. Si nos concitoyens étaient conscients de votre légèreté dans le contrôle des dépenses, ils demanderaient vos têtes. Votre responsabilité est immense. Pendant que la Commission tergiverse, l’argent des contribuables européens alimente la corruption et les mafias. Ça suffit!

Ce ne sont pas des rapports ou des vœux pieux que nous voulons, mais de la transparence, un contrôle systématique et exhaustif au centime près et donc des résultats. En attendant, nous continuerons à dénoncer vos lacunes et à proposer des moyens d’éviter ce qui se passe ici. Il est temps que le laxisme cède sa place à l’exigence.

Alexander Jungbluth (ESN). – Herr Präsident! Der größte Betrugsskandal in der Geschichte der EU wird in dem vorliegenden Bericht nicht einmal erwähnt. Rund 35 Milliarden EUR hat der Impfstoffdeal von von der Leyen den Steuerzahler in etwa gekostet. Nach wie vor verweigert sie die Aufklärung, was die Europäische Staatsanwaltschaft nicht zu stören scheint. Betrug auf allerhöchster Ebene ist in dieser EU längst Standard geworden. Und an die Adresse der Grünen: Herr Freund, es ist immer ganz interessant, dass Sie hier Frau Le Pen ansprechen.

Wir wollen an dieser Stelle doch mal feststellen, dass Ihre Parteivorsitzende, Frau Brantner, dem Magazin Tichys Einblick zufolge genau im Verdacht steht, das Gleiche gemacht zu haben. Im rheinland-pfälzischen Wahlkampf 2011, als die Grünen nicht im Parlament vertreten waren, hat sie genau das gemacht, was Sie heute Le Pen vorwerfen. Sie haben Mitarbeiter dazu verwendet, ihren Wahlkampf zu unterstützen. Sie sind an Korruption in diesem Haus überhaupt nicht zu übertreffen. Sie machen nämlich zwei Dinge: Sie haben eine korrupte Parteivorsitzende Brantner auf der einen Ebene, und mittelbar nutzen Sie über Ihre NGOs diesen Staat, nutzen Sie die EU als Selbstbedienungsladen. Sie sind der korrupteste Haufen, den dieses Parlament überhaupt zu bieten hat, Herr Freund!

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

Lukas Sieper (NI), Frage nach dem Verfahren der „blauen Karte“. – Schauen Sie mal, Herr Jungbluth, mit Ihnen diskutiere ich so gerne. Da opfere ich sogar mein Catch the eye, nur um Ihnen hier diese Frage zu stellen. Ich hoffe, Sie sind bereit. Sie sagen, dass dieser oder jener Teil der korrupteste Haufen hier im EU‑Parlament ist oder auch die Kommission. Ich meine, dass die Berichte da mal öffentlich gemacht werden müssen und die SMS, da sind wir uns ja alle einig. Was da drin steht, das weiß auch nur der liebe Gott. Aber ich schweife ab. Meine Frage an Sie lautet: Wie können Sie eigentlich sagen, dass jemand anderes der korrupteste Haufen ist, wenn es Ihre Partei ist, die sich von ausländischen Agenten schmieren lässt, weswegen wir hier die Immunität aufheben müssen?

Alexander Jungbluth (ESN), Antwort auf eine Frage nach dem Verfahren der „blauen Karte“. – Der Kollege hat es gerade richtig gesagt. Sie haben hier eine Märchenstunde, die Sie erzählen. Und wissen Sie was? Folgendes ist der Fall: Es ist doch tatsächlich so, dass bei uns immer Kleinigkeiten hervorgehoben werden und dann ein angeblicher Korruptionsskandal daraus gemacht wird. Da gibt es irgendwelche dubiosen Geschichten, die Leute wie Sie dann immer gerne erfinden. Auf der anderen Seite haben wir tatsächliche Korruption, die eben nicht geahndet wird, weil wir eben unter anderem keine unabhängige Gerichtsbarkeit haben.

Wir sehen das gerade in Deutschland, was passiert. Wir haben einen abhängigen Inlandsgeheimdienst, wir haben eine abhängige Verfassungsgerichtsbarkeit, und das ist das eigentliche Problem. Das eigentliche Problem ist, dass eine Rechtsstaatlichkeit innerhalb dieser EU kaum noch gegeben ist.

Evin Incir (S&D). – Mr President, every misuse of taxpayers’ money is essentially theft. Viktor Orbán, the leader of the far right in Europe, is one of the biggest ones. The European Commission is currently withholding … So are the colleagues going to be silent or am I allowed to continue?

(The President asked for silence in the room)

Every misuse of taxpayers’ money is essentially theft. Viktor Orbán, the leader of the far right in Europe, is one of the biggest ones. The European Commission is currently withholding many billions in EU funds from Hungary due to rule of law and corruption concerns.

This is corruption. Anti‑democrats remain anti‑democrats. Transparency and accountability are their greatest enemies. Their shamelessness knows no bounds, even extending to spying on investigators from the EU Anti‑Fraud Office, OLAF.

Those who misuse public funds and target our anti‑corruption agencies also attempt to demonise the cornerstone of democracy: civil society. A vibrant civil society is a vital pillar of healthy democracies, which explains why Orbán is attacking it.

Let us also not forget the baseless allegations against important international organisations like UNWRA. Democracy is currently in jeopardy.

András László (PfE). – Elnök Úr! Képviselő Asszonynak rögtön válaszolnék is. Magyarország uniós forrásait részben azért tartják vissza, mert nemet mondunk az ukrajnai háborúra, nemet mondunk az illegális migrációra, és nemet mondunk a genderideológiára. De ami Brüsszelt illeti, az NGO-k finanszírozási botránya végre elérte az Európai Uniót is. Az Európai Számvevőszék jelentése egészen megdöbbentő, egyértelműen átláthatatlan finanszírozásról beszél. Még az sincs rendesen szabályozva, hogy mi számít ténylegesen nem kormányzati szervezetnek.

Az EU egyszerűen elfogadja azt, hogyha egyes szervezetek annak vallják magukat, miközben fontos politikai kérdésekben rájuk hivatkozik az Európai Bizottság mint akik az európai polgárok akaratát képviselik. Az elmúlt években az Európai Parlament korrupciós botránya, a legutóbb zöld botrányban érintett Frans Timmermans esetében is kiderült, hogy NGO-k a politikai befolyásszerzés eszközei voltak. A Magyarországon működő legnagyobb, magukat civilnek hazudó szervezetek pedig támogatásuk túlnyomó részét nem magyar magánszemélyektől kapják, hanem külföldről. Ennek véget kell vetni, véget kell vetni a politikai árnyékhatalomnak, és át kell világítani ezt a rendszert. A bújtatott politikai lobbinak véget kell vetni.

Intervenții la cerere

Maria Grapini (S&D). – Domnule președinte, domnule comisar, stimați colegi, discutăm o problemă extrem de importantă și este păcat că suntem atât de puțini.

Apărarea intereselor financiare ale Uniunii ține, de fapt, de credibilitatea instituțiilor europene și cum le putem apăra?

În primul rând, toate instituțiile care sunt desemnate și plătite pentru a apăra interesele financiare și a combate frauda trebuie să lucreze transparent, să ne informeze, să transmitem în țara noastră, în țările noastre, ce fac aceste instituții, pentru că le plătim și nu cu bani puțini.

Am exemple concrete – Parchetul European – am fost raportor în mandatul trecut, Parchetul European nu este eficient. A recuperat 1%, circa 1% din sumele pentru care au cheltuit bani, au controlat. Mai mult, sunt cazuri extrem de grave: trei ani de zile terorizează o companie și, în final, nu este vinovată compania de a o scoate din piață.

Deci, dacă nu lucrează pentru cu adevărat pentru recuperarea pagubelor și evitarea fraudelor, ne pierdem credibilitatea și să nu ne mirăm că se dezvoltă extremismul.

Asta cer Comisiei Europene: transparență și eficiență în munca pe care o fac.

Lukas Sieper (NI). – Mr President, dear people of Europe, dear Commissioner, when I was researching the most important administrative body of the European Union regarding the topic of this debate, OLAF – who, by the way, also has one of the funniest names of all European institutions, at least from a German or maybe Scandinavian perspective – I found a shocking truth: this so important administrative body does not have Instagram, no TikTok, nothing but a LinkedIn account and a website.

Everyone in this room, maybe because of different political ideas, agrees on the fact that fraud is hurting this Union, is hurting the trust in our Union. And so I’m wondering, why do we not publish this important work of OLAF in a system that is modern, that reaches the young generation? How can this be?

And maybe we should also ask ourselves, which other institutions make the same mistake? I hope you can take this with you, Commissioner, even though you are not directly responsible.

(Încheierea intervențiilor la cerere)

Piotr Serafin, Member of the Commission. – Mr President, many thanks for the debate. I appreciate a number of suggestions and remarks that have been raised and that can help us to improve the way in which the anti-fraud architecture operates.

And as I said already in the opening remarks, the work on the reform and the review of the anti-fraud architecture will be absolutely key during this mandate.

I think a lot of positive developments took place in the last few years. The fact that we have in place EPPO is clearly a positive development. The fact that we have been and we will continue to invest also European taxpayers’ money into the development of the anti-fraud architecture, let me just make a reference to the announcement of President von der Leyen to increase financial resources available for Europol, that is also a positive development.

But it’s also true that since we have new actors, since we are also going to have a few new players in the area of anti-fraud architecture, that’s why that review is really necessary. And I believe that that review is not just important from the perspective of the protection of the financial interests of the EU, not only from the perspective of the protection of the EU budget, but also from the perspective of our Member States. Because the truth is that the single market is an opportunity not only for our companies, not only for our citizens, but it is also an opportunity for fraudsters. And I’m absolutely certain that without a system that we have at EU level, Member States alone would not be able to detect and fight against fraud. And that is one of the important takeaways that we will also keep in mind while looking into the future of the anti-fraud architecture.

The second point that I would like to make refers to the data on the detection of fraud. Many of you have referred to that data. Yes, it is an issue of concern. That is an issue that we would need to continue to address. But that is also a measure that we have put in place: an anti-fraud system that is able to detect fraud, that is able also to fight fraud and corruption. The system is not perfect, that’s why we would need to review it. That’s why we need to continuously work to improve it. Because as we know, one thing that the fraudsters are not missing is creativity. They will continue to look for ways in which they can misuse public money, including the EU budget money.

But that system is already is already bringing results. And to be frank, I’ve heard about some countries, not necessarily in the European Union, in which those in power say there is no fraud, there is no corruption – I don’t believe it. I think there is fraud and there is corruption everywhere because that risk is everywhere. The question is whether we have a system in place that can address it and fight it.

And that is another point that I would like to share with you, and one last on the NGOs: I think it has to be stated clearly, we’ll discuss it also tomorrow, there is no fraud. There has never been fraud. And those who are referring to NGOs, they know it. I have more and more the impression that they are doing that, because they would like to eliminate NGOs from the public debate at the European level.

Gilles Boyer, rapporteur. – Monsieur le Président, Monsieur le Commissaire, chers collègues, merci pour ce débat utile qui fait émerger des positions non pas unanimes, parce que l’unanimité n’est pas de ce monde, mais des positions largement consensuelles ou en tout cas une volonté partagée de faire, tous ensemble, le meilleur usage de l’argent public européen, de lutter contre une fraude protéiforme, massive, inventive et souvent plus rapide que nous, décideurs européens.

À partir de ce consensus, j’aimerais que l’ensemble des groupes qui partagent cette vision, au-delà des nuances que nous pouvons avoir, ne se laissent pas polluer par un sujet important, mais finalement marginal dans notre architecture européenne, celui des ONG. Ce sujet, vous l’avez évoqué, il a été évoqué dans ce débat et il sera à nouveau évoqué dans cet hémicycle, j’en suis certain, à plusieurs reprises.

J’ai proposé une formulation, dans le rapport, qui me semble équilibrée, qui rappelle le rôle important des ONG dans le débat public européen, que nous devons préserver, et qui rappelle aussi que tous ceux qui perçoivent des fonds européens doivent la transparence aux contribuables européens et aux autorités de contrôle. Je crois que c’est ce que nous pouvons dire dans le cadre de ce rapport.

Je pense que c’est un bon rapport, non pas parce que c’est le mien – pas seulement parce que c’est le mien –, mais parce qu’il est issu d’un travail réfléchi avec l’ensemble des rapporteurs fictifs que je remercie pour leur collaboration. Je souhaite que, lors du vote de demain, nous gardions en tête, comme on dit en bon français, «the big picture».

Preşedinte. – Cu acest anunț am încheiat dezbaterea. Votarea va avea loc mâine.

20. Composition of committees and delegations

Preşedinte. – Am un anunț de făcut: deputații neafiliați au comunicat președintelui o decizie referitoare la modificări cu privire la numirile în cadrul comisiilor.

Această decizie va fi consemnată în procesul-verbal al ședinței de astăzi și produce efecte de la data prezentului anunț, respectiv, domnul Volker Schnurrbusch îl înlocuiește pe domnul Taner Kabilov în Comisia pentru petiții.

21. Control of the financial activities of the European Investment Bank – annual report 2023 (debate)

Ondřej Knotek, rapporteur. – Mr President, good afternoon colleagues, Vice-President Fitto and Vice-President of the EIB de Groot. Despite the fact that the main scope of the report is dedicated to the financial activities of the bank in 2023, we considered, on top of this scope, other useful elements to better understand the EIB’s operational model, internal system and also strategy in current vibrant times. Why? Because the EIB already now plays a crucial role in implementing EU policies, and its role might grow in the near future. Therefore, I am extremely grateful for the openness and hospitality that the bank provided while drafting this report.

I would like to also remind all of us that the EIB is not the subject of the standard discharge procedure we are used to. To sum up the activities we have done: firstly, there was a questionnaire based on the inputs from the CONT committee members that was effectively answered by the bank. Then on 11 December 2024, we held a one-day working visit in the EIB, meeting eight representatives of departments and one vice-president. And on 25 January, we held a follow-up video conference on topics like transparency and prevention of the conflict of interest.

Now, on the substance, the EIB maintained in 2023 the triple A rating and liquidity ratio within the limits and had a positive result of EUR 2.3 billion. Also, the 2023 signed investments are expected to create 1.4 million new jobs in coming years, and this shall contribute growth of one percentage in GDP.

The EIB manages up to 130 mandates, both from the Commission and the shared management, and produces 450 reports every year. Therefore, simplification is not only needed here, but as well has been recognised within the system and addressed in the system, and of course not at the cost of sound management. By the way, EIB manages six mandates from the RRF, namely for Greece, Italy, Romania and Spain.

On energy security, the bank focuses on the security of supplies via grids reinforcement, cross-border infrastructure, but also introduces new modern elements like demand response and energy storage projects, and also value chains for critical materials.

Another important topic is security – EIB supports the EU defence and security industry under the dual-use principle, and the budget has been increased here from EUR 6 billion to EUR 8 billion and newly includes also activities in space. The bank cooperates with the European Defence Agency and, in order to mobilise money for innovative projects, has opened the One-Stop-Shop.

When we look at the climate, it is one of the main priorities of the bank – there has been EUR 40 billion in climate, EUR 25 billion in sustainability and also many projects newly in climate adaptation. The bank is active also outside the EU, namely in Ukraine, Western Balkans, Moldova but also Africa. When it comes to accountability, the bank cooperates within OLAF and EPPO and has its own ethics and compliance committee.

We are running slowly out of time, so to sum up, the EIB has demonstrated, I would say, unprecedented engagement with the Parliament in preparing this report. I am very thankful, in my opinion, as also an auditor outside the European Parliament, the EIB is running a successful operational model applying risk prevention and continual improvement approach and tries to address existing challenges and opportunities effectively. I would like to thank all the representatives of the CONT committee, of course, of the bank, of the Secretariat, and I am looking forward to the debate to come.

Robert de Groot, Vice-President of the EIB. – Mr President, honourable Members, it’s my pleasure to be with you here today to address some important issues raised in the report and update you on the activities of the EIB Group. And I want to thank the rapporteur, Mr Ondřej Knotek, for his thorough work and the excellent cooperation to reach a well‑balanced report.

Your report rightly acknowledges the bank’s achievements in 2023, and since then, a lot has happened. 2024, the first year of President Calviño at the helm of the bank was a year of change. The bank signed EUR 89 billion in new financing for high‑impact projects supporting EU policy priorities. Our investments help close the investment gap Europe faces. Investment strengthens European competitiveness, it bolsters our strategic autonomy and makes the European economy more resilient in this increasingly complex world.

Last year alone, nearly 60 % of our financing went to supporting the green transition, including circular economy and climate adaptation. The EIB Group made more investments than ever to strengthen the EU’s energy security, mobilising over EUR 100 billion for projects in the new and upgraded infrastructure, such as grids and interconnectors, renewables, net zero industries, efficiency and energy storage.

At the same time, higher risk operations for Europe’s most innovative companies have sharply increased, with EUR 8 billion in equity and quasi‑equity investment for start‑ups, scale‑ups and European pioneers. This number will increase in 2025.

We operate with clear priorities set out by our shareholders in our 2024‑2027 strategic roadmap. We have significant progress in simplification – the rapporteur alluded to it – resulting in cutting red tape for clients and shortening the time to market required to improve and deploy new investments, and, thanks to the support of your House, with the change of our statute to increase the gearing ratio, allowing us to invest more while maintaining our equity base.

The EIB Group plans to increase its overall investments, as I said, to EUR 90‑95 billion in 2025, with flagship initiatives to support European tech champions through a dedicated Tech EU programme, contributing to a deeper and broader European capital markets union, which is essential to support our start‑up and scale‑up companies and to keep them in Europe.

We will act on critical raw materials, water management, energy efficiency of SMEs, as well as sustainable and affordable housing. Housing is a top priority for the EIB Group, as it is for so many citizens all over Europe. That’s why we have designed an action plan, working closely with the Commission to set up a pan‑European investment platform. Our aim is to generate about EUR 10 billion of investment over the next two years. This is a good example of how the bank is willing and able to evolve, adapt and be part of the solution to the multiple challenges Europe currently faces.

InvestEU is a success story with a multiplier effect of close to 15 times, according to the Commission. It’s an excellent example of how leveraging is realised. Indeed, the market demand and pace of deployment are such that we are even at risk of missing the firepower to deliver some of our projects in the last years of the budget cycle.

I turn now to another area which is highly relevant in the current geopolitical context, namely defence and security. The EIB board decided in March to broaden the EIB Group’s eligibility criteria for security and defence investments, ensuring that excluded activities remain as minimal as possible. This allows us to finance large‑scale strategic projects in areas such as border protection, military mobility, space, cybersecurity, anti‑jamming technologies, radar system, seabed and other critical infrastructure and critical raw materials. These changes will further facilitate investment to bolster Europe’s industrial defence capabilities. I think this is very important at this moment in time.

Mr President, once again, many thanks to the rapporteur for the report and thank you very much for this opportunity.

Raffaele Fitto, Executive Vice-President of the Commission. – Mr President, Vice-President of the EIB, dear rapporteur, honourable Members, I would like to thank the European Parliament for the opportunity to present the Commission’s views in this regard. This was another year of positive cooperation with our long-standing partner, the European Investment Bank group, which we value very much. It is essential that our institutions keep working together as strategic partners.

Today, the EIB group has been provided indispensable financial support to ensure implementation of the EU priorities on the ground. This concerns areas such as energy, electricity distribution, networks, water, social and affordable housing, education and the mobile network, to name just a few. We welcome the eight strategic priorities of the EIB Strategic Roadmap adopted last year. They are well-aligned with EU priorities, including new ones such as defence and security.

The projects and the investments carried out by the EIB also contribute to the competitiveness agenda of the current Commission. This agenda critically depends on the ability of highly innovative start-ups. This is especially relevant in areas such as AI, quantum computing and deep tech, biotech and clean tech, or in the defence sector.

Given the scale of the investment needed, as mentioned in the Draghi report, we will have to strive to attract institutional investors, such as the insurers and the pension funds to leverage all available resources. The Commission and the EIB group should continue working together to identify all options available. At the same time, we encourage the EIB group to further exploit the risk-taking potential, to foster higher additionally in its interventions and avoid the risk of crowding out other investors.

In March, the Commission published the communication on the Savings and Investments Union. I therefore welcome the EIB’s recent initiative to address the most challenging needs of strategically important, innovative companies. These initiatives, such as the European Tech Champions Initiative 2.0, aimed to scale-up venture capital investments, facilitate easier exits of the venture funds, thus allowing circularity of investment and better use of available funds.

The Commission has strongly connected competitiveness to simplification: one cannot exist without the other. Our strategy on implementation and simplification for the next five years aims at making sure that EU rules are as simple and cost-effective as possible, and that they deliver on the ground to achieve our economic, social, security and environmental goals. We are working closely with the EIB to deliver on our simplification agenda, for example via the Invest EU omnibus regulation.

Outside the EU, the role of EIB Global will be crucial in delivering EU policy priorities and enhancing the EU’s visibility and development impact. The EIB remains our important partner in ensuring continued support to Ukraine now and in the long-term. In April, the Commission witnessed the signature of four new EIB operations, which will address Ukraine’s most pressing recovery needs, supporting municipalities in renewable energy and energy efficiency, water infrastructure and district heating.

These projects, backed by the EU budget through the Ukraine Facility, reflect our commitment to Ukraine’s long-term resilience and to its people. In this regard and in view of an increasingly difficult geopolitical context, strengthening EU security and defence has been brought to the forefront of our agenda. Rebuilding Europe’s defence capabilities requires urgent and significant investment.

In March, the Commission presented the ReArm Europe Plan/Readiness 2030 initiative to facilitate a unique surge in defence investment. It aims to unlock up to EUR 800 billion of additional defence expenditures – a game changer for European defence. The EIB has a clear role to play here, particularly in supporting the investments needed to ramp up the defence industry. This also includes targeted support for small and medium enterprises across the supply chain. In this sense, we welcome the recent amendment of the EIB group’s exclusion policy to further boost its investment in security and defence, while safeguarding the group’s financial capacity. I believe that by working together, focusing investment and maintaining a coherent regulatory framework, we can ensure Europe’s continued growth, technological leadership and resilience in the face of an increasingly volatile and competitive global environment.

I welcome the EP report, which brings important insights and recommendations. The EIB has been successful in ensuring a balance between being a bank with public commission and maintaining agility to ensure it remains an attractive partner for projects, promoters and to advance our important investment policies, often with private partners. I hope this balance will be further retained.

Kinga Kollár, a PPE képviselőcsoport nevében. – Elnök Úr! Európa következő évei az óriásberuházásokról fognak szólni: évi 800 milliárd euró az európai vállalkozásokba, további 800 milliárd euró Európa védelmi iparába. Végül, de semmiképpen sem utolsósorban, jelentős összegek a kohézió, a jólét és az egészséges környezet fenntartására, különösen a megfizethető lakhatásra és a kapcsolódó egészségügyi, oktatási és közlekedési infrastruktúra finanszírozására.

Az Európai Beruházási Bank több szempontból is előnyös helyzetben van, hogy ezeket a nagymértékű befektetéseket mozgósítani tudja. Egyrészt tőkeerős helyzete, az EU által biztosított garancia és kiváló hitelminősítése lehetővé teszi számára, hogy előnyös feltételek mellett tudjon hitelt nyújtani. Másrészt jelentős tapasztalata van a privát befektetők és a tőke bevonásában, amire mindenképpen szükség lesz a célok eléréséhez. Kérem ezért a bankot, hogy a prudens és gazdaságos működés megtartása mellett, fokozza a beruházási tevékenységét és merjen bátrabban kockázatot vállalni.

Az EIB-nek a tagállamok beruházási bankjaként arra is figyelnie kell, hogy finanszírozási tevékenysége földrajzilag is kiegyensúlyozott legyen. Magyarországon például a bank által befektetett összeg jelentősen elmarad az európai átlagtól, pedig Magyarországon külön kiemelt szerepe is lenne a banknak, a magyar kormány korrupciója miatt kiesett uniós támogatások pótlásában. A bank az EU pénzügyi érdekeinek védelme mellett tudna a magyar gazdaságba és vállalkozásokba, infrastruktúrába pénzt pumpálni.

Végül kiemelném, hogy az, hogy a jelentéstevő a Patrióta csoport tagja, nem szoríthatja háttérbe azt, hogy mi mindannyian azért vagyunk itt, hogy a választópolgárok érdekeit szolgáljuk. A Tisztelt Ház előtt lévő jelentés ezt teszi, ezért remélem, hogy széles körű támogatásra talál a holnapi szavazáson.

Maria Grapini, în numele grupului S&D. – Domnule președinte, domnule comisar, domnule vicepreședinte, sunt raportor din partea grupului meu la acest raport și, așa cum am spus și la audierea în comisie, apreciez activitatea Băncii Europene de Investiții. Vin din mediul privat, știu procedurile de lucru în bănci, știu că nu își asumă de multe ori riscuri, vor să fie acoperiți.

Ce mi-aș dori, domnule vicepreședinte, este ca în viitor, din acele multe zeci de miliarde pe care ați spus că le-ați investit, să crească procentul investițiilor și creditelor acordate întreprinderilor mici și mijlocii. Am spus asta și în dezbaterea din comisie.

De asemenea, mi-aș dori să flexibilizați, și mai multă transparență, să eliminăm aceste bariere în calea celor care ar dori să investească, să aibă credite. De asemenea, în mediul rural, foarte puțini din mediul rural pot să aibă acces la credite. Poate vă gândiți la alte mecanisme.

Femeile care conduc afaceri, de asemenea, am pus amendament, îmi doresc să aibă mai mult acces, și poate la următorul raport ne aduceți, așa întreg, procentele de creștere la investițiile, la creditele acordate IMM-urilor, femeilor, apoi în domeniul sanitar.

Și avem o mare problemă cu locuințele. S-a mai spus aici: este o criză de locuințe, în special la tineri și aici trebuie să ne gândim cum putem să facem prin Banca Europeană de Investiții să acordăm credite tinerilor pentru a avea locuințe.

Şerban Dimitrie Sturdza, în numele grupului ECR. – Domnule președinte, stimate domnule Fitto, stimați colegi, în calitate de raportor al ECR pentru dosarul cu privire la activitatea anuală a Băncii Europene de Investiții, mi-am asumat un rol activ în protejarea intereselor financiare ale Uniunii Europene.

Fondurile publice ale Uniunii Europene trebuie să fie utilizate eficient și transparent, fără a risipi vreo resursă. De aceea, am cerut ca evaluările de impact să fie riguroase și să garanteze că fiecare euro cheltuit aduce beneficii concrete cetățenilor europeni, în special în contextul crizelor economice și sociale cu care ne confruntăm.

Consider că este esențial ca alocarea banilor europeni să se facă pe baza unor principii raționale și nu pe fundamente ideologice care pot pune în pericol stabilitatea economică a Uniunii.

În virtutea acestui raționament, prin amendamentele pe care le-am susținut, am cerut ca Fondul European de Investiții să fie orientat clar către creșterea competitivității, a rezilienței și a dezvoltării economice. Cerințele privind obiectivele climatice nu trebuie să devină scopuri în sine și nici să afecteze competitivitatea.

Împreună cu colegii deputați din Grupul ECR, voi continua să urmăresc cu atenție modul în care Banca Europeană de Investiții gestionează fondurile și să mă asigur că deciziile financiare sunt luate în interesul tuturor cetățenilor europeni.

Vlad Vasile-Voiculescu, în numele grupului Renew. – Domnule președinte, apreciez rolul Băncii Europene de Investiții în arhitectura instituțională a Uniunii Europene. Este o instituție cheie pentru coeziune, dezvoltare durabilă, tranziție verde.

Dar tocmai pentru că știm ce rol esențial are, avem datoria să spunem și acolo unde lucrurile nu merg bine.

Am evaluat din partea grupului politic Renew activitatea băncii în 2023. Doar un sfert, doar un sfert din finanțările BEI au mers către regiunile mai puțin dezvoltate din Uniunea Europeană în 2023. Este un procent care ar trebui să ne îngrijoreze, dacă ne pasă cu adevărat de reducerea inegalităților între Est și Vest, între centrul și periferia Uniunii.

România este un exemplu elocvent. Este o țară cu nevoi uriașe în infrastructură, digitalizare, sănătate, tranziție energetică, dar cu o prezență relativ modestă în portofoliul BEI.

Este clar că trebuie să înțelegem ce nu funcționează, și ce nu funcționează este colaborarea cu autoritățile naționale și locale. Există blocaje administrative și de capacitate și parteneriatele public-private sunt prea puțin folosite și ar trebui să fie o prioritate pentru viitor.

În final, salut cooperarea cu OLAF și Parchetul European. Cred că este un pas esențial pentru întărirea transparenței și a încrederii cetățenilor.

Rudi Kennes, namens de The Left-Fractie. – Voorzitter, de Europese Investeringsbank (EIB) werkt op basis van een non-profitmandaat, met als doel projecten te financieren die ten goede komen aan gewone mensen in de Europese Unie en daarbuiten. In werkelijkheid heeft de EIB echter vooral bijgedragen aan het verhogen van bedrijfswinsten met belastinggeld. Miljarden euro’s aan overheidsleningen zijn toegekend aan zeer winstgevende bedrijven die hun projecten perfect zonder overheidssubsidies hadden kunnen financieren.

Tussen 2020 en 2023 ontvingen zeven zakelijke EIB-klanten – Iberdrola, Stellantis, Intesa San Paolo, Leonardo, Orange, Nordfolk en Gavi (the Vaccine) Alliance – meer dan 11 miljard EUR aan EIB-leningen. In dezelfde periode boekten deze bedrijven samen 100 miljard EUR winst, keerden zij 38,7 miljard EUR aan dividend uit, besteedden zij €11,9 miljard EUR aan aandeleninkoop en betaalden zij hun CEO’s maar liefst meer dan 146 miljoen EUR.

Sommige van deze bedrijven liggen bovendien onder vuur vanwege betrokkenheid bij sociale onregelmatigheden en milieumisstanden, corruptie en het leveren van wapens aan landen die het internationale recht schenden. Dit moet veranderen.

De EIB moet prioriteit geven aan publieke partnerschappen en onze publieke diensten financieren. Zij moet hoge sociale en milieunormen hanteren voor alle projecten, strenge voorwaarden stellen aan bedrijfsleningen en nauwer samenwerken met de EU en nationale publieke financiële instellingen om de positieve impact van overheidsinstellingen te maximaliseren.

Tomáš Zdechovský (PPE). – Pane předsedající, vážený pane komisaři, vážený pane místopředsedo, vážení kolegové, rád bych poděkoval všem kolegům za velmi dobrou práci. Je to jasný signál, že Evropská investiční banka musí převzít klíčovou roli v oblasti strategické obrany Evropy – technologie dvojího užití, tedy ty, které slouží k civilním i obranným účelům, zásadní pro naši bezpečnost a suverenitu. A Evropská investiční banka se musí s touto výzvou utkat. Je skvělé, že Evropská investiční banka opustila zastaralý model příjmového testu. Evropská investiční banka ale musí investovat i do oblastí, jako je kybernetická bezpečnost nebo inovace v oblasti obrany. Potřebujeme také cílené investice do energetické bezpečnosti, což jsme viděli jako Evropská lidová strana ve Španělsku minulý týden. Ale řekněme si to otevřeně – bez bezpečnosti nebude stabilita. Právě proto musí být obranné schopnosti a duální technologie jádrem budoucího mandátu Evropské investiční banky. Podporuji tuto zprávu, protože nevidím v Evropské investiční bance jenom banku, ale i instituci, která chrání odolnost Evropy.

Jonás Fernández (S&D). – Señor presidente, señor comisario, en primer lugar, me gustaría felicitar y agradecer el trabajo del Banco Europeo de Inversiones en todos estos años, y especialmente —como ha dicho el vicepresidente— en esta última etapa con una nueva presidenta, que sin duda está reactivando el trabajo del Banco Europeo de Inversiones, tan necesario ante el volumen ingente de financiación que debemos acometer en los próximos años.

Quisiera quizá hacer dos apuntes. En primer lugar, necesitamos más financiación para la vivienda social. Y tengo un mensaje para la Comisión: la propuesta de reforma de la definición de pequeña y mediana empresa que está en la revisión del Reglamento por el que se establece el Programa InvestEU he de decir que a los socialistas no nos gusta mucho, porque creo que no define bien lo que es una pyme y podría distraer la atención y los esfuerzos del Banco Europeo de Inversiones en financiar a las pequeñas y medianas empresas.

En todo caso, y para terminar, me gustaría anunciar que el Grupo Socialista votará en contra de este informe, porque realmente entendemos que el Grupo parlamentario de los Patriotas, que ha estado haciendo uso fraudulento de la financiación europea en Francia con Le Pen, en Hungría con Orbán o en España con VOX, no puede firmar un documento como este.

Sandra Gómez López (S&D). – (inicio de la intervención fuera de micrófono) … especialmente al ponente del informe. ¿Cómo se puede hablar del Banco Europeo de Inversiones sin mencionar a las personas que más lo necesitan? Este informe olvida lo que es el corazón de Europa: nuestras empresas, nuestras pymes, nuestros jóvenes agricultores y nuestras zonas rurales. Y también se borran referencias importantísimas como el pilar europeo de derechos sociales, los Objetivos de Desarrollo Sostenible o el impacto de la guerra de Rusia contra Ucrania.

Así que nosotros no queremos que se refleje que el BEI tiene que ser un banco técnico y distante; queremos que se refleje que es un banco humano y social, que está comprometido con las personas que viven en Europa, con la cohesión social y con nuestro futuro, y por eso vamos a votar en contra de este informe como grupo.

La buena noticia que tenemos es que, pese a lo que ustedes querrían, hoy contamos con un gran liderazgo, Nadia Calviño como presidenta del BEI, que va a permitirle ser garante de los valores que nos representan como Unión Europea.

Intervenții la cerere

Lukas Sieper (NI). – Mr President, first of all, I beg your forgiveness for being too loud a few minutes ago. Actually, being present in this room sometimes requires having a conversation and listening to the debate at the same time.

Herr Präsident, liebe Menschen Europas! Wir haben ein Recht darauf zu wissen, was mit dem Geld der Europäischen Union passiert. Die Europäische Investitionsbank verwaltet einen wesentlichen Teil dieses Geldes. Sie nimmt wichtige Investitionen vor in Klimaschutz, in unsere Wirtschaft, in die Transformation zu einer gerechteren Gesellschaft – und sie unterstützt unsere Partner auf der ganzen Welt, wie etwa die Ukraine.

Umso schockierender ist es, dass der Bundesrechnungshof der Europäischen Investitionsbank vor allen Dingen mangelnde Transparenz vorwirft. Wir leben in einer Zeit, in der die Skepsis an der Demokratie wächst, in der Populisten überall auf diesem Kontinent auf dem Vormarsch sind. Wir können es uns nicht erlauben, dass unsere Bevölkerung nicht genau weiß, was mit unserem Geld geschieht.

(Încheierea intervențiilor la cerere)

Raffaele Fitto, Executive Vice-President of the Commission. – Mr President, thank you for this very engaging and substantive discussion. It is clear that we all are determined to act together to push the European agenda of competitiveness and security, and deliver on our main priorities.

The EIB Group will remain an important player in this. I want to say this now, because we are working, for example, for the mid-term review of the cohesion policy, with the five new priorities. I heard during this discussion some of these points – for example, water, housing, competitiveness. I think this can be an important occasion to reinforce this cooperation in this way. The EIB Group is our natural closest partner, and we are aligned on our strategic priorities.

We will continue to rely on the EIB Group to support the implementation of our agenda and adjust our support in view of new and emerging priorities when needed. I look forward to continuing our close cooperation, with the common goal of achieving greater impact inside and outside the Union.

Robert de Groot, Vice-President of the EIB. – Mr President, thank you for the words of the Vice-President of the Commission, honourable Members, thanks for your remarks and questions. Let me go into more detail on some of the points you have made.

First, on cohesion – cohesion was the number one obligation of the European Investment Bank group when we started in 1958, and today, 48 % of our national budget is still spent on cohesion. It is in the least advantageous areas of Europe, it is in rural areas where public services are under pressure, and we will continue to work in that direction.

Secondly, we are a demand-driven organisation, which implicates that we do not go out into the Member State and force upon them a loan by the European Investment Bank group. It is the other way around; people knock on our doors and we try and help as much as possible. One of the first criteria we look at is if there is a market failure – the EIB is active and will be active in those areas where other financial institutions will not go.

One of the most important elements, which makes us such an important player in Europe, is that we have a very large unit of hundreds of engineers and economists, which not only work on making a loan and a financial proposition possible, but also look at the content and help each and every applicant, whether in the private sector or in the public sector, to bring about a project which really gives a return to European taxpayers.

I noticed very well the remarks on small- and medium-sized enterprises, but also micro businesses, and I fully agree the access to credit for these companies, these very small companies, who are so important when it comes to the labour market inside the EU, is still an issue we really have to worry about and work on, and that’s what we are doing as the EIB group. We cannot do this directly with SMEs and micro businesses in Europe. We always go through a financial intermediary, mostly European commercial banks – a very important element of our business.

I listened very carefully to the remarks on agriculture, and especially young farmers receive our attention when it comes to the area of agriculture. For this year, we envisage to invest at least EUR 3 billion in this area.

In the area of housing, which was also mentioned by honourable Members, we are trying to leverage the financing we are going to make available to a couple of billion euro, hopefully in a couple of years, to EUR 300 billion annually. We have three priorities in the area of housing: one – innovation, supporting innovative building technologies like modular housing to make construction faster, cheaper and easier; second – sustainability, scaling up energy efficient renovation to reduce living costs when it comes to energy prices; and three – affordability, strengthening support for public investment tailored to the specific needs of each country and piloting private investments.

Now, on the issue of climate, which is also close to a bit more than half of what we are doing annually. This is about climate adaptation; this is about dealing with droughts, it is about dealing with floods – we have seen both inside many countries of the European Union, and they require large-scale investment to counter. But also in the area of energy, we have to be more self-sufficient when it comes to energy. This requires investments, not only in the energy carriers but also in the grids, which is a big and very expensive investment too.

Now, when it comes to high risk, some of the honourable Members have called for more risk. Others have said: no, we should not take risks. We are in the banking business and banking business is about giving a loan and getting a loan paid back with interest. But there are cases where this will not happen, and one of the examples was mentioned. But I want to stress here that when it comes to becoming more self-sufficient in the area of energy: we have provided more than EUR 6 billion over the past years to finance the sector and trying to find the best, innovative and technologically sound way forward when it comes to the energy sector. And we have to take into account too that sometimes we will fail by taking risks. But it’s part of the business of finding the best answer.

Finally, Mr President, when it comes to the auditing that the European Investment Bank is undergoing, I have to say we are one of the most audited financial institutions in the European Union. Whether it’s from the Central Bank of Luxembourg, because we have our headquarters there, whether it’s from external accountants, external audit committees, I think we fulfil every obligation and every best bank banking practice around.

Finally, on security and defence, we have done away with the concept of dual use, which means that today we can also invest directly in the domain of defence. Let’s talk about military mobility across Europe and the big corridors. And let’s also talk about the military bases we need to have more and more, especially in Central Europe.

Ondřej Knotek, rapporteur. – Mr President, thank you Vice-President Fitto, Vice-President de Groot, thank you colleagues for the debate – the debate shows the high importance of the European Investment Bank, and also it shows the high level of expectation that the members in this House have of the institution, of the bank, about the role of the bank in achieving its goals and addressing risks, not only for you as such, but also for our Member States and, in the end, for our citizens and communities.

I have been very grateful for many of the topics that have been put on the table during the debate: geographical balance, taking higher risks, focus on SMEs, climate adaptation, security, cybersecurity, housing, agriculture and cohesion, and, of course, many others. I am happy that the Budgetary Control Committee has put forward the report which touches on those topics, clearly describes the development and successes of the bank, but also the expectations and needs of the Parliament when it comes to the needs for investment and the future role of EIB, which this House, I believe, sees as a partner, and is looking forward to cooperating with in the very long term. Allow me once again to thank you for the chance of being a rapporteur, and I would like to invite all of you voting tomorrow to support the report.

Preşedinte. – Mulțumesc, domnule raportor și vă urez succes cu acest raport.

Cu această contribuție, dezbaterea este închisă. Votarea va avea loc mâine.

22. Ninth report on economic and social cohesion (debate)

Jacek Protas, Sprawozdawca. – Panie Przewodniczący! Szanowni Państwo! Panie Komisarzu! Debatujemy dzisiaj nad bardzo ważnym sprawozdaniem, które po przegłosowaniu stanie się stanowiskiem Parlamentu Europejskiego na temat przyszłości polityki spójności po 2027 roku. Dokument, którego jestem sprawozdawcą, był szeroko konsultowany z organizacjami i instytucjami reprezentującymi różne środowiska oraz z Komitetem Regionów Unii Europejskiej. Odzwierciedla poglądy zdecydowanej większości grup politycznych reprezentowanych w Parlamencie Europejskim.

Oto 10 podstawowych tez, które w tym krótkim wystąpieniu chcę uwypuklić. Po pierwsze, polityka spójności jest głównym narzędziem Unii Europejskiej służącym inwestycjom w zrównoważony rozwój gospodarczy, społeczny i terytorialny, sprzyjającym zmniejszeniu różnic rozwojowych europejskich regionów.

Po drugie, aby polityka spójności nadal odgrywała tę ważną rolę, musi mieć zapewnione po 2027 roku wystarczająco ambitne i łatwo dostępne finansowanie, co najmniej na poziomie obecnych wieloletnich ram finansowych w ujęciu realnym.

Po trzecie, Parlament Europejski opowiada się za zdecentralizowanym modelem programowania i wdrażania polityki spójności, opartym na zasadzie partnerstwa i na wielopoziomowym sprawowaniu rządów. Tylko wtedy może być ona skuteczna i akceptowalna dla naszych obywateli. Sprzeciwiamy się wszelkim formom centralizacji i ograniczania roli władz regionalnych i lokalnych.

Po czwarte, wzywamy do dalszych wysiłków na rzecz uproszczenia i uelastycznienia przepisów i procedur administracyjnych regulujących fundusze polityki spójności na szczeblu unijnym, krajowym i regionalnym. Kluczem do sukcesu może być zwiększenie elastyczności na etapie programowania i wdrażania z odejściem od sztywnych ram koncentracji tematycznej i z uwzględnieniem specyfiki regionów.

Po piąte, podkreślamy jednocześnie konieczność zapewnienia przejrzystego, sprawiedliwego i odpowiedzialnego wykorzystywania zasobów Unii Europejskiej przy należytym zarządzaniu finansami, podkreślając rolę Europejskiego Urzędu do Spraw Zwalczania Nadużyć Finansowych i Prokuratury Europejskiej. Uznając także warunkowość w zakresie praworządności jako warunek podstawowy finansowania w ramach polityki spójności. Podkreślamy strategiczne znaczenie silnych regionów przygranicznych dla bezpieczeństwa i odporności Unii Europejskiej. Wzywamy Komisję Europejską do szczególnego wspierania regionów graniczących z Rosją, Białorusią i Ukrainą, by mogły radzić sobie ze skutkami społeczno-gospodarczymi wojny dla ich ludności i terytoriów.

Zwracamy uwagę na konieczność specjalnego podejścia do problemów regionów najbardziej oddalonych i wyspiarskich, które stoją w obliczu wyjątkowych i skumulowanych wyzwań strukturalnych. Wyrażamy zaniepokojenie rosnącą liczbą regionów znajdujących się w pułapce rozwoju, które dotknięte są stagnacją gospodarczą, problemami demograficznymi i ograniczeniem dostępu do usług publicznych.

Specyficznym i ukierunkowanym wsparciem powinny też być objęte obszary wiejskie, ale także miasta i obszary metropolitalne borykające się z własnymi poważnymi wyzwaniami. I w końcu nalegamy także, by polityka spójności dążyła do zwiększenia innowacyjności i ukończenia tworzenia jednolitego rynku Unii Europejskiej zgodnie z wnioskami zawartymi w sprawozdaniu Draghiego w sprawie konkurencyjności Europy.

I na koniec, apelujemy o przestrzeganie zasady “nie szkodzić spójności”, by żadne działania nie utrudniały procesu konwergencji europejskich regionów.

Raffaele Fitto, Executive Vice-President of the Commission. – Mr President, honourable Members, thank you for the opportunity to address you today. First, let me thank the rapporteur, Mr Protas, for preparing this important report. This is particularly timely. I very much welcome the strong alignment with the Commission’s perspective. This shared perspective reinforces the fundamental message of the 9th Cohesion Report.

Cohesion policy has a positive and significant impact in terms of convergence. It reduces the disparities among EU Member States and regions, it stimulates long-term growth and competitiveness, and it plays a key role in supporting public investment. To continue to achieve our goals, we need to bring the cohesion policy up to date, considering the current situations and challenges that we are facing. If we want a stronger, more resilient and competitive Europe, we must reinforce and relaunch the cohesion policy – both for the present and for the future.

As many of you know, the mid-term review of the cohesion programme has been a central focus for me during these past months. The Commission’s recent proposals respond directly to many of your concerns. The proposal will bring more flexibility, more incentives and simple rules to allow Member States and the regions to respond to urgent challenges now – not waiting for the next period.

In this regard, I would like to stress certain important aspects. First, the new priorities identified are affordable housing, water resilience, energy transition, competitiveness and defence.

Second, since compliance with the review is voluntary, it will be up to each Member State to decide whether and how to update its programmes.

Third, the cohesion policy funds remain under the shared responsibility of Member States and the regions under shared management.

My ambition is clear: to modernise, simplify and strengthen cohesion policy so that it is more targeted and responsive, keeping our regions at the centre, and fully respecting the diversity and specific needs of our territories. This ambition is based on four key pillars.

First, a tailor-made solution for the Member States will include the key reforms and investment, focusing on our joint priorities. They will be designed and implemented in close partnership with the national, regional and local authorities. I would like to underline that the principles of partnership, shared management, multilevel governance and the place-based approach will remain core principles of the cohesion policy.

Second, we must also make cohesion policy more accessible, with fewer administrative burdens. We will work to reduce complexity and offer a more performance-based delivery mode to increase speed and efficiency, as underlined in your report.

I will continue to advocate for a strong territorial dimension. This will ensure the cohesion policy addresses the real challenges faced by regions undergoing structural transitions, as your report rightly identifies. This includes our eastern border regions as well as less developed peripheral, remote and rural areas, islands and outermost regions.

Honourable Members, I remain fully committed to the principles this House defends. The cohesion policy core mission has always been to stimulate growth and development across the EU. This mission remains as vital as ever, and this report marks an important step forward in that journey. Let us work together, speaking with one strong and united voice to make this mission a success.

Andrey Novakov, on behalf of the PPE Group. – Mr President, Mr Vice-President, dear colleagues, we are having this debate at a very crucial moment. I would like to start by thanking Mr Protas for his work, because he dedicated a lot of his time, and he is a decent man who is doing a good job. In times when such crucial decisions are taken, I think those who contribute have to be mentioned.

I would like to congratulate Mr Fitto for his efforts to increase the absorption rate of cohesion policy, and to speak to those who don’t believe in the future of cohesion. Because the future of the cohesion policy means the future for Europe. The Founding Fathers put cohesion policy in the Treaty on the Functioning of the Union. So, no cohesion policy means no European Union.

I hope that with this we are going to put an end to the debate about the future of cohesion. Very rightly so, the Founding Fathers decided to have cohesion policy to balance the imbalances of the single market. So we need regions and cities in.

I am against – and a lot of other colleagues are against – further centralising cohesion policy and isolating mayors, regions and cities from the governing of this policy. We need more Europe at local level, not less. Every euro spent at local level solving local problems means more Europe tomorrow.

Sérgio Gonçalves, em nome do Grupo S&D. – Senhor Presidente, Senhor Vice-Presidente Raffaele Fitto, gostaria de começar por agradecer ao relator e a todos os grupos políticos pela postura construtiva demonstrada ao longo das negociações deste relatório. Acredito que o Parlamento Europeu envia hoje uma mensagem clara: a política de coesão deve ser mantida descentralizada, onde as autoridades locais e regionais tenham um papel fundamental, quer na definição das políticas, quer na sua implementação.

Estamos conscientes dos desafios estruturantes que a Europa enfrenta, como a defesa e a segurança, o alargamento ou as migrações. Mas não podemos desvirtuar o objetivo principal da política de coesão de reduzir as disparidades entre as várias regiões europeias, promovendo o desenvolvimento sustentável e dando respostas a problemas específicos, como é o caso da habitação.

Este relatório reafirma a necessidade de a Europa se adaptar aos desafios que tem pela frente, assegurando, em simultâneo, o respeito pelo princípio da subsidiariedade que sempre norteou a política de coesão. É nesta Europa que acreditamos, é por esta Europa que continuaremos a lutar.

Séverine Werbrouck, au nom du groupe PfE. – Monsieur le Président, chers collègues, une fois de plus, nous constatons l’inquiétante dérive fédéraliste de l’Union européenne au travers de ce rapport sur la bien mal nommée «politique de cohésion» – celle-là même qui sert à financer à perte le développement des pays fraîchement intégrés, sur le dos des travailleurs français qui n’ont malheureusement plus le luxe de la charité.

Dans l’Union, quand une politique dysfonctionne, la solution consiste toujours à augmenter son budget et à élargir son champ d’application. Vous demandez plus de largesse pour utiliser les fonds, vous les superposez – fonds de cohésion, fonds d’urgence, politique sectorielle –, vous éparpillez les objectifs – climatiques, numériques, démographiques et bien d’autres –, vous offrez un statut de quasi-État aux régions et enfin, vous en arrivez à votre serpent de mer habituel, celui de la prétendue nécessité de percevoir des ressources propres, dernier clou dans le cercueil de notre souveraineté.

Mais ne pourrait-on pas mieux utiliser cet argent? Le rendement annuel surévalué et médiocre est d’environ 4 % sur chaque euro investi, ce qui correspond à des centaines de milliards, alors que des politiques industrielles nationales, que vous interdisez, permettraient, par exemple, des profits bien supérieurs et des résultats plus concrets pour la France.

Nous continuerons de nous opposer à votre agenda fédéraliste spoliateur pour les Français.

Antonella Sberna, a nome del gruppo ECR. – Signor Presidente, signor Commissario, onorevoli colleghi, la politica di coesione è il volto visibile dell’Europa nei territori: è quella che riapre un asilo nido in un piccolo comune dove i genitori erano costretti a fare diversi chilometri al giorno per portare i figli a scuola; è quella che permette a un’impresa di digitalizzarsi e restare sul mercato o che finanzia un’unità mobile di assistenza sanitaria che porta cure e visite mediche a chi non ha alternative.

Eppure, leggendo questa relazione, emerge chiaramente che la distanza tra le intenzioni e la realtà è ancora troppo ampia. Se vogliamo che la coesione resti una leva per la crescita e non solo un capitolo di spesa, dobbiamo cambiare approccio: lo sta facendo il Commissario Fitto con la proposta di modifica di medio termine della politica di coesione, la cui procedura d’urgenza abbiamo appena votato in commissione REGI.

Il gruppo ECR ha presentato diversi emendamenti che vanno in una direzione molto chiara: anche i comuni devono accedere direttamente ai fondi insieme alle regioni. Un sindaco che vuole riqualificare un edificio scolastico, creare uno spazio per giovani e anziani, non può affrontare ostacoli amministrativi da grande ente. Tutto deve essere più semplice e flessibile. Chi lavora con persone fragili non può impiegare mesi solo per capire come rendicontare un finanziamento.

Servono regole che si adattino ai territori e non territori che devono seguire regole troppo rigide, perché la politica di coesione serve là dove il mercato non arriva. Io credo in una coesione che non misuri solo la spesa ma il cambiamento che genera; che non si perda nella burocrazia, ma che parli il linguaggio della concretezza, della prossimità e dell’equità.

Ľubica Karvašová, za skupinu Renew. – Vážená pani predsedajúca, na Deň Európy organizujem podujatie s regiónmi. Volá sa Ruka v ruke za našu Európu. Prečo? Pretože regióny sú miesto, kde začína, ale veľakrát, bohužiaľ, aj končí podpora pre našu Úniu. Počúvam županov, primátorov, ľudí, ktorí v nich žijú. A posolstvo je jasné: chceme byť súčasťou EÚ. Dnes ale napríklad hrozí, že slovenská vláda sa chystá presunúť 400 miliónov EUR z rúk samospráv na svoje priority. Aj keď mnohé projekty sú už pripravené a obce na ne vyčlenili svoje zdroje. To je neprípustné. Kohézna politika v prvom v prvom rade patrí ľuďom v regiónoch na ich dlhodobý rozvoj. Zároveň zohráva kľúčovú úlohu v podpore Európskej únie v regiónoch. Ako tieňová spravodajkyňa som preto presadila dôležitý princíp, aby mali regióny a mestá priamejší prístup k európskym zdrojom, a to vďaka nástrojom ako integrované územné investície. A chcem sa poďakovať spravodajcovi Jacekovi Protasovi za prácu na celej správe, ale aj za to, že sa nám v tejto téme podarilo nájsť nateraz dobrý kompromis.

Gordan Bosanac, u ime kluba Verts/ALE. – Poštovani predsjedavajući, povjereniče, kohezijska politika je valjda uz politike proširenja jedna od najuspješnijih politika Europske unije i to će ovaj deveti izvještaj također potvrditi, o tome koliko smo smanjili nejednakosti, i regionalne i socijalne, diljem teritorija Europske unije.

Posebno mi je zanimljivo da se govori o tome kako je ona važna u borbi protiv klimatskih promjena i nastavljamo dalje u tom smjeru, a naravno, mene će posebno zanimati uloga malih gradova i gradova i regija, koji ponovno u ovom devetom izvještaju se naglašava da im je potreban direktan pristup financiranju. Jer znate, često se govori o tom multi level, načinu konzultacija, razgovorima, ali u realnosti stvari su drugačije – konzultacije izostaju, gradovi ostaju izbačeni.

Vi imate, na primjer, mog premijera moje zemlje koji govori da je on sam donio koheziju i fondove iz Europske unije u Hrvatsku. Kao da gradovi ne provode tu politiku. Vjerojatno ga vi možete, povjereniče, ispraviti.

Ali ono što je sada pred nama je nova era kohezijske politike i vi ste došli pred ovaj parlament s novim prijedlogom, u vrlo vrlo brzoj proceduri. Maloprije smo na Odboru regija izglasali, nažalost, brzu proceduru i ono što se ja sada brinem da je EPP zajedno s ekstremnom desnicom išao na neki način poniziti ovaj parlament i gurnuti sve ovo kroz vrlo vrlo brzu proceduru, a radi se o temeljnoj politici koja je jedna od najuspješnijih politika Europske unije zajedno s proširenjem.

Ja ću vas još jednom pozvati, vrijeme je možda da ipak povučemo hitnu proceduru i vratimo budućnost kohezije u redovnu parlamentarnu proceduru.

Kathleen Funchion, on behalf of The Left Group. – Mr President, thank you, Commissioner, for being here. I firstly want to thank Mr Protas and all his team for their cooperation and work, as in many ways this is the report the European Parliament needs. It is ambitious for a well-budgeted and progressive cohesion policy.

However, it has a major flaw, which means it fails the litmus test for myself and for my colleagues on the Left. It opens the door to the militarisation of cohesion policy.

Let’s take a step back and think about what that means. Cohesion policy, the flagship policy of solidarity of the EU, is now on the road, with the Parliament’s blessing, to being just another military policy. This is shameful.

We are, of course, all aware of the geopolitical realities. But is nothing sacred? Is absolutely everything now just fuel for the fire and drive towards the militarisation agenda of the EU? Our regions, all of them, need investment and need the EU to help protect jobs, develop our environment and support our workers in these very uncertain times.

Yet this report, which I acknowledge has many strengths, says that spending on military infrastructure, disguised as so-called dual technology, is as important as investing in our workers or our infrastructure.

Let’s be clear that each cent diverted into military spending is a cent taken away from my constituency of Ireland South, and all of our regions. The EU cohesion policy that funded roads and funded jobs and funded some of our community childcare facilities in Ireland is now being used to feed the war machine. This is a new low and I call upon all MEPs, especially our Irish MEPs, to reject it.

Irmhild Boßdorf, im Namen der ESN-Fraktion. – Herr Präsident! Kaum Erfolge, Milliarden an deutschen Steuergeldern versickern – das ist die traurige Bilanz der REGI‑Förderung. Weniger Armut, mehr Jobs, weniger Abwanderung aus ländlichen Regionen – Fehlanzeige, trotz 270 Milliarden Euro Förderung. Doch was ist eigentlich mit dem vielen Geld passiert? Ich habe Elisa Ferreira, die letzte REGI‑Kommissarin, danach gefragt. Sie hat zugegeben, dass es nicht um Kosten und Nutzen geht, sondern um Frieden, Freiheit und Wohlstand. Schließlich würden diese Mittel auch helfen, rechtspopulistische Parteien im ländlichen Raum einzudämmen.

Tatsächlich gab es im vergangenen Jahr eine Studie der Uni Kiel, die nachgewiesen hat, dass ohne die REGI‑Mittel rechte Parteien in entlegenen Regionen zwei bis drei Prozent mehr bekommen hätten. 270 Milliarden umgewidmet in den Kampf gegen Rechts – das ist ungeheuerlich. Machen wir den ländlichen Raum wieder lebenswert. Setzen wir die REGI‑Mittel endlich für unsere Heimat ein.

Gabriella Gerzsenyi (PPE). – Tisztelt Kollégák! Tisztelt Alelnök Úr! Szeretném megköszönni mindazoknak az eddigi munkáját, akik ezen a jelentésen dolgoztak. Kulcsfontosságú megállapításokat tartalmaz, olyanokat, hogy a beruházások helyben tudnak jobban megvalósulni, hogy a források felhasználási szabályait egyszerűsíteni szükséges, hogy a vállalkozások adminisztratív terheit csökkenteni kell, és hogy ne üres szólam maradjon az az alapelv, hogy senkit nem hagyunk hátra, senkit nem hagyunk magára. Hogy gondolnunk kell a fogyatékossággal élő személyekre, a vidéki területekre, az elnéptelenedő régiókra, hiszen Európa biztonságának záloga, hogy együtt maradunk, együtt vagyunk erősek a globális kihívások közepette. Külön öröm számomra, hogy a helyi és regionális szereplők partnerségének megemlítése és megerősítése a szövegben hangsúlyt kap. Külön öröm ez magyarként, a Tisza képviselőjeként, hiszen mi azon dolgozunk, hogy a helyi és regionális szereplők, a városok, az önkormányzatok szót kaphassanak, hogy meghallgassák őket, hogy bevonják, hogy partnerként kezeljék, és hogy forrásokhoz jussanak. Kormányra kerülése után a Tisza Párt azon fog dolgozni továbbra is, hogy minél több uniós forrást hazahozhasson és biztosíthasson a kedvezményezetteknek, akiknek ezek járnak.

Marcos Ros Sempere (S&D). – Señor presidente, señor vicepresidente, la política de cohesión es la política social de la Unión Europea, la política que invierte en hospitales, la política que invierte en centros de salud, en escuelas, la política que invierte en carreteras. Es la política que nos ayudará a alcanzar nuestros objetivos a pesar de los retos que tenemos por delante.

Nos ayudará a completar la transición ecológica, digital y social; a que todas las regiones de la Unión Europea avancen al mismo ritmo. Y lo hará a pesar de las dificultades: la pandemia, la guerra en Europa, la nueva era de Trump.

Para conseguirlo, necesitamos una política de cohesión que refuerce sus cimientos, que tenga en mente a los ciudadanos, que tenga menos trabas burocráticas, que potencie la participación de regiones y de ciudades. Necesitamos una política de cohesión que invierta en un parque público de viviendas y que esté condicionada a cumplir con el Estado de Derecho. Necesitamos una política de cohesión que tenga presupuestos suficientes para afrontar los nuevos retos.

Mélanie Disdier (PfE). – Monsieur le Président, la proposition de résolution dont nous débattons ce soir porte sur la cohésion entre tous les territoires d’Europe. Ceci est censé être une bonne chose, mais, malheureusement, même lorsque les propositions se fondent sur les meilleures intentions, la Commission européenne et ses soutiens réussissent à y injecter leur poison.

C’est ainsi qu’on y retrouve insidieusement la promotion de la conditionnalité des aides. Selon eux, ceux qui s’opposent à la Commission devraient se voir priver des aides auxquelles ils ont droit, alors même qu’ils ont participé à leur financement. Au nom d’un état de droit à géométrie variable, certains voudraient donc faire pression sur un gouvernement démocratiquement élu – les mêmes qui, par ailleurs, sont étrangement silencieux lorsque l’on révèle que la Commission finance des ONG pour faire du lobbying.

Les Européens méritent mieux que vos discours creux où les bonnes intentions ne sont que de façade – des discours où vous déplorez la diminution des fonds nationaux tout en étant responsables des causes, des discours qui prônent la décentralisation alors que vous voulez contourner la volonté nationale.

La cohésion de l’Europe ne doit pas être uniquement sociale, elle doit être aussi démocratique.

Ciaran Mullooly (Renew). – Mr President, I welcome this report and its well-rounded assessment of what cohesion funds and policy actually stand for today. I compliment the rapporteurs.

The report makes it clear, however, that stark disparities remain among the EU’s regions, especially in rural areas. And in this context, I support the report’s call for the need to address these disparities and simplify access to the funds, Commissioner: simplification.

As a rapporteur of Parliament’s own-initiative report on the just transition, I am glad to see the report calling for the continuation of that process and ensuring its reinforced financial means for the post-2027 period.

However, I’m less happy with the announcement in the mid-term review of the cohesion policy of what seems to be the exclusion of my country, Ireland, from the one-year extension of the current year transition fund? I don’t understand it. We must seek adequate flexibility in the capacity for Member States, such as Ireland, to have full access to the extended timeline to provide extra time to spend their allocations.

As an MEP, I know how vital cohesion policy is for the regions. As we prepare for the next programming period, let’s ensure cohesion policy remains properly funded, simplified and accessible to all the regions.

Valentina Palmisano (The Left). – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, per il Movimento Cinque Stelle i fondi di coesione sono quella straordinaria opportunità di investire nelle persone, nella loro istruzione, nella loro crescita professionale, nelle infrastrutture, nella sanità pubblica. In una parola: per ridurre il divario tra territori ricchi e territori poveri.

Il rapporto che discutiamo oggi introduce in modo ambiguo la possibilità di utilizzare questi fondi per tecnologie militari, nascondendosi dietro la dicitura dual use, doppio uso. Ecco, per fare un esempio, potremmo utilizzare i fondi di coesione per comprare droni da impiegare anche nei teatri di guerra.

Per noi questo cambiamento di rotta è inaccettabile: la politica di coesione non è nata per sostenere le industrie belliche della difesa ma per dare risposte concrete ai bisogni sociali, economici e ambientali dei territori più fragili.

E Lei, Commissario Fitto, lo sa bene, visto che proveniamo entrambi da una regione che ha una necessità vitale di questi fondi. Quindi, per noi nessun euro va dirottato verso la logica del riarmo. Difendere la coesione significa difendere la pace, l’equità e il diritto di ogni territorio ad avere un futuro sostenibile.

Krzysztof Hetman (PPE). – Panie Przewodniczący! Panie Komisarzu! Ile to już razy na tej sali rozmawialiśmy o tym, co trzeba zrobić, jeśli chodzi o politykę spójności? Ile razy omawialiśmy tego typu sprawozdania, z których płynął zawsze ten sam wniosek, który mamy także i tym razem – uelastycznić i uprościć politykę spójności.

Panie Komisarzu, wielu przed Panem to zapowiadało. Nikomu nie udało się tego zrobić. Może być Pan pierwszy, może stać się Pan bohaterem wszystkich beneficjentów polityki spójności w całej Unii Europejskiej, tych beneficjentów, którzy z coraz mniejszym zainteresowaniem patrzą w stronę polityki spójności, biorąc pod uwagę tę całą biurokrację, którą muszą przebrnąć, aby te pieniądze uzyskać. Szczególnie, gdy porównują to do procedur związanych z krajowymi planami odbudowy.

Cieszę się, że w sprawozdaniu przygotowanym przez Parlament Europejski, znalazło się miejsce dla obronności, dla wsparcia produktów podwójnego zastosowania na rynek wojskowy i cywilny. To niezwykle ważne w tej chwili.

I na koniec chciałbym, Panie Komisarzu, odnotować z zadowoleniem, że dostrzega Pan potrzebę pomocy regionom przygranicznym, które odczuwają skutki agresji Rosji na Ukrainę. Jeśli chce Pan rzeczywiście im pomóc, trzeba natychmiast zmienić mapę intensywności pomocy publicznej. Każdy przedsiębiorca ocenia ryzyko. Jeśli będzie mógł uzyskać wsparcie, które to ryzyko zmniejszy, z pewnością tam zainwestuje.

Sabrina Repp (S&D). – Herr Präsident, Herr Kommissar! Die Kohäsionspolitik ist eine europäische Erfolgsgeschichte – sichtbar, wirksam und unverzichtbar für den Zusammenhalt in unseren Regionen. Wie der neunte Kohäsionsbericht zeigt, entfalten die Investitionen spürbare Wirkung, insbesondere in strukturschwachen Gebieten. Der wiederholte Vorwurf vom Kommissar, dass zu wenig Gelder abgerufen würden, ist irreführend. Die Mittel sind verplant, Projekte sind längst auf dem Weg.

Kohäsionspolitik und Kohäsionsmittel sind keine Reservekasse für spontane politische Richtungswechsel. Sie dienen einer langfristigen Entwicklung, gerade auch im ländlichen Raum. Doch genau diese Räume drohen nun erneut, ins Hintertreffen zu geraten. Der Gesetzentwurf zur Halbzeitbewertung verlagert Mittel zugunsten urbaner und industrieller Zentren – entgegen dem Versprechen, insbesondere ländliche Räume in den Blick zu nehmen. Wer Kohäsionspolitik ernst nimmt, muss ländliche Räume stärken. Wir sollten die Prinzipien der Kohäsionspolitik wahren, statt die dafür vorgesehenen Gelder gießkannenartig und zweckfremd auszuschütten. Denn Kohäsionspolitik ist das Fundament eines widerstandsfähigen und vor allem demokratischen Europas, das wir gerade mehr denn je brauchen.

PRESIDENZA: PINA PICIERNO
Vicepresidente

Julien Leonardelli (PfE). – Madame la Présidente, Monsieur le Commissaire Fitto, chers collègues, ce neuvième rapport sur la cohésion économique et sociale ne peut passer sous silence l’une des urgences vitales pour nos territoires: l’eau.

En France, chez moi, en Occitanie, comme dans tant d’autres régions européennes, les sols s’assèchent, les nappes s’épuisent et les conflits d’usage se multiplient. L’agriculture est menacée, la santé publique est fragilisée et nos villages perdent leur souffle, car, oui, l’eau, c’est la vie. Cependant, au lieu d’aider les peuples à faire face à cela, les technocrates imposent une vision centralisée, hors sol et obnubilés par le réchauffement climatique.

À chaque urgence concrète, ils répondent par des rapports abstraits. Ils freinent les retenues d’eau, ils entravent les initiatives locales et ils accablent ceux qui nourrissent nos nations, nos paysans.

Cela n’est pas notre Europe. L’Europe que nous voulons, c’est l’Europe des peuples, celle qui défend les nations – les nations gardant la maîtrise de leurs ressources – et où les décisions sont prises au plus près du terrain et non imposées par une bureaucratie lointaine et idéologique.

L’heure est venue de redonner aux nations leur souveraineté hydraulique, de protéger l’eau comme un bien commun, nécessaire au développement urbain et touristique, indispensable à notre agriculture, à notre industrie et à nos territoires. Sans eau, il n’y aura ni renaissance rurale, ni cohésion, ni avenir pour nos enfants.

Rasmus Andresen (Verts/ALE). – Frau Präsidentin! Viele Menschen haben Angst in diesen Zeiten. Menschen, die in ländlichen Regionen oder in Grenzregionen leben, haben Angst, ihren Job zu verlieren oder abgehängt zu werden, weil die Bahn nicht mehr fährt oder das Krankenhaus vor Ort schließt. Viele Menschen in Metropolen haben Angst, dass ihre Einkommen durch die hohen Mieten oder hohe Lebenshaltungskosten aufgefressen werden und sie nicht mehr mithalten können. Viele Menschen merken, dass das Leben nicht mehr so einfach ist. Und ich finde, dass die Europäische Union ein klares Versprechen für ein gutes Leben an alle Menschen in der Europäischen Union abgeben muss. Dafür kann die Europäische Union zuständig sein, und die Kohäsionspolitik ist dafür ein sehr zentrales Element.

Es ist wirklich sehr schön zu hören, dass sich der Kommissionsvizepräsident Fitto hier heute dem Bericht angeschlossen hat, den wir im Parlament verhandelt haben. Aber ich muss auch ganz ehrlich sagen: Das passt nicht zur Realität, wie wir sie wahrnehmen. Die Realität ist, dass die EU‑Kommission weiter Zentralisierungspläne hat, dass die Kohäsionsgelder zukünftig in nationalen Plänen ausgezahlt werden müssen, dass Regionen die Gelder nicht mehr bekommen, dass soziale Organisationen, dass kleine Unternehmen, dass Gewerkschaften in Zukunft ausgeschlossen werden. Und das will ich ganz deutlich sagen: Das darf nicht passieren, und dafür setzen wir uns auch mit diesem Bericht zur Wehr.

Wir sagen aber auch, dass die Kohäsionspolitik besser werden muss. Es muss einfacher werden, EU‑Fördermittel zu bekommen, es muss weiterhin klare Ziele geben – soziale Ziele und grüne Ziele –, und wir brauchen direkte Instrumente für Städte, damit auch sie besser an EU‑Fördermitteln partizipieren können. Hier im Parlament sind wir uns einig. Jetzt kommt es darauf an, dass Sie handeln und dass Sie im Sommer den richtigen Vorschlag machen und sich an der Position des Parlaments orientieren.

Έλενα Κουντουρά (The Left). – Κυρία Πρόεδρε, κύριε Επίτροπε, η πολιτική συνοχής έχει βασικό στόχο την επίτευξη ισόρροπης ανάπτυξης σε όλη την Ευρώπη μέσω της κοινωνικής, οικονομικής και εδαφικής σύγκλισης όλων των περιφερειών. Ωστόσο, παρά την πρόοδο, είμαστε ακόμα πολύ μακριά από την επίτευξη αυτών των κρίσιμων στόχων.

Η πράσινη και η ψηφιακή μετάβαση, η στεγαστική κρίση, η κλιματική κρίση, το υψηλό μεταφορικό και ενεργειακό κόστος δημιουργούν νέες προκλήσεις για τις τοπικές κοινωνίες, ειδικά στα νησιά και στις απομακρυσμένες περιοχές.

Η ιδέα χρηματοδότησης αμυντικών τεχνολογιών από τα Ταμεία Συνοχής πρέπει να απορριφθεί. Χρειαζόμαστε ενίσχυση της χρηματοδότησης της πολιτικής συνοχής στο νέο Πολυετές Δημοσιονομικό Πλαίσιο. Πρέπει να διασφαλίσουμε ότι θα βασίζεται στις ιδιαίτερες ανάγκες των τοπικών κοινωνιών, στην αρχή της πολυεπίπεδης διακυβέρνησης, στο αποκεντρωμένο μοντέλο προγραμματισμού και στην ενισχυμένη συμμετοχή των περιφερειακών αρχών.

Τέλος, θα πρέπει να αντιμετωπιστούν οι ενδοπεριφερειακές ανισότητες σε επίπεδο NUTS 3, συνυπολογίζοντας παράγοντες πέραν του περιφερειακού ΑΕΠ, όπως η δημογραφική ερήμωση, η νησιωτικότητα, η περιβαλλοντική επιβάρυνση και η ποιότητα ζωής.

Isabelle Le Callennec (PPE). – Madame la Présidente, Monsieur le Commissaire Fitto, la politique de cohésion vise la réduction des disparités économiques, sociales et territoriales au sein de l’Union européenne, et pèse pour un tiers de son budget. La politique de cohésion, parfaitement identifiée et incarnation de l’Europe dans nos territoires, est au cœur du projet européen et ne saurait être remise en cause. A contrario, elle doit être renforcée dans ses budgets et améliorée dans sa mise en œuvre.

Non à une ponction des fonds de cohésion à d’autres fins que celles pour lesquelles ils ont été créés. Oui à un régime spécial et légitime pour les régions ultrapériphériques, non à une recentralisation de la gestion. Oui à une simplification du fonctionnement; non à une utilisation des fonds inadéquate et oui à une meilleure synergie avec les programmes sectoriels de l’Union et le soutien de la BEI dans les investissements d’avenir.

À vous écouter, Monsieur le Commissaire Fitto, j’ai bon espoir que nous soyons enfin entendus.

Maravillas Abadía Jover (PPE). – Señora presidenta, señor comisario, la política de cohesión es una palanca esencial de la competitividad europea, pero Europa sufre hoy un déficit de ejecución para su ambición global. La revisión intermedia muestra avances, pero también revela un problema grave: las tasas de absorción son inaceptablemente bajas.

En España, donde Eurostat confirma una vez más el triste liderazgo del paro en Europa, la ejecución del Fondo Social es del 0 %. Esta parálisis no es un fallo de Bruselas, sino de una gestión centralizada ineficaz y de una burocracia que bloquea inversiones estratégicas. La cohesión no se consigue con papeles, sino invirtiendo en la vida cotidiana: en empleos de calidad, en trenes que circulen con normalidad, en el acceso garantizado al agua, en luz encendida cada día y no en apagones de los cuales aún no hay respuesta.

Para lograrlo, los entes locales y regionales deben tener un papel protagonista. Son ellos los que mejor conocen las necesidades reales. La política de cohesión debe garantizar una ejecución eficaz, promover inversiones de calado y seguir siendo el motor de una Europa fuerte, solidaria y competitiva.

Paulo Do Nascimento Cabral (PPE). – Senhora Presidente, Senhor Vice-Presidente Raffaele Fitto, a política de coesão tem de ter um orçamento robusto, e recorda-se que cada euro investido através desta política deverá ser multiplicado por três até 2040. Isto só será possível se envolvermos as autoridades regionais e locais numa abordagem multinível no seu desenho e gestão, respeitando o princípio da subsidiariedade e de parceria.

Este tem de continuar a ser o principal instrumento no combate às desigualdades regionais. No último quadro, a política de coesão representou 13 % de todo o investimento público na União Europeia e 51 % nos Estados-Membros das regiões menos desenvolvidas. Isto mostra que é a maior política de investimentos da União Europeia e beneficia todos os Estados-Membros, direta ou indiretamente.

O relatório refere ainda flexibilidade na gestão que defende, quer para os beneficiários, quer para as administrações, e saúdo, portanto, o nosso relator Protas por isto.

Destaco apenas as regiões ultraperiféricas, com os seus desafios estruturais permanentes, que devem continuar a ter uma abordagem específica, como estabelecido no artigo 349.º do Tratado. Mas são também territórios de elevado potencial estratégico para a União, com condições únicas para liderar processos de inovação territorial.

É essencial que a Comissão Europeia promova sempre avaliações de impacto nessas regiões de novas propostas legislativas, para evitarmos erros como o ETS e evitarmos sobrecargas regulatórias que possam comprometer o seu desenvolvimento económico e social. E termino com um desafio: os transportes são a principal limitação da competitividade das empresas nas RUP e por isso precisamos urgentemente de um POSEI Transportes.

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

João Oliveira (The Left), Pergunta segundo o procedimento «cartão azul». – Senhora Presidente, Senhor Deputado Paulo do Nascimento Cabral, os fundos de coesão são um instrumento absolutamente essencial para países como Portugal, para garantir o desenvolvimento e a coesão nas suas três dimensões — económica, social e territorial.

Ora, este relatório faz uma referência direta à promoção do investimento em projetos e bens de dupla utilização, ou seja, com dimensão militar e civil. E as perguntas que lhe faço são duas: primeiro, se o senhor deputado está de acordo com esta possibilidade de desvio de fundos da coesão para fins militares e, em segundo lugar, como é que o senhor deputado entende que o desvio de fundos de coesão para objetivos militares pode servir o desenvolvimento de países como Portugal.

Paulo Do Nascimento Cabral (PPE), Resposta segundo o procedimento «cartão azul». – Senhor Deputado, de facto, há esta referência numa lógica facultativa, não é obrigatório — os Estados-Membros podem utilizar esta possibilidade para desenvolver a sua indústria militar, como foi apresentado também aqui na revisão intercalar da política de coesão.

Neste caso específico, a indústria militar pode ser considerada de várias formas. Falamos também daquilo que mais valoriza o território, desde logo a ocupação do território, a promoção das zonas rurais, e falo também daquilo que tem que ver com a possibilidade que nós temos para desenvolver estes mesmos locais, essas mesmas zonas rurais com alguma indústria. Pode estar diretamente relacionado, ou não, com as questões militares, mas, por exemplo, a agricultura também pode ser considerada segurança e defesa, autonomia alimentar — a autonomia estratégica da União Europeia também tem de ser considerada.

Não vejo no relatório uma obrigação; vejo uma possibilidade para aumentar a taxa de execução dos fundos de coesão.

Nikolina Brnjac (PPE). – Poštovana predsjedavajuća, povjereniče, drage kolegice i kolege, deveto izvješće o koheziji potvrđuje ono što znamo iz prakse, a to je da kohezijska politika donosi konkretne i donosi mjerljive rezultate.

Kao zastupnica iz Republike Hrvatske iz prve ruke svjedočim koliko su upravo kohezijska ulaganja ključna za ravnomjerni razvoj naših regija, za jačanje naših gospodarstava, za prometnu i socijalnu infrastrukturu, ali koliko su važna i za očuvanje radnih mjesta. No, pred nama su i dalje važni i ozbiljni izazovi: od demografskog pada i administrativnih prepreka do niske apsorpcije sredstava.

Kao koordinatorica EPP-a u Odboru za stambenu krizu, posebno pozdravljam što izvješće prepoznaje stratešku važnost ulaganja u priuštivo stanovanje. To je temelj socijalne kohezije, zadržavanje mladih i obitelji i radne snage u našim regijama te borbe protiv depopulacije.

Za Hrvatsku i druge članice, manje države članice, snažna, fleksibilna i pojednostavljena kohezijska politika i nakon 2027. godine mora ostati prioritet. Europska unija mora ostati savez jednakih prilika za sve.

Procedura “catch-the-eye”

Juan Fernando López Aguilar (S&D). – Señora presidenta, señor vicepresidente Fitto, lo ha escuchado usted claramente: una mayoría de este Parlamento Europeo concuerda en que la política de cohesión es la razón de ser de Europa, correctora de desigualdades –también territoriales– en origen.

Tiene que ser particularmente sensible con regiones expuestas a conflictos en su frontera inmediata –como es el caso de la guerra de Ucrania– y en regiones particularmente expuestas por ser la primera línea ante el hecho migratorio –como es el caso de las regiones ultraperiféricas–. Pero, además de eso, este Parlamento subraya que sí es posible simplificar la gestión de los fondos de cohesión y los fondos de solidaridad distintivos de la Unión Europea sin que ello perjudique su gestión compartida y su gobernanza multinivel, y que –por tanto– le permita rendir cuentas asimismo en su gestión regional.

Se presenta, además, un objetivo muy importante: que tengan financiación suficiente para atender las nuevas prioridades, las emergencias y las catástrofes climáticas –cada vez más frecuentes– y, sobre todo, la extrapolación de la política social europea a la política de vivienda, que es el gran desafío de la solidaridad intergeneracional en la Unión Europea.

João Oliveira (The Left). – Senhora Presidente, a política de coesão é, de facto, um instrumento absolutamente essencial para combater desigualdades económicas, sociais e territoriais, e garantir que todos os países possam, efetivamente, ter a possibilidade de estar no mesmo patamar de desenvolvimento.

Mas, para isso, é absolutamente essencial aumentar o investimento dos fundos de coesão e garantir que eles não sejam negligenciados. E, também, não associar a política de coesão a um modelo de financiamento baseado em objetivos ou resultados, como muitas vezes a Comissão Europeia procura querer, porque isso é, naturalmente, um elemento de limitação na possibilidade da utilização mais adequada dos fundos de coesão à realidade e à circunstância de cada país.

É também absolutamente essencial garantir uma governação descentralizada, com o nível adequado de articulação entre governos nacionais, regionais e locais, e assegurando que as estratégias locais de desenvolvimento sejam de responsabilidade partilhada e que não sejam impostas a cada região e a cada localidade.

Por fim, é absolutamente essencial garantir que o próximo quadro financeiro plurianual tenha um nível adequado de investimento na política de coesão, garantindo que o princípio da coesão seja um princípio horizontal que atravessa todas as políticas setoriais como critério de decisão para que esses objetivos de coesão possam ser alcançados.

Maria Grapini (S&D). – Doamnă președintă, domnule comisar, stimați colegi, politica de coeziune este esența Uniunii Europene. Nu o să putem, domnule comisar, să consolidăm și să fie puternică piața unică în raport cu piața globală dacă nu vom rezolva politica de coeziune.

Și cred că s-au făcut câteva greșeli: nu analizăm prea des efectele, pentru că dacă nu reușim să avem coeziune socială, să eliminăm disparitățile sociale, uitați-vă între est și vest, uitați-vă între regiunile periferice, între rural și urban. Deci, dacă nu reușim să facem aceste lucruri, înseamnă că nu avem politică de coeziune.

Apoi, ca să poată să aibă acces la bani, și cei din rural, și întreprinderile mici și mijlocii și zonele îndepărtate, trebuie foarte multă flexibilitate, foarte mult pus accent pe rezultate, simplificare, descentralizare, foarte important. Și sigur că trebuie, așa cum s-a și spus aici, trebuie să avem grijă acum ca țările care sunt în regiunile vecine cu Rusia, cu Bielorusia, cu Ucraina, cum este și țara mea, România, să aibă fonduri alocate, pentru că aceste state au preluat cetățeni ucraineni, copii ucraineni și nu putem să susținem singuri.

Politica de coeziune este cea care va da viitorul Uniunii Europene!

(Fine della procedura “catch the eye”)

Raffaele Fitto, Executive Vice-President of the Commission. – Madam President, Members, thank you for this debate. Let me begin by thanking you all for your valuable contributions. I have listened closely to your comments and concerns. Your insights this evening confirm a strong, shared commitment to the future of cohesion policy, one that is modern, responsive and grounded in the real needs of our regions. The status quo is not an option.

You spoke about the role of the regions, the role of the cities, less bureaucracy, defending the principles of cohesion, defending the financial dimension, the simplification; these are the most important issues that you raised and I agree with you, but it’s important to underline some points. For example, we cannot defend the cohesion policy as it is if we want to give a future to this policy. About defence, for example, you know that – some of you know that and said that –defence now is a new opportunity that the Commission gives with the mid-term review. Well, you know that the current programmes are already financing some projects on defence. The mid-term review gives the possibility on a voluntary basis to use all of the five priorities, or some of the priorities, or, if the Member States can simply decide to not use the mid-term review, solve the problem. There is not an obligatory decision of the European Commission. There is not a transfer of money from cohesion. I want to be clear, it’s important to be clear about this point. This is a voluntary basis. And now we have these opportunities because in the current programmes, without a mid-term review, there is the opportunity, the possibility, to use the resources of cohesion for defence. We have some clear examples in this way. It’s important to have the right approach between us, because I think that for the mid-term review to be successful, we must act swiftly and a modernised policy framework needs to be in place as soon as possible so that Member States and the regions can choose which investments should be directed towards our new and emerging priorities without delay. At the same time, we must remain attentive to the ongoing challenges that many EU regions continue to face – challenges clearly highlighted in the Cohesion Report. We also have a duty to ensure that every euro we spend delivers maximum impact.

Honourable Members, cohesion policy has proven its value time and again. Its core principles – partnership, shared management, multi-level governance, place-based approach – are not just a technical terms, they are what makes this policy work, what brings Europe closer to its citizens. With a renewed vision and determination, we can build on these foundations and shape a cohesion policy fit for the future. I will continue to engage closely with this House, with the Member States, with the regions, with the mayors, and with all authorities in the weeks and months ahead to listen, to learn, to create tailored solutions for every region. This has been and will always remain my approach. T.

hank you once again for this valuable exchange and for your continued commitment to Europe’s regions and citizens. And thank you again, Mr Protas, for this report. I think that this is a very positive basis for our work for the next weeks or the next months. It is not simple, the debate for the future, but I think that it’s important to build one position between us. I think that there isn’t a different approach. Now we need to have only one voice, not to defend cohesion policy, but to relaunch and modernised cohesion policy. These are our challenges and I count on you about this future and for the next steps that together we will have for these important challenges.

Jacek Protas, Sprawozdawca. – Pani Przewodnicząca! Szanowni Państwo! Drogie Koleżanki i Koledzy! Bardzo serdecznie dziękuję zarówno za tą dzisiejszą debatę i za ciepłe słowa skierowane również do mnie, ale bardzo też serdecznie dziękuję za prace nad tym ważnym dokumentem, który – tak jak powiedziałem – moim zdaniem będzie naszym mocnym stanowiskiem, mocnym stanowiskiem Parlamentu Europejskiego w dalszej debacie, tak jak powiedział pan komisarz, na temat modernizacji polityki spójności.

Pozwólcie państwo, że podobnie jak pan komisarz, odniosę się do produktów podwójnego zastosowania, bo wydaje mi się, że nie wszyscy rozumieją, o co chodzi. Otóż, po pierwsze, rzeczywiście to nie jest obligatoryjne podejście. Tylko te regiony, te państwa, które czują taką potrzebę, żeby przesuwać środki na niektóre działania, mogą to uczynić. Komisja Europejska zarówno w czasie przeglądu śródokresowego, jak i – mam nadzieję – w przyszłości pozwoli na takie działania. I nie jest to przesuwanie środków na wspieranie zakupów zbrojeniowych, jak tutaj też słyszałem. W żadnym wypadku.

Ja, szanowni państwo, mieszkam 30 kilometrów od granicy z Rosją, 30 kilometrów od granicy z agresorem, z wrogim państwem. I chciałbym, żeby w moim regionie można było budować nowe hale sportowe ze schronem pod tą halą, żeby można było modernizować wskazane szpitale, które w razie zagrożenia wojennego będą również pełniły rolę wsparcia dla wojska. Chciałbym móc wzmacniać mosty, modernizować drogi dojazdowe czy budować je w takich parametrach, żeby mogły również służyć celom obronnym. I to nie jest militaryzowanie polityki spójności, ale danie możliwości tym regionom, które czują taką potrzebę, realizowania tych celów.

Szanowni państwo, panie komisarzu, bardzo serdecznie dziękuję za te dzisiejsze wystąpienia. Dziękuję za współpracę. Mam głębokie przekonanie, że ten dokument, który w czwartek przegłosujemy, również pomoże panu, bowiem znamy pana historię zawodową. Wiemy, że jest pan samorządowcem. Był pan szefem regionu, ministrem odpowiedzialnym również za politykę regionalną, więc wiemy, że rozumie pan potrzeby regionu, potrzeby społeczności lokalnych. Ale u nas w Polsce się mówi, że diabeł tkwi w szczegółach. Co do głównych założeń polityki spójności zgadzamy się również, że trzeba iść w kierunku modernizacji, ewolucji, nie rewolucji. Ale będziemy dyskutować na temat tego, jak to w praktyce ma wyglądać i jak Komisja Europejska to widzi. Mam nadzieję, że wspólnie osiągniemy sukces.

Presidente. – La discussione è chiusa.

La votazione si svolgerà giovedì.

23. One-minute speeches on matters of political importance

Rody Tolassy (PfE). – Madame la Présidente, chers collègues, voici le vrai visage du pacte vert quand il affecte les Outre-mer: un cataclysme économique déguisé en vertu écologique.

Costa Croisières quitte la Guadeloupe, non pas parce que notre territoire est moins attractif ou compétent, mais parce que Bruxelles impose aux régions ultrapériphériques (RUP) une transition énergétique restrictive et destructrice. Résultat: 15 000 à 20 000 passagers en moins, des dockers au chômage, des transporteurs en détresse, un port affaibli, et ce n’est que le début. L’augmentation du prix des billets d’avion frappait déjà nos familles, maintenant ce sont nos entreprises ainsi que notre tourisme qui sont touchés. Ce n’est plus une alerte, c’est un signal d’alarme.

Je vous pose donc une question simple: que compte faire la Commission pour compenser concrètement ces pertes? Mieux encore, arrêtez de faire les poches de nos compatriotes. Ainsi, je vous demande la suppression du dispositif d’échange de quotas d’émission dans les RUP sur la base de l’article 349 du traité FUE.

Daniel Buda (PPE). – Doamnă președintă, stimați colegi, în România s-a încheiat primul tur al alegerilor prezidențiale. Mi-aș fi dorit ca domnul Crin Antonescu, un lider cu viziune, cu experiență, capabil să fie un pilon de stabilitate pe scena politică europeană, să fi ajuns în turul al doilea. Din păcate, la doar câteva zeci de mii de voturi distanță, alegătorii au ales alt drum, plasând România într-un moment de răscruce.

Privind înainte, îmi doresc ca țara noastră să-și continue parcursul european și să rămână un punct de stabilitate într-o regiune marcată de războiul din Ucraina.

Astăzi, mai mult ca oricând, Europa are nevoie de o Românie puternică, responsabilă, fidelă valorilor democratice, o Românie care să nu cadă pradă extremismului sau populismului.

O Europă puternică este o Europă unită, unită în jurul valorilor care garantează pacea, libertatea, stabilitatea și prosperitatea.

Tocmai de aceea, România trebuie să aleagă candidatul pro-european Nicușor Dan, rămas în cursă și să spună nu izolării și nu întoarcerii în trecut.

Ciaran Mullooly (Renew). – Madam President, the housing crisis is crippling thousands of families and young couples all over Europe and especially in Ireland. I went to the town of Naas in County Kildare, a town which had 5 000 people in 1971, now a car-based town with 30 000 people in housing estates, and another 4 500 waiting for homes. A town that’s been forgotten. Planning is terrible. The demand is just incredible.

I spoke to Angela Garrett. She has two children, one aged 32, who has autism, the other 28. They’re still living at home. She tells me the average price of a family home in this town is half a million euro – five hundred thousand euro! It is out of control. And what does our government do in Ireland? We put in charge a man who’s paid a salary of almost half a million euro in another job to come in to take over this job.

We lack ideas. We lack strong thinking. We lack an ability to consider the people who are involved here, the people who are suffering because of the lack of a home. It is an absolute disgrace. We need, throughout Europe and in Ireland, to focus on real progress for families like these.

Nicolae Ştefănuță (Verts/ALE). – Doamnă președintă, România are de ales. Între Europa și extrema dreaptă. Între viitor și frică.

Nu mai e despre „îmi place de tine, tu mă placi pe mine”. Nu mai e nici măcar despre negocieri banale, despre funcții, ministere și mai știu eu ce.

Este despre direcția în care merge România, despre ce alegem să fim: o țară europeană, liberă, demnă, sau o țară închisă, izolată, vulnerabilă, slabă.

Fac un apel sincer și direct către toate partidele europene prezente în sală și cele de acasă: să ne unim în sprijinul pentru turul doi, pentru democrație. E momentul să fim împreună. Nu pentru un om, ci pentru un drum. Pentru drumul european al României.

Tinerii din România nu vor să trăiască în ură, nu vor să aibă un președinte care ne izolează, care alimentează ura, care ne scoate din Europa.

Pe 18 mai avem o singură opțiune cu toții: să ieșim la vot și să încurajăm unitatea europeană a României.

Anthony Smith (The Left). – Madame la Présidente, chers collègues, les secteurs stratégiques de l’économie comme l’industrie de l’acier doivent devenir des secteurs publics sous contrôle des États. Oui, nous n’hésitons pas à le dire dans cet hémicycle, qui continue de faire du néolibéralisme moribond son étendard.

Depuis des mois, les syndicats européens et français du secteur sonnent l’alarme sans réponse ni action de la Commission.

En France, c’est la direction d’ArcelorMittal qui a annoncé, fin avril, la suppression de centaines de postes qui s’ajoute aux annonces précédentes, laissant des milliers de familles sur le carreau. C’est toute la filière de l’acier en France et en Europe qui est menacée, alors qu’elle a été gavée d’argent public sans contrepartie. Au lendemain de cette annonce, le commissaire européen français Séjourné a même osé exprimer son incompréhension face à la décision du géant de la sidérurgie; mais de qui se moque-t-on?

La Macronie applique ici et au sein de la Commission le laissez-faire capitaliste pour permettre aux industriels d’accumuler toujours plus. Avec La France insoumise, nous le répétons sans faiblir: nationalisez ArcelorMittal!

Tomasz Froelich (ESN). – Frau Präsidentin! Die Opposition bespitzeln, die Opposition kriminalisieren, die AfD verbieten? Das sind Zustände wie in einem autoritären Staat – das sind Zustände in Deutschland. Wer so was tut, rettet nicht die Demokratie. Wer so was tut, der schafft die Demokratie ab, weil er Angst vor ihr hat, weil er zu schwach für sie ist. Veranlasst hat all dies Nancy Faeser, scheidende Innenministerin, gesichert linksextrem, Autorin des Antifa‑Magazins.

Das Gutachten gegen die AfD, auf das sie sich beruft, bleibt geheim. Es bleibt geheim, weil es harmlos ist. Der Presse wurde es dennoch gesteckt. Weil wir das deutsche Volk erhalten wollen, sollen wir rechtsextrem sein? Lächerlich! Marco Rubio hat völlig recht – das ist keine Demokratie, das ist verkappte Tyrannei. Und dann erdreistet sich diese Bundesregierung auch noch, dem Rest der Welt Demokratiedefizite vorzuwerfen. Einfach nur frech! Wer keine Argumente hat, muss auf Repression setzen, aber ich verspreche Ihnen: Wir halten das aus, denn unsere Überzeugungen sind stärker als diese Arroganz der Macht.

Maria Grapini (S&D). – Doamnă președintă, domnule comisar, am ales să vorbesc astăzi despre criza de locuințe pentru tineri. O locuință decentă este o condiție esențială pentru aspirațiile tinerilor și există studii făcute de Banca Mondială, există studii, are Comisia Europeană rezultatele acestor studii?

Este clar că sunt mai ales state cum ar fi Grecia, Bulgaria, România, chiar și Germania, unde criza locuințelor a crescut. Există însă și soluții.

Am vorbit mai devreme de politica de coeziune. Ține și acest lucru de politica de coeziune. Aceste rapoarte și analize dau și niște recomandări. De exemplu, să se acorde teren din spațiile publice neutilizate, tinerilor. Să aibă acces, așa cum am spus mai devreme, la finanțare, de exemplu la Banca Europeană de Investiții, simplificarea procedurilor prin care să se primească, dar și construcția de locuințe sociale.

Cum facem să asigurăm aceste lucruri? Pentru că tot rapoartele arată că există o legătură între productivitate, competitivitate, dar chiar și legătură cu sănătatea mintală, nu mai spun de demografie.

Deci trebuie să găsim soluții pentru ca tinerii să aibă acces la locuințe.

Tiago Moreira de Sá (PfE). – Senhora Presidente, quando James Madison elaborou as primeiras 10 emendas à Constituição dos Estados Unidos, que ficaram conhecidas como «Bill of Rights», fê-lo para garantir que, mesmo numa república acabada de nascer de uma guerra, a liberdade era constitucionalmente protegida.

O acordo «Pandemic», que deverá ser aprovado na próxima sessão da World Health Assembly, em Genebra, evoca intenções nobres, como proteger a saúde global. Está bem, mas deve ser encarado com cautelas e máxima vigilância. Há quatro áreas onde essa vigilância é absolutamente crítica — as liberdades individuais, a soberania nacional, a confidencialidade dos dados genéticos e a liberdade de expressão.

A responsabilidade histórica que temos hoje é a mesma que Madison teve no seu tempo: assegurar que a prevenção de um mal nunca se faça à custa da liberdade, seja dos indivíduos, seja, neste caso também, dos Estados. Porque a liberdade não é o preço da segurança; é a sua condição moral.

Cristian Terheş (ECR). – Doamnă președintă, dragi colegi, am atras atenția din toamna lui 2019 că programul utopic Green Deal, promovat de Ursula von der Leyen, va conduce la o criză energetică în Europa, cu efect dezastruos asupra populației și economiilor europene.

Pe de o parte, aceste politici au condus deja la creșterea consumului de energie, pe de altă parte, în loc să diversifice sursele și să asigure independența energetică, UE a impus statelor să-și închidă surse de energie, cum sunt termocentralele pe cărbune, ceea ce a redus producția de energie.

Efectul a fost că prețul energiei a crescut peste tot în UE, cu efect devastator, în special asupra pensionarilor și celor mai săraci europeni. Acest lucru a afectat și economia, făcând bunurile și serviciile europene mai scumpe și mai greu de vândut pe piața mondială.

Această politică centralizată de tip comunist, care pornește de la premisa că cei de la Bruxelles știu mai bine decât guvernele statelor membre UE ce e mai bine pentru țările lor, și-a dovedit eșecul și trebuie să înceteze.

Pentru a gestiona cu adevărat criza energetică, statele membre trebuie să-și definească propriul mix energetic. Viitorul nu poate fi dictat de dogme verzi impuse de birocrații de la Bruxelles, ci de soluții funcționale specifice fiecărei țări.

Michael McNamara (Renew). – (start of speech off mic) … I suppose the instability and unprecedented level of conflict in the world is such that when two of the world’s greatest powers, two of the world’s most populous nations, both nuclear armed, are squaring up and threatening each other, it barely receives a word here in the European Union, or indeed from this Parliament. I would like to take this opportunity to express my condolences to the families of those slaughtered so savagely in Kashmir recently. But I think it is also important for this Parliament to call for restraint and dialogue.

The speech of Pakistan’s army chief, General Munir, to representatives of the diaspora a couple of days before the attack is viewed as inflammatory in India. However, there is no evidence of any link between Pakistan and the heinous attack and, in the absence of such evidence, any attack by India and Pakistan, which is itself a frequent victim of terrorist attacks, would be unjustified.

However, one cannot help but reflect on the benefits of democratically elected leaders speaking on behalf of their country rather than military men. In that regard, one might recall that when the Great Leader Jinnah outlined his vision of Pakistan in 1947, he spoke of no distinction between one community and another.

Jaume Asens Llodrà (Verts/ALE). – Señora presidenta, con el genocidio en Gaza, la historia nos mira y nos va a juzgar.

Albert Camus decía que no hay mejor combate –combate más fuerte– que el del ser humano que se enfrenta al mundo con las manos vacías, pero con la dignidad intacta. Israel ha atacado un buque de ayuda humanitaria: Flotilla por la Libertad. Se trata de un crimen de guerra gravísimo que nos recuerda esa distinción moral, la de quienes tienen las manos limpias porque ayudan a las víctimas, y las de los que las tienen manchadas de sangre porque ayudan a los verdugos y callan ante esos crímenes.

Ningún líder europeo ha dicho nada. ¿Qué habría sucedido si hubiera sido Putin –y no Netanyahu– quien hubiera intentado hundir un barco europeo?

El ministro español Albares ha condenado hoy el ataque al aeropuerto sin víctimas, pero no ha dicho nada del hundimiento del barco ni de los más de mil asesinados –cooperantes, médicos y enfermeras– que intentan salvar vidas. Esas muertes son una mancha indeleble en la conciencia de los líderes europeos que siguen cooperando con el genocidio en Gaza.

Nuestra obligación como ciudadanos es movilizarnos como garantes del Derecho internacional y recordar que, cuando la barbarie se normaliza, la desobediencia es una obligación moral.

Γεώργιος Αυτιάς (PPE). – Κυρία Πρόεδρε, κύριε Επίτροπε, η άσκηση οικονομικής πολιτικής, πέραν της ανταγωνιστικότητας και της σταθερότητας —και το ξέρετε πολύ καλά αυτό, γιατί η πατρίδα μου πέρασε από τρία μνημόνια— πρέπει να έχει και έντονο κοινωνικό χαρακτήρα, δηλαδή στήριξη μισθών και συντάξεων, στήριξη φορολογικών ελαφρύνσεων, λύση δημογραφικού, στέγη. Το ξέρετε πολύ καλά, κύριε Επίτροπε, το θέμα, και εσείς, αξιότιμοι συνάδελφοι. Μείωση της ανεργίας και φθηνή ενέργεια.

Προς αυτή την κατεύθυνση, η χώρα μου κινείται με ταχύτατο ρυθμό, αποπληρώνει δάνεια δεκαετίες μπροστά, έχει άριστες κριτικές από οίκους αξιολόγησης και, παράλληλα, πλεόνασμα. Αυτό το πλεόνασμα, λοιπόν, επιστρέφεται στην κοινωνία.

Να ξέρετε, κύριε Επίτροπε, ότι αυτός ο βηματισμός θα συνεχιστεί και το επόμενο χρονικό διάστημα και προς αυτή την κατεύθυνση σας ενημερώνω συνεχώς.

Anne-Sophie Frigout (PfE). – Madame la Présidente, chers collègues, enfin, après avoir mené l’industrie automobile au bord de la mort, la Commission européenne revient à la raison et nous propose d’offrir un court répit aux constructeurs automobiles, avec davantage de flexibilité dans l’application des objectifs d’émissions de CO2.

Cela fait des années que nous alertons sur les conséquences désastreuses de l’écologie punitive imposée par les technocrates bruxellois. Sans cet assouplissement, nos constructeurs auraient dû payer jusqu’à 15 milliards d’euros d’amende dès cet automne.

Ce revirement partiel est une première victoire, mais le combat continue. Il est essentiel de revenir sur la fin des moteurs thermiques neufs en 2035, une décision absurde et complètement hors sol qui menace nos emplois et le pouvoir d’achat des Européens.

Avec notre groupe des Patriotes pour l’Europe, nous avons déposé des amendements de bon sens pour défendre notre industrie et une transition écologique réaliste. Ils seront, je l’espère, votés par tous les collègues qui déplorent comme nous cette désastreuse politique de sabotage industriel.

Quoi qu’il en soit, nous ne lâcherons rien et nous ne laisserons pas Bruxelles sacrifier l’Europe qui travaille.

Mélanie Disdier (PfE). – Madame la Présidente, chers collègues, dans mon département du Nord, ArcelorMittal, une industrie structurante du secteur métallurgique, est contrainte de licencier des salariés par centaines. À cause d’une concurrence déloyale et des prix de l’énergie exorbitants, ce sont plus de 600 salariés et, à travers eux, plus de 600 familles qui vont se retrouver en difficulté. Je peux déjà voir venir le programme d’aide de l’Union pour aider face aux désastres de la mondialisation et donc poser un nouveau pansement sur une jambe de bois, mais les Français en ont marre, les Européens en ont marre!

Ce dont l’Europe a besoin, ce n’est pas de cacher la misère, mais de créer les conditions de son éradication. C’est en se donnant les moyens de produire des richesses que l’Europe pourra se redresser. Si vous vous contentez de nier les conséquences désastreuses de votre politique, vous n’arriverez à rien et l’Europe continuera de décliner. Si, à l’inverse, vous regardez la vérité en face et qu’enfin vous décidez de sortir de votre idéologie régressive et criante, peut-être que nous pourrons enfin lancer le chantier du redressement économique de l’Europe.

Şerban Dimitrie Sturdza (ECR). – Madame la Présidente, chers collègues, après l’annulation abusive du premier tour des élections présidentielles roumaines de décembre 2024, le premier tour a été de nouveau organisé hier.

L’humiliation et la trahison du peuple roumain par l’annulation de son vote, simplement parce qu’il avait exprimé une préférence européenne, mais souverainiste, ont provoqué une vague de colère sociétale sans précédent contre le parti globaliste au pouvoir en Roumanie depuis 35 ans. Parce que le vote en faveur de Călin Georgescu a été annulé et qu’il lui a été interdit de se présenter à nouveau, les Roumains ont voté massivement pour George Simion.

Le message des Roumains est extrêmement clair: ils exigent d’être respectés tant par les dirigeants de Bruxelles que par leurs représentants nationaux et rejettent de nombreuses décisions absurdes, contraires à leurs intérêts, à leurs traditions, à leur foi et à leur identité, imposées de manière autoritaire. Les Roumains ont commencé à prendre leur pays en main.

Nous sommes un peuple européen avec des aspirations dignes de la grande famille européenne, et en même temps un peuple conservateur, fier.

Δημήτρης Τσιόδρας (PPE). – Κυρία Πρόεδρε, τα νέα γεωπολιτικά δεδομένα ωθούν την Ευρώπη από καταναλωτής ασφάλειας να πάρει τις τύχες στα χέρια της και να οικοδομήσει κοινή άμυνα. Κοινή άμυνα, όμως, δεν σημαίνει μόνο κοινή παραγωγή αμυντικών συστημάτων. Σημαίνει κοινή πολιτική άμυνας. Και, σε αυτή την πολιτική, προφανώς χωρούν και τρίτες χώρες. Όμως, χώρες οι οποίες μοιράζονται κοινές αρχές και κοινές αξίες. Όχι χώρες, όπως η Τουρκία, που κατέχουν παράνομα ευρωπαϊκό έδαφος στην Κύπρο, απειλούν χώρες μέλη και έχουν βρεθεί απέναντι στην Ευρώπη σε μια σειρά από περιοχές, όπως στη Μέση Ανατολή, στη Λιβύη και στον Καύκασο.

Η διάθεση εθνικών κονδυλίων για άμυνα αποτελεί, προφανώς, απόφαση κάθε χώρας, όμως δεν μπορεί να μη λαμβάνονται υπόψη οι ευρωπαϊκές αρχές. Διαφορετικά, δεν θα διαμορφώσουμε κοινή πολιτική, που είναι ακριβώς αυτό που χρειαζόμαστε. Οι Ευρωπαίοι πολίτες θα αισθάνονται ασφαλείς όταν νιώθουν ότι τα σύνορα της χώρας τους είναι ευρωπαϊκά σύνορα και ότι η απειλή εναντίον ενός είναι απειλή εναντίον όλων.

Ştefan Muşoiu (S&D). – Doamnă președintă, dragi colegi, am fost invitat recent să le explic unor elevi de clasa a doua ai unei școli din Slobozia, orașul din România din care provin și eu, despre arhitectura Uniunii Europene și despre rolul său decizional reflectat în viața cetățenilor ei, indiferent de vârsta, sexul, statutul sau preocupările lor.

Bucuria mi-a fost răsplătită de interesul viu al școlarilor și de numeroasele cunoștințe pe care le au despre Uniunea Europeană. La rândul lor, copiii mi-au cerut să dau citire aici, în plen, scrisorii pe care mi-au adresat-o, astfel încât dezvoltarea Uniunii Europene și un viitor mai bun și mai sigur să se edifice și pe interesele lor.

Vă citez: „Vă rugăm să aveți grijă de planeta noastră. Vrem o Europă cu aer și ape curate, cu păduri verzi și cu animale protejate. Ne dorim să trăim în pace, să mergem în siguranță la școală și să ne facem prieteni în toate colțurile continentului. Vrem ca toți copiii europeni să aibă acces la educație, sănătate, să nu sufere de foame sau să fie speriați de război. Vă rugăm să ne ascultați rugămințile, pentru că noi suntem viitorul Europei. Dacă ne ajutați să creștem într-o lume mai bună, promitem că vom avea grijă de ea și de ceilalți când vom fi și noi mari. Vă mulțumim!” Am încheiat citatul.

Întrebarea mea este: le lăsăm o lume mai bună?

Presidente. – La discussione è chiusa.

La prossima seduta si svolgerà domani 6 maggio 2025 ore 9:00.

24. Agenda of the next sitting

Presidente. – L’ordine del giorno è stato pubblicato ed è disponibile sul sito internet del Parlamento europeo.

25. Approval of the minutes of the sitting

Presidente. – Il processo verbale della seduta sarà sottoposto all’approvazione del Parlamento domani.

La seduta è tolta.

26. Closure of the sitting

(La seduta è tolta alle 22.05)

MIL OSI Europe News –

May 7, 2025

MIL-OSI USA: Trump HHS Nominee Dodges Cantwell Questions on Admin’s Proposed $18B in Medical Research Cuts

US Senate News:

Source: United States Senator for Washington Maria Cantwell
05.06.25
Trump HHS Nominee Dodges Cantwell Questions on Admin’s Proposed $18B in Medical Research Cuts
During his Finance Committee hearing, James O’Neill pleads ignorance when asked about Trump’s massive budget cut proposal for NIH: “I haven’t had a chance to review the details”; White House proposal released Friday would slash 40% of NIH research funding and “reform” its priorities to align with Trump
WASHINGTON, D.C. – Today, U.S. Senator Maria Cantwell (D-WA), senior member of the Senate Finance Committee and ranking member of the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation, pressed James O’Neill – President Trump’s nominee to serve as Deputy Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) — on the Trump administration’s latest budget proposal that would wipe out $18 billion from the National Institute of Health (NIH), the federal agency tasked with lifesaving medical research.
“Mr. O’Neill, do you support the proposed $18 billion cuts to NIH funding?” asked Sen. Cantwell.
O’Neill responded: “Senator, I had no involvement in the development of any proposed budgets. I think it’s important to pursue gold standard research, and anything we can do to improve NIH, ensure that it’s promoting gold standard research, ensuring that it’s funding research that replicates seems completely reasonable to me.”
Sen. Cantwell: “You mean the proposed cuts seem reasonable because there’s some stuff we’re doing that isn’t gold standard?”
O’Neill: “Senator, I believe the President’s proposal for NIH suggests combining some separate institutes of NIH into single institutes, where the functions belong together to reduce duplication.”
Sen. Cantwell: “That would cut $18 billion?”
O’Neill: “Senator, I haven’t had a chance to review the details that went into the budget. All I can say is I did not participate in that decision.”
Sen. Cantwell: “Okay, well, I’m looking for a little bit of philosophy here. I come from a part of the world where we like innovation. We certainly like NIH investment in that because we look at it and say, ‘How are we going to reduce these unbelievable costs of a Baby Boomer population reaching retirement and having huge demand?’ So places like the University of Washington have done incredible work on Alzheimer’s research. So we’re going to strive to solve these huge health care costs by innovation, not by shortcutting innovation.”
On Friday, President Trump released a budget proposal that would cut NIH research funding by $17.97 billion and “reform” the agency so that its remaining $27 billion for research aligns with his administration’s priorities. The budget also proposes more than $3.5 billion in cuts to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
In Washington state, NIH funding supports over 12,000 jobs and more than $3 billion in economic activity.
Last month, National Science Foundation (NSF) Director Sethuraman Panchanathan resigned after the White House directed the NSF to accept a 55% cut in funding – part of “a deliberate dismemberment of America’s innovation engine,” Sen. Cantwell said at the time.
In February, Sen. Cantwell joined the entire Senate Democratic Caucus in sending a letter to U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. expressing serious alarm over the Trump Administration’s decisions that threatened to undermine America’s life-saving biomedical research infrastructure, in violation of federal law. The letter followed her strong opposition to RFK Jr.’s nomination, which she articulated in a speech on the Senate floor:
“Now we are at the possibility of the beginning of another crisis, the avian flu. This crisis is yet another reminder of the importance of medical research and collaboration,” Sen. Cantwell said in her February floor speech. “Does it make sense to cut science at the time we might have another pandemic? Does it make sense to continue to cut the collaborative efforts of research?”
Video of Sen. Cantwell’s Q&A today is available HERE, audio HERE, and a full transcript is HERE.

MIL OSI USA News –

May 7, 2025
MIL-OSI USA: Attorney General Bonta Secures Preliminary Injunction in Lawsuit to Protect Vital Education Funding

Source: US State of California

Tuesday, May 6, 2025

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

OAKLAND – California Attorney General Rob Bonta today issued a statement on the decision by the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York granting a preliminary injunction to prevent the federal government from rescinding access to hundreds of millions of dollars in vital education funding while litigation proceeds. In California alone, over $200 million in previously awarded and obligated funding is at stake – funding that school districts are already putting to use for programs such as afterschool and summer learning initiatives, the purchase of educational technology, and the provision of mental health services and support.

“The Trump Administration continues to break the law, and we continue to hold him accountable,” said Attorney General Bonta. “I’m pleased by the court’s decision today allowing vital education funding to continue to flow into our schools while our case continues. We will not stop fighting to ensure these unlawful, nonsensical funding cuts never see the light of day. Our students deserve nothing less.”

BACKGROUND

On March 28, 2025, Education Secretary Linda McMahon notified state departments of education that the U.S. Department of Education had unilaterally rescinded access to previously awarded and obligated education funding that is currently being used by school districts to support the academic recovery of students following the COVID-19 pandemic. These programs and services address, among other things, the impact of lost instructional time; students’ academic, social, and emotional needs; and the disproportionate impact of the pandemic on economically-disadvantaged students, including homeless children and children in foster care.

On April 10, 2025, Attorney General Rob Bonta and a coalition of states challenged the Department of Education’s actions. The states argue that the Department’s decision to rescind access to this funding is arbitrary and capricious in violation of the Administrative Procedures Act, exceeds the Department’s statutory and regulatory authority under the law, and will cause immediate and devastating harm to school districts in California and across the nation.

A copy of the court’s order is available here.

# # #

MIL OSI USA News –

May 7, 2025
MIL-OSI USA: Scalise’s 100 Days of Trump Recap: House Republicans Deliver America First Wins

Source: United States House of Representatives – Congressman Steve Scalise (1st District of Louisiana)

WASHINGTON, D.C. — As we reach the first 100 days under President Trump’s leadership, House Majority Leader Steve Scalise (R-La.) released the following statement highlighting the progress House Republicans have made in furthering President Trump’s America First agenda: “Just 100 days into his second term, President Trump has already taken historic action at a whirlwind pace to turn our country around, reversing so much damage done by the Biden Administration and following through on his promise to put America first. Illegal border crossings have drastically declined, criminal aliens are being deported en masse, consumer prices and inflation are dropping, companies are investing trillions of dollars back into America, domestic energy production is being unleashed, gas prices are dropping, and much more. “House Republicans are working hard to do our part to further President Trump’s America First agenda, passing legislation to secure our border, keep families safe, unleash American energy, support American job growth, and increase government efficiency. We passed legislation like the Laken Riley Act, the first piece of legislation signed into law by President Trump, to protect our citizens from criminal illegal aliens. We also passed the Protection of Women and Girls in Sports Act to prevent men from competing in women’s sports. To ensure only American citizens are voting in federal elections, we passed the SAVE Act, and to safeguard American energy, we passed legislation such as the Protecting American Energy Production Act.”Additionally, House Republicans have passed 10 CRAs overturning costly and unnecessary regulations from the Biden Administration that crush American businesses, raise costs, and take away consumer choice, as well as the Midnight Rules Relief Act to keep the administrative state out of our homes. When partisan judges attempted to hinder President Trump from carrying out the policy agenda he was elected to deliver, we passed the No Rogue Rulings Act to prevent them from issuing nationwide injunctions. “These are just a few things House Republicans have accomplished working with President Trump, but we are far from done. Congress has a critical role to play in helping the President renew the American dream and make our nation great again, particularly through the reconciliation process. We are currently drafting one of the most consequential pieces of legislation in history in one big, beautiful bill that will deliver on President Trump’s full agenda. Republicans won’t stop fighting to take President Trump’s great vision for our nation – an America that is safe, strong, free, and full of opportunity – and make it a reality, for Americans today, tomorrow, and for generations to come.”Make America Safe Again ✅Border

H.R. 29 (Collins) – Laken Riley Act: Holds the Biden Administration accountable for their role in these tragedies through their open border policies, requires detention of illegal aliens who commit theft and mandates ICE take them into custody, and allows a state to sue the Federal government on behalf of their citizens for not enforcing the border laws, particularly in the case of parole.

Passed 264-159

Republicans: 216-0
Democrats: 48-159

Senate version became law on 1/29/25

H.R. 30 (Mace) – Preventing Violence Against Women by Illegal Aliens Act: Amends the Immigration and Nationality Act to make illegal immigrants who are convicted of, who admit having committed, or who admit committing sex offenses or domestic violence inadmissible and deportable from the United States.

Passed 274-145

Republicans: 213-0
Democrats: 61-145

H.R. 27 (Griffith) – HALT Fentanyl Act: Permanently classifies fentanyl-related substances (FRS) in Schedule I of the Controlled Substances Act, guarantees law enforcement has the resources to keep these drugs off the street, and allows for further research of FRS.

Passed 312-108

Republicans: 214-1
Democrats: 98-107

H.R. 35 (Ciscomani) – Agent Raul Gonzalez Officer Safety Act: Creates new criminal offenses for operating a vehicle within 100 miles of the southern border while fleeing from Border Patrol agents, or any law enforcement officer assisting the U.S. Border Patrol, including serious jail time and prohibition from ever receiving legal status in the United States.

Passed 264-155

Republicans: 214-0
Democrats: 50-155

Online Safety

S. 146 (Sen. Cruz) – TAKE IT DOWN Act: Prohibits the nonconsensual online publication of intimate visual depictions of individuals, both authentic and computer-generated, and requires certain online platforms to promptly remove such depictions upon receiving notice of their existence.

Passed 409-2

Republicans: 207-2
Democrats: 202-0

Foreign Relations

H.R. 23 (Roy) – Illegitimate Court Counteraction Act: Imposes sanctions on the ICC or any foreign actor who supports their effort to arrest, detain, or prosecute protected persons of the United States and its allies, including Prime Minister Netanyahu and Defense Minister Gallant.

Passed 243-140-1

Republicans: 198-0-1
Democrats: 45-140

H.R. 1048 (Baumgartner) – DETERRENT Act: Protects our institutions of higher education from foreign interference by strengthening disclosure requirements for foreign gifts and contracts, and in some cases, banning contracts between these schools and certain foreign entities of concern.

Passed 241-169

Republicans: 210-1
Democrats: 31-168

H.R. 33 (Smith-MO) – United States-Taiwan Expedited Double-Tax Relief Act: Strengthens the U.S. economic alliance with Taiwan and enhances our competitive position by providing targeted and expedited relief from double taxation on cross-border investment between America and Taiwan through tax code changes and authorizing the President to broker and enter into a tax agreement relative to Taiwan.

Passed 423-1

Republicans: 213-1
Democrats: 210-0

Women’s Sports

H.R. 28 (Steube) – Protection of Women and Girls in Sports Act: Prevents schools from allowing biological males to compete in school athletic programs for women or girls by stating that sex in an athletic competition must be defined by genetics at birth, and withholding federal funding from schools that facilitate athletic programs where biological men compete against biological women.

Passed 218-206-1

Republicans: 216-0
Democrats: 2-206-1

Life

H.R. 21 (Wagner) – Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act: Secures medical protections for babies that survive an attempted abortion, requiring health care providers to administer the same medical care they would to a fetus born prematurely at the same age, transport the child to the hospital, and report violations to law enforcement.

Passed 217-204

Republicans: 216-0
Democrats: 1-204

Make America Grow Again ✅Energy

H.R. 26 (Pfluger) – Protecting American Energy Production Act: Prevents a moratorium on hydraulic fracturing (fracking) to protect American energy production, and expresses that states have primacy over energy production on state and private land.

Passed 226-188

Republicans: 210-0
Democrats: 16-188

S.J. Res. 11 (Sen. Kennedy) – Protection of Marine Archaeological Resources CRA: Disapproves the Biden BOEM’s rule requiring oil and gas lessees and operators to submit an archaeological report for certain exploration or development activities on the Outer Continental Shelf to protect marine archeological resources like shipwrecks and so-called “cultural resources,” blocking increases in domestic energy production, weakening energy independence, and raising costs for consumers.

Passed 221-202-1

Republicans: 212-1-1
Democrats: 9-201

Signed into law 3/14/25

H.J. Res. 35 (Pfluger) – Waste Emissions Charge CRA: Disapproves the Biden Environmental Protection Agency’s “Waste Emissions Charge for Petroleum and Natural Gas Systems,” rule that imposes a significant fee (WEC) on methane emissions from oil and natural gas facilities that exceed specific levels, preventing the rule from raising costs for consumers, reducing domestic energy production, and increasing reliance on foreign energy sources.

Passed 220-206

Republicans: 214-1
Democrats: 6-205

Signed into law 3/14/25

Budget

H.Con. Res. 14 (Arrington) – Establishing the congressional budget for the United States Government for fiscal year 2025 and setting forth the appropriate budgetary levels for fiscal years 2026 through 2034: Establishes a congressional budget for the U.S. Government that delivers for Americans by cutting waste and government spending, reducing burdensome regulations, providing tax cuts that support families and small businesses, supporting domestic energy production and security, and securing the border.

Passed 217-215

Republicans: 217-1
Democrats: 0-214

Passed in Senate 4/5/25

Senate Amendment to H.Con. Res. 14 (Arrington) – Establishing the congressional budget for the United States Government for fiscal year 2025 and setting forth the appropriate budgetary levels for fiscal years 2026 through 2034: Establishes a congressional budget for the U.S. Government that delivers for Americans by cutting waste and government spending, reducing burdensome regulations, providing tax cuts that support families and small businesses, supporting domestic energy production and security, and securing the border.

Passed 216-214

Republicans: 216-2
Democrats: 0-212

Crypto

H.J. Res. 25 (Carey) – Digital Asset Sales CRA: Overturns Biden’s rule that would require brokers to report gross proceeds from crypto sales and other digital asset transactions, including data about the taxpayers involved, increasing tax filing burdens, stifling innovation, and raising privacy concerns over the sharing of taxpayers’ personal information.

Passed 292-132-1

Republicans: 216-0
Democrats: 76-132-1

Signed into law 4/10/25

Consumer Financial Protection

S.J. Res. 28 (Sen. Ricketts) – Digital Wallets CRA: Reverses the Biden Administration CFPB’s rule “Defining Larger Participants of a Market for General-Use Digital Consumer Payment Applications,” that would allow the CFPB more oversight power over non-bank entities that complete 50 million digital transactions a year, providing no benefit to consumers or the market and placing significant burdens on businesses that use digital payments.

Passed 219-211

Republicans: 219-0
Democrats: 0-211

Passed Senate 3/5/25

S.J. Res. 18 (Sen. Scott-SC) – Overdraft Price Controls CRA: Nullifies the Biden CFPB’s final rule “Overdraft Lending: Very Large Financial Institutions,” preventing the price cap limitations on overdraft fees from taking effect, ensuring overdraft services remain accessible for American consumers.

Passed 217-211

Republicans: 217-1
Democrats: 0-210

Passed Senate 3/27/25

Make America Free Again ✅Consumer Choice

H.J. Res 20 (Palmer) – Gas Water Heaters CRA: Expresses congressional disapproval of the Biden Department of Energy’s “Energy Conservation Standards for Consumer Gas-fired Instantaneous Water Heaters,” rule that effectively bans certain natural gas water heaters from the market, burdening consumers and threatening their choice.

Passed 221-198

Republicans: 210-0
Democrats: 11-198

Passed Senate 4/10/25

H.J. Res. 24 (Bice) – Walk-in Coolers & Freezers CRA: Overturns the Biden Administration’s “Energy Conservation Program: Energy Conservation Standards for Walk-In Coolers and Walk-In Freezers” rule imposing new or amended energy efficiency standards for walk-in coolers and walk-in freezers that are not technologically feasible and economically justified.

Passed 203-182

Republicans: 197-0
Democrats: 6-182

Passed Senate 4/3/25

H.J. Res. 75 (Goldman-TX) – Commercial Fridges & Freezers CRA: Overturns the Biden Administration’s “Energy Conservation Program: Energy Conservation Standards for Commercial Refrigerators, Freezers, and Refrigerator-Freezers” rule imposing new or amended energy efficiency standards for commercial refrigerators, freezers, and refrigerator-freezers that are not technologically feasible and economically justified.

Passed 214-193

Republicans: 209-0
Democrats: 5-193

H.J. Res. 61 (Griffith) – Rubber Tire Manufacturing CRA: Overturns the Biden EPA’s harmful “NESHAP for Rubber Tire Manufacturing” rule that establishes new emissions standards for rubber tire manufacturing, preventing it from increasing compliance costs for the industry and placing a heavier financial burden on smaller businesses, which would result in higher prices for consumers.

Passed 216-202

Republicans: 209-1
Democrats: 7-201

H.J. Res. 42 (Clyde) – Energy Conservation Standards CRA: Disapproves the Biden DOE’s “Energy Conservation-Appliance Standards, Certification and Labeling” rule which expands certification and labeling for the Department of Energy’s conservation standards program and could slow the introduction of products to market, reduce options for consumers, and affect supply chains and inventories.

Passed 222-203

Republicans: 215-0
Democrats: 7-203

Make America Efficient Again ✅
Reining In Executive Actions

H.R. 77 (Biggs-AZ) – Midnight Rules Relief Act: Amends the Congressional Review Act to allow Congress to disapprove multiple rules through one joint resolution if those rules were issued during the last year of a President’s term in office.

Passed 212-208

Republicans: 211-1
Democrats: 1-207

Election Security

H.R. 22 (Roy) – SAVE Act: Amends the National Voter Registration Act of 1993, requiring individuals to provide proof of United States citizenship in order to register to vote in federal elections.

Passed 220-208

Republicans: 216-0
Democrats: 4-208

Judicial Oversight

H.R. 1526 (Issa) – NORRA of 2025: Prevents partisan judges from abusing their authority and issuing politically motivated nationwide injunctions that inhibit the President from carrying out the policy agenda the American people elected him to implement by blocking federal judges from issuing injunctions that extend beyond specific parties involved in a case.

Passed 219-213

Republicans: 219-1
Democrats: 0-212

Fraud

H.R. 1156 (Smith-MO) – Pandemic Unemployment Fraud Enforcement Act: Extends the statute of limitations to ten years for fraudulent unemployment claims funded by federal pandemic unemployment programs by amending the CARES Act, allowing federal law enforcement to continue prosecuting fraudsters and criminals and recover billions of taxpayer dollars lost to fraud during COVID-19.

Passed 295-127

Republicans: 212-0
Democrats: 83-127

Public Lands

H.R. 471 (Westerman) – Fix Our Forests Act: Expedites and improves forest management activities on Bureau of Land Management (BLM) public lands, tribal lands, and National Forest System lands, deters frivolous litigation that delays important projects, promotes collaboration across jurisdictions, prioritizes treatments in the forests with highest risk of wildfire, and encourages active forest management.

Passed 279-141

Republicans: 215-0
Democrats: 64-141

Appropriations

H.R. 1968 (Cole) – Full-Year Continuing Appropriations and Extensions Act, 2025: Extends government funding through September 30, 2025, keeping the government open and serving the American people while we fight to reduce wasteful government spending and lower our debt.

Passed 217-213

Republicans: 216-1
Democrats: 1-212

Signed into law 3/15/25

MIL OSI USA News –

May 7, 2025
MIL-OSI United Kingdom: Couple’s historic wedding day is picture perfect

Source: City of Leeds

When happy couple Charlotte and Matthew Harrison tied the knot in Temple Newsam House’s stunning Picture Gallery, it was a love story more than a century in the making.

The historic ceremony saw the newlyweds become the first people to be married in the gallery’s beautiful surroundings in over a hundred years.

Originally designed centuries ago to act as an “indoor garden” for the house’s aristocratic residents, the room’s spectacular floral theme instead became the ideal backdrop for what was a dream wedding day.

The couple, who met five years ago, chose the house as a venue after falling in love with the colourful gallery, which has only recently been made available for ceremonies.

Charlotte said: “We spend a lot of our time at Temple Newsam both together and with friends and when we heard they did weddings, we thought we’d check it out before making a decision.

“We love visiting stately homes and historic sites and when we saw the picture gallery we immediately fell in love and immediately knew it was just us. The room is absolutely stunning and steeped in history and was the perfect backdrop for our wedding.”

She added: “The wedding day was everything I have ever dreamed of and more. All of our guests commented on what a beautiful venue it was and how much they enjoyed the wedding. It was genuinely a dream come true.”

The couple were joined on their special day by family, friends and 20-month-old son Blake.

After meeting online during the Covid pandemic, Charlotte and Matthew had their first date at The Red Kite in Wakefield, where Matthew’s difficulties parking his car followed by some takeaway donuts made for an evening that was both sweet and memorable.

Almost five years later, Matthew, 33, popped the question on Christmas Eve at their home in Apperley Bridge, with a custom-designed ring and specially made scratch card.

Charlotte said: “It’s our family Christmas tradition to get scratch cards so I didn’t think anything of it- it looked super realistic- and then it had three ring symbols and Matt got down on one knee and asked me to marry him.”

Now the couple’s romantic story has become part of Leeds history, entering the record books at the 500-year-old mansion as the first couple to be married in the Picture Gallery since the house passed into public ownership in 1922.

Matthew said: “We’re honoured to be the first couple to be married there in over a century. We didn’t realise what a historic moment it was not just for us, but for Temple Newsam too and to be a part of that just made our day even more special. Temple Newsam has always held a fond place in our lives but the fact we can now be a part of its history is truly humbling.”

Charlotte added: “On a personal note, as a bit of a history nerd I’m genuinely thrilled that I can be a part of the history of the house.”

A Grade I listed mansion house, Temple Newsam House is one of the country’s finest examples of its kind, seen as equally significant to Hampton Court, and was a family home for much of its history.

Owned by Leeds City Council since 1922, Temple Newsam has built one of the most significant decorative art collections in the UK.

Councillor Salma Arif, Leeds City Council’s executive member for adult social care, active lifestyles and culture, said: “We’re absolutely thrilled to have played our part in this special and historic occasion and to have made Charlotte and Matthew’s special day so memorable.

“Our museums and galleries really are a beautiful setting for a wedding and it’s wonderful to see couples tying the knot there and becoming part of the story of these amazing sites.”

To find out more about weddings at Temple Newsam, visit: Weddings at Temple Newsam | Leeds Museums and Galleries | Days out and exhibitions

More details about wedding at other Leeds Museums and Galleries sites can be found at: Weddings | Leeds Museums and Galleries | Days out and exhibitions

ENDS

MIL OSI United Kingdom –

May 7, 2025
MIL-OSI USA: Pappas Speaks Out on Behalf of Veterans At Risk of Losing Their Homes

Source: United States House of Representatives – Congressman Chris Pappas (D-NH)

During a House Veterans’ Affairs markup, Pappas advocated for veterans left out in the cold by the Trump administration’s cancellation of the VASP program.

Today in a House Veterans’ Affairs Committee markup, Congressman Chris Pappas (NH-01), member of the House Veterans’ Affairs Committee and Ranking Member of the Subcommittee on Economic Opportunity, spoke out against the ending of Veterans Affairs Servicing Purchase (VASP) program and in support of an amendment to provide a foreclosure moratorium for veterans who are at risk of losing their homes following the end of the VASP program, and helped pass bipartisan legislation to establish a new home loan assistance program.

During the markup, Congressman Pappas said, “We have to recognize that with VASP abruptly ending, that there’s a need to provide a safe landing for veterans today that are at risk of foreclosure. My office has heard from one such veteran who was hopeful that he would be able to enroll in VASP. He was seeking that with his loan servicer prior to VASP ending but wasn’t able to get that help. He’s a 100% disabled veteran from the First Gulf War. His name is Daniel Getchell. He is from Raymond, New Hampshire. His loan is in forbearance and he wanted to enroll in VASP, but again his servicer couldn’t put him in the program a few weeks ago. Without support, now he’s unsure whether he will be able to stay in his home and whether he and his service animals are going to have a safe place to go.”

“We’re going to continue to assist this veteran to the degree that we can. But we are concerned with what this means. While we see a partial claims program stood up and implemented, we need to be giving veterans like Daniel, who are worried about losing their homes, a little breathing room in the interim. And so I think this moratorium is an important intermediate step we can take as we get to the point of having a bipartisan program that’s implemented.”

The VASP program was created as a “last-resort” option for veterans and their family members facing foreclosure on VA-backed loans following the expiration of pandemic programs, which when coupled with rising interest rates, increased the risk of default for thousands of veterans. Before its termination, VASP was the only program of last resort that existed for veterans facing immediate foreclosure, and helped over 17,000 veterans since the program launched in 2024. By abruptly ending this program on May 1 with no alternative in place, 80,000 veterans and their families now face the prospect of losing their homes with no relief mechanism in place.

Background:

In January, Pappas joined a letter to U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Acting Secretary Todd Hunter demanding answers about how VA is implementing President Trump’s Inaugural Executive Order to freeze hiring across the executive branch and how it is hurting veterans’ access to the health care and benefits they earned.

In March, Pappas condemned reports that the Trump administration is planning to cut 80,000 staff from the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA), which could have catastrophic consequences for America’s veterans and cause significant delays and disruptions for those seeking medical treatment, as well as support for housing, addiction, mental health, and other lifesaving services. These firings would also result in job losses for thousands of veterans, who make up 25% of VA’s workforce.

In April, Pappas spoke out forcefully against the administration abruptly ending the Veterans Affairs Servicing Purchase Program (VASP) during a House Veterans’ Affairs Subcommittee on Economic Opportunity markup. He joined a bicameral letter pressing Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Secretary Doug Collins to immediately reverse his decision to abruptly end VASP.

MIL OSI USA News –

May 7, 2025
MIL-OSI Global: Are kids resilient? Societies and families need to offer supports and relationships to nurture resilience
Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Elena Merenda, Assistant Program Head of Early Childhood Studies, University of Guelph-Humber

“Kids are resilient.” You have heard this before, right? You might have even said it, with the best of intentions.

Resilience sometimes seems like a buzzword and is used in ill-defined ways. If adults praise children’s resilience without addressing their needs, this leaves children vulnerable to harm.

Resilience doesn’t mean being unaffected by adversity — it means having the tools, relationships and supports to cope with it.

Part of my role as a child development specialist with expertise in therapeutic play, as well childhood loss and grief, is consulting work with families and educators. I see children acting out in classrooms, withdrawing at home or having difficulties processing and regulating emotions and behaviours. Finding the right supports for a child often means many things.

Offering children the environments and relationships that build resilience includes:
- Adequate social infrastructure and resourcing to ensure families can meet basic needs in dignified ways (for example, they can access nutritious food and safe and sustainable housing);
- Parent communities and support groups so parents aren’t expected to parent in isolation;
- Parents and caregivers who have access to mental health support;
- Emotionally safe classrooms that focus on supports for the whole child, not just academically rigorous ones.
In the everyday, children need adults who are well enough to care for them and present enough to notice their struggles.

Many families with deep needs

The 2024 National Report Card on Child and Family Poverty from Campaign 2000, a network of organizations committed to ending child and family poverty in Canada, reveals that in 2022, nearly one in five children were growing up in poverty.

The child poverty rate rose by two and a half percentage points from the previous year, representing the largest annual increase in child poverty on record. Lone-parent households, most of them led by women, are disproportionately affected, with one in five relying on social assistance.

Read more:
Child poverty is on the rise in Canada, putting over 1 million kids at risk of life-long negative effects

As financial insecurity deepens and government supports like the Canada Child Benefit lose their effectiveness due to high costs of living, parents are under formidable financial pressure that impacts their parenting capacity and personal wellness.

Mental health gaps

Mental Health Research Canada’s 2023 report, Exploring the Mental Health Landscape of Canadian Parents, reveals that younger parents, especially those under 30, are facing self-reported elevated levels of anxiety and depression since the end of the COVID-19 pandemic.

The data also suggests that parents of children under two years of age are more likely to receive a new mental health diagnosis, likely due to decreased contact with health-care providers during the pandemic.

What happens when parents are overwhelmed? Children feel it, and they need support to bounce back from it.

The pressures parents face are not isolated. In a 2025 study on the perceptions of kindergarten, Grade 1 and Grade 2 educators in Ontario regarding their students’ developmental and academic skills and their own mental health during the 2021 to 2022 school year, teachers reported increased anxiety and slower developmental progress in children.

Read more:
From full-day learning to 30 minutes daily: The effects of school closures on kindergarteners

Healthy development can’t be taken for granted

If we only skim headlines that children displayed resilient capacities during the pandemic without looking deeper at how the pandemic also impeded healthy development, we are missing the full picture.

It is only through longitudinal study — examining how kids are doing across time — that we’ll be able to fully understand impacts. For example, data from the Canadian Health Survey on Children and Youth shows about one in five youth who felt their mental health was good in 2019 no longer felt that way four years later.

Read more:
Pandemic babies’ developmental milestones: Not as bad as we feared, but not as good as before

The 2023 Raising Canada Report, based on research conducted by researchers at the University of Calgary and McGill University and published by the non-profit organization Children First Canada, reports on violence, poverty, mental health struggles and online sexual exploitation affecting Canadian children.

The report reveals there were 40 child homicides in 2022, and rates of hospital visits for self-harm and suicide attempts among youth have doubled over the past decade.

These alarming reports suggest many families and children are struggling, lacking the resources they need to process their experiences and heal.

Building your child’s and your own resilience

Parental burnout is real — and compassion for oneself is the first step in supporting children.

A few minutes of undistracted time with your child matters.
(Shutterstock)

Here are a few strategies parents can try to use, even when worn down:

Focus on connection. A few minutes of undistracted time with your child — reading a book, going for a walk or simply talking without a phone nearby — builds connection and safety. When children feel a sense of safety and connection with their parent, they are more likely to share their thoughts and emotions. When children feel safe enough to verbalize their emotions, they are more inclined to process challenging times.

Name and normalize emotions. Help your child build emotional vocabulary by labelling feelings for them in your day-to-day interactions. Saying things like “I noticed you looked frustrated when your Lego broke. That’s OK. It’s hard when things don’t go as planned” helps children to learn how to identify and name their emotions which is the first step in taming emotions.

Model self-regulation, and when you feel overwhelmed, label your feelings. Try saying, “I’m feeling really worried right now, so I’m going to take a few deep breaths.” This teaches children that big feelings are a normal human experience. It also models for children healthy coping strategies.

Ask for help and accept support. Parenting shouldn’t be done alone. Ask for help. Find a community of like-minded parents who can talk through big and small moments with you. Let your child see that it’s OK to ask for help — this is how you build resilience.

Elena Merenda 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. Are kids resilient? Societies and families need to offer supports and relationships to nurture resilience – https://theconversation.com/are-kids-resilient-societies-and-families-need-to-offer-supports-and-relationships-to-nurture-resilience-253789
MIL OSI – Global Reports –
May 7, 2025
MIL-OSI USA: Kim, Colleagues Introduce Bipartisan Bill to Protect U.S. Economy from CCP Military Aggression
Source: United States House of Representatives – Representative Young Kim (CA-39)

Washington, DC — Today, U.S. Representative Young Kim (CA-40) joined Reps. Zach Nunn (IA-03) and Ritchie Torres (NY-15) to introduce bipartisan legislation to shield American markets from the catastrophic economic fallout of a potential Chinese Communist Party (CCP) invasion of Taiwan.

The Fortifying U.S. Markets from Chinese Military Aggression Act would create an advisory committee under the Financial Stability Oversight Council (FSOC) to develop an actionable plan to safeguard the U.S. economy in the event of CCP military escalation.

“Taiwan is not just a steadfast partner to the United States – it is home to 90% of the world’s advanced semiconductors that power our lives. The impact of a CCP attack on Taiwan on the lives of all Americans cannot be overstated,” said Rep. Young Kim. “The United States must be proactive in protecting our economy in case of an attack or blockade against Taiwan, and I’m glad to partner with Reps. Nunn and Torres on a bipartisan bill that would do exactly that.”

“While the United States has long-standing military plans in place to respond to a potential Chinese invasion of Taiwan, there’s no economic game plan,” said Rep. Nunn. “90% of the world’s advanced semiconductors are manufactured in Taiwan. The economic impact of that capacity falling into the hands of the CCP would be devastating, not just for global markets, but for Main Street Iowa businesses. This bipartisan bill ensures we have a clear, coordinated plan to respond.”

“American investors should never be in the business of bankrolling the CCP’s military. Our bipartisan bill is a clear-eyed effort to ensure American financial markets are not exploited to strengthen an authoritarian regime that threatens our values and our allies,” said Rep. Torres. “Transparency and accountability are not just economic principles: they are national security imperatives. I’m proud to work with Congressman Nunn to push for a bipartisan solution to safeguard the integrity of our markets and defend American interests.”

“Representatives Zach Nunn, Ritchie Torres and Young Kim are demonstrating the kind of forward-thinking leadership our markets urgently need. In today’s globally interconnected financial system, the economic consequences of a geopolitical crisis — particularly one involving China and Taiwan — could be swift and severe,” said Ari Rubenstein, Global Trading Systems CEO. “This bipartisan bill takes a critical step toward strengthening market resilience, enhancing coordination among regulators, and ensuring we’re not caught flat-footed. Capital markets thrive on stability and preparedness, and I applaud Congressmen Nunn, Torres and Kim for proactively addressing a risk that is too significant to ignore.”

The bill responds to growing concerns from financial analysts and national security leaders who warn that the U.S. has no economic contingency plan to address the ripple effects of CCP aggression in the Taiwan Strait. Taiwan produces nearly 90% of the world’s most advanced semiconductors, components critical to the global supply chain and U.S. national security.

If the CCP were to invade, economists estimate a short-term market drop of up to 34%. Bloomberg estimates a global GDP loss of $10 trillion, more than double the contraction caused by the 2008 financial crisis or the COVID-19 pandemic.

While military contingency plans exist, the U.S. currently lacks an economic response strategy to such an invasion. This bipartisan effort would build a framework for interagency and private sector coordination, ensuring Main Street and U.S. markets are better protected if geopolitical tensions escalate by:
- Establishing a 12-member FSOC Advisory Committee that would include market makers, asset managers, exchanges, and experts on China-related geopolitical risk.
- Tasking the committee with developing detailed reports and recommendations to identify market vulnerabilities and safeguard U.S. financial stability.
- Requiring FSOC to issue annual public reports on economic risks from a Taiwan conflict, including threats to U.S. banking and retaliatory actions from China.
- Providing recommendations to regulators to ensure U.S. capital markets are prepared for potential market volatility or trade disruptions.
Text of the bill can be found here.

MIL OSI USA News –
May 7, 2025
MIL-OSI USA: Mfume Joins Letter Demanding Back Education Dollars Cut by Trump

Source: United States House of Representatives – Congressman Kweisi Mfume (MD-07)

WASHINGTON, DC – As reported today in The Washington Post, Congressman Kweisi Mfume (D-Md.-07) joined a letter 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. This letter was led by Senator Angela Alsobrooks (D-Md.) with the Maryland Democratic Delegation – U.S. Senator Chris Van Hollen and Representatives Steny Hoyer, Jamie Raskin, Glenn Ivey, Sarah Elfreth, April McClain Delaney, and Johnny Olszewski (all D-Md.) also signing on in support.

“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 –

May 7, 2025

Category: Pandemic

Transmission of policy actions and shocks differs in EMs

Weaker policy credibility complicates monetary policy trade-offs

Exchange rates have a much larger imprint on price and financial stability

Steering through the fog: How should policy respond?

Foreign exchange intervention should be used prudently

Conclusion

References

What is empathy anyway?

Sympathy and social contagion

The uses and abuses of empathy

From an external to an internal enemy

Channeling anger

Benefits

Shortcomings and pitfalls

What needs to be done

Benefits

Shortcomings and pitfalls

What needs to be done

How do measles cases this year compare with previous years?

How did the US eliminate measles?

Why are rising measles rates so worrisome?

What happens if measles rates continue to rise?

What would it take to reverse the rise in measles?

Contamination, investigation and intrigue

Finding the source

Lessons learned

Memory as a political battle

How many cases and hospitalisations?

What can we expect as we head into winter?

What are the most common COVID symptoms?

Should you bother doing a test?

How long does COVID last these days?

Vaccination remains the best way to prevent COVID

‘Movies made in America’

Tariffs on tickets?

Taxing production

Australia’s film industry

The biggest draw card

Why Australia is worried

During a House Veterans’ Affairs markup, Pappas advocated for veterans left out in the cold by the Trump administration’s cancellation of the VASP program.

Many families with deep needs

Mental health gaps

Healthy development can’t be taken for granted

Building your child’s and your own resilience