NewzIntel.com

    • Checkout Page
    • Contact Us
    • Default Redirect Page
    • Frontpage
    • Home-2
    • Home-3
    • Lost Password
    • Member Login
    • Member LogOut
    • Member TOS Page
    • My Account
    • NewzIntel Alert Control-Panel
    • NewzIntel Latest Reports
    • Post Views Counter
    • Privacy Policy
    • Public Individual Page
    • Register
    • Subscription Plan
    • Thank You Page

Category: Politics

  • MIL-OSI New Zealand: Federated Farmers Statement: Members’ Bill puts woke banks on notice

    Source: Federated Farmers

    Federated Farmers say Andy Foster’s Members’ Bill, drawn from the ballot earlier this afternoon, will stop lenders from unfairly de-banking legitimate businesses and industries.
    “Banks have been under huge pressure recently for some of their more unpalatable lending practices,” Federated Farmers banking spokesperson Richard McIntyre says.
    “This Bill is only going to add to that scrutiny and will shine a white-hot light on big banks that have been forcing their ideological views down the throats of everyday New Zealanders.”
    Federated Farmers have been vocal critics of the banking sector in recent years and were instrumental in securing the select committee inquiry currently underway.
    They have also played a significant role in exposing discrepancies between the different targets big Australian banks are setting for Kiwi farmers compared to their Australian clients.
    Late last year the organisation blew the whistle on the Bank of New Zealand’s outrageous decision to effectively de-bank legitimate businesses like petrol stations from 2030.
    “Federated Farmers support this Bill and will be encouraging all Government parties to throw their support in behind it,” McIntyre says.
    “Lending decisions should be based on financial drivers, not ideological or political considerations.
    “Legitimate New Zealand businesses, like farms and petrol stations, should not be unfairly targeted by banks because of the industry we operate in.
    “It’s important we can continue to access banking services and the capital we need to keep growing our businesses, creating jobs, and contributing to the economy.
    “Provided we’re following the laws set by our democratically elected Government, we should be able to go about our business without our bank becoming the moral police.”

    MIL OSI New Zealand News –

    February 20, 2025
  • MIL-Evening Report: A new play about Julian Assange, Truth is an intelligent, thoughtful and unsettling work

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Kate Hunter, Senior Lecturer in Art and Performance, Deakin University

    Pia Johnson/Malthouse Theatre

    Truth, the new play from writer-director pair Patricia Cornelius and Susie Dee, dives headfirst into the contentious world of Julian Assange. It offers us a nuanced portrait of the WikiLeaks founder who transformed from hacker wunderkind to global lightning rod.

    An apt celebration of the significant body of work from the acclaimed duo, Truth opens nearly 40 years after the pair created and performed their first collaboration, Lilly and May.

    Assange rose to global prominence by publishing classified documents that exposed government secrets and surveillance programs. He became both a celebrated whistleblower and a controversial figure in debates about transparency and national security.

    Truth unravels the threads of his story.

    Truth reveals the complex legacy of a man whose actions have both championed and challenged modern democracy.
    Pia Johnson/Malthouse Theatre

    A complex legacy

    The work is set in a spare, black-box space, characterised by Matilda Woodroofe’s bureaucratic brutalist design.

    A backdrop of hard mesh enclosures and scaffolded structures evokes a monotonous line of outdoor exercise yards or prison cells. This is flanked by colourless filing cabinets, 80s-style laminated brown desks and office chairs on wheels. A giant LED screen crowns the structure.

    The ensemble (Emily Havea, Tomàš Kantor, James O’Connell, Eva Rees and Eva Seymour) weaves together key moments in Assange’s life, revealing the complex legacy of a man whose actions have both championed and challenged modern democracy.

    Speaking in chorus at times, the actors perform multiple versions of Assange and other characters. They are journalists, whistleblowers, narrators, and include the key figures of Edward Snowden and Chelsea Manning.

    A terrific and youthful ensemble cast delivers sensitive and energised performances.
    Pia Johnson/Malthouse Theatre

    Characterised by Cornelius’ trademark rapid-fire dialogue, the text is tightly calibrated with smart, sparse, dry comments that, at times, comically undercut our Australian sensibilities. As one character says, “the worst thing to be in this country is too smart”.

    The ensemble is physically dynamic and vocally strong. They have a particular choreographic fluidity. A spaciousness and attention to timing allows each performance to land. This is a testament both to Dee’s sharp, contained direction, and a terrific and youthful ensemble cast who deliver sensitive and energised performances.

    From geek to advocate

    The play moves chronologically through Assange’s life. We begin with the rocky early years marked by the dissonance between his sharp intelligence and reputation as computer nerd. We witness his arrests for hacking. We follow his evolution from awkward geek to outspoken advocate for free speech.

    The play offers us a nuanced portrait of the WikiLeaks founder who transformed from hacker wunderkind to global lightning rod.
    Pia Johnson/Malthouse Theatre

    The play is grounded in comprehensive research, and solo moments featuring Snowden and Manning serve as poignant interludes to the fast-paced narrative of Assange’s life events.

    I am struck by the way the work unsettles my preconceptions. The small, stark image of a naked Private Manning in her isolated cell is particularly raw and affecting – but is juxtaposed on stage against Assange’s dubious behaviour towards two young women in Sweden.

    The show clips along, all the while unfolding a nuanced consideration of the complexities of reported narratives and the myriad ways in which journalistic narratives are influenced – and controlled.

    The delivery to the audience is largely direct-address. This risks becoming tedious, but Cornelius’ intelligent style and the ensemble’s strong performance carries through.

    The LED screen is used to great effect. The video design (Meri Blazevski) shifts through rainstorms of binary digits, to list of early Assange manifestos or leaked stories, to pixellated images of actors’ faces as teenage gamers.

    The work is set in a spare, black-box space, characterised by Matilda Woodroofe’s bureaucratic brutalist design.
    Pia Johnson/Malthouse Theatre

    In a long and shocking sequence, we witness drone footage from the Afghanistan war logs accompanied by the chillingly dispassionate commentary of the operators.

    Often, the screen becomes a surface for live video feeds which work to personalise or disembody characters, functioning variously as narrator, witness, and surveillance device. Transitions between closeups, documentation and stark data both drive and complicate the storytelling.

    Kelly Ryall’s composition and sound design – often paired with the pulsing or flashing giant texts on the screen – is a retro-electronic tapestry of victory chimes, synthetic bleeps and Pac Man pings. It is all underscored by deep digital tones and rapid analogue tapping of keyboards.

    A long artistic relationship

    This is an intelligent and thoughtful show that manages to be both complex and entertaining. The play is particularly salient given current global events, challenging us to consider the scale of what we’re up against, how long we should remain silent, and what power – if any – we have to effect change.

    In an era of heated debate about transparency and fake news, Truth emerges as a vital and edgy work in the capable hands of two highly respected theatre makers.

    The work is testament to the longevity of an artistic relationship between two older women that carries decades of embodied knowledge.

    Despite the persistent ageism in Australian theatre that often equates “urgency” exclusively with youth, this work reminds us older artists can and do challenge and disrupt – and bring a special and necessary currency to our cultural life.

    Truth is at Malthouse Theatre, Melbourne, until March 8.

    Kate Hunter 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. A new play about Julian Assange, Truth is an intelligent, thoughtful and unsettling work – https://theconversation.com/a-new-play-about-julian-assange-truth-is-an-intelligent-thoughtful-and-unsettling-work-247909

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

    February 20, 2025
  • MIL-OSI: Aegon reports second half year 2024 results

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    The Hague – February 20, 2025. Please click here to access all 2H 2024 results related documents. 

    2H 2024 IFRS results

    • Net profit of EUR 741 million as operating result and benefit from the a.s.r. stake are partly offset by restructuring charges and net impairments in the US
    • Operating result of EUR 776 million, up 14% compared with the second half of 2023, reflecting improved experience variance in the US and business growth in the US and asset management
    • Shareholders’ equity per share of EUR 4.53, increases by 13% compared with June 30, 2024, while contractual service margin per share after estimated tax adjustment increases by 5% to EUR 4.38. Valuation equity per share – the sum of these components – grew by 9% to EUR 8.91

    2H 2024 capital generation, cash and capital management

    • Operating capital generation before holding funding and operating expenses remained broadly stable at EUR 658 million compared with the second half of 2023. Aegon meets its increased guidance of EUR 1.2 billion for 2024
    • Capital ratios of Aegon’s main units remain above their respective operating levels and Cash Capital at Holding at EUR 1.7 billion per year-end 2024. EUR 200 million share buyback completed in December
    • Free cash flow of EUR 385 million, which includes capital distributions from a.s.r. Full-year free cash flow of EUR 759 million meets guidance of more than EUR 700 million
    • 2024 final dividend of EUR 0.19 per common share proposed, an increase of 19% compared with 2023 final dividend

    Lard Friese, Aegon CEO, commented:  
    In 2024, we continued to make good progress with our transformation and are on track to meet the 2025 targets we laid out at our 2023 Capital Markets Day (CMD). We will provide an update on our strategy and new group targets at our next CMD on December 10, 2025, in London. Looking back on the year, I am proud of what the teams achieved, and I am grateful for their hard work.

    We have delivered on both our increased guidance for operating capital generation (OCG) of EUR 1.2 billion, and on our free cash flow guidance of more than EUR 700 million for 2024. Our main business units remained well capitalized, and we have generated a full year IFRS operating result of EUR 1.5 billion. Our valuation equity per share, which is a measure of shareholder value, increased by 12% to EUR 8.91.

    We continued to execute our strategy to grow our businesses and improve the service we offer to customers. This included the roll-out of a new brand identity across our fully owned units that facilitates improved digital customer experiences. Taking a closer look at our commercial performance in 2024: in the Americas, we strengthened our distribution capabilities as World Financial Group (WFG) grew its number of licensed agents to over 86,000, up 17% compared with the prior year. This contributed to the 22% increase in the operating result of Transamerica’s distribution segment, which reached USD 191 million. Transamerica generated Individual Life sales of USD 473 million, slightly down compared with 2023. The Retirement Plans business experienced outflows but the mid-sized Retirement Plans business continued to grow with strong written plan sales and USD 557 million of net deposits. Throughout the year, we also continued to implement management actions to reduce our exposure to Financial Assets. This included achieving the goals of our program to purchase universal life policies from institutional owners earlier than anticipated.

    In the United Kingdom, we are executing the strategy we presented at our June 2024 Teach-In. Our UK Workplace platform performed strongly, with net deposits amounting to GBP 3.7 billion in 2024, due to the onboarding of new schemes and higher regular contributions from existing schemes. While outflows continued in our UK Adviser platform, we are executing our strategy to return the platform to growth by 2028 that includes targeting the top 500 financial adviser firms.

    2024 saw our Asset Management business return to growth, with third-party net deposits in Global Platforms and net deposits in Strategic Partnerships combined totaling around EUR 14 billion. This was driven by consecutive net deposits at both businesses during each quarter of 2024.

    Our International business saw 15% lower new life sales, mainly driven by pricing actions in China to reflect lower interest rates. At the same time, its value of new business grew by 18%, driven by Brazil and Spain & Portugal, underscoring our focus on profitable growth.

    Over the year, we remained disciplined in our management of capital. During the first half of 2024, we completed the EUR 1.535 billion share buyback program. In the second half, we completed a EUR 200 million share buyback program and announced a new EUR 150 million share buyback program, which began in January 2025.

    On the basis of our 2024 performance, we today propose a final dividend of 19 eurocents per share. This will result in a total dividend paid for the full-year 2024 of 35 eurocents, up 17% compared with 2023, and means we are on our way to achieve our target of around 40 eurocents per share over 2025.

    Additional information 
    Presentation
    The conference call presentation is available on aegon.com.

    Supplements
    Aegon’s second half 2024 Financial Supplement and other supplementary documents are available on aegon.com.

    Webcast and conference call including Q&A
    The webcast and conference call starts at 9:00 am CET. The audio webcast can be followed on aegon.com. To join the conference call and/or participate in the Q&A, you will need to register via the following registration link. Directly after registration you will see your personal pin on the confirmation screen, and you will also receive an email with the call details and your personal pin to enter the conference call. The link becomes active 15 minutes prior to the scheduled start time. To avoid any unforeseen connection issues, it is recommended to make use of the “Call me” option. Approximately two hours after the conference call, a replay will be available on aegon.com. 

    Click to join
    With “Call me”, there’s no need to dial-in. Simply click the following registration link and select the option “Call me”.
    Enter your information and you will be called back to directly join the conference. The link becomes active 15 minutes prior to the scheduled start time. Should you wish not to use the “Click to join” function, dial-in numbers are also available. For passcode: you will receive a personal pin upon registration.

    Dial-in numbers for conference call:
    United States: +1 864 991 4103 (local)
    United Kingdom: +44 808 175 1536 (toll-free)
    The Netherlands: +31 800 745 8377 (toll-free); or +31 970 102 86838 (toll)

    Financial calendar 2025
    First quarter 2025 trading update – May 16, 2025
    Annual General Meeting – June 12, 2025
    Second half 2025 results – August 21, 2025
    Third quarter 2025 trading update – November 13, 2025
    Capital Markets Day – December 10, 2025

    About Aegon
    Aegon is an international financial services holding company. Aegon’s ambition is to build leading businesses that offer their customers investment, protection, and retirement solutions. Aegon’s portfolio of businesses includes fully owned businesses in the United States and United Kingdom, and a global asset manager. Aegon also creates value by combining its international expertise with strong local partners via insurance joint ventures in Spain & Portugal, China, and Brazil, and via asset management partnerships in France and China. In addition, Aegon owns a Bermuda-based life insurer and generates value via a strategic shareholding in a market leading Dutch insurance and pensions company.

    Aegon’s purpose of helping people live their best lives runs through all its activities. As a leading global investor and employer, Aegon seeks to have a positive impact by addressing critical environmental and societal issues, with a focus on climate change and inclusion & diversity. Aegon is headquartered in The Hague, the Netherlands, domiciled in Bermuda, and listed on Euronext Amsterdam and the New York Stock Exchange. More information can be found at aegon.com. More information can be found at aegon.com.

    Contacts

    Media relations Investor relations
    Richard Mackillican Yves Cormier
    +31(0) 6 27411546 +31(0) 70 344 8028
    richard.mackillican@aegon.com yves.cormier@aegon.com
       

    Local currencies and constant currency exchange rates
    This document contains certain information about Aegon’s results, financial condition and revenue generating investments presented in USD for the Americas and in GBP for the United Kingdom, because those businesses operate and are managed primarily in those currencies. Certain comparative information presented on a constant currency basis eliminates the effects of changes in currency exchange rates. None of this information is a substitute for or superior to financial information about Aegon presented in EUR, which is the currency of Aegon’s primary financial statements.

    Forward-looking statements
    The statements contained in this document that are not historical facts are forward-looking statements as defined in the US Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. The following are words that identify such forward-looking statements: aim, believe, estimate, target, intend, may, expect, anticipate, predict, project, counting on, plan, continue, want, forecast, goal, should, would, could, is confident, will, and similar expressions as they relate to Aegon. These statements may contain information about financial prospects, economic conditions and trends and involve risks and uncertainties. In addition, any statements that refer to sustainability, environmental and social targets, commitments, goals, efforts and expectations and other events or circumstances that are partially dependent on future events are forward-looking statements. These statements are not guarantees of future performance and involve risks, uncertainties and assumptions that are difficult to predict. Aegon undertakes no obligation, and expressly disclaims any duty, to publicly update or revise any forward-looking statements. Readers are cautioned not to place undue reliance on these forward-looking statements, which merely reflect company expectations at the time of writing. Actual results may differ materially and adversely from expectations conveyed in forward-looking statements due to changes caused by various risks and uncertainties. Such risks and uncertainties include but are not limited to the following:

    • Unexpected delays, difficulties, and expenses in executing against Aegon’s environmental, climate, diversity and inclusion or other “ESG” targets, goals and commitments, and changes in laws or regulations affecting us, such as changes in data privacy, environmental, health and safety laws;
    • Changes in general economic and/or governmental conditions, particularly in Bermuda, the United States, the Netherlands and the United Kingdom;
    • Civil unrest, (geo-) political tensions, military action or other instability in a country or geographic region;
    • Changes in the performance of financial markets, including emerging markets, such as with regard to:         
      • The frequency and severity of defaults by issuers in Aegon’s fixed income investment portfolios;
      • The effects of corporate bankruptcies and/or accounting restatements on the financial markets and the resulting decline in the value of equity and debt securities Aegon holds;
      • The effects of declining creditworthiness of certain public sector securities and the resulting decline in the value of government exposure that Aegon holds;
      • The impact from volatility in credit, equity, and interest rates;
    • Changes in the performance of Aegon’s investment portfolio and decline in ratings of Aegon’s counterparties;
    • Lowering of one or more of Aegon’s debt ratings issued by recognized rating organizations and the adverse impact such action may have on Aegon’s ability to raise capital and on its liquidity and financial condition;
    • Lowering of one or more of insurer financial strength ratings of Aegon’s insurance subsidiaries and the adverse impact such action may have on the written premium, policy retention, profitability and liquidity of its insurance subsidiaries;
    • The effect of applicable Bermuda solvency requirements, the European Union’s Solvency II requirements, and applicable equivalent solvency requirements and other regulations in other jurisdictions affecting the capital Aegon is required to maintain;
    • Changes in the European Commissions’ or European regulator’s position on the equivalence of the supervisory regime for insurance and reinsurance undertakings in force in Bermuda;
    • Changes affecting interest rate levels and low or rapidly changing interest rate levels;
    • Changes affecting currency exchange rates, in particular the EUR/USD and EUR/GBP exchange rates;
    • Changes affecting inflation levels, particularly in the United States, the Netherlands and the United Kingdom;
    • Changes in the availability of, and costs associated with, liquidity sources such as bank and capital markets funding, as well as conditions in the credit markets in general such as changes in borrower and counterparty creditworthiness;
    • Increasing levels of competition, particularly in the United States, the Netherlands, the United Kingdom and emerging markets;
    • Catastrophic events, either manmade or by nature, including by way of example acts of God, acts of terrorism, acts of war and pandemics, could result in material losses and significantly interrupt Aegon’s business;
    • The frequency and severity of insured loss events;
    • Changes affecting longevity, mortality, morbidity, persistence and other factors that may impact the profitability of Aegon’s insurance products and management of derivatives;
    • Aegon’s projected results are highly sensitive to complex mathematical models of financial markets, mortality, longevity, and other dynamic systems subject to shocks and unpredictable volatility. Should assumptions to these models later prove incorrect, or should errors in those models escape the controls in place to detect them, future performance will vary from projected results;
    • Reinsurers to whom Aegon has ceded significant underwriting risks may fail to meet their obligations;
    • Changes in customer behavior and public opinion in general related to, among other things, the type of products Aegon sells, including legal, regulatory or commercial necessity to meet changing customer expectations;
    • Customer responsiveness to both new products and distribution channels;
    • Third-party information used by us may prove to be inaccurate and change over time as methodologies and data availability and quality continue to evolve impacting our results and disclosures;
    • As Aegon’s operations support complex transactions and are highly dependent on the proper functioning of information technology, operational risks such as system disruptions or failures, security or data privacy breaches, cyberattacks, human error, failure to safeguard personally identifiable information, changes in operational practices or inadequate controls including with respect to third parties with which Aegon does business, may disrupt Aegon’s business, damage its reputation and adversely affect its results of operations, financial condition and cash flows, and Aegon may be unable to adopt to and apply new technologies;
    • The impact of acquisitions and divestitures, restructurings, product withdrawals and other unusual items, including Aegon’s ability to complete, or obtain regulatory approval for, acquisitions and divestitures, integrate acquisitions, and realize anticipated results, and its ability to separate businesses as part of divestitures;
    • Aegon’s failure to achieve anticipated levels of earnings or operational efficiencies, as well as other management initiatives related to cost savings, Cash Capital at Holding, gross financial leverage and free cash flow;
    • Changes in the policies of central banks and/or governments;
    • Litigation or regulatory action that could require Aegon to pay significant damages or change the way Aegon does business;
    • Competitive, legal, regulatory, or tax changes that affect profitability, the distribution cost of or demand for Aegon’s products;
    • Consequences of an actual or potential break-up of the European Monetary Union in whole or in part, or further consequences of the exit of the United Kingdom from the European Union and potential consequences if other European Union countries leave the European Union;
    • Changes in laws and regulations, or the interpretation thereof by regulators and courts, including as a result of comprehensive reform or shifts away from multilateral approaches to regulation of global or national operations, particularly regarding those laws and regulations related to ESG matters, those affecting Aegon’s operations’ ability to hire and retain key personnel, taxation of Aegon companies, the products Aegon sells, the attractiveness of certain products to its consumers and Aegon’s intellectual property;
    • Regulatory changes relating to the pensions, investment, insurance industries and enforcing adjustments in the jurisdictions in which Aegon operates;
    • Standard setting initiatives of supranational standard setting bodies such as the Financial Stability Board and the International Association of Insurance Supervisors or changes to such standards that may have an impact on regional (such as EU), national or US federal or state level financial regulation or the application thereof to Aegon, including the designation of Aegon by the Financial Stability Board as a Global Systemically Important Insurer (G-SII);
    • Changes in accounting regulations and policies or a change by Aegon in applying such regulations and policies, voluntarily or otherwise, which may affect Aegon’s reported results, shareholders’ equity or regulatory capital adequacy levels;
    • Changes in ESG standards and requirements, including assumptions, methodology and materiality, or a change by Aegon in applying such standards and requirements, voluntarily or otherwise, may affect Aegon’s ability to meet evolving standards and requirements, or Aegon’s ability to meet its sustainability and ESG-related goals, or related public expectations, which may also negatively affect Aegon’s reputation or the reputation of its board of directors or its management; and
    • Other risks and uncertainties identified in the Form 20-F and in other documents filed or to be filed by Aegon with the SEC.
    • Reliance on third-party information in certain of Aegon’s disclosures, which may change over time as methodologies and data availability and quality continue to evolve. These factors, as well as any inaccuracies in third-party information used by Aegon, including in estimates or assumptions, may cause results to differ materially and adversely from statements, estimates, and beliefs made by Aegon or third-parties. Moreover, Aegon’s disclosures based on any standards may change due to revisions in framework requirements, availability of information, changes in its business or applicable governmental policies, or other factors, some of which may be beyond Aegon’s control. Additionally, Aegon’s discussion of various ESG and other sustainability issues in this document or in other locations, including on our corporate website, may be informed by the interests of various stakeholders, as well as various ESG standards, frameworks, and regulations (including for the measurement and assessment of underlying data). As such, our disclosures on such issues, including climate-related disclosures, may include information that is not necessarily “material” under US securities laws for SEC reporting purposes, even if we use words such as “material” or “materiality” in relation to those statements. ESG expectations continue to evolve, often quickly, including for matters outside of our control; our disclosures are inherently dependent on the methodology (including any related assumptions or estimates) and data used, and there can be no guarantee that such disclosures will necessarily reflect or be consistent with the preferred practices or interpretations of particular stakeholders, either currently or in future. 

    This document contains information that qualifies, or may qualify, as inside information within the meaning of Article 7(1) of the EU Market Abuse Regulation (596/2014). Further details of potential risks and uncertainties affecting Aegon are described in its filings with the Netherlands Authority for the Financial Markets and the US Securities and Exchange Commission, including the 2023 Integrated Annual Report. These forward-looking statements speak only as of the date of this document. Except as required by any applicable law or regulation, Aegon expressly disclaims any obligation or undertaking to release publicly any updates or revisions to any forward-looking statements contained herein to reflect any change in Aegon’s expectations with regard thereto or any change in events, conditions or circumstances on which any such statement is based.

    WORLD FINANCIAL GROUP (WFG):
    WFG CONSISTS OF:
    IN THE UNITED STATES, WORLD FINANCIAL GROUP INSURANCE AGENCY, LLC (IN CALIFORNIA, DOING BUSINESS AS WORLD FINANCIAL INSURANCE AGENCY, LLC), WORLD FINANCIAL GROUP INSURANCE AGENCY OF HAWAII, INC., WORLD FINANCIAL GROUP INSURANCE AGENCY OF MASSACHUSETTS, INC., AND / OR WFG INSURANCE AGENCY OF PUERTO RICO, INC. (COLLECTIVELY WFGIA), WHICH OFFER INSURANCE AND ANNUITY PRODUCTS.
    IN THE UNITED STATES, TRANSAMERICA FINANCIAL ADVISORS, INC. IS A FULL-SERVICE, FULLY LICENSED, INDEPENDENT BROKER-DEALER AND REGISTERED INVESTMENT ADVISOR. TRANSAMERICA FINANCIAL ADVISORS, INC. (TFA), MEMBER  FINRA, MSRB, SIPC , AND REGISTERED INVESTMENT ADVISOR, OFFERS SECURITIES AND INVESTMENT ADVISORY SERVICES.
    IN CANADA, WORLD FINANCIAL GROUP INSURANCE AGENCY OF CANADA INC. (WFGIAC), WHICH OFFERS LIFE INSURANCE AND SEGREGATED FUNDS. WFG SECURITIES INC. (WFGS), WHICH OFFERS MUTUAL FUNDS.
    WFGIAC AND WFGS ARE AFFILIATED COMPANIES.

    Attachment

    • 20250220_PR_Aegon reports second half year 2024 results

    The MIL Network –

    February 20, 2025
  • MIL-Evening Report: A defence treaty with PNG might seem like a ‘win’ for Australia. But there are 4 crucial questions to answer

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Joanne Wallis, Professor of International Security, University of Adelaide

    Today, Australian Defence Minister Richard Marles began negotiations with his Papua New Guinean counterpart, Billy Joseph, on a defence treaty. This builds on the bilateral security agreement signed between the countries in 2023.

    Analysts have been quick to link the new defence treaty with Australia’s anxiety about China’s increasingly visible presence in the Pacific region.

    This reflects Australia’s longstanding anxiety about powers with potentially hostile interests establishing a foothold here.

    Because it’s only three kilometres from Australian territory, PNG has always been a particular concern. TB Millar, one of the architects of modern Australian strategic policy, went so far as to observe in 1965 that:

    if the whole island [of Papua New Guinea] were to sink under the sea, the net result for Australia in terms of military strategy would be a gain. It is an exposed and vulnerable front door.

    So, the possibility of a defence treaty seems like a “win” for an Australian government keen to bolster its security credentials in the frantic months before the federal election.

    But the government needs to have good answers to four questions before it signs on the dotted line.

    1. How will Australia enforce the treaty?

    Although treaties are theoretically legally binding, there are very few practical enforcement mechanisms.

    The constant agonising in Australia about whether the United States will meet its obligations under the Australia, New Zealand and United States Security Treaty (ANZUS) exemplifies this.

    The Trump administration’s actions also illustrate how quickly a change of government can switch foreign and strategic policy directions, including obligations under longstanding treaties. Like ANZUS, the risk of unenforceability of the PNG treaty is higher for Australia. Australia’s anxieties about China mean that it needs the treaty more than PNG does.

    Sanctions are the most likely way Australia could try to enforce the treaty if, say, PNG breached it by striking a security deal with China. But sanctions can be ineffective.

    Alternatively, Australia could threaten to withdraw its support if PNG breached the treaty. But this is also unlikely because Australia knows China is likely to step into any gap.

    This has been demonstrated in Solomon Islands. Even though Australia has a security treaty with Solomon Islands and invested A$3 billion in the 2003–17 Regional Assistance Mission, Solomon Islands still signed a security agreement with China in 2022.

    2. Has Australia mitigated any risks?

    No previous Australian government has offered PNG a binding security guarantee.

    In 1977, Australia and PNG adopted a formal defence relationship. Australia, however, was cautious about instability in PNG and the risk of being drawn into a conflict along its land border with Indonesia. As such, it didn’t provide a commitment to defend PNG.

    In the mid-1980s, PNG requested a defence commitment from Australia. Again, Australia was reluctant. As then-Defence Minister Kim Beazley recalled, PNG was “right in the frame of our relationship with Indonesia”, due to the shared border with Indonesia and the challenge of West Papuan independence activists crossing it.

    As a compromise, the two countries made a Joint Declaration of Principles in 1987 that only provided the two governments “will consult … about matters affecting their common security interests”.

    As the self-determination struggle in West Papua continues, PNG currently has defence units posted on its border with Indonesia.

    Under what circumstances, if any, would Australia provide military support to PNG if violence on the border worsened? And what impact would this have on our relationship with Indonesia?

    Not responding to a call for support from PNG could damage Australia’s reputation in the region. But if Australia did become involved in a conflict, it may be criticised for supporting activities that breach human rights.

    The risk of Australia being unable to respond to a PNG request for military assistance is high because Australia does not have the defence (or policing) capacity to defend or stabilise a sprawling country like PNG.

    Australia’s reliance on US assistance to stabilise Timor-Leste after its 1999 independence referendum illustrates the logistical challenges it faces when making large deployments, even in the region.

    While Australia’s defence capabilities have improved since then, it would still likely only have the capacity to secure key cities in PNG and evacuate Australian citizens if there was serious unrest.

    3. Can Australia justify the cost at home?

    Australian taxpayers – already experiencing cost-of-living pressures – need to be told what funding commitments the government is willing to make to facilitate the treaty negotiations.

    Australia’s promise of A$600 million to fund a PNG team in the National Rugby League is already attracting opposition at home.

    4. What are the long-term defence plans?

    PNG’s strategic location means Australia and the US have long had designs on establishing a permanent military base there.

    Manus Island, for example, has been identified as an ideal submarine base. With Australia developing nuclear-powered submarines under the AUKUS partnership, are there plans to eventually base – or at least resupply – Australian submarines there?

    This could have an impact on Australia’s relationships in the broader Pacific Islands region. There are already concerns in the region about whether the nuclear-powered submarines will comply with Australia’s obligations under the South Pacific Nuclear Free Zone Treaty.

    Australia has legitimate strategic interests in PNG. As such, it’s understandable why a defence treaty is tempting.

    But for 50 years, Australian governments have resisted this temptation because they decided that the risks outweighed the rewards. The current government will need to provide a good justification for its change of course.

    Joanne Wallis receives funding from the Australian Research Council and the Australian Department of Defence. She is a Nonresident Senior Fellow of the Brookings Institution, a nonprofit public policy organisation.

    – ref. A defence treaty with PNG might seem like a ‘win’ for Australia. But there are 4 crucial questions to answer – https://theconversation.com/a-defence-treaty-with-png-might-seem-like-a-win-for-australia-but-there-are-4-crucial-questions-to-answer-250396

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

    February 20, 2025
  • MIL-OSI United Kingdom: By land and by sea: UK supports US-led military exercises improving African security and stability

    Source: United Kingdom – Government Statements

    The UK Armed Forces are working with allies to deliver joint exercises with African partners to protect our people, prosperity and shared values.

    UK advisors guide partner forces in urban operations drills at Justified Accord, Kenya (Credit: U.S. Army Southern European Task Force, Africa)

    Thursday 20 February 2025 – The UK Armed Forces have been one of the biggest contributors to two large-scale military exercises that are reaching their climax this week across the land and sea of East Africa. The United States is leading both exercises and has brought together over 2,000 personnel from the armed forces of 29 countries, including 22 African nations.

    The UK is responsible for delivering component parts of these multinational training exercises, under United States stewardship. The UK has been one of the biggest contributors to the Exercise Justified Accord ‘Field Training Exercise (FTX)’ which sees B Company 3 RIFLES exercise alongside a company from the US 173rd Airborne Brigade, a company of Kenya Army infantry, a troop of Kenyan Marines, Kenya Airforce fixed wing and rotary wing assets and, one infantry platoon each from Tanzania and Somalia.

    Exercise Justified Accord is a land multinational exercise being delivered between 10 – 21 February hosted by Djibouti, Kenya and Tanzania. It began with table-top exercises that have laid the foundation for full-scale live activity, which are now underway. The action-packed drills involve coordinating and executing ground attacks, calling in air-support, urban warfare, using drones, and breaching and clearing buildings, as well as medical evacuations.

    Cutlass Express is being conducted simultaneously, mostly in Mauritius, Seychelles and Tanzania. It is a naval warfare exercise which focuses on boarding various types of vessels at high speed to take command and control. The exercise challenges teams to complete scenarios which become increasingly harder and involve different types of vessels – from boarding small boats and dhows, to gaining control of larger vessels whilst under fire.

    In another example of the United Kingdom and the United States being long-term partners for long-term stability and security, Exercise Cutlass Express is taking place for the 15th time, whilst Exercise Justified Accord has been conducted in various forms since 1998. Further joint exercises with African partners are planned for 2025.

    Both exercises will ensure that the different forces involved work together to achieve combat objectives and prepare for real-life scenarios where they may have to collaborate quickly and effectively to counter threats in the region.

    Falling just after the election of the new African Union Chairperson, the exercises also support the African Union’s security objectives by preparing partners for United Nations and African Union missions in Africa.

    It serves as another example of the UK’s support for improved security not just in East Africa, but across the whole of Africa. These include the creation of the history-making, first-ever Kenyan marines and joint-training with the special forces of Nigeria and Ghana.

    Olly Bryant, Defence Attaché at the British High Commission Nairobi, said:

    The UK is a long-term partner, helping to deliver long-term stability and security across East Africa, and we are proud to be working with our allies on delivering high-capacity and high-quality activity. We are also proud of our security partnerships with our partners across Africa, which protect our people, prosperity and shared interests – we go far when we go together.

    EDITOR’S NOTES

    Video and photo content

    Please find free-to-access video and photo content for Justified Accord here: https://www.dvidshub.net/feature/JustifiedAccord

    Please find free-to-access photo and video content for Cutlass Express here: https://www.dvidshub.net/feature/CutlassExpress2025

    Here is a link to a small selection of photos on Google Drive taken from the sites above: https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1DOz2ajnRjFK4vAMN7KxajL57RgXO-9aJ?usp=sharing 

    Background on Exercise Justified Accord

    You can find more information here, via U.S. Army Southern European Task Force, Africa.

    Background on Exercise Cutlass Express

    You can find more information here, via U.S. Naval Forces Europe-Africa/U.S. Sixth Fleet.

    List of participating nations

    Exercise Justified Accord

    Angola

    Botswana

    Djibouti

    DRC

    Ghana

    Kenya

    Madagascar

    Malawi

    Mozambique

    Nigeria

    Republic of the Congo

    Somalia

    Tanzania

    Tunisia

    Uganda

    Zambia

    France (Observer)

    India (Observer)

    Italy

    Netherlands

    United Kingdom

    United States

    Exercise Cutlass Express

    Comoros

    Djibouti

    Kenya

    Madagascar

    Malawi

    Mauritius

    Morocco

    Mozambique

    Senegal

    Seychelles

    Somalia

    Tanzania

    Tunisia

    France

    Georgia

    India (Observer)

    United Kingdom

    United States

    CONTACT

    For media enquiries, please contact Tom Walker at the British High Commission Nairobi on tom.walker2@fcdo.gov.uk.

    Share this page

    The following links open in a new tab

    • Share on Facebook (opens in new tab)
    • Share on Twitter (opens in new tab)

    Updates to this page

    Published 20 February 2025

    MIL OSI United Kingdom –

    February 20, 2025
  • MIL-OSI NGOs: ‘No going back’: Greenpeace applauds Albanese gov’s investment in green industry and jobs

    Source: Greenpeace Statement –

    SYDNEY, Thursday 20 February 2025 – Greenpeace Australia Pacific has welcomed the Albanese government’s announcement of a new Green Iron Fund in Whyalla today, a move it says will support workers as well as national efforts to tackle climate pollution.

    Prime Minister Anthony Albanese announced a $1 billion Green Iron Fund in Whyalla, SA today to, “boost green iron manufacturing and supply chains by supporting early mover green iron projects and unlocking private investment at scale.”

    Geoff Bice, WA Campaign Lead at Greenpeace Australia Pacific said: “Greenpeace applauds the Albanese government’s significant investment into a green iron industry in Australia. 

    “Green iron presents enormous economic opportunities for Australia, and in particular states like Western Australia with its skilled industrial workforce, export infrastructure, and abundant clean wind and solar energy. 

    “As our export partners move to rapidly decarbonise their supply chains, now is the time for the government to invest in the future of local workers and businesses by supporting green industry and technology. Today’s announcement sends a strong signal globally that Australia is serious about future-proofing our industries and economy, and serious in its commitments to reduce climate pollution.

    “The clean energy transition is well underway and there’s no going back — by investing in green jobs and industry now, and ramping up the rollout of renewable energy backed by storage, we can build a world-leading green economy, protect our precious nature, and support global efforts to address the climate crisis.

    “This is just the beginning — we urge state governments, particularly the WA Government, to follow suit and lay the foundations for the green economy of the future, to ensure our workers and industries don’t get left behind, and to support a safe, liveable planet for all.”

    —ENDS—

    For more information or to arrange an interview please contact Kate O’Callaghan on [email protected] on 0406 231 892

    MIL OSI NGO –

    February 20, 2025
  • MIL-OSI USA: Senator Reverend Warnock’s Issues Statement for the Official Record on Nomination of Jamieson Greer to be USTR

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator Reverend Raphael Warnock – Georgia

    Senator Reverend Warnock’s Issues Statement for the Official Record on Nomination of Jamieson Greer to be USTR

    Today, U.S. Senator Reverend Raphael Warnock (D-GA), issued the following statement on consideration of the Nomination of Jamieson Greer, of Maryland, to be United States Trade Representative, with the rank of Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary.
    “I will vote against the nomination of Mr. Jamieson Greer to serve as the United States Trade Representative. Despite Mr. Greer’s qualifications, he would be responsible for implementing President Trump’s haphazard and reckless trade policies, which I believe are harmful to Georgia businesses, farmers, and families. I am particularly concerned that, instead of advising the President on trade, Mr. Greer would be forced to appease President Trump’s chaotic tariff impulses.”
    “President Trump has used the threat of tariffs on America’s closest allies and trading partners—including Mexico, Canada, and even the European Union—merely to advance partisan or political goals that have little to do with our economy. These actions risk increasing costs for Georgia families and threatening good-paying American jobs.”  
    “Should Mr. Greer be confirmed, as Ranking Member of the Senate Subcommittee on International Trade, Customs, and Global Competitiveness, I will work with him, holding him accountable when necessary, to fight for domestic manufacturing in critical sectors like clean energy and electric vehicles, which are leading Georgia’s economic growth and reducing our dependence on China; to identify new international market access opportunities for Georgia’s farmers and small businesses, while protecting them from harmful trade wars; and to lower costs for hard-working families.”

    MIL OSI USA News –

    February 20, 2025
  • MIL-OSI Australia: Sky News Regional Breakfast

    Source: Australian Ministers 1

    ORTENZIA BORRE: The Regional Aviation Association of Australia is asking the government to consider regional airline operators during the sale process. Regional airlines, which are competitors to Rex, including Sharp Airlines, are concerned about the proposal where the government purchases Rex. Regional Aviation Association Chief Executive, Rob Walker says Rex has competition on 21 of its 46 routes, claiming the number of operators will reduce further if the government is subsidising the airline. And joining me live now on this and more is Regional Development Minister, Kristy McBain. Kristy, thank you for your time this morning. Now, do you share the same concern about the government stepping in to purchase the airline as the regional aviation Association does? 

    KRISTY MCBAIN: What is really important is you’ve got a government that backs regional aviation. What we’ve said from day one is that we want to see the administration process go through in its entirety. What we want to see is a private buyer come through. We’ve made sure that there are incentives in place for that to take place, including the fact that the use it or lose it process for Sydney airport slots doesn’t automatically go into recession. We’ve extended that out to 2026. Those are the things that are important to buyers. What we’ve said is we would be a buyer of last resort. We’re not stepping in now. We’re not substituting the administration process. It’s still got a way to run, and the administrator is keen to work with the private market on it. 

    BORRE: Now, ASIO boss Mike Burgess has revealed there have been multiple attempts by foreign countries to harm Australians, and that the rest of the decade could be even more dangerous. So what does the Albanese Government need to do now before the election to ensure our safety? 

    MCBAIN: What we say consistently is that we have confidence in our security and intelligence agencies. They do a fabulous job. As Mike Burgess has outlined, they’re doing this all whilst keeping Australians safe. Once a year he gives a speech about the things that are happening across our nation and across the world. Without that, Australians would be none the wiser that these things are taking place in the background. We continue to provide all the resources that our security and intelligence agencies need to do their job and keep Australians safe. What we want to make really clear is that we consider it a form of abuse for anyone to harass us, and we continually monitoring this. Harassment of Australians, individuals or businesses is not on. We have full faith that our security agencies will take the appropriate steps they need to. 

    BORRE: Now you’re in Goulburn today as part of the $100 million Community Energy Upgrades Fund. Today, $50 million will be delivered to about 58 local governments in grants for energy upgrades. Talk us through this initiative and how it’s going to benefit Australians. 

    MCBAIN: The Community Energy Upgrade Fund is something that councils have been calling for across the country. They want some help to lower the fixed costs that they have, which in turn helps lower rates for individuals across the country. We’ve supported councils from Geelong in Victoria to Aurukun in Queensland, to the Shire of Flinders Ranges in South Australia. Projects like making community pools fully electric, making sure that there are solar panels and batteries on community libraries, fast car charging stations across our communities to encourage more people to come and visit, or to be able to use electric cars within our community. A really important fund, delivering some cost savings for councils across the country. Round two will be open very soon and we encourage councils to continue to put forward their projects and apply to this fund. 

    BORRE: Kristy McBain, always a pleasure. Thank you for your time this morning. 

    MCBAIN: Good to be with you.

    MIL OSI News –

    February 20, 2025
  • MIL-Evening Report: US backing for Pacific disinformation media course casualty of Trump aid ‘freeze’

    Pacific Media Watch

    A New Zealand-based community education provider, Dark Times Academy, has had a US Embassy grant to deliver a course teaching Pacific Islands journalists about disinformation terminated after the new Trump administration took office.

    The new US administration requested a list of course participants and to review the programme material amid controversy over a “freeze” on federal aid policies.

    The course presentation team refused and the contract was terminated by “mutual agreement” — but the eight-week Pacific workshop is going ahead anyway from next week.

    Dark Times Academy’s co-founder Mandy Henk . . . “A Bit Sus”, an evidence-based peer-reviewed series of classes on disinfiormation for Pacific media. Image: Newsroom

    “As far as I can tell, the current foreign policy priorities of the US government seem to involve terrorising the people of Gaza, annexing Canada, invading Greenland, and bullying Panama,” said Dark Times Academy co-founder Mandy Henk.

    “We felt confident that a review of our materials would not find them to be aligned with those priorities.”

    The course, called “A Bit Sus”, is an evidence-based peer-reviewed series of classes that teach key professions the skills needed to identify and counter disinformation and misinformation in their particular field.

    The classes focus on “prebunking”, lateral reading, and how technology, including generative AI, influences disinformation.

    Awarded competitive funds
    Dark Times Academy was originally awarded the funds to run the programme through a public competitive grant offered by the US Embassy in New Zealand in 2023 under the previous US administration.

    The US Embassy grant was focused on strengthening the capacity of Pacific media to identify and counter disinformation. While funded by the US, the course was to be a completely independent programme overseen by Dark Times Academy and its academic consultants.

    Co-founder Henk was preparing to deliver the education programme to a group of Pacific Island journalists and media professionals, but received a request from the US Embassy in New Zealand to review the course materials to “ensure they are in line with US foreign policy priorities”.

    Henk said she and the other course presenters refused to allow US government officials to review the course material for this purpose.

    She said the US Embassy had also requested a “list of registered participants for the online classes,” which Dark Times Academy also declined to provide as compliance would have violated the New Zealand Privacy Act 2020.

    Henk said the refusal to provide the course materials for review led immediately to further discussions with the US Embassy in New Zealand that ultimately resulted in the termination of the grant “by mutual agreement”.

    However, she said Dark Times Academy would still go ahead with running the course for the Pacific Island journalists who had signed up so far, starting on February 26.

    Continuing the programme
    “The Dark Times Academy team fully intends to continue to bring the ‘A Bit Sus’ programme and other classes to the Pacific region and New Zealand, even without the support of the US government,” Henk said.

    “As noted when we first announced this course, the Pacific Islands have experienced accelerated growth in digital connectivity over the past few years thanks to new submarine cable networks and satellite technology.

    “Alongside this, the region has also seen a surge in harmful rumours and disinformation that is increasingly disrupting the ability to share accurate and truthful information across Pacific communities.

    “This course will help participants from the media recognise common tactics used by disinformation agents and support them to deploy proven educational and communications techniques.

    “By taking a skills-based approach to countering disinformation, our programme can help to spread the techniques needed to mitigate the risks posed by digital technologies,” Henk said.

    Especially valuable for journalists
    Dark Times Academy co-founder Byron Clark said the course would be especially valuable for journalists in the Pacific region given the recent shifts in global politics and the current state of the planet.

    Dark Times Academy co-founder and author Byron Clark . . . “We saw the devastating impacts of disinformation in the Pacific region during the measles outbreak in Samoa.” Image: APR

    “We saw the devastating impacts of disinformation in the Pacific region during the measles outbreak in Samoa, for example,” said Clark, author of the best-selling book Fear: New Zealand’s Underworld of Hostile Extremists.

    “With Pacific Island states bearing the brunt of climate change, as well as being caught between a geopolitical stoush between China and the West, a course like this one is timely.”

    Henk said the “A Bit Sus” programme used a “high-touch teaching model” that combined the current best evidence on how to counter disinformation with a “learner-focused pedagogy that combines discussion, activities, and a project”.

    Past classes led to the creation of the New Zealand version of the “Euphorigen Investigation” escape room, a board game, and a card game.

    These materials remain in use across New Zealand schools and community learning centres.

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

    February 20, 2025
  • MIL-Evening Report: Households are burning plastic waste as fuel for cooking and heating in slums the world over

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Bishal Bharadwaj, Adjunct Research Fellow, Curtin Institute for Energy Transition, Curtin University

    Poor people in vast city slums across the Global South are burning plastic to cook their food, warm their homes and boil water for hot showers.

    Waste plastic is plentiful and highly flammable. So it’s not surprising people in developing countries, mainly in Africa, Asia and Latin America, are putting it to use – especially as wood is increasingly scarce.

    But burning plastic is hazardous, as it releases toxins into the surrounding air – and possibly into the food on the stove.

    We wanted to draw attention to this growing problem, which has received little attention to date despite the many potential harms.

    In our new “perspective” paper, published in Nature Cities, we explain why so many communities are using plastic as an energy source.

    We then explore further research needed and recommend ways for policymakers to tackle the issue.

    Mountains of plastic waste

    The world has produced more plastic in the past 20 years than the total previously produced since commercial production began in 1950. Roughly half a billion tonnes of plastic is now produced every year.

    Plastic production is still accelerating. Global plastic use is predicted to almost triple by 2060 due to soaring demand from a growing population with rising incomes.

    Unfortunately, most plastic is not recycled. Instead, it is discarded and ultimately ends up polluting marginal land such as flooded areas and open dumping grounds before making its way into the ocean.

    Burning plastic waste for cooking and heating is becoming increasingly common in city slums. a–f, Photographs showing the use of plastic to start a fire in Koshi Province in Nepal (a), a household heating milk by burning plastic in Madhesh province of Nepal (b) and the burning of plastic in Guwahati, India (c), in Enugu, Nigeria (d,e) and in the slums of Lahore, Pakistan (f). Credits for photographs: a, Srijana Baniya; b, Pramesh Dhungana; c, Monjit Borthakur; d,e, Chizoba Obianuju Oranu; f, Sobia Rose.
    Bharadwaj, B., Gates, T., Borthakur, M. et al. The use of plastic as a household fuel among the urban poor in the Global South. Nat Cities (2025).

    A product of energy poverty in city slums

    Increasing urbanisation is reducing access to traditional fuels such as wood and crop residue from farmland.

    But plastic is readily available. Low-income households with little or no access to gas or electricity often find themselves living alongside mountains of rubbish.

    This plastic, made from fossil fuels, represents a cheap and convenient fuel. It’s lightweight, easy to transport, and a nuisance material that people want to be rid of. Plastic is also relatively easy to dry and store, but can burn even when wet. It’s also flexible and pliable, so it can be used easily in traditional cooking arrangements such as basic stoves.

    Burning plastic releases toxins such as dioxins, furans and heavy metals into the air. These chemicals are known to cause cancer, heart disease and lung diseases.

    The more vulnerable people in the household – including women and children and those who spend more time indoors – tend to be most exposed to the fumes. But the problem also affects people in the neighbourhood and the wider community.

    Burning plastic is likely to also contaminate food. For example, eggs from farms near plastic waste incinerators in Indonesia contained hazardous chemicals from burned plastic. However, more evidence is needed around food contamination.

    Furthermore, when households burn plastic bottles and other containers, some of the original contents also burn. Given chemicals are poorly regulated, the consequences of burning plastic could be greater still.

    Overcoming the problem

    A first step to overcoming the problem is understanding the reality of those living in slums. Policy-makers need to recognise these people’s needs and the challenges they face.

    Extensive research is needed to design the most effective and inclusive policy interventions. This needs to be addressed if we are to reduce the associated health and environmental impacts on such large populations across the world.

    We have gathered a collaborative, multidisciplinary team of researchers from around 35 countries – mostly in the Global South – to better understand the problem. We recently completed a survey of people exposed to the issue such as local government employees, teachers and community workers in more than 100 cities in 26 countries.

    We are also examining the emissions from waste plastic during food preparation to determine the extent of contamination in variety of stoves.

    Nobody wants to burn plastic waste to cook food, so policies like ban on burning plastic with out contextual intervention will not work. There is a need to design inclusive policy interventions that provide equitable benefits to the wider community. For example, encouraging people to:

    • wash any plastic before it is burned, to remove chemical residues
    • use improved cookstoves that vent the fumes outside
    • expand basic urban amenities like waste management to low income settlements
    • provide support to help lift households out of poverty.

    Each approach will depend on the specific requirements of the slum settlement. But by implementing multiple approaches in parallel, we can tackle the problem more effectively.

    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. Households are burning plastic waste as fuel for cooking and heating in slums the world over – https://theconversation.com/households-are-burning-plastic-waste-as-fuel-for-cooking-and-heating-in-slums-the-world-over-250265

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

    February 20, 2025
  • MIL-OSI Australia: Appointment of new ANROWS Board Chair

    Source: Ministers for Social Services

    20 February 2025

    Following endorsement by Commonwealth and state and territory governments, Australia’s National Research Organisation for Women’s Safety (ANROWS) has appointed Joan Fitzpatrick as the new Chair of their board.

    Ms Fitzpatrick has extensive business leadership experience and more than 25 years of board experience across multiple sectors, including serving as CEO and Director of the Australian Institute of Insurance and Finance (ANZIIF), and as a Director of the Create Foundation.

    Assistant Minister for Social Services and for the Prevention of Family Violence, Justine Elliot, said Ms Fitzpatrick’s wealth of management and board expertise will ensure ANROWS continues to conduct high-quality research integral to the development of effective, evidence-based policies that supports ending violence against women and children.

    “The quality of research conducted by ANROWS is key in implementing effective national policy to address, and ultimately end the crisis of gender-based violence, and I am confident Ms Fitzpatrick’s leadership as the new Chair will allow ANROWS to continue their vital work.”

    “Thank you to both interim Chair Mr Barry Sandison and former Chair, Her Excellency, the Honourable Ms Samantha Mostyn AO for their work towards our shared goal of ending gender-based violence in this country,” Assistant Minister Elliot said.

    ANROWS was established in 2013 as an initiative of Australia’s first National Plan to Reduce Violence against Women and their Children 2010–2022 (National Plan) by the Commonwealth Government and all state and territory governments of Australia.

    Since its establishment, ANROWS has demonstrated strong leadership in working to build the critical evidence base needed to inform policy and programs to support ending violence against women and children in Australia.

    CEO of ANROWS Dr Tessa Boyd-Caine said “we are absolutely delighted to welcome Ms Fitzpatrick as the Chair of ANROWS. Her strength of expertise in best practice governance and her experience leading across a range of environments including nonprofit organisations, alongside her deep commitment to gender equality, make her ideally placed to guide the Board’s oversight of ANROWS and our strategic impact in the work ahead.”

    The work of ANROWS has been backed by extensive investment from the Albanese Labor Government, including $23.3 million for their National Priority Research Fund and $4.3 million in the 2024-25 Budget for building the evidence base on pathways into and out of perpetration of family, domestic and sexual violence.

    The Chairperson will be appointed for a term of three or four years and may be reappointed for a further term of up to 4 years.

    More information on the National Plan to End Violence against Women and Children 2022-2032 is available on the Department of Social Services website.

    If you or someone you know is experiencing, or at risk of experiencing, domestic, family, or sexual violence, call 1800 737 732, text 0458 737 732 or visit www.1800RESPECT.org.au for online chat and video call services.

    If you are concerned about your behaviour or use of violence, you can contact the Men’s Referral Service on 1300 766 491 or visit www.ntv.org.au

    Feeling worried or no good? Connect with 13YARN Aboriginal & Torres Strait Islander Crisis Supporters on 13 92 76, available 24/7 from any mobile or pay phone, or visit www.13yarn.org.au. No shame, no judgement, safe place to yarn.

    MIL OSI News –

    February 20, 2025
  • MIL-OSI Australia: Boosting First Nations trade and investment

    Source: Minister for Trade

    The Albanese Labor Government is backing First Nations people, businesses and communities to take up new trade and investment opportunities through a new First Nations Trade and Investment Advisory Group.

    Growing trade and investment links for First Nations people delivers well paying, secure jobs in communities across Australia. We know that First Nations businesses who export generated over $670 million in revenue in 2022-23 and typically employed over seven times more workers than other First Nations businesses.

    The group will help First Nations businesses tap into a wide array of trade and economic opportunities, including our recently signed free trade agreement with United Arab Emirates, so that First Nations businesses can reap more of the benefits from international trade.

    By establishing this pilot Advisory Group we are delivering on our commitment to share the benefits of trade widely across our community.

    The membership includes a range of First Nations business leaders, industry groups and experts in international trade including:

    • Mr Bevan Mailman, Desert Springs Octopus
    • Mr Joshua Gilbert, Gilbert Consulting
    • Mr Cameron Costello, Costello Consultancy
    • Mr Brian Bero, First Nations Clean Energy Network
    • Ms Sharon Brindley, First Nations Bushfood and Botanical Alliance Australia
    • Mr Michael Dickerson, Gambarra Kaha
    • Ms Shannon McGuire, Kirrikin Foundation
    • Ms Leah Armstrong, First Nations Representative on the Indigenous Peoples Economic Trade and Cooperation Agreement (IPETCA)
    • Mr Leslie Delaforce, Dreamspark
    • Ms Jenny Wardrop, Supply Nation Representative
    • Ms Michelle Deshong, Deshong Consulting

    More information, including terms of reference, will be available at Advisory Group webpage.

    Quotes attributable to the Minister for Trade and Tourism Don Farrell:

    “Our First Nations people were our first traders, exchanging goods with Makassan seafarers from Indonesia.

    “These days First Nations businesses export a range of goods including native botanicals, art, design, cyber and clean energy solutions to the world markets.

    “We know First Nations business involved in trade create more jobs and grow faster.

    “That’s why our government is focussed on helping more First Nations businesses tap into the many opportunities provided by exporting to the world.”

    Quotes attributable to the Minister for Indigenous Australians Malarndirri McCarthy:

    “First Nations Australians are the holders of traditional knowledge and culture, and these perspectives can only benefit Australia’s international trade and investment agenda.

    “Initiatives like the First Nations Trade and Investment Advisory Group ensure First Nations perspectives, experiences and interests are embedded in our international economic agenda.

    “Working in partnership demonstrates the value of knowledge sharing and can deliver real, long-term economic empowerment and self-determination for First Nations Australians.”

    MIL OSI News –

    February 20, 2025
  • MIL-Evening Report: The ASIO threat assessment is a dark outlook for Australia’s security. Are our laws up to the task?

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Sarah Kendall, Adjunct Research Fellow, The University of Queensland

    Shutterstock

    This week, ASIO chief Mike Burgess delivered his sixth Annual Threat Assessment.

    His approach this time was unprecedented. Instead of focusing on past and present threats, Burgess declassified parts of ASIO’s assessment for the future, warning us about Australia’s security outlook to 2030.

    Over the next five years, ASIO is expecting “an unprecedented number of challenges, and an unprecedented cumulative level of potential harm”, Burgess warned. At the same time, the threat environment will become more diverse.

    Espionage and foreign interference are already at extreme levels, but are anticipated to intensify. Sabotage is expected to pose an increasing threat. Politically motivated violence and communal violence will also remain an elevated concern.

    What does this mean for our criminal laws? Are they robust enough to protect us from the growing and diversifying threat of espionage, sabotage and foreign interference? Or will they need bolstering?

    What are the threats?

    Espionage, or spying, involves the theft of information. Burgess has warned that both our enemies and our friends will seek to steal information from us.

    This includes information about our military capabilities and alliances, such as AUKUS.

    Instead of using traditional spies to gather this information, Burgess expects greater use of proxies.

    These proxies could be unwittingly involved in the espionage efforts of a foreign country – such as private investigators. Or they could know exactly what they’re doing.

    Foreign interference involves covertly shaping decision-making to the advantage of a foreign power. Burgess has warned that foreign governments are monitoring, intimidating and coercing Australians and diaspora communities, including engaging in coerced repatriations.

    He also expects that foreign interference may be used to undermine community support for AUKUS.

    Concerningly, ASIO has disrupted plots by foreign countries to physically harm (or even kill) people living in Australia. This includes activists, journalists and ordinary citizens – all critics of certain foreign governments.

    Both espionage and foreign interference will be enabled by advances in technology, including artificial intelligence (AI), deep fakes and large online pools of personal data.

    Sabotage involves deliberately destroying or damaging infrastructure.

    Russia has been engaging in diverse acts of sabotage in Europe, aiming to erode support for Ukraine and damage cohesion. These attacks include arson against various types of infrastructure (including defence and munitions facilities), jamming civil aviation GPS systems, and disrupting railways.

    While Burgess warned that the risk of similar attacks against Australia is increasing (including attacks against infrastructure arising out of AUKUS), cyber-enabled sabotage will be of more concern. At the moment, foreign governments are exploring and exploiting Australia’s critical infrastructure networks to map systems and maintain access in the future.

    As with espionage, Burgess expects criminal proxies to be used more frequently to engage in sabotage. This includes state-sponsored or state-supported terrorist groups.

    Are our laws ready to deal with this?

    With the espionage, sabotage and foreign interference threat growing and diversifying over the next five years, you’d be right to ask whether our criminal laws are robust enough to stand up to the challenge.

    For the most part, they are.

    All the laws apply to conduct that occurs “in the real world” and online. The laws also apply to any foreign country, including our friends, as well as terrorist organisations.

    In addition to foreign countries, the laws apply to conduct on behalf of a foreign country, including where the conduct is directed, funded or supervised by the foreign country or a person acting on its behalf. This means the laws would apply to proxies hired to engage in espionage or sabotage.

    Our sabotage laws are broad enough to cover the explorations of critical infrastructure networks currently being undertaken. An act of sabotage does not have to be committed to be an offence under these laws.

    Our foreign interference laws would cover coerced repatriations. While plots to harm Australians may also fall within these offences, a number of other offences also exist for harming or killing Australian citizens or residents.

    Room for improvement

    Our espionage, sabotage and foreign interference laws certainly are “world-leading”. However, there are some drawbacks.

    For example, the laws are yet to grapple with the rise of AI and its use to gather information for espionage or generate mis- or disinformation for foreign interference.

    While the laws have broad extraterritorial reach – they apply to conduct that occurs within or outside Australia – the practicalities of enforcing the laws when offenders are located overseas is a big barrier.

    But in today’s digital age where espionage, sabotage and foreign interference can be conducted online from the safety of a foreign country and therefore beyond the reach of Australia’s criminal law, we need more than a robust legal response.

    As Burgess stressed, these issues “require whole of government, whole of community, whole of society responses […] national security is truly national security: everybody’s business”.

    We all need to be aware of the risks and what we – as individuals, employees, researchers and business owners – can do to mitigate them.

    This article was written in Sarah Kendall’s personal capacity as an Adjunct Research Fellow at the University of Queensland School of Law. It does not reflect the views of the Queensland Law Reform Commission or the Queensland Government.

    – ref. The ASIO threat assessment is a dark outlook for Australia’s security. Are our laws up to the task? – https://theconversation.com/the-asio-threat-assessment-is-a-dark-outlook-for-australias-security-are-our-laws-up-to-the-task-250372

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

    February 20, 2025
  • MIL-OSI USA News: Fact Sheet: President Donald J. Trump Reduces the Federal Bureaucracy

    Source: The White House

    SHRINKING THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT: Today, President Donald J. Trump signed an Executive Order continuing the reduction of Federal bureaucracy and waste.

    • The Order aims to further decrease the size of the Federal Government to enhance accountability, reduce waste, and promote innovation.
    • It eliminates or reduces to the minimum level of activity and expenditure required by law unnecessary governmental entities and Federal advisory committees.
    • Within 30 days, a list of additional unnecessary government entities and advisory committees must be submitted to the President for termination.

    REDUCING GOVERNMENT OVERREACH: President Trump’s Executive Order is consistent with his Administration’s policy to dramatically reduce the size of the Federal Government, while increasing its accountability to the American people.  

    • The Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) has already identified billions in waste, fraud, and abuse.
    • Cutting these governmental entities and Federal advisory committees will save taxpayer dollars, reduce unnecessary government spending, and streamline government priorities.
    • By reducing the Federal footprint, President Trump is returning power to local communities and state governments.

    REFORMING THE FEDERAL BUREAUCRACY: The American people elected President Trump to drain the swamp and end ineffective government programs that empower government without achieving measurable results.

    • The government wastes billions of dollars each year on duplicative programs and frivolous expenditures that fail to align with American values or address the needs of the American people.
    • President Trump recently eliminated the Federal Executive Institute, a government program purportedly designed to provide bureaucratic leadership training.  
    • President Trump temporarily paused foreign aid to many non-governmental organizations, international organizations, and contractors to ensure every dollar of U.S. foreign assistance supports American values.
    • President Trump established the “Department of Government Efficiency” to examine how to streamline the Federal Government, eliminate unnecessary programs, and reduce bureaucratic inefficiency.
    • President Trump launched a 10-to-1 deregulation initiative, ensuring every new rule is justified by clear benefits.
    • Through these actions, President Trump is keeping his promise to restore efficiency and accountability in the Federal Government.

    MIL OSI USA News –

    February 20, 2025
  • MIL-OSI USA News: Fact Sheet: President Donald J. Trump Reins in Government Overreach and Begins Deconstruction of Unconstitutional Administrative State

    Source: The White House

    ENSURING LAWFUL ENFORCEMENT: Today, President Donald J. Trump signed an Executive Order ensuring lawful governance and implementing the President’s Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) deregulatory initiative. The Executive Order will end Federal overreach in regulation and enforcement and restore the constitutional separation of powers:

    • Agency heads shall, in coordination with their DOGE team leads and the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), review all regulations subject to their jurisdiction for consistency with law and Trump Administration policy, prioritizing rules that impose heavy costs.
      • A Unified Agenda will be developed to rescind and/or modify regulations that are inconsistent with law or the Trump Administration’s policy.
    • Agencies shall utilize enforcement discretion to de-prioritize enforcement actions that stretch statutory authority or exceed the constitutional powers of the Federal Government.
    • The Order exempts, among other things, any action respecting a military, national security, homeland security, foreign affairs, or immigration-related function of the United States.

    ELIMINATING UNLAWFUL REGULATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT: The accumulation of federal regulations and their burdensome enforcement, including legally suspect regulations, has stifled economic growth and constrained Americans’ freedom.    

    • The Biden Administration imposed a historic $1.7 trillion in costs on the American people. 
    • This Executive Order stops and reverses the regulatory overreach and abusive enforcement, ensuring that the operation of the government is responsible, lawful, and efficient.

    BUILDING ON PAST SUCCESS: President Trump’s first term was the most successful deregulatory undertaking in American history. This Executive Order builds on these foundations and furthers the deregulatory project to improve the daily lives of the American people and unleash a new Golden Age of America.

    MIL OSI USA News –

    February 20, 2025
  • MIL-OSI USA News: Ensuring Lawful Governance and Implementing the President’s “Department of Government Efficiency” Regulatory Initiative

    Source: The White House

    class=”has-text-align-left”>By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, it is hereby ordered:
     

         Section 1.  Purpose.  It is the policy of my Administration to focus the executive branch’s limited enforcement resources on regulations squarely authorized by constitutional Federal statutes, and to commence the deconstruction of the overbearing and burdensome administrative state.  Ending Federal overreach and restoring the constitutional separation of powers is a priority of my Administration.  

         Sec. 2.  Rescinding Unlawful Regulations and Regulations That Undermine the National Interest.  (a)  Agency heads shall, in coordination with their DOGE Team Leads and the Director of the Office of Management and Budget, initiate a process to review all regulations subject to their sole or joint jurisdiction for consistency with law and Administration policy.  Within 60 days of the date of this order, agency heads shall, in consultation with the Attorney General as appropriate, identify the following classes of regulations:
    (i)    unconstitutional regulations and regulations that raise serious constitutional difficulties, such as exceeding the scope of the power vested in the Federal Government by the Constitution;
    (ii)   regulations that are based on unlawful delegations of legislative power;
    (iii)  regulations that are based on anything other than the best reading of the underlying statutory authority or prohibition;
    (iv)   regulations that implicate matters of social, political, or economic significance that are not authorized by clear statutory authority;
    (v)    regulations that impose significant costs upon private parties that are not outweighed by public benefits;
    (vi)   regulations that harm the national interest by significantly and unjustifiably impeding technological innovation, infrastructure development, disaster response, inflation reduction, research and development, economic development, energy production, land use, and foreign policy objectives; and
    (vii)  regulations that impose undue burdens on small business and impede private enterprise and entrepreneurship.
    (b)  In conducting the review required by subsection (a) of this section, agencies shall prioritize review of those rules that satisfy the definition of “significant regulatory action” in Executive Order 12866 of September 30, 1993 (Regulatory Planning and Review), as amended.
    (c)  Within 60 days of the date of this order, agency heads shall provide to the Administrator of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) within the Office of Management and Budget a list of all regulations identified by class as listed in subsection (a) of this section.
    (d)  The Administrator of OIRA shall consult with agency heads to develop a Unified Regulatory Agenda that seeks to rescind or modify these regulations, as appropriate.

         Sec. 3.  Enforcement Discretion to Ensure Lawful Governance.  (a)  Subject to their paramount obligation to discharge their legal obligations, protect public safety, and advance the national interest, agencies shall preserve their limited enforcement resources by generally de-prioritizing actions to enforce regulations that are based on anything other than the best reading of a statute and de-prioritizing actions to enforce regulations that go beyond the powers vested in the Federal Government by the Constitution.
    (b)  Agency heads shall determine whether ongoing enforcement of any regulations identified in their regulatory review is compliant with law and Administration policy.  To preserve resources and ensure lawful enforcement, agency heads, in consultation with the Director of the Office of Management and Budget, shall, on a case-by-case basis and as appropriate and consistent with applicable law, then direct the termination of all such enforcement proceedings that do not comply with the Constitution, laws, or Administration policy.

         Sec. 4.  Promulgation of New Regulations.  Agencies shall continue to follow the processes set out in Executive Order 12866 for submitting regulations for review by OIRA.  Additionally, agency heads shall consult with their DOGE Team Leads and the Administrator of OIRA on potential new regulations as soon as practicable.  In evaluating potential new regulations, agency heads, DOGE Team Leads, and the Administrator of OIRA shall consider, in addition to the factors set out in Executive Order 12866, the factors set out in section 2(a) of this order.   

         Sec. 5.  Implementation.  The Director of the Office of Management and Budget shall issue implementation guidance, as appropriate.

         Sec. 6.  Definitions.  (a)  “Agency” has the meaning given to it in 44 U.S.C. 3502, except it does not include the Executive Office of the President or its components.
    (b)  “Agency head” shall mean the highest-ranking official of an agency, such as the Secretary, Administrator, Chairman, or Director.
    (c)  “DOGE Team Lead” shall mean the leader of the DOGE Team at each agency as described in Executive Order 14158 of January 20, 2025 (Establishing and Implementing the President’s “Department of Government Efficiency”).
    (d)  “Enforcement action” means all attempts, civil or criminal, by any agency to deprive a private party of life, liberty, or property, or in any way affect a private party’s rights or obligations, regardless of the label the agency has historically placed on the action.
    (e)  “Regulation” shall have the meaning given to “regulatory action” in section 3(e) of Executive Order 12866, and also includes any “guidance document” as defined in Executive Order 13422 of January 18, 2007 (Further Amendment to Executive Order 12866 on Regulatory Planning and Review).
    (f)  “Senior appointee” means an individual appointed by the President, or performing the functions and duties of an office that requires appointment by the President, or a non-career member of the Senior Executive Service (or equivalent agency system).

         Sec. 7.  Exemptions.  Notwithstanding any other provision in this order, nothing in this order shall apply to:
    (a)  any action related to a military, national security, homeland security, foreign affairs, or immigration-related function of the United States;
    (b)  any matter pertaining to the executive branch’s management of its employees; or
    (c)  anything else exempted by the Director of the Office of Management and Budget.

         Sec. 8.  Severability.  If any provision of this order, or the application of any provision to any person or circumstance, is held to be invalid, the remainder of this order and the application of its provisions to any other persons or circumstances shall not be affected thereby. 

         Sec. 9.  General Provisions.  (a)  Nothing in this order shall be construed to impair or otherwise affect:  
    (i)   the authority granted by law to an executive department, agency, or the head thereof; or  
    (ii)  the functions of the Director of the Office of Management and Budget relating to budgetary, administrative, or legislative proposals.  
    (b)  This order shall be implemented consistent with applicable law and subject to the availability of appropriations.  
    (c)  This order is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person. 
     
     
     
    THE WHITE HOUSE,
        February 19, 2025.

    MIL OSI USA News –

    February 20, 2025
  • MIL-OSI USA News: Commencing the Reduction of the Federal Bureaucracy

    Source: The White House

    class=”has-text-align-left”>By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, it is hereby ordered:

         Section 1.  Purpose.  It is the policy of my Administration to dramatically reduce the size of the Federal Government, while increasing its accountability to the American people.  This order commences a reduction in the elements of the Federal bureaucracy that the President has determined are unnecessary.  Reducing the size of the Federal Government will minimize Government waste and abuse, reduce inflation, and promote American freedom and innovation.

         Sec. 2.  Reducing the Scope of the Federal Bureaucracy.   (a)  The non-statutory components and functions of the following governmental entities shall be eliminated to the maximum extent consistent with applicable law, and such entities shall reduce the performance of their statutory functions and associated personnel to the minimum presence and function required by law:
    (i)    the Presidio Trust;
    (ii)   the Inter-American Foundation;
    (iii)  the United States African Development Foundation; and
    (iv)   the United States Institute of Peace.
    (b)  Within 14 days of the date of this order, the head of each unnecessary governmental entity listed in subsection (a) of this section shall submit a report to the Director of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB Director) confirming compliance with this order and stating whether the governmental entity, or any components or functions thereof, are statutorily required and to what extent.
    (c)  In reviewing budget requests submitted by the governmental entities listed in subsection (a) of this section, the OMB Director or the head of any executive department or agency charged with reviewing grant requests by such entities shall, to the extent consistent with applicable law and except insofar as necessary to effectuate an expected termination, reject funding requests for such governmental entities to the extent they are inconsistent with this order.
    (d)  The Presidential Memorandum of November 13, 1961 (Need for Greater Coordination of Regional and Field Activities of the Government), is hereby revoked.  The Director of the Office of Personnel Management (OPM Director) is directed to initiate the process to withdraw the regulations at title 5, part 960, Code of Federal Regulations, thereby eliminating the Federal Executive Boards.  
    (e)  The OPM Director is directed to initiate the process to withdraw the regulations at title 5, part 362, subpart D, Code of Federal Regulations, and to take any other steps necessary to promptly terminate the Presidential Management Fellows Program.  On the effective date of the final regulations promulgated by the OPM Director, Executive Order 13318 of November 21, 2003, is revoked and Executive Order 13562 of December 27, 2010, is amended by:
    (i)    striking from section 2 the words “along with the Presidential Management Fellows Program, as modified herein,”;
    (ii)   striking section 5;
    (iii)  striking from section 6(b) the words “or PMF Programs” and inserting in their place “program”;
    (iv)   striking from section 7(b)(iii) the words “the competitive service of Interns, Recent Graduates, or PMFs (or a Government-wide combined conversion cap applicable to all three categories together)” and inserting in their place “the competitive service of Interns or Recent Graduates (or a Government-wide combined conversion cap applicable to both categories together)”; and
    (v)    redesignating sections 6, 7, 8, and 9 as sections 5, 6, 7, and 8 respectively.  
    (f)  Within 14 days of the date of this order, the following heads of executive departments and agencies (agencies) shall take the following actions with respect to the following Federal Advisory Committees within their respective agencies:
    (i) the Administrator of the United States Agency for International Development shall terminate the Advisory Committee on Voluntary Foreign Aid; 
    (ii)   the Director of the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection shall terminate the Academic Research Council and the Credit Union Advisory Council;
    (iii)  the Board of Directors of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation shall terminate the Community Bank Advisory Council;
    (iv)   the Secretary of Health and Human Services shall terminate the Secretary’s Advisory Committee on Long COVID; and
    (v)    the Administrator of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services shall terminate the Health Equity Advisory Committee.
    (g)  Within 30 days of the date of this order, the Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs, the Assistant to the President for Economic Policy, and the Assistant to the President for Domestic Policy shall identify and submit to the President additional unnecessary governmental entities and Federal Advisory Committees that should be terminated on grounds that they are unnecessary.  

         Sec. 3.  General Provisions.  (a)  Nothing in this order shall be construed to impair or otherwise affect:
    (i)   the authority granted by law to an executive department, agency, or the head thereof; or
    (ii)  the functions of the Director of the Office of Management and Budget relating to budgetary, administrative, or legislative proposals.
    (b)  This order shall be implemented consistent with applicable law and subject to the availability of appropriations.
    (c)  This order is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person.
     
     
     
    THE WHITE HOUSE,
        February 19, 2025.

    MIL OSI USA News –

    February 20, 2025
  • MIL-OSI Australia: Solar Pools and Libraries with First $50 million for bill busting upgrades

    Source: Australian Ministers for Infrastructure and Transport

    Batteries to soak up excess solar at a council childcare centre, solar panels to cut bills for the local library and the community pool going all-electric are just some of the projects the Albanese Government is backing with its $100 million Community Energy Upgrades Fund (CEUF).

    Today 58 local government bodies around the nation will get on with bringing down their energy bills for good, with $50 million in grants for energy upgrades going out the door.

    Whether it’s the neighbourhood sports club, the community hall, the local pool or library, local government brings us together and keeps us thriving. Each year 8 million people use community sporting infrastructure, including local councils. Now the Albanese Government is working with councils, so they can save on their bills and invest more into their communities.

    One-off grants of between $25,000 to $2.5 million have been awarded through the merit-based program, with local government providing at least 50 per cent of project costs.

    Successful funding applications include 31 upgrades to local aquatic centres and five grants for smart electric vehicle charging infrastructure for local government vehicles.

    In Melbourne, Collingwood Leisure Centre will go electric, with its air, pool and hot water system using 100% renewable energy and storage.

    In Western Sydney, council-owned early learning centres will free up funding to invest more into our next generation by cutting bills with batteries that soak up excess solar to be used across their own and other community buildings. While in Broken Hill they’ll unlock their sunny skies with the council installing solar panels over the car park and replacing gas heating with electric heat pumps.

    Meanwhile in Darwin, the Casuarina Library will be cooler this summer with an energy upgrade, while further upgrades to Parap Pool and West Lane carpark will see the council save $83,500 a year.

    In Tasmania, a local council will ensure people keep on moving, installing smart electric vehicle chargers and dynamic load management to support electrification and decarbonisation of its vehicle fleet.

    The highly popular Albanese Labor Government initiative saw Round 1 oversubscribed, with 165 applications overall for the first $50 million package of funding. Round 2 is expected to open shortly, with unsuccessful applicants from round 1 warmly encouraged to reapply.

    Quotes attributable to Minister for Climate Change and Energy Chris Bowen:

    “Local councils run many of the sport and public facilities that keep our communities and clubs thriving. We want facilities that Australians know and love, like cricket grounds and local pools, to be able to save on their energy bills and spend more on the things they do best.

     “The Albanese Government is not just providing short term relief on power bills, with our Community Energy Upgrades Fund and Energy Savings Package, we’re helping communities bring down bills for good.”

     Quotes attributable to Minister for Local Government Kristy McBain:

     “We’ve heard loud and clear from councils about the need to upgrade ageing facilities with more energy-efficient technology, to bring down their overheads and to lower their emissions – which is exactly why we launched the Community Energy Upgrades Fund.

     “We now have transparent grant programs that every postcode can apply for, we’ve delivered record funding increases for local roads, and we’ve brought local councils back to the table as a trusted delivery partner after a decade of neglect – with this program a real testament to what we can achieve for our communities when we work together.”

    Quotes attributable to Assistant Minister for Climate Change and Energy Josh Wilson:

     “The Albanese government is investing in energy efficiency measures for community facilities because it has a triple-whammy effect of cutting emissions, cutting running costs, and allowing those savings to be used for other local services.

     “These projects are helping to deliver a cheaper, cleaner energy future for Australians.”

    BACKGROUND: 

    STATE SUCCESSFUL COUNCILS TOTAL GRANT FUNDING
    NSW

    17

    Blue Mountains City Council, Campbelltown City Council, Coolamon Shire Council, Council of the City of Broken Hill, Cowra Shire Council, Dubbo Regional Council, Inner West Council, Junee Shire Council, Ku-Ring-Gai Council, Leeton Shire Council, Lockhart Shire Council, Mid-Western Regional Council, Northern Beaches Council, Parkes Shire Council, Port Macquarie Hastings Council, Wagga Wagga City Council, Wingecarribee Shire Council,

    $15.3 million
    VICTORIA

    15

    Ballarat City Council, Banyule City Council, Cardinia Shire Council, City of Maribyrnong, Colac Otway Shire, Corangamite Shire Council, Glen Eira City Council, Mansfield Shire Council, Melbourne City Council, Merri-Bek City Council, Mildura Rural City Council, Surf Coast Shire, Wyndham City Council, Yarra City Council, Yarra Ranges Shire Council

    $23.9 million
    QUEENSLAND 7
    Aurukun Shire Council, Brisbane City Council, Cassowary Coast Regional Council, Mackay Regional Council, Maranoa Regional Council, Murweh Shire Council, Paroo Shire Council
    $4.5 million
    SOUTH AUSTRALIA

    7

    Barunga West Council, City of West Torrens, Corporation of the City of Unley, District Council of Loxton Waikerie, Rural City of Murray Bridge, The Barossa Council, The Flinders Rangers Council,

    $2.3 million
    WESTERN AUSTRALIA

    5

    City of Armadale, City of Melville, City of Swan, Town of East Fremantle, Town of Port Hedland

    $2.8 million
    TASMANIA 5
    Brighton Council, Clarence City Council, Devonport City Council,  Huon Valley Council, Launceston City Council,
    $674,011
    NORTHERN TERRITORY 2
    Central Desert Regional Council, City Darwin
    $580,528

    Note: This media release was originally published by the Climate and Energy portfolio: Solar pools and libraries with first $50 million for bill busting upgrades (https://minister.dcceew.gov.au)

    MIL OSI News –

    February 20, 2025
  • MIL-OSI USA: Murphy: if Your Plan is to Destroy the Rule of Law, Kash Patel is the Perfect Person to Lead the FBI

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Connecticut – Chris Murphy
    [embedded content]
    WASHINGTON—U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) on Wednesday spoke on the U.S. Senate floor to sound the alarm on President Donald Trump’s blatant disregard for the rule of law. Murphy condemned Trump’s efforts to use the justice system as a tool to punish his critics and protect his allies, warning the confirmation of Kash Patel to lead the FBI would be a dangerous step toward dismantling American democracy.
    On the dangerous nomination of Kash Patel to lead the FBI, Murphy said: “If your plan is to destroy the rule of law and turn the Department of Justice into a political weapon that rewards loyalty and punishes dissent, then Kash Patel is the perfect person to lead the FBI, and that is likely exactly why he was chosen. […] He has an enemies list. He thinks that people who helped elect Joe Biden are criminals. […] Honestly, how on Earth are we going to let someone lead the world’s most important, most revered law enforcement agency, who is secretly in business with the Chinese Communist Party, who believes that the FBI organized the invasion of the Capitol, who runs a fake charity, who has a brand in order to make money off of his affiliation with Donald Trump?”
    Murphy called out Patel’s sham foundation: “While he believes this, he also knows that there’s a money-making opportunity in all of this. This is his logo: K$H. He’s a brand. He says all these things because he believes them, but also because it makes him a hero to the gullible conspiracy theorists inside MAGA. He uses them. He sells stuff to them: sweatshirts, T-shirts, lapel pins. K$H. Now if you buy this sweatshirt for $55, it says all net profits go to the Kash Foundation. But you know what we found out, unsurprisingly, is that in 2023, by selling all these sweatshirts and merch, the K$H Foundation had $1.3 million in revenues. Now it purports to support heroic whistleblowers with legal services and other support services. You know what percentage of that $1.3 million went to actual services? Less than 15%. Kash Patel pocketed almost all the money that he made from selling these T-shirts.”
    Murphy detailed how President Trump is brazenly using the Department of Justice to curry favor and punish critics: “Trump ordered the Department of Justice to cut a deal with the indicted mayor of New York City, Eric Adams. The deal was simple. If Adams pledged loyalty to Trump and agreed specifically to cooperate with Trump’s immigration raids in the city, Trump would look the other way regarding Adams’ corruption. The charges would be dropped, and Adams could keep stealing money as long as he was politically loyal to Trump. They didn’t hide this deal. Adams and a high-ranking Trump official literally went on TV to announce that they had formed an alliance based upon the release of charges in exchange for political loyalty.
    He added: “There is not a rule of law anymore. There is one set of law for people or entities who are loyal to Donald Trump, and there is one set of law for people who dare criticize him. That is not democracy. And if we don’t find a way, Republicans and Democrats, to come together to defend the rule of law, if we don’t say that what is happening today – deals being cut with corrupt politicians in exchange for their pledges of loyalty to Donald Trump – if we can’t speak with one voice about that kind of corruption, well, then our democracy is cooked.”
    He concluded: “The law loses all meaning when it becomes simply what the president, what the leader, on any given day decides. This is the worst possible moment to put a person like Kash Patel in charge of the FBI. It is heartbreaking to see so many of my Republican colleagues, many of whom I admire, put loyalty to Donald Trump ahead of loyalty to this country, and more specifically loyalty to that sacred principle, the rule of law. My prediction is that if you vote for Kash Patel, more than any other confirmation vote you make, you will come to regret this one to your grave.”
    A full transcript of his remarks can be found below:
    MURPHY: “Thank you, Mr. President. Mr. President, the idea that men and women citizens are bound by a common set of laws that are applied consistently and universally, regardless of one’s income or political power or political affiliation, it’s a fairly modern invention. Because for thousands of years, laws were simply what rulers used to impose and maintain power, to control people. Laws were applied or crimes were invented for the ruler’s critics, and laws were ignored or waived away for those in favor with the regime.
    “Now early Americans had watched the British kings apply laws selectively, both in Britain and in the colonies, and they sought – our founders sought – to create a nation where all men were equal in the face of the law, and [where] the law was applied uniformly and justly. 
    “That idea – equal justice, the law applies to everybody regardless of who you support politically or who you are aligned with politically – was in many ways the founders’ most vital check against tyranny. That’s the difference between a democracy made of equal citizens and an autocracy where the law is simply whatever the ruler decides. It is a foundational principle of American constitutional democracy. It is not something that we can take for granted. 
    “Now, I will admit, likely every president has made a decision or decisions that compromised that belief in the rule of law. Often those decisions were related to one of the maximalist powers that the president supposes. That’s the power of the pardon. I, for instance, did not agree with President Biden’s decision to issue pardons to his family members. I thought that was excessive. I thought that compromised the rule of law. 
    “But this President’s contempt for the rule of law, Donald Trump’s contempt for the rule of law, is unprecedented. What we are all watching right now is Donald Trump throwing away the idea that laws apply to everyone equally. And it is astonishing to watch so many of my Republican colleagues fall in line. Some of them may be on board for the destruction of the rule of law because they want the Trump family to rule forever, but many of them know that this is wrong, what is happening, and their silence is heartbreaking. 
    “Donald Trump issued a statement over the weekend: quote, ‘He who saves the country does not violate any law.’ That’s a quote attributed to one of the most notorious dictators of the last half millennium: Napoleon Bonaparte. It’s a stunning claim that Trump, not the law or Congress, decides what is legal and illegal. 
    “If he had said that in 2017, maybe we could just write it off as Trump being Trump, as just bluster trolling. But this time he is actually implementing a methodical campaign to seize control of the law and apply it differently depending on whether you support him or oppose him. 
    “Take, for example, what happened on Friday night. Trump ordered the Department of Justice to cut a deal with the indicted mayor of New York City, Eric Adams. The deal was simple. If Adams pledged loyalty to Trump and agreed specifically to cooperate with Trump’s immigration raids in the city, Trump would look the other way regarding Adams’ corruption. The charges would be dropped, and Adams could keep stealing money as long as he was politically loyal to Trump. 
    “They didn’t hide this deal. Adams and a high-ranking Trump official literally went on TV to announce that they had formed an alliance based upon the release of charges in exchange for political loyalty. But when Trump told the highest-ranking Justice Department employees in New York City to execute the corrupt deal, they wouldn’t. The top official resigned rather than take part in the corruption. So did the next in the chain of command. By the time that Trump found someone who would implement the deal, seven DOJ lawyers and four of Adams’ deputy mayors had resigned because what was happening in plain view was a fundamental challenge, a fundamental corruption to the rule of law, a rule of law that up until today Republicans and Democrats had both revered. 
    “Meanwhile, other parts of Trump’s team are engaging on the other side of the ledger, targeting and harassing – using the law – the President’s critics. Because that’s what happens in a nation without the rule of law. Law enforcement lets loyalists like Adams off the hook and is overzealous in targeting critics. 
    “Let me give you just one example of what is happening right now as we speak. Last month, Trump’s new FCC Chairman opened an investigation into a single radio station that had the audacity to simply file a news report about an ICE raid that was happening locally. Multiple other sources filed similar reports with similar footage, but only one investigation was opened, and you guessed it, it was against the radio station that was owned by a high-profile critic of Donald Trump, George Soros. 
    “So the game is clear. Like, we can see it. They’re not even hiding it. There is not a rule of law anymore. There is one set of law for people or entities who are loyal to Donald Trump, and there is one set of law for people who dare criticize him. That is not democracy.  And if we don’t find a way, Republicans and Democrats, to come together to defend the rule of law, if we don’t say that what is happening today – deals being cut with corrupt politicians in exchange for their pledges of loyalty to Donald Trump – if we can’t speak with one voice about that kind of corruption, well, then our democracy is cooked.
    “Which brings us to the pending nominee to lead the FBI, Kash Patel. If your plan is to destroy the rule of law and turn the Department of Justice into a political weapon that rewards loyalty and punishes dissent, then Kash Patel is the perfect person to lead the FBI, and that is likely exactly why he was chosen.
    “Listen, Kash Patel is a joke. Many of my Republican colleagues know this. He has spent the last four years taking the most extreme positions inside the world of MAGA in order to make money for himself. 
    “For instance, he says that he can provide proof beyond a reasonable doubt that the FBI was behind the January 6 invasion of this building. Let me say that again. The man that my Republican colleagues are about to vote to lead the FBI believes that there is irrefutable proof that the agency he is about to lead secretly organized the violent assault on the Capitol. That is bananas. My Republican colleagues know that. That is a lie. And we’re about to put this guy in charge of the FBI? An agency that he claims organized a secret plot to invade the Capitol?
    “He wrote a book called ‘Government Gangsters’ and at the end he added an Appendix entitled ‘Enemies List.’ Like, straight out of the McCarthy era. He has a list – he wrote it down – of people he believes are enemies of America. And, shocker, they’re all Democrats, or Republicans who dared speak out and criticize Donald Trump. 
    “You’re going to put at the head of the FBI – the agency that can arrest anyone they want, put people in jail – a man who thinks that anyone who disagrees with Donald Trump politically is an enemy of the United States. Patel has further suggested that anybody who administered the 2020 election could be subject to arrest. Why? Because he believes in his heart that the election was rigged, despite the fact that Joe Biden won by seven million votes – far, far more than Trump won by in 2024. So anybody who helped rig the 2020 election is, in his mind, a potential criminal. 
    “This is off-the-wall stuff. But of course it is, because while he believes this, he also knows that there’s a money-making opportunity in all of this. This is his logo: K$H. He’s a brand. He says all these things because he believes them, but also because it makes him a hero to the gullible conspiracy theorists inside MAGA. He uses them. He sells stuff to them: sweatshirts, T-shirts, lapel pins. K$H.
    “Now if you buy this sweatshirt for $55, it says all net profits go to the Kash Foundation. But you know what we found out, unsurprisingly, is that in 2023, by selling all these sweatshirts and merch, the K$H Foundation had $1.3 million in revenues. 
    “Now it purports to support heroic whistleblowers with legal services and other support services. You know what percentage of that $1.3 million went to actual services? Less than 15%. Kash Patel pocketed almost all the money that he made from selling these T-shirts. 
    “He even hocks a COVID vaccine reversal pill. Let me say that again: the incoming director of the FBI, in addition to selling T-shirts and pocketing most of the proceeds, also sells a vaccine reversal pill that is just pure snake oil. But if there are enough people loyal to Donald Trump to buy anything Trump’s lieutenants sell on the internet, then fair game. 
    “To top it all off, just recently after his confirmation hearing, we also found out that Kash Patel has been a fashion consultant to a shadowy holding company controlled, it seems, by members of the Chinese Communist Party. Honestly, how on Earth are we going to let someone lead the world’s most important, most revered law enforcement agency, who is secretly in business with the Chinese Communist Party, who believes that the FBI organized the invasion of the Capitol, who runs a fake charity, who has a brand in order to make money off of his affiliation with Donald Trump? He has an enemies list. He thinks that people who helped elect Joe Biden are criminals. 
    “This is a really dangerous moment. It’s a really dangerous moment. This deal that Donald Trump just cut with the mayor of New York, it’s a big deal. It’s a big deal. I admit that prior presidents have made decisions that compromise the rule of law. But we’ve never seen anything like this, so brazen and out in the open, that the mayor of New York and a Trump official would go on national TV to announce that they had made an arrangement in which Mayor Adams could continue his corruption as long as he was politically loyal to Donald Trump. 
    “They did that out in the open on TV because it’s a signal to everybody else out there that the law will be applied differently to you if you are loyal to the president and that the law will be zealously applied to you, maybe in excess of the letter of the law, if you are a critic of the president. That’s why they went on TV, to show the world the corruption, as a signal that things are different now, that the law is not the law, the law is what President Trump decides the law is. 
    “The law loses all meaning when it becomes simply what the president, what the leader, on any given day decides. This is the worst possible moment to put a person like Kash Patel in charge of the FBI. It is heartbreaking to see so many of my Republican colleagues, many of whom I admire, put loyalty to Donald Trump ahead of loyalty to this country, and more specifically loyalty to that sacred principle, the rule of law. My prediction is that if you vote for Kash Patel, more than any other confirmation vote you make, you will come to regret this one to your grave. I yield the floor.”

    MIL OSI USA News –

    February 20, 2025
  • MIL-OSI Australia: Building climate resilience into food systems in the Eastern Gangetic Plains

    Source: Australian Centre for International Agricultural Research

    The world’s highest concentration of rural poverty occurs in the Eastern Gangetic Plains of Bangladesh, India and Nepal – a region that is home to 450 million people.

    Livelihoods in this part of the world rely greatly on agriculture. Opportunities to work with smallholder farmers can lay the foundations for a more productive, sustainable and diversified agricultural economy. 

    Among the research-for-development professionals on the ground is a team working on the Rupantar project, an ACIAR-supported initiative led by Dr Tamara Jackson of the University of Adelaide.

    The Rupantar project operates at a whole-of-system level. It spans both social and farming practices and extends all the way through to policy settings, market opportunities and other agrifood system barriers holding smallholders back. It also builds on prior investments by ACIAR and the Australian Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade (DFAT).

    Included in this integrated approach are considerations for climate impacts.

    This concern saw 15 team members from the Rupantar project visit the University of Adelaide and regional South Australia and Victoria in October 2024. Funded as part of a DFAT Australia Awards Fellowship program, the study tour focused on climate resilience and adaptation.

    The Rupantar project

    ‘Rupantar’ has a common meaning in Bangla, Hindi and Nepali. It means change on a level so profound that it is transformative. Launched in 2021, the Rupantar project is identifying opportunities for inclusive and diversified food production innovation. 

    Given the partnership model typical of ACIAR projects, these opportunities need to be priorities for local communities. They also need to be sustainable and to fit with longer-term climate, nutrition and available water resource projections. 

    Achieving this level of integration requires working on multiple levels at the same time. There is ground-up innovation – from personal to organisational. Then there are high-level policies that work down and can make important change on the ground.

    Our hypothesis is that an integrated approach to livelihood change – coupled with inclusive and collaborative approaches – will result in more effective and sustainable development pathways.

    Dr Tamara Jackson, 
    University of Adelaide

    ‘So, our goal is to understand the processes and practices needed to diversify food production in ways that improve farm livelihoods and reduce inequity, production risk and unsustainable resource use.’

    The on-the-ground work with smallholders is implemented at sites in West Bengal (India), Rangpur (Bangladesh) and Koshi Province (Nepal). Implementation involves actioning ‘diversification pathways’ that were co-developed collaboratively with local partners. 

    Diversification pathways

    The aim of these pathways is twofold. The first is to test diversification options and select the most appropriate crop and livestock options that are priorities for local communities. These are then implemented within existing networks and are aligned with institutional settings.

    The second aim is to monitor the changes associated with the pathways, including long-term sustainability. 

    The project is also mindful that diversification can look very different to different members within households and can include off-farm income from seasonal male migration and greater reliance on women household members.

    In all, three types of diversified systems are being explored:

      •  plant-based production, including crops and horticulture
      •  livestock-based, including chickens, goats and dairy that are especially important to women’s income
      •  irrigation-constrained systems.

    ‘The project is working on strengthening what already works about a farming system in the Eastern Gangetic Plain and building on innovations from prior projects, such as ACIAR’s introduction of conservation agriculture cropping practices,’ said Dr Jackson.

    Long-running ACIAR initiatives in the Eastern Gangetic Plains worked with smallholder farmers across Bangladesh, India, and Nepal to introduce sustainable practices and innovations to intensify production.

    The project team has spent the first 2 years on the ground running baseline surveys and mapping villages to better understand the system. 

    Implementation started in 2023 once it became clear what would work best in different settings. The visit to Australia in 2024 provided project partners with opportunities to observe what diversified and climate-resilient Australian farms look like.

    Participants included Rupantar project partners from provincial government, cooperatives, farmer producer companies, NGOs, local university partners and the International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center. 

    Climate-smart innovation

    Dr Jay Cummins from International Agriculture for Development hosted the study tour group and developed the course that focused on addressing the climate realities in collaboration with the Rupantar project.

    The 20-day study tour was entitled ‘Supporting climate-smart, resilient food production networks in the Indo-Gangetic Plains’. 

    Key experts shared their experiences responding to climate change and on-farm visits examined how Australian agriculture builds climate resilience into its practices in different environmental and socioeconomic settings. 

    ‘Included were visits to more rainfed, dryland cropping systems in the Mallee and, in addition, to irrigated production systems in the Murray–Darling Basin,’ said Dr Cummins. 

    The Australia Awards program provided a valuable mechanism to connect the participants with a whole range of Australian organisations and professionals, which in turn will help build international networks and collaboration.

    Dr Jay Cummins 
    International Agriculture for Development 

    In the Eastern Gangetic Plain, food production can be heavily focused on wet season rice crops. In Australia, the visitors were able to explore dry season opportunities for diversified production of crops and livestock, including in mixed farming systems. They saw how Australian farmers manage risks around water scarcity and drought. At South Australian Riverland sites, discussions included irrigation and water management that present different diversification options.

    Participant perspectives

    Loxton farmer Brycen Rudiger (left)discusses the challenges of growing wheat in the Mallee region with Nepali participant Gautam Bhupal (right).

    Among the participants were Dr Deepa Roy from India, Ms Bimala Pokhrel from Nepal and Dr Mamunur Rashid from Bangladesh. 

    Dr Roy is an agricultural extension expert based at Uttar Banga Krishi Viswavidyalaya, India. She told ACIAR that smallholder farmers in the Eastern Gangetic Plains face numerous challenges that can lock them into poverty.

    These range from small and fragmented landholdings that make mechanisation difficult, to a lack of agronomic knowledge, limited agricultural support services, limited market access, financial constraints and climatic hazards.

    ‘Through the course several key insights and learnings emerged that may help our farmers in understanding and adopting climate resilient technologies,’ said Dr Roy.

    Key insights for participants included:

      •  assessing the carbon footprint of farming and taking action to reduce it
      •  introducing efficient soil moisture management strategies such as mulching
      •  adopting agronomic practices such as crop rotations and climate-resilient crops 
      •  building soil fertility
      •  advocating for improved climate forecasting
      •  adopting grower-led research and extension
      •  developing digital tools to monitor the adoption of innovation
      •  providing financial management training to smallholder farmers
      •  using podcasts and radio to provide farm advisory services. 

    Overall, Dr Roy said that the course equipped attendees with a holistic understanding of climate-smart practices. ‘It helped us not only to strengthen technical knowledge but also to develop critical soft skill and a deeper understanding of sustainable climate resilient farming.’

    It’s a point of view shared by Ms Pokhrel, who works with the Ministry of Industry Agriculture and Cooperatives in Koshi Province, Nepal. She said the course enriched efforts to both help farmers and policymakers with future planning. And it worked by enhancing both her professional and personal capacity.

    ‘What stood out was the extent that Australian farmers have already adopted technology to mitigate against climate change,’ said Ms Pokhrel. ‘This was particularly stark when it came to soil health and sustainable soil management practices. One of the key learnings is that we can tailor these practices for our context in the Koshi Province and, in that way, improve crop productivity by improving soil health.’

    Mr Rashid agreed. He is a research fellow at Hajee Mohammad Danesh Science and Technology University in Dinajpur, Bangladesh. He noted that while ACIAR is helping to introduce conservation agriculture to Bangladesh, South Australian farmers have already adopted these soil and soil-moisture conserving practices. 

    They are also growing more legume crops for soil health and fertiliser benefits, adopting risk-aversion strategies amid climate variability, and introducing carbon farming to adapt to climate change.

    Improved water management

    Both Ms Pokhrel and Mr Rashid were especially impressed by Australian water management systems in drought-prone landscapes. They think these kinds of Australian practices have a role to play at the project sites.

    While the cost and expertise required to adopt and maintain technologies such as drip irrigation systems used in Australia may be beyond the capacity of many smallholder farmers, the study tour has already inspired a new water conservation pilot project.

    The Bangladesh team will launch ‘Conserving soil moisture through mulching technique in chili farming’ in the Rupantar project areas, focusing on farmers in northern Bangladesh, who experience frequent floods and droughts.

    The Rupantar project delegation on tour in the northern Mallee of South Australia.

    ‘This initiative aims to use soil moisture and reduce irrigation in chilli farming, aided by Chameleon soil water sensors that can support decision-making for the farmers of the Rupantar project,’ said Mr Rashid.

    Ms Pokhrel was greatly impressed by the grower-centric research, development and extension infrastructure built around farmers’ needs in Australia. For her, this was typified by organisations such as the Grains Research and Development Corporation and the Almond Board.

    She thinks there are opportunities to ‘sensitise’ the different boards in Nepal to this approach. 

    Surprises for the project partners included the large size of farms given the small number of people working in agriculture. 

    What also surprised us is the rate of technology adoption by farmers, along with their dedication and the satisfaction they receive from the agricultural profession.

    Ms Bimala Pokhrel
    Nepal 

    ‘Mallee Sustainable Farming System was impressive and working with farmers groups and developing the communication material in local languages are the things that we can develop for our smallholder farmers too.’

    Finally, they praised the networking opportunities provided by the course, including with farmers, and opportunities to understand the people, country and culture. 

    ACIAR Project WAC/2020/148: ‘Transforming smallholder food systems in the Eastern Gangetic Plain’

    MIL OSI News –

    February 20, 2025
  • MIL-OSI Australia: Transcript-Press conference, Frankston

    Source: Australian Ministers for Regional Development

    JODIE BELYEA: Good morning. Jodie Belyea, the Federal MP for Dunkley here, with the Minister for Infrastructure and Transport, the Honourable Catherine King. And we’re here today to announce a $923,000 funding initiative into the Tower Hill Road precinct in Frankston South. Each day, this one kilometre stretch of road sees over 2000 students from Overport Primary and Frankston High School come to this area to and from school. It’s very congested, sometimes unsafe, so this funding is going to ensure that people can walk, ride and drive through this area in a safe and orderly manner so that everyone gets to school easily.

    And now I’m going to hand over to the Minister to talk a bit more about the whole initiative.

    CATHERINE KING: Yeah, thanks very much, Jodie. It’s great to be here and particularly also with Councillor Brad Hill as well – it’s part of his ward. And really this project that we’re funding here, and I’ll talk a little bit about the program all up, but just over $923,000 really is the Active Transport Fund. It’s been out for competitive expressions of interest, basically expressions of application. And basically what we’ve seen with a project like this is exactly what we’ve been looking for, trying to make sure we’re making our transport to schools safer, trying to make sure that we’ve got people who are in cars can actually slow down around schools, and also really utilise the amenities in your neighbourhoods much better. So this is a great example. It’s part of $21 million we’re announcing today across the state of Victoria, out of the Active Transport Fund.

    Further south there’s a project in Phillip Island, some $980,000 there for Bass Coast Shire, particularly for Cowes. And that will really help with the Regional Precincts and Partnerships Program there– we’ve done down the Esplanade, again, making it more walkable, less people, less reliant on cars. Ararat Rural Council, there’s some funding going to them there for the Ararat on the move strategy, something that that council has been working on for a while.

    This program was very highly sought after, so I do want to particularly commend the Frankston City Council and the officers, but also Brad, because he almost did a little dance before when we saw him about this project. This has been on your list for a while, Brad. Really commend the council officers. These are really important ways in which we’re actually making the neighbourhood safer, but we’re also giving people back your amenity so that you can move around. You can use your bike, you can push your pusher. If you’ve got a walker, you can walk safely in your neighbourhoods, and you don’t have to rely on your car so much. And that’s really what the Active Transport Fund is all about.

    BRAD HILL: Fantastic. Thank you. Brad Hill, local ward councillor, and I am really, happy this project now gets some traction. And, you know, it ticks all the boxes. It links the sporting precinct. It links our community centre, it links the primary school, it links Frankston High School. It links the surrounding streets right up to the end of where Moorooduc Road is, where the existing path network is. So it provides safe connectivity for all those kids walking, riding. But it’s not just about bikes. It’s not just about kids and community centres and sporting clubs. It’s also about mothers with prams. It’s also about people who can’t walk properly, uh, people who have to ride a disability scooter. So it just ticks so many boxes. And it’s clear to me this project was selected on its merits for all those reasons. So I’m really, really happy. And I thank the Minister today for the announcement.

    CATHERINE KING: You are welcome.

    JOURNALIST: Councillor, how long has this project been in the works?

    BRAD HILL: A few years now. The council has a strategy for linking together our disparate network of shared user paths. We’ve been very clear what the strategy is, and yeah, it’s a few years now, and there’s a few more to go.

    JOURNALIST: Jodie, how do you think your community is going to respond to this?

    JODIE BELYEA: They’ll be thrilled. I have lived and worked in this area for some time, and I’m a local resident in this ward, so I know how congested this gets, having seen and lived in this area. So they’ll be thrilled. Safety first. And active transport.

    BRAD HILL: Exactly. It’ll encourage people to leave their homes more than perhaps they were before. That’s what I think. Yeah.

    MIL OSI News –

    February 20, 2025
  • MIL-OSI China: Chinese FM calls for true multilateralism, more equitable global governance system

    Source: China State Council Information Office

    Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi, also a member of the Political Bureau of the Communist Party of China Central Committee, chairs the UN Security Council’s high-level meeting on “Practicing multilateralism, reforming and improving global governance” at the UN headquarters in New York on Feb. 18, 2025. [Photo/Xinhua]

    Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi on Tuesday called for reinvigorating true multilateralism and speeding up the efforts to build a more just and equitable global governance system.

    Wang, also a member of the Political Bureau of the Communist Party of China Central Committee, made the remarks in his speech at the UN Security Council’s high-level meeting on “Practicing multilateralism, reforming and improving global governance.”

    The year 2025 marks the 80th anniversary of the founding of the United Nations, Wang said.

    The 80 years of history is enlightenment enough. In the face of the turbulent and changing international landscape, the UN-centered international system provides important safeguards for the cause of human progress, and the vision of multilateralism with coordination and cooperation as its cornerstone is the best solution to global issues, he said.

    In the face of the historical trend of shared future, no country can prosper alone, and mutually beneficial cooperation is the right choice. In the face of the profoundly changing international landscape, the Global South should not only achieve the historic feat of moving toward modernization together, but also remain at the forefront of improving the global governance system, he added.

    “In a time of intensifying turbulence and transformation, we need, more than ever, to remind ourselves of the founding mission of the United Nations, reinvigorate true multilateralism, and speed up the efforts to build a more just and equitable global governance system,” said Wang.

    In this connection, Wang made a four-point proposal:

    First, upholding sovereign equality. In advancing global governance, all countries have the right to participate as equals, make decisions as equals, and benefit as equals. There is a need to respect the development paths chosen independently by people of all countries, uphold the principle of non-interference in internal affairs, and not impose one’s will upon others.

    Second, upholding fairness and justice. A critical part of global governance is to ensure that justice prevails. Under the new circumstances, international affairs should no longer be monopolized by a small number of countries. The reform of the Security Council should continue to emphasize democratic consultation, increase the representation and say of developing countries, especially African countries, and effectively redress historical injustice.

    Third, upholding solidarity and coordination. Promoting international cooperation is an important purpose of the UN Charter, and a sure path toward improving global governance. Countries should commit themselves to the principle of extensive consultation and joint contribution for shared benefit, replace confrontation with coordination, prevent lose-lose through win-win cooperation, and break down small circles with greater solidarity.

    Fourth, upholding an action-oriented approach. Global governance has to be improved, not through words but through action. In the face of protracted wars, loss of innocent lives, and challenges brought by new technologies, UN agencies should seek solutions rather than chant slogans.

    On the situation in the Middle East, Wang said it is vital to uphold the two-state solution, press for a comprehensive, just and lasting settlement of the Palestinian question, and bring lasting peace and security to the Middle East.

    On the Ukraine crisis, the foreign minister said that since the start of the crisis, China has been calling for a political settlement and pushing for peace talks, and China supports all efforts conducive to peace.

    Noting that China has remained steadfast in making its contribution to global governance, Wang said a community with a shared future for mankind, the Global Development Initiative, the Global Security Initiative and the Global Civilization Initiative represent China’s proposal for the reform and improvement of global governance.

    Stressing that China pursues peace and security, advances common development, champions openness and inclusiveness, and upholds multilateral cooperation in global governance, Wang said that China, as a founding member of the United Nations, takes the lead in practicing true multilateralism.

    China is a member of almost all universal intergovernmental organizations and a party to over 600 international conventions and their amendments, he said, adding China supports the United Nations in playing a central role in international affairs and makes continuous contribution to the UN cause.

    With the United Nations about to enter its next 80 years, China stands ready to work with all parties to draw wisdom from history, open a new era for multilateralism, and make global governance more fair and equitable, Wang said.

    MIL OSI China News –

    February 20, 2025
  • MIL-Evening Report: With Whyalla steelworks forced into administration, Australia has crucial decisions to make on the future of its steel industry

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Geoffrey Brooks, Professor of Engineering, Swinburne University of Technology

    Alex Cimbal/Shutterstock

    Whyalla is a proud steel town. The steelworks physically dominates the townscape, and most jobs in the town are either directly at the steelworks or heavily reliant on it.

    In recent months, however, the steelworks have lurched from one setback to another, from serious technical problems that forced shutdowns to rising debts owed to suppliers and the state government.

    On Wednesday, the South Australian government forced Whyalla steelworks into administration. To do so, it quickly passed amendments to the Whyalla Steelworks Act. Current owner GFG Alliance will no longer operate the site.

    For me, someone intimately involved in the steel industry, the news that the steelworks has been put into administration is not a shock. This has been coming for some time.

    On Thursday, Prime Minister Anthony Albanese unveiled a A$2.4 billion rescue package.

    A portion of this money will be used to address immediate debt issues and keep the plant afloat. But $1.9 billion has been earmarked for major, long-term infrastructure upgrades under a new owner.

    The next steps will be crucial if this vital component of Australia’s manufacturing infrastructure – and heart of the town of Whyalla – is to survive.

    How we got here

    Whyalla’s steelworks was founded by BHP and opened in 1941, originally concentrating on ship building. It later transitioned to producing structural and rail products during the 1970s and ‘80s.

    After the steel division was spun out of BHP in 2000, the steelworks operated under the OneSteel banner, which was renamed Arrium in 2012.

    The plant has been in decline for a couple of decades. Its products have had difficulty competing against overseas imports and there have been issues with the scale of production and costs.

    GFG Alliance took over Whyalla’s struggling steelworks in 2017, to great fanfare and optimism.

    GFG is led by Indian-born British billionaire Sanjeev Gupta, who owns steel plants across the world. Until recently, he was a relatively unknown figure in the steel industry, but rapidly built up a steel empire after buying his first major steel plant in the UK in 2013.

    Gupta’s business practices have recently drawn close scrutiny from regulators in the UK, particularly the financing arrangements for several of his businesses. GFG’s largest lender, Greensill Capital, collapsed in 2021.

    A failure to turn things around

    Upon purchasing the plant in 2017, GFG promised to invest in upgrading the equipment and move the steelworks towards “green” steel production.

    But these investments never materialised, and the operations have continued to lose money. There have also been significant operational issues over the past year, resulting in months of no production.

    These challenges have been compounded by what appears to be poor management of key equipment in the plant, particularly the blast furnace.

    The steelworks has been beset by technical issues over the past year.
    Adwo/Shutterstock

    Keeping blast furnaces running smoothly is one most important technical issues facing any steelmaker.

    A string of recent breakdowns, resulting in major production shutdowns in 2024, does not reflect well on GFG.

    On Wednesday, SA Premier Peter Malinauskas said the state government had been forced to step in, given debts of more than $300 million owed by GFG and reports workers weren’t being paid.

    Still a valuable asset

    The town of Whyalla will be watching the outcome of the state and federal governments’ rescue plan with bated breath. If it’s not to be GFG, who should be trusted with taking over and running the steelworks?

    In such times, it is worth pointing out some of the key advantages of the plant that could make it an attractive asset to prospective owners.

    Whyalla has good port facilities, a major iron ore deposit (Middleback Range) nearby, and abundant renewable energy.

    It also has an experienced and trained workforce, with established product lines that are in demand (particularly rail steel).

    Bluescope has been touted as one potential new owner. But there is also likely to be foreign interest, given the potential for linking steel production to renewable energy in Whyalla.

    Taking Whyalla into the future

    The current scale of the Whyalla steelworks, about 1.2 million tonnes of raw steel per year, is simply too small to be competitive. It is operating in a market where plants producing more than 3 million tonnes per year are common.

    The plant’s product range could be broadened and raised in value by investing in key steelmaking equipment.

    The general shift towards green production routes also presents opportunities for Whyalla. The local abundance of solar energy is likely to be a significant advantage for the plant’s future.

    However, converting from the plant from its current coal-based technology to non-coal based technology (such as hydrogen ironmaking) will take significant investment and technical skill.

    Whyalla is close to iron ore deposits in the Middleback Range.
    Adwo/Shutterstock

    Opportunities for Australia

    Could Australia simply let the steelworks shut down and import its rail steel instead?

    That would draw parallels with Australia’s car manufacturing sector, which the government ultimately allowed to collapse. But I believe this position is unlikely to attract much support.

    For one, there would be an enormous human cost to the people of Whyalla. The town of 20,000 people would be economically devastated by the plant’s closure.

    There’s also a fear such a move would further weaken Australia’s ability to generate long-term wealth. Historically, the steel industry has been an important generator of long-term jobs and national wealth.

    And it would certainly be demoralising for our manufacturing sector. Australia has plentiful ore, energy and a huge railway network. We should be able to run a sustainable steel plant specialising in rail and structural steel.

    All these challenges need investment and strong technical leadership. The decisions taken by the state and federal government in the next few months will be vital for Whyalla’s future.

    Geoffrey Brooks receives funding from the HILT CRC, ARC Steel Innovation Hub and Victorian Hydrogen Hub for fundamental research into steelmaking. The Liberty GFG company and other steel companies financially invest into these research bodies and directly support some of his steelmaking research. He is also the Chairman of the Association of Iron and Steel Technology Australian and New Zealand Chapter. This organisation organises conferences and seminars on steelmaking topics. His activity in this Chapter is on a voluntary basis.

    – ref. With Whyalla steelworks forced into administration, Australia has crucial decisions to make on the future of its steel industry – https://theconversation.com/with-whyalla-steelworks-forced-into-administration-australia-has-crucial-decisions-to-make-on-the-future-of-its-steel-industry-250317

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

    February 20, 2025
  • MIL-Evening Report: Two in five scientists in our survey reported harassment and intimidation. Often, the perpetrators are inside the institution

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Robert Hales, Director, Centre for Sustainable Enterprise, Griffith University

    Roman Samborskyi/Shutterstock

    The goal of science is to uncover truths and create new knowledge. But this is not always welcome. Increasingly, scientific findings are being attacked or downplayed. And scientists themselves face intimidation or harassment.

    In our global study of more than 2,000 scientists across six areas of science, two-fifths (41%) of respondents had, as a result of their work, been harassed or intimidated at least once over a five-year period.

    Intimidation efforts included online abuse, physical threats, and threats to budgets or employment. Harassment, while personal, could be meted out by superiors, colleagues or outsiders. Some scientists felt their leaders had thrown them under the bus to protect the institution’s reputation.

    Who’s doing the intimidation? Strikingly, a majority of cases of intimidation and harassment actually came from inside the institution for most fields. That is, it was perpetrated by senior colleagues or managers. But for climate scientists, most intimidation efforts came from outside.

    Intimidation of scientists doesn’t happen in a vacuum. In recent years, there has been a rise in populist leaders who pour scorn on “elites” and evidence. Scientific issues are increasingly politicised. Disinformation is rampant. This atmosphere adds to the pressure faced by scientists, especially those working in politically sensitive areas such as climate science or COVID.

    Harassment and intimidation can silence or isolate scientists.
    Hayk_Shalunts/Shutterstock

    What did we find?

    We used an online database of scientists to find and contact experts publishing in six fields: climate science, medical health, humanities and social science, food and plant science, astronomy, and other STEM areas.

    More than 2,000 responded to our survey on whether they had experienced various types of intimidation or harassment. We asked respondents for more detail on the perpetrators, what triggered the incident, and what effect it had on them.

    Many respondents had a clear view as to what the intimidation or harassment was meant to do. The motivations of perpetrators varied greatly. But the most common reasons were to damage their reputation, to stop them from publishing certain types of research, or to “put me in my place”.

    Specific fields of science were more prone to harassment and intimidation – in particular climate science, and humanities and social science.

    Among those scientists who had been intimidated, climate scientists reported online abuse three times more often than astronomers. Climate science is politically charged, because climate change is clearly linked to pollution from some of the world’s largest industries – oil, gas and coal. Astronomy is not. Half of the climate scientist respondents experiencing intimidation saw the bad behaviour as a way to discourage them from undertaking specific research and speaking about it.

    Researchers from humanities and social sciences faced similar levels of online abuse to climate scientists.

    When it came to personal harassment, there was a clear gender dimension. Among those who reported experiencing harassment, female scientists were more than four times more likely to report “unwelcome or inappropriate behaviour of a sexual nature” than their male counterparts. Women were affected almost twice as much as men by non-sexual forms of personal harassment.

    Our findings follow earlier research finding similar rates of intimidation. For instance, a 2021 survey of 321 scientists working on COVID-19 found 15% had received death threats and 22% received threats of sexual violence.

    Intimidation and harassment are damaging

    The consequences of intimidation are profound and far-reaching. Many scientists told us the experience had caused lasting damage, whether to wellbeing, career prospects or research activities.

    More than 40% of those affected said their career prospects had worsened following incidents of harassment. Just over a third (34%) reported a decline in their desire to work in science. Scientists who experienced intimidation often cut back their collaboration with colleagues (35%), leaving them more isolated.

    Many of our respondents described flow-on effects such as decreased access to funding (35% of respondents) and less public communication from their institution about their work (23%).

    Scientists targeted with multiple types of harassment reported very damaging effects, from difficulty finding their next job to poor mental health.

    Intimidation slows progress

    Intimidation and harassment have a chilling effect on science. This, in turn, could hinder progress on crucial issues such as climate change, public health and technological advancements.

    The disproportionate impact on women and researchers in politically sensitive fields threatens to undermine diversity and inclusivity in science.

    Without targeted interventions, women in science may continue to suffer disproportionate levels of harassment and intimidation. This will have long-term implications for gender diversity in scientific leadership and the direction of research in various fields.

    In the United States, the Trump administration’s withdrawals from the Paris climate agreement and the World Health Organization are likely to further embolden anti-science movements. Many American scientific institutions are engaged in anticipatory obedience of the Trump administration’s demands that diversity and anti-discrimination programs be abolished, or climate change stop being mentioned. Many even go beyond what is explicitly sought.

    Female scientists are targeted in different ways.
    PeopleImages.com – Yuri A/Shutterstock

    What can be done?

    Science and academia is often seen as a bastion of free inquiry and open discussion. One of our most surprising findings was how common intimidation was within scientific institutions.

    The key to beating intimidation is organisational support and clear strategies, not obedience. These include:

    • genuine commitment to institutional policies protecting scientists from both internal and external intimidation

    • formal, well-resourced support systems for researchers facing harassment or pressure (not the HR office)

    • programs to increase public understanding of the scientific process to build trust and resilience to misinformation

    • boosting international collaboration between scientists and policymakers to ensure resilience against country-specific efforts to undermine science

    • educating the public on the importance of scientific independence and of fostering respectful dialogue around contentious topics.

    As populist movements gain traction in many countries, scientists working on controversial issues will face heightened scrutiny – and potentially more intimidation.

    Climate science is likely to remain a particularly contested field. As the damage wrought by climate change becomes more and more apparent, it will get even more contentious.

    Over the last few centuries, science has produced breakthroughs in many areas. But the integrity of science is not guaranteed. Harassment and intimidation from both inside and outside institutions has a very real effect on scientists.

    The future of evidence-based decision-making and ability to tackle global challenges depends on fostering an environment where scientists can work free from fear and undue pressure.

    Robert Hale receives funding from the Australian Research Council.

    David Peetz undertook research over many years with occasional financial support from governments from both sides of politics, employers and unions. He has been and is involved in several Australian Research Council-funded projects, including this one.

    Ian Lowe was president of the Australian Conservation Foundation from 2004 to 2014.

    Carolyn Troup and Georgina Murray 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. Two in five scientists in our survey reported harassment and intimidation. Often, the perpetrators are inside the institution – https://theconversation.com/two-in-five-scientists-in-our-survey-reported-harassment-and-intimidation-often-the-perpetrators-are-inside-the-institution-248013

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

    February 20, 2025
  • MIL-OSI USA: Statement by Performing the Duties of Deputy Secretary of Defense Robert G. Salesses

    Source: United States Department of Defense

    President Trump’s charge to the Department is clear: to achieve peace through strength. We will do this by putting forward budgets that revive the warrior ethos, rebuild our military, and reestablish deterrence.

    To achieve our mandate from President Trump, we are guided by his priorities including Securing our borders, building the Iron Dome for America, and ending radical and wasteful government DEI programs and preferencing.

    Accordingly, Secretary Hegseth has directed a review to identify offsets from the Biden Administration’s FY26 budget that could be realigned from low-impact and low-priority Biden-legacy programs to align with President Trump’s America First priorities for our national defense.

    The Department will develop a list of potential offsets that could be used to fund these priorities, as well as to refocus the Department on its core mission of deterring and winning wars. The offsets are targeted at 8% of the Biden Administration’s FY26 budget, totaling around $50 billion, which will then be spent on programs aligned with President Trump’s priorities.

    The Department of Defense is conducting this review to ensure we are making the best use of the taxpayers’ dollars in a way that delivers on the President Trump’s defense priorities efficiently and effectively.

    Through our budgets, the Department of Defense will once again resource warfighting and cease unnecessary spending that set our military back under the previous administration, including through so-called “climate change” and other woke programs, as well as excessive bureaucracy. The time for preparation is over – we must act swiftly to deter current and impending threats and make the best use of taxpayers’ dollars in doing so.

    MIL OSI USA News –

    February 20, 2025
  • MIL-OSI USA: On Senate Floor, Shaheen Blasts Trump Administration’s Reckless Firing of FAA Personnel Critical to Aviation Safety

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for New Hampshire Jeanne Shaheen

    (Washington, DC) – On the Senate floor, U.S. Senator Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH) raised concerns for public safety after the Trump Administration recklessly decided to fire hundreds of Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) personnel critical to aviation safety. This week’s decision will further strain the system at a time when incidents and near-misses are at a high. Last week, Shaheen and U.S. Senator John Hoeven (R-ND) sent a bipartisan letter calling on Acting Administrator of the FAA, Chris Rochelau to urgently work with Congress to address air safety workforce staffing shortages. You can watch her remarks in full here. 

    Key Quotes:

    • “Many towers and facilities are operating buildings and on equipment that’s five, ten, even fifteen years old and when something goes wrong, they need to know there’s someone on call to fix things because lives literally depend on it. Americans need to know that the skies are secure and that their safety is a top priority.” 
    • “I think we should do everything we can to make government run efficiently and effectively. But indiscriminately freezing hiring across the board [and] pushing out thousands of civil servants makes that problem worse, not better.” 
    • “I don’t think people elected Donald Trump to dismantle this country’s air traffic control system. I think they elected him because they wanted to see inflation go down, they wanted to see their grocery prices reduced, they wanted to see help with rental costs, mortgage rates, with energy costs, and what have we seen in the weeks since Donald Trump got inaugurated? No effort to address any of those things.” 

    Full Remarks as Delivered:

    I come to the floor today to call attention to the Trump Administration’s unconscionable disregard for air safety. 

    Last month, here in Washington, we saw the deadliest commercial aviation event on U.S. soil in over 23 years.

    And while this loss of life was horrifying, it was unfortunately not unimaginable. 

    In recent years, near misses at airports across the country have increased, and the incident at DCA illustrated just how quickly these dangerous situations can take a turn for the worst. 

    Several times last year, runway incidents were narrowly avoided, due in no small part to the heroic actions of certified professional air traffic controllers who staff our towers. 

    These controllers are hardworking Americans.

    They often log six-day weeks and ten-hour days—and that’s on a good week.

    So even before this week’s misguided and, frankly, stupid—I mean, I have to say, I think it’s a stupid decision to lay off hundreds of FAA workers and air traffic controllers who have been overworked and understaffed.

    And this is not a new problem.

    We’ve known about it for years. 

    For years in Congress, we’ve been sounding the alarm about the need to invest in our air traffic control workforce.  

    In last year’s FAA reauthorization bill, we worked in a bipartisan fashion to address this issue—to support our air traffic control workforce so they can do their vital, often lifesaving jobs effectively.

    By partnering with the National Air Traffic Control Union and the FAA, we successfully adopted a new staffing method, model, staffing model, in the reauthorization bill, and they’ve been making good progress, but of course we have more work to do.

    It’s important to acknowledge that any response to the tragedy at Reagan National Airport must include a commitment to reinforce all parts of our aviation safety workforce. 

    Controllers would be the first ones to tell you that they don’t work in a vacuum. 

    The equipment they use is maintained by hundreds of dedicated support personnel who go through years of highly specialized training.

    Many towers and facilities operate in buildings and on equipment that’s five, ten, even fifteen years old, and when something goes wrong, they need to know that there’s someone on call to fix things because lives literally depend on it.

    Americans need to know that the skies are secure and that their safety is a top priority. 

    Sadly, I can’t say that the actions we’re seeing from this administration does any of that. 

    Secretary Duffy said he wants to surge air traffic controller hiring.  
     

    I agree with him on that. 

    We can and we should hire more air traffic controllers, but not at the expense of the rest of FAA’s workforce. 

    We can hire any number of air traffic controllers tomorrow, but without the dedicated support staff that make their work possible, it wouldn’t matter. 

    So how is the Administration responding to the American people’s distress over increasingly frequent close calls and, indeed crashes, sadly, like the one we saw in Toronto this week?

    Well, over the weekend this administration fired nearly 400 FAA employees, some of them in my state of New Hampshire. 

    We heard an outpouring of concern over the weekend from controllers, pilots, airlines and passengers who want to know that they’re going to be safe when they fly.

    I’m sure the Administration must be hearing this too.

    But when asked about the impact of the irresponsible and reckless effort, this is what Secretary Duffy had to say, he said and I quote, “zero critical safety personnel were let go.”

    Well, so I’m not sure I understand this. 

    We’re telling the American people that if a communications system goes down while the plane is approaching the runway, the person who knows how to get it back up and running isn’t critical?

    That if the power goes out at an en-route facility while 747s are flying overhead, the eighteen fired maintenance personnel who know how to turn the lights back on won’t be necessary?

    That the staffers who develop innovative safety and flight procedures every time there is an incident, to make sure your plane takes off on time and arrives safely, are fair game to be fired?

    Because we just lost 13 of them. 

    And to anyone who’s worried about our national security, good news: According to this administration, the FAA employees working on a classified radar system to detect cruise missiles, aren’t all that important either, and they also were fired.

    So I’m going to say that again because this administration thinks that the civil servants at the FAA’s National Airspace System Defense Program are apparently not critical to our safety. 

    None of this makes me or my constituents sleep better at night, but I bet you it makes our enemies happy. 

    The Administration has tried to defend this by saying that everyone who [they] fired was probationary.

    They’d like you to believe that these are all brand-new employees. 

    Sort of the philosophy that the last one in, is the first one out. 

    But that’s not how the system works, and it sure as heck isn’t how you keep Americans safe. 

    In fact, employees who were promoted based on stellar performance within the last year, many of them who have been with the FAA for ten or fifteen years, are also labeled as probationary employees when they start their new positions.

    So in fact, the Administration just fired some of the people with the most experience, not the least.

    And this speaks to what is a bigger problem. 

    Time and again, we’re seeing this happen with so-called “government efficiency,” in quotes, experts. 

    Listen, like most of us in this chamber, I think we should do everything we can to make government run efficiently and effectively, but indiscriminately freezing hiring across the board, pushing out thousands of civil servants, makes that problem worse, not better. 

    Last week, hundreds of employees at the National Nuclear Security Administration were fired without warning. 

    This week, the Administration is scrambling to try and hire most of them back because they didn’t realize they oversee our nuclear stockpile.

    And the Department of Energy fired more than a thousand employees, including three-quarters of the State and Community Energy Program’s office.

    Now, I don’t know if the people who are making these decisions in the Administration even know what that office does.

    But I can tell you that in New Hampshire we depend on them because they help keep weatherization programs up and running, they support emergency operations in the wake of disasters.

    And with folks in New Hampshire dealing with some of the highest home heating costs, who are worried about how they’re going to keep themselves warm this winter, and states around the country still recovering from floods and fires and winter storms, I can’t imagine why anybody would think that it’s a good idea to get rid of the people who are helping make sure those programs operate. 

    And then on Monday, we found out that dozens of USDA employees, so the Department of Agriculture, who have been working to prevent bird flu, were fired. 

    And then the White House realized what they had done, they panicked and they tried to bring them back. 

    Now that’s on top of all of the people around the globe who have been monitoring the bird flu potential epidemic—who have already been fired with the closure of the U.S. Agency for International Development.

    And just this afternoon, we heard that nearly 500 employees at the National Institute of Standards and Technology would be fired, including almost 60 percent of the CHIPS office.

    So the effort that we stood up, that this Congress stood up, to try and make sure we could compete with China, with Taiwan in the production of semiconductors, which are included in almost everything we use from our cell phones to our refrigerators to our cars, 60 percent of those people are now gone.

    So who’s going to provide that effort that we need in order to compete with China? 

    These are the staff that make sure our high-tech semiconductor manufacturing industry stays competitive. 

    Example after example shows that the firings that Elon Musk has taken credit for have not been thought through. 

    Either he’s doing it deliberately in an effort to undermine the United States or he’s doing it because he’s so ignorant he has no idea what any of these people do or what their operations do.

    Either way, it’s inexcusable. 

    I heard from a constituent this week who works, who worked, past tense, for the New Hampshire Fish and Game Department for 24 years, and she just took a job as a wildlife biologist with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service last year. 

    Her job focused on implementing the Pittman-Robinson Wildlife Restoration Act. 

    As my colleagues on both sides of the aisle know, this involves conserving bird and wildlife habitat, hunter education and shooting ranges. 

    Its funds come not from taxpayer dollars, but from excise taxes on firearms, ammunition and archery equipment.

    And yet, her job was terminated under the guise of government efficiency. 

    She has a mortgage; she has kids in college who need health care coverage, but her main ask to me was to help put a stop to these firings and to simply help her get her job back because like most of our public servants, she cares about the mission of her work.

    Over and over, we’re seeing this administration take out irresponsible, reckless initiatives with devastating consequences for critical positions without taking a second to think through or learn about what those positions do. 

    And when things inevitably break as a result, they don’t own up to their mistakes. 

    Instead, they try to convince you that keeping the lights on at control towers or inspecting airplane engines, making plans to manage some of the busiest airspace in the country really isn’t critical to your safety. 

    Well, I don’t believe that and I don’t think you should either. 

    For the sake of the American people, we can and we must do better.

    I don’t think people elected Donald Trump to dismantle this country’s air traffic control system. 

    I think they elected him because they wanted to see inflation go down, they wanted to see their grocery prices reduced, they wanted to see help with rental costs, with mortgage rates, with energy costs and what have we seen in the weeks since Donald Trump got inaugurated?

    No effort to address any of those things. 

    All we’ve seen is an effort at retribution against his perceived enemies, at firing and undermining of services and programs within the government to serve the American people. 

    For the sake of our citizens, we must do better. 

    I’m calling on this administration to right this wrong as quickly as possible, before it’s too late. 

    I yield the floor.

    MIL OSI USA News –

    February 20, 2025
  • MIL-OSI Australia: Helping charities and strengthening communities

    Source: Australian Treasurer

    The Albanese Government is helping Australia’s 62,000 charities by ensuring that states and territories collaborate effectively with the federal government – reducing unnecessary paperwork.

    We’re taking the practical step of including representatives from all states and territories on the advisory board of the Australian Charities and Not‑for‑profits Commission (ACNC). This will include the greatest representation from state and territory governments since the Board’s inception in 2013.

    This move builds on the substantial body of work that Labor has done to support charities, and aligns with recommendations in the Productivity Commission’s landmark Future Foundations for Giving report.

    These strategic appointments aim to ensure the diverse interests of our communities are effectively represented, fostering a consistent national approach to regulatory and policy matters within the charity sector.

    The ACNC Advisory Board supports the Commissioner by offering informed advice on matters affecting charities and strengthening the governance and effectiveness of the sector.

    The new ex‑officio appointments will provide an additional layer of regulatory expertise, complementing the sector‑based members and enhancing the Board’s role as a forum supporting charity law, policy and regulatory reform.

    The new appointments to the ACNC Advisory Board are:

    • New South Wales – Ms Natasha Mann, Commissioner of Fair Trading and Deputy Secretary of Fair Trading and Regulatory Services, Department of Customer Service
    • Northern Territory – Ms Amanda Nobbs‑Carcuro, Executive Director, Industry Capability, Licensing and Migration, Department of Trade, Business and Asian Relations
    • Queensland – Ms Victoria Thompson, Deputy Director‑General, Harm Prevention and Regulation, Department of Justice
    • South Australia – Mr Brett Humphrey, Commissioner for Consumer and Business Services
    • Tasmania – Ms Robyn Pearce, Executive Director of Consumer, Building and Occupational Services, Department of Justice
    • Victoria – Ms Nicole Rich, Director of Consumer Affairs Victoria, Executive Director of Regulatory Services, Department of Government Services
    • Western Australia – Ms Patricia Blake, Commissioner for Consumer Protection, Department of Energy, Mines, Industry, Regulation and Safety

    The ACT is already represented on the board, with David Crosbie, CEO of the Community Council for Australia, reappointed in July 2023.

    This ensures that all states and territories will be represented in the national conversation about helping charities and reconnecting communities.

    These appointments reinforce the Government’s commitment to fostering a robust, well‑regulated charity sector that serves communities across Australia. It builds on our achievements to date. Since coming into government, the Australian Government has:

    • Improved the deductible gift recipient system by creating a new pathway for community foundations to access tax deductible status.
    • Streamlined the deductible gift recipient application process for environmental organisations, harm prevention charities, cultural organisations, and overseas aid organisations.
    • Introduced legislation to give the ACNC greater discretion to comment publicly on harmful breaches of compliance, to better support public trust and confidence in the regulatory framework.
    • Appointed a widely respected charity sector expert, Sue Woodward, to head the ACNC.
    • Refreshed the ACNC Advisory Board to be more representative of the charity sector, bringing First Nations, CALD and youth voices onto the Board.
    • Sent a clear signal that charitable advocacy is supported and welcomed by this government.
    • Worked with state and territory governments to streamline and harmonise fundraising rules across jurisdictions.
    • Funded a new General Social Survey with new questions on participation in volunteering and involvement in cultural events and cultural activities, and providing insights reflecting the impact of giving, participation, and purpose driven activity.

    Quotes attributable to Assistant Minister for Charities, Dr Andrew Leigh MP

    “Labor wants to minimise the time that Australia’s great charities spend doing paperwork, so we can maximise the energy they devote to helping the vulnerable, cleaning up the environment, helping people stay active, and connecting neighbours.

    “One of the best ways of achieving this is to ensure that all jurisdictions are working together on charitable regulation.

    “Bringing sector experts and regulators from all states and territories onto the advisory board of the charities commission will help charities by reducing regulatory overlap, and ensuring jurisdictions are working together to help charities and non‑profits thrive.”

    MIL OSI News –

    February 20, 2025
  • MIL-OSI Australia: Opinion piece: Strengthen charities, strengthen democracy

    Source: Australian Treasurer

    In 2015, a group of young Australians had a simple yet ambitious vision: to use hospitality to change lives. They believed that something as universal as sharing a meal could also build a stronger community.

    A decade later, that vision has made a real difference – Stepping Stone Café, located in my electorate of Fenner in the ACT, has helped over 60 migrant and refugee women to participate in meaningful work. Last April, I recognised the café as my monthly ‘community champion’ for its contribution to inclusion and opportunity, and on Australia Day 2025, its founders, Vanessa Brettell and Hannah Costello, were named Australian of the Year Local Heroes.

    Their philosophy is simple: participation strengthens society. ‘We dream of a society where diversity is celebrated, where all people are empowered and able to live the lives that they choose,’ Hannah said upon receiving the award. By breaking bread together, newcomers and locals don’t just share food – they build community, foster belonging, and strengthen democracy itself.

    It is initiatives like Stepping Stone Café that our government seeks to support – not just because their work is virtuous, but because when charities thrive, democracy thrives.

    That’s why our focus has been strengthening the operating environment for charities and not‑for‑profits, so they can all do what they do best – serve communities. We have made significant progress and the path to a stronger sector is clearer than ever.

    When the Albanese government took office in 2022, the charities sector was facing serious challenges after the Coalition’s nine‑year war on charities. Charities were being tied in knots by outdated, inconsistent fundraising laws, spending time on compliance that could be spent helping people. They needed a government that saw them as partners, not just service providers. Across society, we saw that charitable donations were up, but fewer people were giving – a worrying trend and a long‑term risk to our culture of generosity and equality of opportunity.

    We’ve tackled this by cutting excessive paperwork, aiming to double philanthropy by 2030, and strengthening social capital through community engagement. Our reforms aren’t about just one big fix, but about laying the foundations for lasting change. Each step we have taken strengthens the path towards a more connected, generous, and fair Australia.

    A giving nation: doubling philanthropy by 2030

    Giving in Australia has been too dependent on too few people. We need to broaden the base, not just by increasing donations from existing philanthropists but by encouraging more Australians to give. We committed to doing this as a partner, working alongside businesses, non‑profits and philanthropists.

    That’s why we commissioned the Productivity Commission’s review into philanthropy, Future Foundations for Giving, released at the end of 2024, and are considering its findings. Anticipating some of the Commission’s final recommendations, we’ve taken practical steps to build a systematic culture of giving.

    In addition, since coming into government, we have introduced a new deductible gift recipient (DGR) category for community foundations to support place‑based and community‑driven giving. We have streamlined the DGR application process for environmental organisations, harm prevention charities, cultural organisations and overseas aid organisations. And we have reformed the tax deductibility of donations, including removing the $2 minimum for tax‑deductible claims to encourage small donations, such as rounding up purchases at the checkout.

    More impact, less paperwork

    For years, charities called for fundraising reform, stuck navigating outdated, inconsistent state laws designed for an era of street collections, not digital donations. A Senate committee, chaired by Catryna Bilyk, put the compliance cost at over $1 million a month – money better spent in communities.

    In February 2023, we worked with state and territory governments to introduce national fundraising principles and streamline regulations. Once fully implemented nationwide, this will mean charities can fundraise under a single, modern set of national principles, without the unnecessary paperwork that’s held them back for years.

    Our government has also acted to strengthen trust and transparency in the charity sector. We passed legislation empowering the Australian Charities and Not‑for‑profits Commission (ACNC) to publicly address harmful breaches of compliance, ensuring Australians can have confidence in the system. We appointed Sue Woodward, a highly regarded expert, as head of the ACNC to provide the sector with strong, informed leadership. And to better represent the voices charities serve, we refreshed the ACNC Advisory Board, bringing First Nations, CALD and youth perspectives to the table.

    Rebuilding social capital

    In an era of rising disconnection, the work of charities in building communities has never been more vital.

    We’re making volunteering easier and more accessible. Last year, we funded the General Social Survey to provide better data on volunteering and social cohesion, which will help charities plan their work and target beneficiaries, by providing new questions on participation in volunteering and involvement in cultural events and activities. This builds on our 2023 initiative to connect 5,000 young people with volunteering opportunities.

    To build social capital and trust, charities must have the freedom to bring people together, take action, and advocate for their interests. We have sent a clear signal that charitable advocacy is supported and welcomed by this government by removing restrictive gag clauses, ensuring charities can shape policy to suit the needs of their communities.

    Strengthening our social fabric, one step at a time

    Stepping Stone Café creates change by providing a supportive, enabling environment for refugee and migrant women. government plays a similar role. Our job is to create the conditions in which charities and not‑for‑profits can thrive, one connection and reform at a time.

    Stepping Stone Café’s impact grows meal by meal, connection by connection. We’ve taken a plethora of practical steps to create a better operating environment for not‑for‑profits – to remove barriers to fundraising, boost philanthropy and strengthen community engagement.

    Our reforms aren’t about just one big fix, but about laying the foundations for lasting change. Each step we have taken strengthens the path towards a more connected, generous, and fair Australia.

    In the year ahead, we will build on this momentum, continuing to work with the sector to unlock new opportunities for giving, volunteering, community participation, and building the 4 key pillars that the Productivity Commission inquiry identified.

    This cannot be done by government alone. We want to go far on this path, and charities, businesses, and individuals must go together with government to make giving a habit, volunteering a priority, and participation a cornerstone of our democracy.

    MIL OSI News –

    February 20, 2025
  • MIL-OSI New Zealand: SH3 Rukuhia rebuild is flying ahead

    Source: New Zealand Transport Agency

    From Monday 24 February, both lanes of a short section of State Highway 3 (SH3) between Rukuhia Road and Narrows Road near Hamilton airport will be rebuilt and closed to southbound traffic for approximately 4 weeks.

    The rebuild work involves digging out the existing road layers and replacing them layer by layer. The road is then surfaced, swept and line marked. 

    The work will be completed 1 lane at a time. The lane not being worked on will be open to northbound traffic at all times. A 24/7 southbound detour will be in place for light vehicles via Raynes Road and State Highway 21 Airport Road, to re-join SH3, adding approximately 7 minutes to journeys between Hamilton and Te Awamutu.  

    The intersection of SH21 Airport Road and Raynes Road will be under stop/go between 7.30am and 6.00pm each weekday. 

    Any residents travelling southbound will be required to use the detour route to travel north to access their properties. We will make sure that Rukuhia Road will remain open at all times, but it will be left turn in and left turn out only. Once 1 lane is completed, work will switch to the other lane meaning that northbound traffic will stay on SH3 at all times. 

    HPMV’s, overweight and over dimension vehicles will be stacked and allowed through the worksite with the buses, however up to 30 minute delays should be expected.  

    If you are heading to the airport to catch a flight, you may want to leave a few minutes earlier as there will be additional travel time related to this worksite as well as the works at Ōhaupō Village, which are still underway. 

    These works form part of the government’s $2.07 billion investment into road and drainage renewal and maintenance across 2024-27 via the State Highway Pothole Prevention fund.  

    NZTA thanks road users for their patience.

    MIL OSI New Zealand News –

    February 20, 2025
  • MIL-OSI China: Cross-border telecom fraud gang stands trial

    Source: China State Council Information Office 2

    A total of 23 defendants, including key members of several major telecom fraud groups based in northern Myanmar stood trial in China on multiple charges including crimes that had killed 14 Chinese nationals and injured six others.

    Members of a telecom fraud criminal gang stand trial at Wenzhou Intermediate People’s Court in Zhejiang province. The six-day trial closed on Wednesday. [Photo/Xinhua]
    A local court in Wenzhou, east China’s Zhejiang Province, heard the case from Feb. 14 to 19.
    The defendants included Mg Myin Shaunt Phyin and Ma Thiri Maung, ringleaders of a criminal gang led by their family, as well as major members of the gang and members of other related gangs who served as the “sponsors” of the family’s criminal activities.
    They were facing 11 counts of criminal charges including fraud, intentional homicide, intentional injury, illegal detention, operating casinos, drug trafficking, and organizing prostitution.
    According to the prosecutors, the defendants took advantage of the family’s influence in relevant areas in northern Myanmar and set up several compounds to house criminal gangs, providing armed protection for the operations of the “sponsors” and colluding with them in relevant crimes, such as telecom fraud schemes targeting people in China.
    The gambling and fraud crimes involved funds of more than 10 billion yuan (about 1.4 billion U.S. dollars) and caused the deaths of 14 Chinese nationals and injuries to six other Chinese, the indictment said.
    In a high-profile incident, on Oct. 20, 2023, the gang, in collaboration with the “sponsors,” organized armed escorts to relocate people working for their gangs in an attempt to evade an upcoming crackdown.
    During the relocation, some individuals attempted to escape but were shot by the armed escorts, resulting in multiple deaths and injuries.
    At the trial, prosecutors presented evidence and each defendant and their lawyers examined it. Both sides gave their respective accounts, and the defendants made their respective final statements.
    More than 100 people, including Chinese legislators, political advisors, journalists, family members of those involved, and members of the public, observed the court proceedings.
    The verdict will be announced in due course.
    In addition to the latest trial, several thousand other suspects linked to the criminal groups have been put under investigation after they were linked to more than 10,000 reported telecom fraud cases.
    A prior official statement emphasized that the handling of the case reflects China’s dedication to protecting the legitimate rights and interests of the nation and its citizens.
    The crimes partially took place within Chinese borders, specifically targeted Chinese citizens, and jeopardized the shared interests of the international community, thus granting China jurisdiction under its Criminal Law and international treaties, according to procuratorial sources. 

    MIL OSI China News –

    February 20, 2025
←Previous Page
1 … 1,350 1,351 1,352 1,353 1,354 … 1,899
Next Page→
NewzIntel.com

NewzIntel.com

MIL Open Source Intelligence

  • Blog
  • About
  • FAQs
  • Authors
  • Events
  • Shop
  • Patterns
  • Themes

Twenty Twenty-Five

Designed with WordPress