Category: Politics

  • MIL-OSI: The Herzfeld Caribbean Basin Fund, Inc. Pays Distribution

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    MIAMI BEACH, Fla., June 30, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — The Herzfeld Caribbean Basin Fund, Inc. (NASDAQ: CUBA) (the “Fund”) today announced that the Fund has made the following distribution pursuant to the Fund’s Managed Distribution Policy (the “Policy”):

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

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

    The price used to calculate the number of shares to be issued in lieu of cash is $2.4618, which was determined using the volume weighted average price per share of the Fund on June 12, 13 and 16, 2025. The total amount of cash and shares distributed under the Policy was as follows:

    Total Cash Total Shares
    $731,093.39 1,187,755.00

    Stockholders who elected to receive the distribution solely in shares of common stock and stockholders who did not make an election will receive approximately 0.0944 shares of common stock for each share of common stock they owned on the record date of May 9, 2025. Holders of approximately 50.62% of the Company’s common stock elected to receive only stock or did not make an election.

    Stockholders electing to receive the distribution in all cash will receive cash in the amount of $0.09418 per common share, or approximately 40.51% of the $0.2325 distribution, and 0.0562 shares of common stock, or approximately 59.49% of the total distribution for each share of common stock they owned on the record date of May 9, 2025. Cash in lieu of fractional shares will be issued, if applicable. Total outstanding shares of the Company’s common stock following the distribution will be approximately 16,908,652.

    The primary purpose of the Policy is to provide stockholders with a constant, but not guaranteed, fixed minimum rate of distribution (currently set at the annual rate of 15% of the Fund’s net asset value as determined on June 30, 2024). Under the Policy, distributions may be made at quarterly, semi-annual or annual periods of distribution and are reviewed by the Board each quarter. This allows the Fund to maintain its 15% annual distribution of NAV, but provides flexibility in determining the timing of those distributions in order to account for required year-end regulatory distributions of capital gains necessary to maintain the Fund’s tax-free status.

    The Fund cannot predict what effect, if any, the Policy will have on the market price of its shares or whether such market price will reflect a greater or lesser discount to net asset value as compared to prior to the adoption of the Policy

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

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

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

      Current Distribution % Breakdown of the Current Distribution Total Cumulative Distributions for the Fiscal Year to Date % Breakdown of the Total Cumulative Distributions for the Fiscal Year to Date
    Net Investment Income $0.00 0%   $0.00 0%  
    Net Realized Short-Term Capital Gains $0.00 0%   $0.00 0%  
    Net Realized Long-Term Capital Gains $0.2122 91.25%   $0.2122 45.6%  
    Return of Capital $0.0203 8.75%   $0.2528 54.4%  
    Total (per common share) $0.2325 100%   $0.4650 100%  
    Average annual total return (in relation to NAV) for the 5-year period ending on May 30, 2025 2.52%  
    Annualized current distribution rate expressed as a percentage of NAV as of May 30, 2025 17.55%  
    Cumulative total return (in relation to NAV) for the fiscal year through May 30, 2025 0.09%  
    Cumulative fiscal year distributions as a percentage of NAV as of May 30, 2025 17.55%  


    No conclusions should be drawn about the Fund’s investment performance from the amount of the Fund’s distributions or from the terms of the Policy.

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

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

    About Thomas J. Herzfeld Advisors, Inc.

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

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

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

    Forward-Looking Statements

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

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

    The MIL Network

  • MIL-OSI: Zeo Energy Corp. Joins Russell Microcap® Index

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    NEW PORT RICHEY, Fla., June 30, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Zeo Energy Corp. (Nasdaq: ZEO) (“Zeo”, “Zeo Energy”, or the “Company”), a leading Florida-based provider of residential solar and energy efficiency solutions, today announced that it has joined the Russell Microcap® Index following the conclusion of the 2025 Russell US Indexes annual reconstitution, effective after the US market open on June 30.

    The annual Russell US Indexes reconstitution captures the 4,000 largest US stocks as of Wednesday, April 30, ranking them by total market capitalization. Membership in the Russell Microcap® Index, which remains in place for one year, means automatic inclusion in the appropriate growth and value style indexes. FTSE Russell determines membership for its Russell indexes primarily by objective, market-capitalization rankings, and style attributes.

    “Zeo’s inclusion in the Russell Microcap® Index marks an important milestone in our nascent journey as a public company,” said CEO Tim Bridgewater. “Over the past year, we’ve significantly enhanced our operational capabilities and continued to expand our scale through accretive acquisition. We expect our inclusion in this respected index to bring increased exposure to the broader investment community as we work to deliver long-term value to our shareholders.”

    Russell indexes are widely used by investment managers and institutional investors for index funds and as benchmarks for active investment strategies. Russell’s US indexes serve as the benchmark for about $10.6 trillion in assets as of June 2024. Russell indexes are part of FTSE Russell, a leading global index provider.

    For more information on the Russell Microcap® Index and the Russell indexes reconstitution, go to the “Russell Reconstitution” section on the FTSE Russell website.

    About Zeo Energy Corp.
    Zeo Energy Corp. is a Florida-based regional provider of residential solar, distributed energy, and energy efficiency solutions. Zeo focuses on high-growth markets with limited competitive saturation. With its differentiated sales approach and vertically integrated offerings, Zeo, through its Sunergy business, serves customers who desire to reduce high energy bills and contribute to a more sustainable future. For more information on Zeo Energy Corp., please visit www.zeoenergy.com.

    About FTSE Russell
    FTSE Russell is a leading global provider of benchmarking, analytics, and data solutions for investors, giving them a precise view of the market relevant to their investment process. A comprehensive range of reliable and accurate indexes provides investors worldwide with the tools they require to measure and benchmark markets across asset classes, styles, or strategies.

    FTSE Russell index expertise and products are used extensively by institutional and retail investors globally. For over 30 years, leading asset owners, asset managers, ETF providers, and investment banks have chosen FTSE Russell indexes to benchmark their investment performance and create ETFs, structured products, and index-based derivatives.​​​​​

    FTSE Russell is focused on applying the highest industry standards in index design and governance, employing transparent rules-based methodology informed by independent committees of leading market participants. FTSE Russell fully embraces the IOSCO Principles, and its Statement of Compliance has received independent assurance. Index innovation is driven by client needs and customer partnerships, allowing FTSE Russell to continually enhance the breadth, depth, and reach of its offering.

    FTSE Russell is wholly owned by London Stock Exchange Group.

    For more information, visit https://www.lseg.com/en/ftse-russell.

    Forward-Looking Statements
    This news release contains certain forward-looking statements within the meaning of section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended (the “Securities Act”), and Section 21E of the Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, that are based on beliefs and assumptions and on information currently available to the Company. Such statements may include, but are not limited to, statements that refer to projections, forecasts, or other characterizations of future events or circumstances, including any underlying assumptions. The words “anticipate,” “intend,” “plan,” “goal,” “seek,” “believe,” “project,” “estimate,” “expect,” “strategy,” “future,” “likely,” “may,” “should,” “will,” and similar references to future periods may identify forward-looking statements, but the absence of these words does not mean that a statement is not forward-looking. Forward-looking statements may include, for example, statements about the future financial performance of the Company; the ability to effectively consolidate the assets of Lumio and produce the expected results; changes in the Company’s strategy, future operations, financial position, estimated revenues and losses, projected costs, prospects, the ability to raise additional funds, and plans and objectives of management. These forward-looking statements are based on information available as of the date of this news release, and current expectations, forecasts, and assumptions, and involve a number of judgments, risks, and uncertainties. Accordingly, forward-looking statements should not be relied upon as representing the Company’s views as of any subsequent date, and the Company does not undertake any obligation to update such forward-looking statements to reflect events or circumstances after the date they were made, whether as a result of new information, future events, or otherwise, except as may be required under applicable securities laws. You should not place undue reliance on these forward-looking statements. As a result of a number of known and unknown risks and uncertainties, the Company’s actual results or performance may be materially different from those expressed or implied by these forward-looking statements. Some factors that could cause actual results to differ include: (i) the outcome of any legal proceedings that may be instituted against the Company or others; (ii) the Company’s success in retaining or recruiting, or changes required in, its officers, key employees, or directors; (iii) the Company’s ability to maintain the listing of its common stock and warrants on Nasdaq; (iv) limited liquidity and trading of the Company’s securities; (v) geopolitical risk and changes in applicable laws or regulations, including tariffs or trade restrictions; (vi) the possibility that the Company may be adversely affected by other economic, business, and/or competitive factors; (vii) operational risk; (viii) litigation and regulatory enforcement risks, including the diversion of management time and attention and the additional costs and demands on the Company’s resources; (ix) the Company’s ability to effectively consolidate the assets of Lumio and produce the expected results; and (x) other risks and uncertainties, including those included under the heading “Risk Factors” in the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”) for the year ended December 31, 2024 and in its subsequent periodic reports and other filings with the SEC.

    In light of the significant uncertainties in these forward-looking statements, you should not regard these statements as a representation or warranty by the Company, its respective directors, officers or employees or any other person that the Company will achieve its objectives and plans in any specified time frame, or at all. The forward-looking statements in this news release represent the views of the Company as of the date of this news release. Subsequent events and developments may cause that view to change. However, while the Company may elect to update these forward-looking statements at some point in the future, there is no current intention to do so, except to the extent required by applicable law. You should, therefore, not rely on these forward-looking statements as representing the views of the Company as of any date subsequent to the date of this news release.

    Zeo Energy Corp. Contacts
    For Investors:
    Tom Colton and Greg Bradbury
    Gateway Group
    ZEO@gateway-grp.com

    For Media:
    Zach Kadletz
    Gateway Group
    ZEO@gateway-grp.com

    The MIL Network

  • MIL-OSI: CNB Financial Corporation and ESSA Bancorp, Inc. Receive Bank Regulatory Approvals for Merger

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    CLEARFIELD, Pa. and STROUDSBURG, Pa., June 30, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — CNB Financial Corporation (“CNB”) (NASDAQ: CCNE) and ESSA Bancorp Inc. (“ESSA”) (NASDAQ: ESSA) are pleased to announce that they have received the necessary bank regulatory approvals to complete the proposed merger (the “Merger”) of ESSA with and into CNB and ESSA Bank & Trust (“ESSA Bank”) with and into CNB Bank (“CNB Bank”). The Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation and the Pennsylvania Department of Banking and Securities approved the merger of ESSA Bank with and into CNB Bank, and CNB received a waiver from the Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia for any application with respect to the merger of ESSA with and into CNB.

    “We are pleased to have received the required bank regulatory approvals or waivers to move forward with the Merger,” said Michael D. Peduzzi, President and Chief Executive Officer of CNB. “This marks an exciting milestone as we bring together two strong institutions with shared values and a commitment to client-focused services and great experiences for all of our stakeholders. We look forward to welcoming ESSA customers, employees, and shareholders to CNB. Together, we will expand our reach, enhance our capabilities and efficiencies, and better meet the needs of the communities we serve.”

    “We are excited to move ahead with our proposed merger with CNB,” commented Gary Olson, President and Chief Executive Officer of ESSA and ESSA Bank. He added, “Joining the CNB family will benefit our customers and communities as they will continue to be served by a combined organization that upholds our shared culture and values, maintains our relationship-focused approach, and offers an elevated suite of financial products and services.”

    On January 9, 2025, CNB, CNB Bank, ESSA and ESSA Bank entered into an Agreement and Plan of Merger pursuant to which ESSA will merge with and into CNB in an all-stock transaction, and immediately after, ESSA Bank will merge with and into CNB Bank. The Merger is expected to close on July 23, 2025, pending customary closing conditions.

    About CNB Financial Corporation

    CNB Financial Corporation is a financial holding company with consolidated assets of approximately $6.3 billion. CNB Financial Corporation conducts business primarily through its principal subsidiary, CNB Bank. CNB Bank is a full-service bank engaging in a full range of banking activities and services, including trust and wealth management services, for individual, business, governmental, and institutional customers. CNB Bank operations include a private banking division, one loan production office, one drive-up office, one mobile office, and 55 full-service offices in Pennsylvania, Ohio, New York, and Virginia. CNB Bank, headquartered in Clearfield, Pennsylvania, with offices in Central and North Central Pennsylvania, serves as the multi-brand parent to various divisions. These divisions include ERIEBANK, based in Erie, Pennsylvania, with offices in Northwest Pennsylvania and Northeast Ohio; FCBank, based in Worthington, Ohio, with offices in Central Ohio; BankOnBuffalo, based in Buffalo, New York, with offices in Western New York; Ridge View Bank, based in Roanoke, Virginia, with offices in the Southwest Virginia region; and Impressia Bank, a division focused on banking opportunities for women, which operates in CNB Bank’s primary market areas. Additional information about CNB Financial Corporation may be found at www.CNBBank.bank.

    About ESSA Bancorp, Inc.

    ESSA Bancorp, Inc. is the holding company for its wholly owned subsidiary, ESSA Bank & Trust, which was formed in 1916. The company has total assets of $2.2 billion. Headquartered in Stroudsburg, Pennsylvania, the company has two regional offices in Allentown and Radnor, and operates 19 community offices throughout the greater Pocono, Lehigh Valley, Scranton/Wilkes-Barre, and suburban Philadelphia areas. ESSA Bank & Trust offers a full range of commercial and retail financial services, asset management and trust services, investment services through Ameriprise Financial Institutions Group and insurance benefit services through ESSA Advisory Services, LLC. ESSA Bancorp Inc. stock trades on the NASDAQ Global Market (SM) under the symbol “ESSA”.

    Forward-Looking Statements

    This communication contains forward-looking statements as defined in the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Such forward-looking statements about CNB  and ESSA and their industry involve substantial risks and uncertainties. Statements other than statements of current or historical fact, including statements regarding CNB’s or ESSA’s future financial condition, results of operations, business plans, liquidity, cash flows, projected costs, and the impact of any laws or regulations applicable to CNB or ESSA, are forward-looking statements. Words such as “anticipates,” “believes,” “estimates,” “expects,” “forecasts,” “intends,” “plans,” “projects,” “may,” “will,” “should” and other similar expressions are intended to identify these forward-looking statements. Such statements are subject to factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from anticipated results.

    Among the risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ from those described in the forward-looking statements include, but are not limited to the following: (i) CNB’s and ESSA’s ability to complete the proposed merger on the proposed terms or on the anticipated timeline, or at all, including risks and uncertainties related to satisfaction of other closing conditions to consummate the proposed merger; (ii) the occurrence of any event, change or other circumstance that could give rise to the termination of the merger agreement relating to the proposed merger; (iii) risks related to diverting the attention of management from ongoing business operations; (iv) failure to realize the expected benefits of the proposed merger; (v) significant transaction costs and/or unknown or inestimable liabilities; (vi) the risk of shareholder litigation in connection with the proposed merger, including resulting expense or delay; (vii) the risk that ESSA’s business will not be integrated successfully or that such integration may be more difficult, time-consuming or costly than expected; (viii) risks related to future opportunities and plans for the combined company, including the uncertainty of expected future financial performance and results of the combined company following completion of the proposed merger; (ix) the effect of the announcement of the proposed merger on the ability of CNB and ESSA to operate their respective businesses and retain and hire key personnel and to maintain favorable business relationships; (x) risks related to the market value of the CNB common stock to be issued in the proposed merger; (xi) other risks related to the completion of the proposed merger and actions related thereto; (xii) the dilution caused by CNB’s issuance of additional shares of its capital stock in connection with the proposed merger; (xiii) national, international, regional and local economic and political climates and conditions; (xiv) changes in general economic conditions, including changes in market interest rates and changes in monetary and fiscal policies of the federal government; and (xv) legislative and regulatory changes. Further information about these and other relevant risks and uncertainties may be found in CNB’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2024, in ESSA’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended September 30, 2024 and in subsequent filings CNB and ESSA make with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”).

    Forward-looking statements speak only as of the date they are made. CNB and ESSA do not undertake, and specifically disclaim any obligation, to publicly release the result of any revisions which may be made to any forward-looking statements to reflect the occurrence of anticipated or unanticipated events or circumstances after the date of such statements. You are cautioned not to place undue reliance on these forward-looking statements.

    The MIL Network

  • MIL-OSI: SB Financial Group Joins Russell 3000 Index

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    DEFIANCE, Ohio, June 30, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — SB Financial Group, Inc. (NASDAQ: SBFG) (“SB Financial”), a diversified financial services company providing full-service community banking, mortgage banking, wealth management, private client and title insurance services, today announced that it has been named to the Russell 3000® and Russell 2000® indices.

    The annual reconstitution of the Russell US indices captures the 4,000 largest US stocks as of April 30, ranking them by total market capitalization. Membership in the Russell 3000® Index, which remains in place for one year, means automatic inclusion in the large-cap Russell 1000® Index or small-cap Russell 2000® Index as well as the appropriate growth and value style indices. FTSE Russell determines membership for its Russell indices primarily by objective, market-capitalization rankings and style attributes.

    “We are honored to be included in the Russell 3000 Index, a milestone that reflects the market’s recognition of the strength of our financial performance, the resilience of our business model, and the trust placed in us by our clients and shareholders,” said Mark A. Klein, Chairman, President and CEO of SB Financial Group. “This inclusion broadens our visibility within the investment community and underscores our continued progress in delivering consistent financial results and long-term value. As we move forward, we remain focused on disciplined growth and serving the evolving needs of the communities and clients we support.”

    About SB Financial Group, Inc.

    Headquartered in Defiance, Ohio, SB Financial Group is a diversified financial services holding company for The State Bank and Trust Company (State Bank) and SBFG Title, LLC dba Peak Title (Peak Title). State Bank provides a full range of financial services for consumers and small businesses, including wealth management, private client services, mortgage banking and commercial and agricultural lending, operating through a total of 26 offices: 24 in ten Ohio counties and two in Northeast, Indiana, and 26 ATMs. State Bank has six loan production offices located throughout the Tri-State region of Ohio, Indiana and Michigan. Peak Title provides title insurance and title opinions throughout the Tri-State and Kentucky. SB Financial Group’s common stock is listed on the NASDAQ Capital Market with the ticker symbol “SBFG”.

    About FTSE Russell, an LSEG Business

    FTSE Russell is a global index leader that provides innovative benchmarking, analytics and data solutions for investors worldwide. FTSE Russell calculates thousands of indexes that measure and benchmark markets and asset classes in more than 70 countries, covering 98% of the investable market globally. FTSE Russell index expertise and products are used extensively by institutional and retail investors globally. Approximately $18.1 trillion is benchmarked to FTSE Russell indexes. Leading asset owners, asset managers, ETF providers and investment banks choose FTSE Russell indexes to benchmark their investment performance and create ETFs, structured products and index-based derivatives. A core set of universal principles guides FTSE Russell index design and management: a transparent rules-based methodology is informed by independent committees of leading market participants. FTSE Russell is focused on applying the highest industry standards in index design and governance and embraces the IOSCO Principles. FTSE Russell is also focused on index innovation and customer partnerships as it seeks to enhance the breadth, depth and reach of its offering. 

    FTSE Russell is wholly owned by London Stock Exchange Group. 

    For more information, visit FTSE Russell.

    Forward-Looking Statements

    Certain statements within this document, which are not statements of historical fact, constitute forward-looking statements within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Forward-looking statements involve risks and uncertainties, and actual results may differ materially from those predicted by the forward-looking statements. These risks and uncertainties include, but are not limited to, risks and uncertainties inherent in the national and regional banking industry, changes in economic conditions in the market areas in which SB Financial and its subsidiaries operate, changes in policies by regulatory agencies, changes in accounting standards and policies, changes in tax laws, fluctuations in interest rates, demand for loans in the market areas in SB Financial and its subsidiaries operate, increases in FDIC insurance premiums, changes in the competitive environment, losses of significant customers, geopolitical events, the loss of key personnel and other risks identified in SB Financial’s Annual Report on Form 10-K and documents subsequently filed by SB Financial with the Securities and Exchange Commission. Forward-looking statements speak only as of the date on which they are made, and SB Financial undertakes no obligation to update any forward-looking statement to reflect events or circumstances after the date on which the statement is made, except as required by law. All subsequent written and oral forward-looking statements attributable to SB Financial or any person acting on its behalf are qualified by these cautionary statements.

    Investor Contact Information:

    Mark A. Klein
    Chairman, President and
    Chief Executive Officer
    Mark.Klein@YourStateBank.com

    Anthony V. Cosentino
    Executive Vice President and
    Chief Financial Officer
    Tony.Cosentino@YourStateBank.com

    The MIL Network

  • MIL-OSI Economics: Members explore technology transfer case studies, patent information, trade-related IP data

    Source: WTO

    Headline: Members explore technology transfer case studies, patent information, trade-related IP data

    Discussions at the meeting saw a high level of engagement by delegations. Members highlighted how voluntary technology transfer to developing economies can boost innovation, productivity and development, drawing on sectoral case studies. They also focused on better harnessing information from expired patents and underlined the importance of systematic, transparent reporting on global IP trade flows.
    A paper entitled “Intellectual Property and Innovation: Technology Transfer case studies” was submitted by Australia, Canada, the European Union, Israel, Japan, the Republic of Korea, New Zealand, Singapore, Switzerland, Chinese Taipei, the United Kingdom and the United States.
    The paper highlights how technology enhances productivity, competitiveness, growth and development, motivating countries to foster an environment that attracts voluntary technology transfer and innovation. The paper invites members to submit case studies on voluntary transfers of patent-protected or trade secret technologies and highlights the importance of domestic policies and capacity-building. The aim of the paper is to inform TRIPS Council discussions on incentivizing mutually beneficial technology transfer to address global challenges.
    The paper indicates that practical examples are useful in illustrating how technology transfer occurs across sectors such as agriculture, sustainability and manufacturing. IP offices and WIPO GREEN,  an online platform for technology exchange, provide case studies and opportunities to promote green technology exchange. TRIPS Article 66.2 on technology transfer details incentives for transfer to least-developed countries (LDCs). In public health, the Medicines Patent Pool (MPP) enables voluntary sublicensing of patented treatments, increasing access to lifesaving medicines and supporting local production.
    Colombia submitted a communication titled “After-life of patents” proposing joint efforts ahead of the 14th WTO Ministerial Conference (MC14), to be held in Cameroon in March 2026, to explore better use of patent information, potentially expanding the discussion to copyrighted works. The proposal envisions a cooperative WTO approach, without affecting debates on the need for balance in IP protection. Colombia said it is considering an MC14 decision where members would agree to make patent disclosures publicly accessible, promote good practices for their use, permit artificial intelligence (AI) training on such data, and establish a global, publicly accessible repository for such information. 
    Colombia submitted a second paper for discussion: “Trade-Related Figures of Intellectual Property at the WTO: The Case of IP Royalties at the Global Level”. The paper argues that since the TRIPS Agreement’s adoption in 1995, WTO members have applied common IP standards yet little focus has been placed on trade-related IP metrics. Unlike goods and services, IP trade flows – such as royalty payments – receive limited, inconsistent attention in WTO data. Occasional studies exist but lack regularity. However, reliable data is available through IMF and World Bank sources, which track cross-border royalty payments in national balance of payments statistics, offering an important resource for understanding global IP trade dynamics.
    The paper suggests the WTO should implement systematic, detailed reporting on IP-related financial flows, integrating this data into TRIPS Council updates, Trade Policy Reviews and WTO databases. Disaggregated by IP category, such data would support informed policy decisions and foster balanced, evidence-based debate on the global IP regime.
    Notifications
    Members were updated on notifications under various provisions of the TRIPS Agreement that the Council has received since its last meeting in March.
    The Chair of the Council, Emmanuelle Ivanov-Durand of France, said that the pace of notifications to the Council has increased in recent years, but they are still not keeping up with the actual development of laws and regulations relating to TRIPS. She emphasized that TRIPS Article 63.2 is not a “one-off” requirement but a core element of TRIPS transparency and a central part of the Council’s work. It obliges members to notify new or amended laws on TRIPS, including those recently adopted to address the COVID-19 pandemic.
    This requirement includes the notification of legislative changes to implement the special compulsory licensing system to export medicines covered by TRIPS Article 31bis. The notification of relevant laws and regulations can assist members in preparing for the potential use of the system. It would also help the WTO Secretariat in its efforts to provide informed technical support to members.   
    The Chair recalled that the e-TRIPS Submission System is available for members to easily notify their laws and to make other required submissions to the TRIPS Council. The platform also permits digital access, consultation and analysis of information through the e-TRIPS Gateway, an easy-to-use interface to search and display information related to the TRIPS Council.
    Members agreed to test the e-Agenda tool at the next TRIPS Council meeting on a trial, non-committal basis. Developed by the Secretariat and already in use across over 20 WTO bodies, the e-Agenda enhances transparency, organization and access to meeting documents and statements. The Chair stressed that implementation costs would be minimal, with a tailored prototype and training available. The trial aims to assess the practical value of the tool without altering established procedures.
    Non-violation and situation complaints
    Members repeated their well-known positions on the issue of non-violation and situation complaints (NVSCs) under the TRIPS Agreement. With less than a year to go to the 14th WTO Ministerial Conference (MC14), the Chair reminded members that it is a ministerial mandate for the Council to examine the scope and modalities for NVSCs, and that members should make serious efforts to do so.
    The Chair noted that members have not displayed much appetite for advancing substantive discussions in this area. If this situation persists in the coming months, it is difficult to foresee any outcome in this area at MC14 other than an extension of the moratorium or its expiry, she noted. She suggested that if discussion on this matter is going to be limited to choosing between these two options, members could decide in Geneva ahead of MC14.
    At the 13th Ministerial Conference (MC13) in Abu Dhabi in 2024, ministers adopted a Decision on TRIPS Non-Violation and Situation Complaints, instructing the TRIPS Council to continue reviewing the issue and submit recommendations to MC14. Until then, members agreed not to initiate such complaints under the TRIPS Agreement.
    The Decision on TRIPS Non-Violation and Situation Complaints concerns whether and how WTO members can bring disputes to the WTO alleging that an action or situation has nullified expected benefits under the TRIPS Agreement, even without a specific violation.
    Other issues
    WTO members continued talks on how to proceed on the long overdue review of the implementation of the TRIPS Agreement. Under Article 71.1, the TRIPS Council is required to conduct a review of the implementation of the Agreement after two years and at periodic intervals thereafter. However, the initial review in 1999 was never completed and no review has subsequently been initiated.
    The Chair recalled that members were able to propose last year a process for the first review, which ultimately could not be adopted. After holding informal consultations in May with the most active member on this issue to find a way forward, the Chair has concluded that the concerns that prevented the adoption of the proposal remain.
    Ms Ivanov-Durand noted that the mandate set out in TRIPS Article 71.1 is highly significant and encouraged delegations to keep working towards the initiation of the implementation review. A number of delegations expressed their willingness to continue discussions on this issue. The Chair expressed her availability to conduct further informal consultations once there is greater likelihood of members agreeing on how to make substantial progress.
    The Council did not agree on renewing the invitation to the European Free Trade Association (EFTA) to participate in the TRIPS Council as ad hoc observer. This invitation had been renewed on a meeting-to-meeting basis since 2012. A number of members said that the current list of observers is not balanced and asked the Council to reassess the situation with regards other international intergovernmental organizations whose requests have been pending for years. It was suggested that the Chair could address this issue in the technical meetings she is planning with members.
    The updated list of pending requests for observer status in the TRIPS Council by intergovernmental organizations is contained in document IP/C/W/52/Rev.14.
    The Chair said that there have been no new acceptances of the protocol amending the TRIPS Agreement since the last Council meeting. This means that, to date, the amended TRIPS Agreement applies to 141 members. Twenty-five members have yet to accept the Protocol. The current period for accepting the protocol runs until 31 December 2025.  
    Next meeting
    The next regular meeting of the TRIPS Council is scheduled for 10-11 November 2025.

    Share

    MIL OSI Economics

  • MIL-OSI Economics: Thales Alenia Space to develop SOLiS very-high-throughput laser communications demonstrator

    Source: Thales Group

    Headline: Thales Alenia Space to develop SOLiS very-high-throughput laser communications demonstrator

    Cannes, June 30th, 2025 – Thales Alenia Space, the joint venture between Thales (67%) and Leonardo (33%), has been selected by the French space agency CNES, as part of the space component of the France 2030 program launched by the French government, to devel…

    MIL OSI Economics

  • MIL-OSI Economics: Trade Policy Review: Norway

    Source: World Trade Organization

    The following documents are available:

    Secretariat report

    A detailed report written independently by the WTO Secretariat.

    Government report

    A policy statement by the government of the member under review.

    From the meeting

    The Secretariat and Government reports are discussed by the WTO’s full membership in the Trade Policy Review Body (TPRB).

    Background

    Trade Policy Reviews are an exercise, mandated in the WTO agreements, in which member countries’ trade and related policies are examined and evaluated at regular intervals. Significant developments that may have an impact on the global trading system are also monitored. All WTO members are subject to review, with the frequency of review depending on the country’s size.

    Share

    MIL OSI Economics

  • MIL-OSI Economics: Christine Lagarde, Philip R. Lane: Opening remarks on the ECB strategy assessment press conference

    Source: European Central Bank

    Christine Lagarde, President of the ECB,
    Philip R. Lane, Member of the Executive Board of the ECB

    Sintra, 30 June 2025

    Good afternoon, ECB Chief Economist Philip Lane and I welcome you to this press conference, on the occasion of the conclusion of the 2025 assessment of our monetary policy strategy.

    The Governing Council recently agreed on an updated monetary policy strategy statement. You can find this statement on our website, together with an explanatory overview note and the two occasional papers presenting the underlying analyses.

    I will start by putting this strategy assessment into the broader context. Philip Lane will then go through the updated strategy statement and explain what has changed and why, as well as what has remained unchanged.

    Following the strategy review we carried out in 2020-21, the Governing Council committed to “assess periodically the appropriateness of its monetary policy strategy, with the next assessment expected in 2025”. Such regular assessments ensure that our framework, toolkit and approach remain fit for purpose in a changing world.

    And the world has changed significantly over the last four years. Some of the issues we were most concerned about back in 2021 – including inflation being too low for too long – have taken a rather different turn.

    Not only did we see inflation surge, but some fundamental structural features of our economy and the inflation environment are changing: geopolitics, digitalisation, the increasing use of artificial intelligence, demographics, the threat to environmental sustainability and the evolution of the international financial system.

    All of those suggest that the environment in which we operate will remain highly uncertain and potentially more volatile. This will make it more challenging to conduct our monetary policy and fulfil our mandate to keep prices stable.

    During the strategy assessment, we asked: what do these changes mean for the way we assess the economy, conduct our policy, use our toolkit, take our decisions and communicate them? In seeking to answer this question, our mindset was forward-looking.

    On the whole, we concluded that our monetary policy strategy remains well suited to addressing the challenges that lie ahead.

    But our strategy also needs to be updated and adjusted in certain areas, so that the ECB can remain fit for purpose in the years to come. The next assessment is expected in 2030.

    With our updated strategy statement, we are taking a comprehensive perspective on the challenges facing our monetary policy, so that the ECB can remain an anchor of stability in this more uncertain world.

    This is our core message to the euro area citizens we serve: the new environment gives many reasons to worry, but one thing they do not need to worry about is our commitment to price stability.

    The ECB is committed to its mandate and will keep itself and its tools updated to be able to respond to new challenges.

    Let me conclude by thanking, on behalf of the Governing Council, all the colleagues across the Eurosystem who have contributed to this assessment in a great team effort.

    I now hand over to our Chief Economist Philip Lane and, following his remarks, we will be ready to take your questions.

    MIL OSI Economics

  • MIL-OSI Economics: Christine Lagarde: Strategy assessment: lessons learned

    Source: European Central Bank

    Introductory speech by Christine Lagarde, President of the ECB, at the opening reception of the ECB Forum on Central Banking 2025 “Adapting to change: macroeconomic shifts and policy responses”

    Sintra, 30 June 2025

    As Nietzsche once observed, “it is our future that lays down the law of our today.”

    When we last reviewed our strategy four years ago, our thinking was shaped – quite naturally – by the recent past: a decade of too-low inflation, compounded by the pandemic.

    But as Nietzsche warned, there is a danger in letting the past dominate our thinking. Sometimes, it is the future – still dimly understood – that is already shaping our present.

    And soon after that review, the world changed in ways we had not foreseen.

    The reopening of our economies after the pandemic brought about major sectoral shifts. Russia’s invasion of Ukraine triggered a fundamental shift in energy markets.

    The geopolitical landscape was upended, reshaping global trade. And structural changes in labour markets became increasingly apparent – driven by demographics, technological transformation, and evolving worker preferences.

    Given all these developments, the fundamentals of our strategy have held up well – as they should, because a sound strategy must be robust to a changing environment.

    Our symmetric 2% inflation target has proven effective in anchoring expectations – even through some of the most severe and persistent shocks in recent economic history.

    And our medium-term orientation has provided essential flexibility to absorb an extremely large shock – helping to reduce the overall cost of disinflation to the economy, while still enabling a timely return of inflation to target.

    We therefore saw no need to revisit these core pillars – which is why we refer to the exercise we have just concluded as a strategy assessment rather than a review.

    The central theme of our work has been to update the framework so that monetary policy can continue to deliver price stability in the face of the new types of shocks we are confronting.

    This evening, without downplaying the other lessons learned, I would like to highlight three key conclusions that have emerged from this work.

    They concern the nature of the new environment, how we assess the risks that arise from it, and how we have adjusted our reaction function to safeguard price stability in this new world.

    The changing environment

    One word has dominated the public debate in recent weeks: uncertainty.

    And this is one of the first key conclusions from our strategy assessment: the world ahead is more uncertain – and that uncertainty is likely to make inflation more volatile.

    First, we see clear signs that supply shocks are becoming more frequent.

    Model-based analysis by ECB staff shows that, during the recent inflation surge, such shocks played a much greater role in driving inflation than they had over the previous two decades. And even today, supply-side forces continue to generate inflation risks in both directions.

    Second, we see mounting evidence that more regular supply disruptions are leading firms to adjust prices more frequently – thereby contributing to greater inflation volatility.

    This is not simply an extrapolation from the most recent shock. Rather, it reflects a structural shift in how firms operate under conditions of permanently higher uncertainty.

    Research shows that, in such an environment, firms tend to react more quickly to shocks – especially supply ones – in order to protect against potential future losses.[1] At the same time, they are more likely to adopt more flexible pricing strategies, which means prices may respond not just to major shocks, but also to smaller frictions and local disruptions.[2]

    Third, if inflation becomes more volatile, we could see non-linearities on both sides.

    In our last strategy review, we rightly focused on the non-linear dynamics that emerge in a prolonged environment of too-low inflation – where interest rates are eventually pushed to their effective lower bound. That constraint can, in turn, feed into inflation expectations and risk creating a self-fulfilling low-inflation trap. And we remain alert to the possibility of renewed downside inflation shocks.

    But recent experience has also revealed non-linearities on the upside.

    Since firms are generally quicker to raise prices than to lower them, more frequent price adjustments mean inflation can rise quickly in response to large upside shocks. If wages then adjust only gradually to these price increases – as we saw in recent years – inflation may remain above target for longer as wage growth slowly catches up. This, in turn, can raise the risk of inflation expectations de-anchoring on the upside.[3]

    Assessing the distribution of risks

    The next question that follows is: if the economic environment becomes more volatile, how can we make our economic assessment more robust?

    Large shocks can trigger feedback loops and non-linear effects that inherently give rise to a broader range of possible outcomes. In a world of higher uncertainty, it is all the more important to augment the baseline with alternative risk scenarios.

    This is why the second key conclusion of our assessment is the need for monetary policy to take into account risks and uncertainty, using a systematic but context-specific approach.

    The ECB has used both scenario and sensitivity analysis for many years – deploying internal scenarios since the global financial crisis and publishing them for the first time during the pandemic.

    But our experience in recent years has underscored the particular strength of scenario analysis in times of elevated uncertainty.

    A clear example is Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and the resulting energy price shock. In that case, scenarios provided insights that neither our baseline projections nor standard sensitivity analyses around the baseline could fully capture.

    For instance, in March 2022 – just a few weeks after the invasion – our baseline projected inflation at around 5% for that year, based on market-implied energy futures. The sensitivity analysis suggested a slightly higher figure of about 5.5%. In contrast, the Ukraine war scenario already pointed to inflation exceeding 7% – close to the final annual figure of over 8%.

    At the same time, there were moments when – in hindsight – publishing scenarios could have supported both our policymaking and our communication.

    One example was the high uncertainty in 2021 about the speed of vaccine rollout and the nature of post-pandemic reopening, including the sectoral shifts in supply and demand across goods and services sectors, both in the euro area and globally.[4]

    Scenario analysis could have helped in illustrating that the range of possible inflation outcomes was unusually wide – and reduced the risk of projecting false certainty to the public.

    This is why our updated strategy commits to ensuring that our policy decisions account not only for the most likely path of inflation and the economy, but also for the surrounding risks and uncertainty – including through the appropriate use of scenario and sensitivity analyses.

    The reaction function

    So what should our reaction function be, if we know that the road ahead is likely to be more uncertain?

    In our last strategy review, we explicitly acknowledged the risks posed by the effective lower bound. Our strategy statement called for “especially forceful or persistent” action when policy rates are close to the lower bound.

    This “asymmetric” focus was grounded in the asymmetry of policy space and the downward inflation bias it can produce. The lower bound continues to constrain monetary policy in the face of large disinflationary shocks.

    But the recent inflation surge has revealed upside non-linearities – and with them, the need for a two-sided reaction function, both in terms of forcefulness or persistence. This is the third key conclusion of our strategy assessment.

    This is not about reacting to small or temporary deviations, but about a symmetric commitment to respond to inflation dynamics that could de-anchor inflation expectations in either direction.

    When disinflationary shocks risk pushing policy rates towards the lower bound, acting forcefully early on helps minimise the time spent near that constraint. Likewise, when inflation overshoots raise the risk of a feedback loop between frequent price adjustments and staggered wage responses, forceful tightening at the outset is key to anchoring expectations.

    We began our recent policy cycle with historically large rate hikes delivered at an unprecedented pace. Our analysis shows that, had we not acted, the probability of inflation expectations de-anchoring would have exceeded 30% in 2022 and 2023.[5]

    At the same time, this policy cycle also offered new perspectives on optimal policy paths.

    One insight from our last strategy review was that, when rates are near the lower bound, persistence can substitute for forcefulness – helping to deliver the necessary policy stance with fewer side effects. Until recently, however, this concept had not been widely applied to tightening cycles.

    Typically, forceful tightening follows an inverted V-shape – with rapid rate increases followed by relatively swift cuts. But as rates move deeper into restrictive territory, the costs and side effects of further tightening also grow.

    At that point, it can become optimal to shift the focus from forcefulness to persistence – even if, in principle, there is no upper bound constraining policy space.

    Model simulations support this insight: forcefulness and persistence can act as substitutes, both capable of delivering the necessary disinflation. But persistence, in particular, can help limit the economic and financial stability costs compared with continued rate increases.

    This was borne out in our own experience. When we entered what I described as the “holding phase”, we placed greater weight on the persistence dimension.[6] This allowed the disinflation process to advance at a steady pace, while the so-called “sacrifice ratio” remained historically low compared with previous disinflation episodes.[7]

    Reflecting this experience, the Governing Council considers that its reaction function is best described as requiring “appropriately forceful or persistent monetary policy action in response to large, sustained deviations of inflation from the target in either direction.”

    To this end, all our instruments remain available in our toolkit. But the word “appropriately” is important, as it underscores that the choice of instruments, and the intensity with which we use them, must reflect proportionality.

    Conclusion

    Let me conclude.

    Our strategy assessment has been an exercise in evolution, not revolution – and in fact, many of its conclusions are already reflected in our current policy conduct.

    We responded to the recent inflation shock with initially forceful and then persistent action, aiming to steer inflation back to target as swiftly as necessary, but as painlessly as possible.

    And scenario analysis is helping us to better understand the range of risks ahead – and how best to respond to them.

    For example, our scenarios on potential US import tariffs have helped us navigate an uncertain global trade landscape, while also enabling us to communicate more clearly the two-sided risks shaping our current monetary policy stance.

    At our last monetary policy press conference in June, I described our monetary policy stance as being “in a good place”.

    Following the conclusion of this strategy assessment, I would add that our monetary policy strategy is also in a good place – strengthened by experience, and better equipped for the challenges of the future.

    To close the circle with Nietzsche: “he who has a why to live can bear almost any how.”

    Even as the world changes around us, we know our purpose. And we will do whatever is necessary to deliver on it – ensuring price stability for the people of Europe.

    MIL OSI Economics

  • MIL-OSI United Nations: UN Secretary-General’s remarks at the launch of the Sevilla Platform for Action [bilingual as delivered; scroll down for all-English]

    Source: United Nations secretary general

    Señor Presidente del Gobierno, querido Pedro Sánchez, Excelencias, señoras y señores:
     
    Gracias por unirse a este lanzamiento de la Plataforma de Acción de Sevilla.
     
    Estimado Presidente: felicito a usted y a su Gobierno por su visión y liderazgo como anfitriones de la Cuarta Conferencia Internacional sobre la Financiación para el Desarrollo.
     
    We are all here to respond to a global development crisis that threatens people and planet alike.
     
    Our roadmap to a better future — the Sustainable Development Goals — is in danger.
     
    Two-thirds of the targets are not progressing fast enough — or at all.
     
    Solutions depend on financing. 
     
    Developing countries need over $4 trillion a year to deliver on the 2030 Agenda.
     
    But they are being battered by limited fiscal space, slowing growth, crushing debt burdens and growing systemic risks. 
     
    The Sevilla Commitment document represents a bold plan to get the engine of development revving again:
     
    Through new domestic and global commitments that can channel public and private finance to the areas of greatest need…
     
    By overhauling the world’s approach to debt to make borrowing work in service of sustainable development…
     
    And by reforming the global financial architecture to reflect today’s realities and the urgent needs of developing countries.
     
    But we need all hands on deck.
     
    And that’s why the Sevilla Platform for Action is so critical — and so significant.
     
    In the midst of a world of division, conflict and economic uncertainty, this Platform contains more than 130 specific initiatives that demonstrate what we can achieve by working together.
     
    Governments, private sector partners, international institutions, and civil society groups all together teaming up to launch high-impact initiatives to bring the Sevilla Commitment to life.
     
    This includes a global hub for debt swaps at the World Bank as part of a broader facility aimed at relieving liquidity constraints and lowering the cost of borrowing.
     
    A debt pause alliance to help countries in times of crisis.
     
    A global coalition to scale-up pre-arranged finance that can be readily deployed when disasters strike.

    A blended finance platform to bring public and private finance together in a new and expanded way.
     
    A new tool for Multilateral Development Banks to manage currency risks.

    And a commission to explore the future of development cooperation.
     
    In December, I appointed a group of experts on debt who today are announcing 11 immediately actionable proposals to help resolve the debt crisis. 
     
    This includes the commitment to establish a borrowers forum for countries to learn from one another and coordinate their approaches in debt management and restructuring.
     
    I look forward to working closely with Member States — including the G20 — to bring this forum to life, to empower borrower countries, and create a fairer system.
     
    Excellencies, ladies and gentlemen,
     
    The Sevilla Platform for Action offers an ambitious, action-oriented response to the global financing challenge.
    It provides a springboard toward a more just, inclusive, and sustainable world for all countries.
     
    And above all, it proves that progress and change are possible if we work together.
     
    I hope the Platform inspires countries to work as one to tackle other challenges facing our world today.
     
    Y una vez más, agradezco al Presidente del Gobierno y a todos ustedes por su liderazgo.
     
    Muchas gracias.

    *****
    [all-English]

    Mr. President of the Government of Spain, dear Pedro Sánchez,

    Excellencies, ladies and gentlemen,

    Thank you for joining this launch of the Sevilla Platform for Action.

    Respected President of the Government of Spain — I commend you and your government for your vision and leadership as hosts of the Fourth International Conference on Financing for Development.

    We are all here to respond to a global development crisis that threatens people and planet alike.

    Our roadmap to a better future — the Sustainable Development Goals — is in danger.

    Two-thirds of the targets are not progressing fast enough — or at all.

    Solutions depend on financing. 

    Developing countries need over $4 trillion a year to deliver on the 2030 Agenda.

    But they are being battered by limited fiscal space, slowing growth, crushing debt burdens and growing systemic risks.  

    The Sevilla Commitment document represents a bold plan to get the engine of development revving again:

    Through new domestic and global commitments that can channel public and private finance to the areas of greatest need…

    By overhauling the world’s approach to debt to make borrowing work in service of sustainable development…

    And by reforming the global financial architecture to reflect today’s realities and the urgent needs of developing countries.

    But we need all hands on deck.

    And that’s why the Sevilla Platform for Action is so critical — and so significant.

    In the midst of a world of division, conflict and economic uncertainty, this Platform contains more than 130 specific initiatives that demonstrate what we can achieve by working together.

    Governments, private sector partners, international institutions, and civil society groups all together are teaming up to launch high-impact initiatives to bring the Sevilla Commitment to life.

    This includes a global hub for debt swaps at the World Bank as part of a broader facility aimed at relieving liquidity constraints and lowering the cost of borrowing.

    A debt pause alliance to help countries in times of crisis.

    A global coalition to scale-up pre-arranged finance that can be readily deployed when disasters strike.

    A blended finance platform to bring public and private finance together in a new and expanded way.

    A new tool for Multilateral Development Banks to manage currency risks.
     
    And a commission to explore the future of development cooperation.

    In December, I appointed a group of experts on debt who today are announcing 11 immediately actionable proposals to help resolve the debt crisis. 

    This includes the commitment to establish a borrowers forum for countries to learn from one another and coordinate their approaches in debt management and restructuring.

    I look forward to working closely with Member States — including the G20 — to bring this forum to life, to empower borrower countries, and create a fairer system.

    Excellencies, ladies and gentlemen,

    The Sevilla Platform for Action offers an ambitious, action-oriented response to the global financing challenge.
     
    It provides a springboard toward a more just, inclusive, and sustainable world for all countries.

    And above all, it proves that progress and change are possible if we work together.

    I hope the Platform inspires countries to work as one to tackle other challenges facing our world today.
     
    Once again, I thank Prime Minister Sánchez and all of you for your leadership.

    Thank you.

    MIL OSI United Nations News

  • MIL-OSI USA: CISA and Partners Urge Critical Infrastructure to Stay Vigilant in the Current Geopolitical Environment

    News In Brief – Source: US Computer Emergency Readiness Team

    Today, CISA, in collaboration with the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), the Department of Defense Cyber Crime Center (DC3), and the National Security Agency (NSA), released a Fact Sheet urging organizations to remain vigilant against potential targeted cyber operations by Iranian state-sponsored or affiliated threat actors. 

    Over the past several months, there has been increasing activity from hacktivists and Iranian government-affiliated actors, which is expected to escalate due to recent events. These cyber actors often exploit targets of opportunity based on the use of unpatched or outdated software with known Common Vulnerabilities and Exposures or the use of default or common passwords on internet-connected accounts and devices.

    At this time, we have not seen indications of a coordinated campaign of malicious cyber activity in the U.S. that can be attributed to Iran. However, CISA, FBI, DC3, and NSA strongly urge critical infrastructure asset owners and operators to implement the mitigations recommended in the joint Fact Sheet, which include: 

    • Identifying and disconnecting operational technology and industrial control systems devices from the public internet,
    • Protecting devices and accounts with strong, unique passwords,
    • Applying the latest software patches, and
    • Implementing phishing-resistant multifactor authentication for access to OT networks.

    Review the joint Fact Sheet: Iranian Cyber Actors May Target Vulnerable US Networks and Entities of Interest and act now to understand the Iranian state-backed cyber threat, assess and mitigate cybersecurity weaknesses, and review and update incident response plans to strengthen your network against malicious cyber actors. 

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI USA: Joint Statement from CISA, FBI, DC3 and NSA on Potential Targeted Cyber Activity Against U.S. Critical Infrastructure by Iran

    News In Brief – Source: US Computer Emergency Readiness Team

    Iranian state-sponsored or affiliated threat actors are known to conduct a range of targeted cyber activity to include exploit known vulnerabilities in unpatched or outdated software, compromise internet-connected accounts and devices that use default or weak passwords and work with ransomware affiliates to encrypt, steal and leak sensitive information.

    At this time, we have not seen indications of a coordinated campaign of malicious cyber activity in the U.S. that can be attributed to Iran. However, we are urging critical infrastructure organizations to stay vigilant to Iranian-affiliated cyber actors that may target U.S. devices and networks. We strongly urge organizations to review our joint fact sheet and implement recommended actions to strengthen our collective defense against this potential cyber activity.

     The Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA), Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), Department of Defense Cyber Crime Center (DC3) and the National Security Agency (NSA) are actively monitoring and coordinating with government, industry, and international partners to identify and share actionable intelligence and provide resources and assistance. We also strongly urge organizations report suspicious or criminal activity related to potential Iranian cyber activity.

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI USA: Neal Statement on Evans Retirement

    Source: United States House of Representatives – Congressman Richard Neal (D-MA)

    Neal Statement on Evans Retirement

    Springfield, MA, June 30, 2025

    Ways and Means Committee Ranking Member Richard E. Neal (D-MA) released the following statement after Ways and Means Committee Member Dwight Evans (D-PA) announced that he will not seek re-election:

    “Congressman Dwight Evans has dedicated more than 45 years of public service to the people of Philadelphia, fighting each and every day for fairer, stronger, and safer communities. Nearly a decade ago, he brought his deep record of leadership and achievement from the Pennsylvania House to Congress. His service has been marked by his focus on expanding access to health care, championing our nation’s hospitals, promoting gun safety, and investing in a brighter tomorrow through economic development and urban renewal. Through it all, he has carried the spirit and resilience of the City of Brotherly Love. 

    “Congress, the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, and the nation are better because of Dwight’s service. I will miss his passionate advocacy and unshakeable moral compass. I look forward to our continued work this Congress, and wish him and his family every success in their next chapter.”

    ### 

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI Russia: IMF Executive Board Completes the Eighth Review of the Extended Arrangement under the Extended Fund Facility for Ukraine

    Source: IMF – News in Russian

    June 30, 2025

    • The IMF Board today completed the Eighth Review of the Extended Arrangement under the Extended Fund Facility (EFF) for Ukraine, enabling a disbursement of about US$0.5 billion (SDR 0.37 billion) to Ukraine, which will be channeled for budget support.
    • Ukraine’s economy remains resilient, and the authorities met all end-March and continuous quantitative performance criteria, the prior action, and two structural benchmarks for the review.
    • Despite the challenges, progressing with domestic revenue mobilization, strengthening the investment climate, improving governance, and completing the debt restructuring strategy are necessary to restore fiscal and debt sustainability and support growth. The full and timely disbursement of external support during the program period remains indispensable for macroeconomic stability

    Washington, DC: The Executive Board of the International Monetary Fund (IMF) today completed the Eighth Review of the EFF, enabling the authorities to draw US$0.5 billion (SDR 0.37 billion, which will be channeled for budget support. This will bring the total disbursements under the IMF-supported program to US$10.6 billion.

    Ukraine’s 48-month EFF, with access of SDR 11.6 billion (equivalent to about US$15.5 billion, or 577 percent of quota), was approved on March 31, 2023, and forms part of an international support package totaling US$152.9 billion in the program’s baseline scenario. Ukraine’s IMF-supported program helps anchor policies that sustain fiscal, external, and macro-financial stability at a time of exceptionally high uncertainty. The EFF aims to support Ukraine’s economic recovery, enhance governance, and strengthen institutions with the aim of promoting long-term growth and investment.

    For the Eighth Review, Ukraine met all end-March and continuous quantitative performance criteria as well as the prior action to submit to the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine a detailed reform plan for the State Customs Service (SCS). Two structural benchmarks on tax reporting for digital platform operators and publication of the external audit of NABU were also completed. Four new benchmarks were also established, including: measures to update the single project pipeline; preparation of a prioritized roadmap for financial market infrastructure; implementation of international valuation standards; and development of legislative proposals to align securitization and bonds with international standards. The timelines of some other structural benchmarks, including the appointment of the head of the SCS, have been reset by the IMF Executive Board to allow the authorities more time to complete these important reforms. The authorities also requested a rephasing of access to IMF financing over the remainder of 2025 to better align them with Ukraine’s updated balance of payments needs, while the overall size of the program remains unchanged.   

    The 2025 growth forecast has been maintained at 2–3 percent as a smaller electricity deficit is offset by lower gas production and weaker agricultural exports. Pressures from Russia’s war will require a supplementary budget for 2025, and the medium-term fiscal path has been revised to better reflect the authorities’ policy intentions on revenue mobilization and expenditure prioritization. The National Bank of Ukraine (NBU) has maintained a tight monetary policy to respond to the still high inflation, while inflation expectations remain anchored. FX reserves remain adequate, sustained by continued sizeable external support. Overall, the outlook remains subject to exceptionally high uncertainty.

    Following the Executive Board discussion on Ukraine, Ms. Gita Gopinath, First Deputy Managing Director of the IMF, issued the following statement[1]:

    “Russia’s war continues to take a devastating social and economic toll on Ukraine. Nevertheless, macroeconomic stability has been preserved through skillful policymaking as well as substantial external support. The economy has remained resilient, but the war is weighing on the outlook, with growth tempered by labor market strains and damage to energy infrastructure. Risks to the outlook remain exceptionally high and contingency planning is key to enable appropriate policy action should risks materialize.

    “The Fund-supported program remains fully financed, with a cumulative external financing envelope of US$153 billion in the baseline scenario and US$165 billion in the downside scenario, over the 4-year program period. This includes the full utilization of the approximately US$50 billion from the G7’s Extraordinary Revenue Acceleration Loans for Ukraine (ERA) initiative. Full, timely, and predictable disbursement of external support—on terms consistent with debt sustainability—remains essential to achieving program objectives.

    “The continuing war has necessitated a Supplementary Budget for 2025. Restoring fiscal sustainability and meeting elevated priority expenditures over the medium term will require continued decisive efforts to implement the National Revenue Strategy. This includes modernization of the tax and customs services (including the timely appointment of the customs head), reduction in tax evasion, and harmonization of legislation with EU standards. These reforms, combined with improvements in public investment management frameworks, medium-term budget preparation, and fiscal risk management, are critical to underpinning growth and investment. 

    “The authorities continue working to complete their debt restructuring strategy in line with the program’s debt sustainability objectives, which is essential to create room for priority expenditures, reduce fiscal risks, and restore debt sustainability.

    “Given still elevated inflation, the tight monetary policy stance is appropriate, and the NBU should stand ready to tighten further should inflation expectations deteriorate. Greater exchange rate flexibility will help strengthen economic resilience while safeguarding reserves.

    “The financial sector remains stable, though vigilance is needed given heightened risks. Operational and governance weaknesses in the security markets regulator need to be tackled urgently. Closing gaps in Ukraine’s capital markets infrastructure will be key to attracting foreign private capital for post-war reconstruction.

    “Sustained progress in anticorruption and governance reforms remains crucial. The completed audit of the National Anti-Corruption Bureau is an important step; additional efforts are required, including amending the criminal procedures code, appointing the new head of the Economic Security Bureau, and strengthening AML/CFT frameworks.”

    Table 1. Ukraine: Selected Economic and Social Indicators, 2021–27

    2021

     

    2022

     

    2023

    2024

    2025

    2026

    2027

    Act.

    Act.

    Act.

    Proj.

    Proj.

    Proj.

    Proj.

    Real economy (percent change, unless otherwise indicated)

    Nominal GDP (billions of Ukrainian hryvnias) 1/

    5,451

     

    5,239

     

    6,628

    7,659

    8,866

    10,192

    11,322

    Real GDP 1/

    3.4

     

    -28.8

     

    5.5

    2.9

    2-3

    4.5

    4.8

    Contributions:

                     

    Domestic demand

    12.8

     

    -19.0

     

    11.9

    3.8

    5.2

    3.4

    2.7

    Private consumption

    4.5

     

    -19.0

     

    3.0

    4.6

    2.8

    3.4

    2.7

    Public consumption

    0.1

     

    5.6

     

    3.0

    -1.5

    0.3

    -2.5

    -2.0

    Investment

    8.1

     

    -5.5

     

    5.8

    0.6

    2.1

    2.5

    2.0

    Net exports

    -9.3

     

    -9.8

     

    -6.3

    -0.8

    -3.2

    1.1

    2.1

    GDP deflator

    24.8

     

    34.9

     

    19.9

    12.3

    13.5

    10.0

    6.0

    Unemployment rate (ILO definition; period average, percent)

    9.8

     

    24.5

     

    19.1

    13.1

    11.6

    10.2

    9.4

    Consumer prices (period average)

    9.4

     

    20.2

     

    12.9

    6.5

    12.6

    7.6

    5.3

    Consumer prices (end of period)

    10.0

     

    26.6

     

    5.1

    12.0

    9.0

    7.0

    5.0

    Nominal wages (average)

    20.8

     

    1.0

     

    20.1

    23.1

    17.4

    13.7

    10.8

    Real wages (average)

    10.5

     

    -16.0

     

    6.4

    15.6

    4.2

    5.7

    5.3

    Savings (percent of GDP)

    12.5

     

    17.0

     

    12.8

    11.4

    4.4

    10.0

    18.3

    Private

    12.7

     

    30.2

     

    27.4

    23.3

    21.4

    15.9

    18.0

    Public

    -0.2

     

    -13.1

     

    -14.6

    -11.8

    -17.1

    -5.9

    0.3

    Investment (percent of GDP)

    14.5

     

    12.1

     

    18.1

    18.6

    20.9

    22.6

    23.7

    Private

    10.7

     

    9.6

     

    13.4

    13.3

    16.6

    18.3

    18.9

    Public

    3.8

     

    2.5

     

    4.7

    5.4

    4.3

    4.3

    4.9

                     

    General Government (percent of GDP)

                     

    Fiscal balance 2/

    -4.0

     

    -15.6

     

    -19.3

    -17.2

    -21.3

    -10.1

    -4.6

    Fiscal balance, excl. grants 2/

    -4.0

     

    -24.8

     

    -25.8

    -23.1

    -22.1

    -10.4

    -5.6

    External financing (net)

    2.5

     

    10.7

     

    16.2

    15.0

    24.5

    8.9

    1.7

    Domestic financing (net), of which:

    1.5

     

    5.0

     

    3.1

    0.3

    -3.1

    1.3

    2.8

    NBU

    -0.3

     

    7.3

     

    -0.2

    -0.2

    -0.1

    -0.1

    -0.1

    Commercial banks

    1.4

     

    -1.5

     

    2.5

    2.9

    2.7

    0.8

    3.4

    Public and publicly-guaranteed debt

    48.9

     

    77.7

     

    81.2

    89.7

    108.6

    110.4

    106.4

                     

    Money and credit (end of period, percent change)

                     

    Base money

    11.2

     

    19.6

     

    23.3

    7.7

    21.7

    13.1

    10.4

    Broad money

    12.0

     

    20.8

     

    23.0

    13.4

    14.4

    13.2

    10.4

    Credit to nongovernment

    8.4

     

    -3.1

     

    -0.5

    13.5

    10.6

    17.7

    18.6

                     

    Balance of payments (percent of GDP)

                     

    Current account balance

    -1.9

     

    4.9

     

    -5.3

    -7.2

    -16.5

    -12.6

    -5.4

    Foreign direct investment

    3.8

     

    0.1

     

    2.5

    1.8

    2.2

    4.0

    5.0

    Gross reserves (end of period, billions of U.S. dollars)

    30.9

     

    28.5

     

    40.5

    43.8

    53.4

    52.8

    55.6

    Months of next year’s imports of goods and services

    4.5

     

    3.8

     

    5.3

    5.1

    6.3

    6.3

    6.5

    Percent of short-term debt (remaining maturity)

    74.4

     

    83.3

     

    100.3

    130.9

    178.9

    171.5

    172.1

    Percent of the IMF composite metric (float)

    105.5

     

    110.3

     

    130.2

    125.4

    125.5

    114.0

    115.7

    Goods exports (annual volume change in percent)

    39.0

     

    -37.5

     

    -8.5

    16.8

    3.0

    14.9

    14.3

    Goods imports (annual volume change in percent)

    15.1

     

    -29.7

     

    18.5

    6.0

    19.3

    4.7

    5.5

    Goods terms of trade (percent change)

    -8.4

     

    -11.6

     

    3.6

    0.5

    1.3

    1.0

    0.4

                     

    Exchange rate

                     

    Hryvnia per U.S. dollar (end of period)

    27.3

     

    36.6

     

    38.0

    42.0

    Hryvnia per U.S. dollar (period average)

    27.3

     

    32.3

     

    36.6

    40.2

    Real effective rate (CPI-based, percent change)

    2.6

     

    3.2

     

    -6.7

    -6.5

    Memorandum items:

    Per capita GDP / Population (2017): US$2,640 / 44.8 million

    Literacy / Poverty rate (2022 est 3/): 100 percent / 25 percent perpercentpercent

    Sources: Ukrainian authorities; World Bank, World Development Indicators; and IMF staff estimates.

    1/ GDP is compiled as per SNA 2008 and excludes territories that are or were in direct combat zones and temporarily occupied by Russia (consistent with the TMU).

    2/ The general government includes the central and local governments and the social funds.

    3/ Based on World Bank estimates.

    [1] At the conclusion of the discussion, the Managing Director, as Chairman of the Board, summarizes the views of Executive Directors, and this summary is transmitted to the country’s authorities. An explanation of any qualifiers used in summing up can be found here: http://www.IMF.org/external/np/sec/misc/qualifiers.htm.

    IMF Communications Department
    MEDIA RELATIONS

    PRESS OFFICER: Camila Perez

    Phone: +1 202 623-7100Email: MEDIA@IMF.org

    https://www.imf.org/en/News/Articles/2025/06/30/pr-25227-ukraine-imf-completes-8th-rev-of-ext-arrang-under-eff

    MIL OSI

    MIL OSI Russia News

  • MIL-OSI Canada: Province takes action to address health, safety concerns in supportive housing

    Source: Government of Canada regional news

    People living and those working in supportive housing will be safer and better supported as the Province begins work to ensure housing providers are able to take quick and decisive action against problematic tenants and guests, and address air-quality issues related to second-hand exposure to fentanyl.

    A new, time-limited working group will act on requests from housing providers for more authority to respond to urgent safety issues and to explore the potential to remove supportive housing from the Residential Tenancy Act. This will help to better address problematic and dangerous individuals taking advantage of vulnerable people, and better respond to weapons and criminal activity within supportive housing.

    “Supportive housing is a vital and successful way to help people experiencing or at risk of homelessness come indoors and access supports, instead of living on the street or in unsafe encampments,” said Ravi Kahlon, Minister Housing and Municipal Affairs. “We have heard from providers that they need more authority to take action and keep people safe, and we will be working with our partners to find a path forward that ensures people can live in a safe, inclusive and supportive environment.”

    The working group will bring together supportive housing providers, law enforcement and union representatives, as well as staff from the Province and BC Housing, to ensure safety for tenants and workers is paramount. The Province will engage with First Nations and tenant advocates. 

    Government has been listening to housing providers that have raised concerns about drug trafficking, weapons and crime in supportive housing, and difficulties removing individuals who are engaging in activities that affect the safety of other residents, staff and the community. This group will collaborate on a suite of potential measures to help address health and safety concerns.

    In addition, the Province, including the BC Centre for Disease Control and in partnership with WorkSafeBC, is working to respond to significant changes to the ongoing toxic-drug crisis and its potential effect in supportive housing. Coming out of the pandemic, inhaling or smoking fentanyl has become the predominant substance-use method, surpassing injection. As a result, in the past year, WorkSafeBC developed new air-quality safety standards with regard to second-hand exposure to fentanyl. These standards were set in January 2025 and are available to view in the Learn More section below.

    Early indications from a series of tests at 14 buildings in Victoria and Vancouver show some areas of supportive housing are more likely to have elevated levels of airborne fentanyl, above the limit WorkSafeBC has established. As WorkSafeBC outlines, an exposure limit is not intended to represent a fine line between safe and harmful conditions, but rather a way to measure potential exposure to help guide reduction tactics.

    BC Housing is analyzing the reports from the tests and is working with WorkSafeBC and BC Centre for Disease Control to better understand these results. The results in the reports will contribute to the development of provincial exposure-reduction guidance being established by WorkSafeBC and BC Centre for Disease Control, with support from BC Housing and other health partners, to mitigate second-hand exposure to fentanyl in supportive housing and shelters. The new working group will also discuss second-hand fentanyl smoke.

    Since 2017, the Province, through BC Housing has opened nearly 7,500 supportive homes in B.C., with more than 2,900 underway.

    Quotes:

    Jill Atkey, chief executive officer, BC Non-Profit Housing Association –

    “The complexity of operating supportive housing has shifted in recent years and we are grateful that the ministry is working closely with providers to find workable solutions that balance the rights of people with the safety for staff and residents.”

    Julian Daly, chief executive officer, Our Place Society –

    “Our Place welcomes the government’s willingness to make changes to supportive housing. The government really listened to the concerns of our sector and has acted on them. These proposed changes give us, as housing providers, more flexibility in how we manage our buildings, greater control over who lives with us and allows us to create safer homes for those we serve and a safer workplace for our colleagues.”

    Bob Hughes, chief executive officer, ASK Wellness Society –

    “On behalf of ASK Wellness Society, I am grateful to be asked to participate in the Ministry of Housing led working group created to address some of the current challenges being faced in the supportive-housing sector. Through this type of collaboration, I am confident that we will see the desired results of improving the safety and security of residents, and the continued evolution of this much-needed response to homelessness and the many barriers faced by those we support.”

    Liz Vick Sandha, chief operating officer, Connective –

    “With over 400 units of supportive housing across B.C., Connective sees first-hand the strengths and limitations of applying the Residential Tenancy Act in this context. Supportive housing, as a distinct service model, may benefit from a more tailored framework, one better attuned to the unique needs of its tenants and staff. We welcome a review of the act to explore potential changes and appreciate the ministry’s leadership in advancing this important conversation.”

    Outreach worker and BCGEU member –   

    “We look forward to the government honouring our unique perspective by continuing consultations with us. As with any home, the culture is set by everyone who occupies it and their overlapping needs, which are always in conversation with each other. This is why the work to improve B.C.’s supportive housing system will not happen overnight with a rigid framework created in isolation of those that live and breathe in these spaces.”   

    Learn More:

    To view WorkSafe’s fentanyl exposure limits, visit:
    https://www.worksafebc.com/en/resources/law-policy/act-amendments/exposure-limit-fentanyl-fentanyl-citrate?lang=en

    To learn about the steps the Province is taking to tackle the housing crisis and deliver affordable homes for people in British Columbia, visit:
    https://strongerbc.gov.bc.ca/housing/ 

    A map showing the location of all announced provincially funded housing projects in B.C. is available here: https://www.bchousing.org/projects-partners/Building-BC/homes-for-BC

    To learn how BC Housing is helping to build strong, inclusive communities, visit:
    https://www.bchousing.org/podcast

    A backgrounder follows.

    MIL OSI Canada News

  • MIL-OSI Video: FfD4, Gender Equality, Gaza & other topics – Daily Press Briefing (30 June 2025)

    Source: United Nations (video statements)

    Noon Briefing by Stéphane Dujarric, Spokesperson for the Secretary-General.

    Highlights:
    Secretary-General/Conference on Financing for Development
    Deputy Secretary-General/FfD4
    Gender Equality
    Gaza
    Occupied Palestinian Territory
    Security Council
    An Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL)
    Syria
    Ukraine
    Sudan
    DRC/Rwanda
    Afghanistan Refugees
    International Days
    Financial Contribution
    UNGA80
    Programming Note

    SECRETARY-GENERAL/CONFERENCE ON FINANCING FOR DEVELOPMENT
    The Secretary-General is in Sevilla, Spain, where he is attending the 4th International Conference on Financing for Development. This morning, at the opening of the Conference, he said that financing is the engine of development, and right now, this engine is sputtering.
    “As we meet,” the Secretary-General pointed out, “the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, our global promise to transform our world for a better, fairer future, is in danger. He stressed that the conference is not about charity, it’s about restoring justice and lives of dignity.”
    The Secretary-General also added that the conference is not about money, it’s about investing in the future we want to build, together.
    In the afternoon, at the launch of the Sevilla Platform for Action, the Secretary-General highlighted that the Platform offers an ambitious, action-oriented response to the global financing challenge.
    Soon after, at the opening of the International Business Forum, the Secretary-General underscored that by uniting public and private sector leaders, regulators and development banks, we can ensure that the conference is not an end, but rather a beginning.
    The Secretary-General also addressed that media in a joint press encounter with the President of the Government of Spain, Pedro Sánchez. He stressed that with the adoption of the Sevilla Commitment document, countries are proving their dedication to getting the engine of development revving again.
    Today, the Secretary-General also held a bilateral meeting with the President of the Government of Spain, and yesterday, he met His Majesty Don Felipe VI, King of Spain, He is also having a number of bilateral meetings with other delegation leaders who will be at the conference. We will share readouts of some of those meetings shortly.

    DEPUTY SECRETARY-GENERAL/FFD4
    Ms. Amina Mohammed, the Deputy Secretary-General, joined the Secretary-General for the opening ceremony of the conference and his meeting with the President of the Government of Spain.
    Later, she delivered remarks at side events focused on closing the SDG financing gap, including on the role of public-private cooperation, the centrality of gender equality in sustainable finance, and the leadership of African women in advancing the 2030 Agenda and Agenda 2063.
    She also held bilateral meetings with senior government officials and Heads of Government attending the conference.

    GENDER EQUALITY
    At the Fourth International Financing for Development conference in Spain, the adoption of the Compromiso de Sevilla reaffirmed the global commitment to inclusive sustainable development. However, UN Women is warning that chronic underfunding and unfair financial systems are hindering gender equality progress.
    Developing countries are falling short by an estimated $420 billion a year in the funding needed to achieve gender equality under the Sustainable Development Goals.
    UN Women is urging world leaders to match political commitments with the sustained, transparent, and accountable financing needed to deliver on promises to half the world’s population.

    Full Highlights:
    https://www.un.org/sg/en/content/noon-briefing-highlight?date%5Bvalue%5D%5Bdate%5D=30%20June%202025

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=svTsTXC1aiw

    MIL OSI Video

  • MIL-OSI Video: FfD4, Gender Equality, Gaza & other topics – Daily Press Briefing (30 June 2025)

    Source: United Nations (video statements)

    Noon Briefing by Stéphane Dujarric, Spokesperson for the Secretary-General.

    Highlights:
    Secretary-General/Conference on Financing for Development
    Deputy Secretary-General/FfD4
    Gender Equality
    Gaza
    Occupied Palestinian Territory
    Security Council
    An Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL)
    Syria
    Ukraine
    Sudan
    DRC/Rwanda
    Afghanistan Refugees
    International Days
    Financial Contribution
    UNGA80
    Programming Note

    SECRETARY-GENERAL/CONFERENCE ON FINANCING FOR DEVELOPMENT
    The Secretary-General is in Sevilla, Spain, where he is attending the 4th International Conference on Financing for Development. This morning, at the opening of the Conference, he said that financing is the engine of development, and right now, this engine is sputtering.
    “As we meet,” the Secretary-General pointed out, “the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, our global promise to transform our world for a better, fairer future, is in danger. He stressed that the conference is not about charity, it’s about restoring justice and lives of dignity.”
    The Secretary-General also added that the conference is not about money, it’s about investing in the future we want to build, together.
    In the afternoon, at the launch of the Sevilla Platform for Action, the Secretary-General highlighted that the Platform offers an ambitious, action-oriented response to the global financing challenge.
    Soon after, at the opening of the International Business Forum, the Secretary-General underscored that by uniting public and private sector leaders, regulators and development banks, we can ensure that the conference is not an end, but rather a beginning.
    The Secretary-General also addressed that media in a joint press encounter with the President of the Government of Spain, Pedro Sánchez. He stressed that with the adoption of the Sevilla Commitment document, countries are proving their dedication to getting the engine of development revving again.
    Today, the Secretary-General also held a bilateral meeting with the President of the Government of Spain, and yesterday, he met His Majesty Don Felipe VI, King of Spain, He is also having a number of bilateral meetings with other delegation leaders who will be at the conference. We will share readouts of some of those meetings shortly.

    DEPUTY SECRETARY-GENERAL/FFD4
    Ms. Amina Mohammed, the Deputy Secretary-General, joined the Secretary-General for the opening ceremony of the conference and his meeting with the President of the Government of Spain.
    Later, she delivered remarks at side events focused on closing the SDG financing gap, including on the role of public-private cooperation, the centrality of gender equality in sustainable finance, and the leadership of African women in advancing the 2030 Agenda and Agenda 2063.
    She also held bilateral meetings with senior government officials and Heads of Government attending the conference.

    GENDER EQUALITY
    At the Fourth International Financing for Development conference in Spain, the adoption of the Compromiso de Sevilla reaffirmed the global commitment to inclusive sustainable development. However, UN Women is warning that chronic underfunding and unfair financial systems are hindering gender equality progress.
    Developing countries are falling short by an estimated $420 billion a year in the funding needed to achieve gender equality under the Sustainable Development Goals.
    UN Women is urging world leaders to match political commitments with the sustained, transparent, and accountable financing needed to deliver on promises to half the world’s population.

    Full Highlights:
    https://www.un.org/sg/en/content/noon-briefing-highlight?date%5Bvalue%5D%5Bdate%5D=30%20June%202025

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=svTsTXC1aiw

    MIL OSI Video

  • MIL-OSI USA: Warner Introduces Amendment to Prioritize Aviation Safety, Honor Victims of DCA Tragedy

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Commonwealth of Virginia Mark R Warner
    WASHINGTON – U.S. Sen. Mark R. Warner (D-VA) has filed an amendment to the GOP tax and spending ‘reconciliation’ package to ensure that any increased lease payments from the Metropolitan Washington Airports Authority (MWAA) are reinvested directly into aviation safety and security at Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport (DCA), Washington Dulles International Airport (IAD), and across the national aviation system. Warner’s amendment also protects the U.S. Department of Transportation’s (USDOT) power to negotiate long-term lease terms with MWAA, and directs the establishment of a permanent memorial honoring the victims of the January 29, 2025, mid-air collision involving American Airlines Flight 5342 and a U.S. Army Aviation Brigade helicopter over DCA.
    “There is simply no justification for raising lease payments on our region’s airports without dedicating those funds to what should be our top priority: keeping the flying public safe,” said Sen. Warner. “This amendment ensures that any additional resources from MWAA go exactly where they belong — into safety and security upgrades, nationwide aviation improvements, and a fitting memorial to those we tragically lost earlier this year.”
    Under the current lease agreement, which was negotiated with USDOT and runs through the year 2100, MWAA is required to pay the federal government a baseline of $7.5 million per year, with annual adjustments for inflation, for the use of DCA and IAD. Without public justification or analysis, the GOP reconciliation bill proposes doubling that obligation starting in 2027 and requires MWAA’s lease to be renegotiated every 10 years, in spite of the enormous complexity and number of stakeholders who are party to the lease, including USDOT, MWAA, and the governments of the District of Columbia and the Commonwealth of Virginia.
    The Warner amendment would allow the proposed lease increase to proceed but redirect the revenue to:
    Implement preliminary and final safety recommendations from the National Transportation Safety Board and U.S. Department of Transportation (USDOT) related to the January 29 crash;
    Establish and maintain a permanent memorial for the victims of the mid-air collision; and
    Undertake projects directly related to the safety and security of DCA and IAD.
    The amendment also restores USDOT’s ability to negotiate long-term leases with MWAA, a tool that had previously allowed for smart, strategic partnerships to support airport operations and infrastructure over the long term.
    “This is a commonsense step to make sure that aviation policy reflects the lessons of tragedy and the needs of the traveling public,” Sen. Warner added. “I urge my colleagues to support this amendment.”
    The amendment is co-sponsored by Sens. Tim Kaine (D-VA) and Sens. Chris Van Hollen and Angela Alsobrooks (both D-MD).

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI Russia: Givi Mikanadze appointed as new Minister of Education, Science and Youth of Georgia

    Translation. Region: Russian Federal

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

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

    TBILISI, June 30 (Xinhua) — Givi Mikanadze has been appointed Minister of Education, Science and Youth of Georgia. The new minister was introduced by Georgian Prime Minister Irakli Kobakhidze at a briefing at the Georgian government administration on Monday.

    G. Mikanadze replaced Alexander Tsuladze in the ministerial post, who announced his resignation on Monday.

    Before his appointment, G. Mikanadze was the Chairman of the Parliamentary Committee on Education, Science and Youth Affairs.

    A. Tsuladze has held the post of Minister of Education, Science and Youth since October 2024. –0–

    MIL OSI Russia News

  • MIL-OSI Canada: Investing in Indigenous tourism

    Alberta’s tourism sector is thriving, with the province hitting a record-breaking $14.4 billion in visitor spending last year. Indigenous-led tourism is playing a key role in this growth by creating year-round demand, with almost half of international visitors seeking unique and authentic experiences when travelling to Alberta to discover the rich Indigenous cultures, traditions and perspectives across the province.

    To support the growing demand for Indigenous-led tourism experiences, Alberta’s government has committed to investing another $6 million over three years through Travel Alberta’s renewed agreement with Indigenous Tourism Alberta. This investment builds upon the province’s previous record-breaking investments in Indigenous-led tourism, creating meaningful employment and ownership opportunities for Indigenous Peoples while helping reach the ambitious goal of growing Alberta’s annual visitor spending to $25 billion by 2035.

    “This continued support gives Indigenous tourism operators the opportunity to provide authentic experiences for visitors to learn about the histories, arts, cultures and perspectives of Indigenous Peoples. Not only does this strengthen Alberta’s visitor economy, but it creates jobs and economic opportunities for Indigenous communities across the province while fostering understanding and supporting reconciliation.”

    Andrew Boitchenko, Minister of Tourism and Sport

    This continued investment by Alberta’s government will support Indigenous Tourism Alberta’s mentorship and development programs for Indigenous tourism operators, as well as enable joint promotional activities that drive international demand for Indigenous tourism operators across the province. By continuing to invest more in Indigenous-led tourism than any other province, Alberta’s government is positioning the province as a premier destination for travellers and helping the rich histories and cultures of Indigenous Peoples shine on the world stage.

    “When Indigenous communities lead their own tourism initiatives, the benefits ripple far beyond the visitor experience. This renewed investment supports Indigenous ownership, strengthens local economies and helps build vibrant, self-sustaining communities. We recently expanded the mandate of the Alberta Indigenous Opportunities Corporation to include tourism, opening more doors for Indigenous entrepreneurs to access capital, grow their businesses and shape the future of Alberta’s tourism sector. We’re proud to stand with Indigenous Tourism Alberta in building a stronger, more inclusive economy for all.”

    Rajan Sawhney, Minister of Indigenous Relations

    “We’re seeing increasing demand for Indigenous tourism from all over the world at our business, and a strong partnership between Indigenous Tourism Alberta and Travel Alberta is so important to keep that progressing. Tourism is competitive, and Indigenous entrepreneurs represent a huge opportunity as a market differentiator for the entire industry in Alberta, so I’m thrilled to see this collaboration continue.”

    Brenda Holder, chair and founding member of Indigenous Tourism Alberta, owner of Mahikan Trails

    “This renewed investment is a continuation of our long-standing partnership with Indigenous Tourism Alberta, built on a shared vision: more authentic, transformative travel experiences, driven by Indigenous communities that want to share their stories with the world. It reaffirms our belief that Indigenous tourism has the power to support thriving communities, creating economic and entrepreneurial opportunities for Indigenous Peoples to own and lead.”

    Jon Mamela, chief commercial officer, Travel Alberta

    Quick facts

    • Through Travel Alberta’s renewed agreement with Indigenous Tourism Alberta, Alberta’s government is investing $6 million over three years to support Indigenous-led tourism.
    • Since 2021, Alberta’s government invested a historic $12 million to support the growth of Indigenous-owned tourism businesses and organizations across the province.
    • Indigenous tourism contributed $126 million in GDP to Alberta’s economy last year, and is projected to contribute another $138.6 million in 2025.

    Related information

    • Indigenous Tourism Alberta
    • Higher ground: a tourism sector strategy

    Related news

    • Alberta’s tourism soars past national average (Jun. 18, 2025)
    • Alberta tops Canada in tourism growth (Apr. 8, 2025)
    • Supporting Indigenous business development (Mar. 21, 2025)
    • Alberta tourism shines on the national stage (Jan. 24, 2025)
    • AIOC mandate expands to tourism (Oct. 30, 2024)
    • Celebrating Indigenous Tourism (Oct. 4, 2024)

    MIL OSI Canada News

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Answer to a written question – European Movement Serbia – E-001282/2025(ASW)

    Source: European Parliament

    Evropski pokret u Srbiji [1] (European Movement Serbia) has received limited financial support from the EU over the past decade. This funding is part of the EU’s broader strategy to foster a stronger, democratic, and inclusive Serbia for all its citizens and to support their participation in the country’s EU accession process.

    Organisations like Evropski pokret u Srbiji play a crucial role in promoting and supporting a whole-society approach to the EU accession process.

    The Commission engages with a diverse range of stakeholders through open calls, thereby mitigating the risk of any single narrative dominating the political discourse in Serbia.

    In providing EU financial support for civil society in the Western Balkans, including Serbia, the Commission implements strict monitoring and evaluation mechanisms. These include regular audits, reporting requirements, and assessments of the impact of funded projects.

    This multi-faceted oversight aims to uphold the integrity of the funding process and ensure that it contributes positively to the democratic development of the country.

    The portrayal of civil society organisations that receive EU funding as tools of external influence undermines EU’s legitimate efforts to support civil society and democratic processes within Serbia and goes against the values that are fundamental for the future of any candidate country that wants to join the EU.

    • [1] https://www.emins.org/en/.
    Last updated: 30 June 2025

    MIL OSI Europe News

  • MIL-OSI Europe: REPORT on the security of energy supply in the EU – A10-0121/2025

    Source: European Parliament

    MOTION FOR A EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT RESOLUTION

    on the security of energy supply in the EU

    (2025/2055(INI))

    The European Parliament,

     having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular Article 194 thereof,

     having regard to Council Directive 2009/119/EC of 14 September 2009 imposing an obligation on Member States to maintain minimum stocks of crude oil and/or petroleum products[1] (Oil Stocks Directive),

     having regard to the Commission communication of 28 May 2014 entitled ‘European Energy Security Strategy’ (COM(2014)0330),

     having regard to Regulation (EU) 2017/1938 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 October 2017 concerning measures to safeguard the security of gas supply and repealing Regulation (EU) No 994/2010[2],

     having regard to Directive (EU) 2019/944 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 5 June 2019 on common rules for the internal market for electricity and amending Directive 2012/27/EU[3],

     having regard to Regulation (EU) 2019/943 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 5 June 2019 on the internal market for electricity[4],

     having regard to Regulation (EU) 2019/941 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 5 June 2019 on risk-preparedness in the electricity sector and repealing Directive 2005/89/EC[5],

     having regard to the Commission communication of 11 December 2019 entitled ‘The European Green Deal’ (COM(2019)0640),

     having regard to the Commission communication of 8 July 2020 entitled ‘Powering a climate-neutral economy: An EU Strategy for Energy System Integration’ (COM(2020)0299),

     having regard to Regulation (EU) 2021/1153 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 7 July 2021 establishing the Connecting Europe Facility and repealing Regulations (EU) 1316/2013 and (EU) No 283/2014[6],

     having regard to Regulation (EU) 2021/1119 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 June 2021 establishing the framework for achieving climate neutrality and amending Regulations (EC) No 401/2009 and (EU) 2018/1999 (‘European Climate Law’)[7],

     having regard to Regulation (EU) 2022/869 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 May 2022 on guidelines for trans-European energy infrastructure, amending Regulations (EC) No 715/2009, (EU) 2019/942 and (EU) 2019/943 and Directives 2009/73/EC and (EU) 2019/944, and repealing Regulation (EU) No 347/2013[8],

     having regard to the joint communication from the Commission and the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy of 18 May 2022 entitled ‘EU external energy engagement in a changing world’ (JOIN(2022)0023),

     having regard to the Commission communication of 18 May 2022 entitled ‘REPowerEU Plan’ (COM(2022)0230),

     having regard to the Commission communication of 18 October 2022 entitled ‘Digitalising the energy system – EU action plan’ (COM(2022)0552),

     having regard to the final assessment report on the EU-NATO Task Force on the resilience of critical infrastructure, published in June 2023,

     having regard to Directive (EU) 2023/1791 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 September 2023 on energy efficiency and amending Regulation (EU) 2023/955 (recast)[9] (Energy Efficiency Directive),

     having regard to the Euratom Supply Agency Annual Report 2023,

     having regard to Directive (EU) 2023/2413 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 October 2023 amending Directive (EU) 2018/2001, Regulation (EU) 2018/1999 and Directive 98/70/EC as regards the promotion of energy from renewable sources, and repealing Council Directive (EU) 2015/652 (the Renewable Energy Directive)[10],

     having regard to Directive (EU) 2024/1788 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 June 2024 on common rules for the internal markets for renewable gas, natural gas and hydrogen, amending Directive (EU) 2023/1791 and repealing Directive 2009/73/EC (recast)[11],

     having regard to Regulation (EU) 2024/1789 on the internal markets for renewable gas, natural gas and hydrogen, amending Regulations (EU) No 1227/2011, (EU) 2017/1938, (EU) 2019/942 and (EU) 2022/869 and Decision (EU) 2017/684 and repealing Regulation (EC) No 715/2009 (recast)[12],

     having regard to Regulation (EU) 2024/1787 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 June 2024 on the reduction of methane emissions in the energy sector and amending Regulation (EU) 2019/942[13],

     having regard to Directive (EU) 2024/1711 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 June 2024 amending Directives (EU) 2018/2001 and (EU) 2019/944 as regards improving the Union’s electricity market design[14],

     having regard to Regulation (EU) 2024/1747 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 June 2024 amending Regulations (EU) 2019/942 and (EU) 2019/943 as regards improving the Union’s electricity market design (Electricity Market Design (EMD) Regulation)[15],

     having regard to its resolution of 14 November 2024 on EU actions against the Russian shadow fleets and ensuring a full enforcement of sanctions against Russia[16],

     having regard to the report by Sauli Niinistö entitled ‘Safer Together – Strengthening Europe’s Civilian and Military Preparedness and Readiness’ (Niinistö report), published on 30 October 2024,

     having regard to European Court of Auditors Special Report 09/2024 entitled ‘Security of the supply of gas in the EU’[17],

     having regard to the Commission communication of 29 January 2025 entitled ‘A Competitiveness Compass for the EU’ (COM(2025)0030),

     having regard to the joint communication from the Commission and the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy of 21 February 2025 entitled ‘EU Action Plan on Cable Security’ (JOIN(2025)0009),

     having regard to the Commission communication of 26 February 2025 entitled ‘Action Plan for Affordable Energy’ (COM(2025)0079),

     having regard to the joint communication from the Commission and the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy of 26 March 2025 on the European Preparedness Union Strategy (JOIN(2025)0130),

     having regard to Rule 55 of its Rules of Procedure,

     having regard to the report of the Committee on Industry, Research and Energy (A10-0121/2025),

    A. whereas energy security is a key building block of a resilient, sustainable and competitive economy; whereas reliable and affordable energy supplies are essential for economic growth, industrial productivity and societal well-being;

    B. whereas in the context of a general security crisis and the need for preparedness against defence challenges, securing energy supply constitutes a priority;

    C. whereas despite the potential for developing domestic clean and renewable energy sources, the EU imports more than 60 % of its energy, including 90 % of its gas and 97 % of its oil[18], leaving it vulnerable to potential energy supply disruptions;

    D. whereas the EU has the potential to develop renewable resources, and since the publication of the Commission’s last Energy Security Strategy in 2014, the production of home-grown renewable energy has grown substantially – wind power by 98 %, solar photovoltaic by 314 %, solar thermal by 22 % and ocean energy by 244 %; whereas, over the same period, the EU’s domestic fossil fuel production has declined, with coal production falling by 53 %, oil by 31 % and gas by 73 %;

    E. whereas with a renewable energy-dominated grid, Europe will need to secure over 100 GW of new clean firm power capacity by 2035 to ensure reliability, energy security and lower costs[19];

    F. whereas the gap between energy production and EU demand negatively affects the EU’s trade balance, with energy imports amounting to EUR 427 billion in 2024 – down from a peak of EUR 602 billion in 2022 – for coal, oil and gas[20];

    G. whereas EU nuclear production has declined by 24 % since 2014[21]; whereas a number of Member States are demonstrating their commitment to expanding nuclear energy as a pillar of their energy strategies and advancing their nuclear power projects;

    H. whereas the diversification of energy sources contributes to the EU’s open strategic autonomy, energy security and resilience against external supply disruptions;

    I. whereas applying renewable and clean domestic energy production, energy efficiency and energy saving measures across the entire value chain decreases reliance on external energy sources and enhances the security of energy supply; whereas EU energy efficiency policies have yielded structural results, with energy demand peaking in 2006 and declining by 20 % in 2023[22], highlighting energy efficiency as the most cost-effective way to reduce emissions, enhance competitiveness, make energy consumption more affordable and improve energy security;

    J. whereas Member States differ in terms of natural and geographical characteristics, energy supply, security, sources and policies;

    K. whereas the Russian Federation has for decades weaponised its supplies of oil, coal, nuclear power and gas to the EU in order to create division among Member States and, since the summer of 2021, to fuel inflation and weaken Europe’s resolve to support Ukraine in its just fight for freedom; whereas Russia’s war against Ukraine started in 2014; whereas Russia has been carrying out an illegal, unprovoked and unjustified full-scale war of aggression against Ukraine since 24 February 2022; whereas Member States agreed in the Versailles Declaration[23] to reassess how to ensure the security of their energy supplies and to phase out their dependency on Russian gas, oil and coal imports ‘as soon as possible’ by, among other means, speeding up the development of renewables and the production of their key components and accelerating the reduction of overall EU reliance on fossil fuels, taking into account national circumstances and Member States’ energy mix choices; whereas the REPowerEU plan put forward a set of actions to stop importing Russian fossil fuels by 2027 at the latest;

    L. whereas while most Russian oil and coal imports have been sanctioned, Russian gas and nuclear imports have regrettably remained outside of the EU’s sanctions regime amid concerns over security of supply;

    M. whereas the share of Russian pipeline gas, both liquefied natural gas (LNG) and pipeline, in the EU’s total energy imports significantly decreased from 45 % in 2021 to approximately 19 % in 2024; whereas EU imports of Russian fossil fuels in the third year of the invasion have surpassed the EU financial aid sent to Ukraine in the same period (EUR 18.7 billion in 2024)[24]; whereas since the beginning of the war, Russia has earned a total of EUR 206 billion in revenue from fossil fuel exports to the EU; whereas global fossil fuel exports constitute the single largest source of revenue for Russia, amounting to EUR 250 billion per year[25] – equivalent to 160 % of the Russian military budget for this year[26];

    N. whereas among the 100 reactors operating in the EU, 18 are located in five EU countries and are of Russian or Soviet-design, each with varying levels of built-in reliance on Rosatom, which poses a particular risk to European energy security; whereas in 2024, Russia met around 23 % of the EU’s total demand for uranium conversion services and 24 % for uranium enrichment services;

    O. whereas Russia has been circumventing sanctions through its shadow fleet, which transports oil to willing buyers under false flags or without flags and which poses serious environmental risks; whereas Member States have yet to implement the effective measures adopted by the Council in the 15th sanctions package against sanctions evasion through the shadow fleet;

    P. whereas in its November 2024 resolution, Parliament called for the EU and its Member States to ban all imports of Russian energy, including LNG and nuclear, to require that ships exporting LNG from Russia be banned from entering EU ports and to refrain from concluding any new agreements with Rosatom or its subsidiaries;

    Q. whereas the absence of an updated robust EU energy security strategy is adversely affecting businesses, industries and households; whereas, among other contributing factors, this has led to a sharp rise in energy poverty with nearly one in ten households (10.6 %) unable to adequately heat their homes in 2023[27], an increase from 6.9 % in 2021[28];

    R. whereas attacks against critical energy infrastructure can lead to a loss of power affecting several Member States simultaneously and substantial economic damage, undermine public security and have implications for the EU’s defence capabilities; whereas Europe’s energy sector has been inundated with cyberattacks since Russia’s invasion of Ukraine; whereas the Baltic Sea’s critical energy infrastructure is under regular attack from Russia; whereas the growing number of perimeter harassment incidents against offshore energy infrastructure poses a serious concern;

    S. whereas NATO’s role in energy security was first defined at the 2008 Bucharest Summit and has since been strengthened; whereas NATO is strengthening the security of critical infrastructure to prevent sabotage, including through the recently launched Baltic Sentry initiative; whereas NATO is supporting national authorities in enhancing their resilience against energy supply disruptions that could affect national and collective defence;

    T. whereas the integration of the Baltic states’ electricity systems into the continental European network in February 2025 was a critical step towards enhancing their energy security, as it eliminated reliance on the Russian-controlled grid, thereby reducing geopolitical vulnerabilities and strengthening the resilience of the Baltic region;

    A new vision for energy security in a changing global landscape

    1. Recalls that the European Environment Agency defines energy security as ‘the availability of energy at all times in various forms, in sufficient quantities, and at reasonable and/or affordable prices’; considers that a comprehensive approach to energy security should take into account the physical infrastructure dimension, the availability, reliability, stability and affordability of supplies and their sustainability, and should place emphasis on the geopolitical and climate dimensions;

    2. Stresses that energy security is a cross-sectoral issue that underpins the functioning of all critical sectors, making it indispensable for economic stability, public safety and national resilience; underlines that integrating energy security considerations into relevant policies and their underlying impact assessments is crucial for enhancing the coherence, consistency and overall effectiveness of EU policymaking;

    3. Emphasises that the current geopolitical situation and continued perilous energy supply dependencies underscore the need to revise the understanding of energy security and recognises that the resilience of energy systems, understood as the ability to anticipate, withstand, adapt to, and quickly recover from possible disruptions, is now a strategic imperative;

    4. Stresses that as the energy system continues to decarbonise, the share of renewables increases and electrification advances, a well-functioning and integrated energy market, energy efficiency, the integration of flexibility sources (electricity and heat storage, hydrogen, comprehensively developed and resilient infrastructure, demand response, etc.), and sufficient dispatchable capacity will be crucial to successfully manage the intermittency of renewable energy sources and unlock the full potential of the energy transition;

    5. Highlights that energy security cannot work without adequacy; notes that ‘the scarcity issues tend to shift from the peripheral areas of Europe in 2025 to the central parts of the continent by 2033’[29]; believes that capacity remuneration mechanisms play a structural role in securing dispatchable backup capacity to ensure adequacy during peak times or periods of supply shortages and in helping to incentivise the necessary investments in generating capacity that market signals, relying solely on infrequent scarcity price hours, may fail to justify; underlines the need to ensure that the mechanisms are open to different types of resources (such as demand side, energy savings, aggregation, storage units and cross-border resources) capable of providing the necessary services, such as flexibility, do not create undue market distortions or limit cross-zonal trade, and reflect compatibility with a future decarbonised electricity system, including through coherence with defined emission limits as set out in Article 22 of the EMD Regulation; recalls that remuneration for capacity mechanisms only covers their availability; stresses the urgent need to simplify and streamline their approval processes, as requested by the EMD revision, while giving due consideration to the specific problems of the electricity market in the respective Member States in the Commission’s approval process; notes the Commission report on the assessment of possibilities of streamlining and simplifying the process of applying a capacity mechanism[30] and the ongoing works on the Clean Industrial Deal State Aid Framework with concrete proposals to accelerate the approval process; notes that while the balancing market provides essential short-term services, it is not yet investment-friendly and calls therefore on the Commission to develop incentives to build the flexible assets that balancing markets urgently need;

    6. Stresses that decarbonisation should take into account the specificities of Member States and their regions, including Europe’s outermost territories and Just Transition Fund regions and their level of access to different types of clean energy sources, the needs of their industries and the vulnerability of their citizens in order to ensure a just transition that maintains energy security by creating synergies between climate ambitions, geographical and natural conditions, and social and economic realities;

    7. Notes the need for a broader approach to non-fossil flexibility and energy storage that incorporates molecules and heat; highlights the potential of district heating systems that can use thermal storage to reduce the temperature of the loop and incorporate waste heat, solar, geothermal and other renewable sources, where appropriate, using natural gas and biomass in a transition period; draws attention to the important role that the optimal use of high-efficiency cogeneration, in line with the Energy Efficiency Directive, can play in contributing to balancing the electricity grid and to the competitiveness of some industrial sectors, especially those that do not have alternative ways of producing affordable heat in their industrial processes; stresses the need to modernise and expand district heating grids to this end;

    8. Emphasises that technological neutrality plays a key role in enhancing the security of energy supply while avoiding lock-in effects and fostering sustainability, economic efficiency and a just transition; recalls the need to invest in a diverse portfolio of clean technologies that allow regions to adopt technologies best suited to their needs in a cost-effective way, making energy more affordable and accessible;

    9. Notes that the Draghi report[31] highlights that a reduction in dependency on fossil fuel imports would enhance EU competitiveness and the affordability and security of supply; notes that natural gas is currently a component of the EU’s energy security, with demand of 320 bcm in 2024, and notes the International Energy Agency (IEA) forecasts indicating a moderate demand of 260 bcm annually by 2035[32], while a REpowerEU scenario projected a possible demand reduction of 184 bcm by 2030, implying an approximate 50 % slash in natural gas demand in less than five years, compared to demand of 356 bcm in 2022; recalls Draghi’s proposal to establish a comprehensive strategy for natural gas, managing its role during the transition and securing its supply, that should guide infrastructure choices, international partnerships and legislation; notes, with concern, that inconsistent policies on natural gas have weakened the trading position of EU companies, leaving them exposed to global spot market prices and potentially creating a gap between what the EU has contractually secured and what will be imported over time;

    10. Stresses that the development of nuclear energy remains a national prerogative in the framework of EU law; notes that for the Member States that choose to have nuclear power in their energy mix, it can have an important role to play in an integrated energy system with increasing penetration of renewables; notes that a number of Member States see a need to support the development and deployment of both existing and a new generation of nuclear technologies, as well as the entire nuclear fuel cycle, that will contribute to building a competitive technological supply chain in the EU so as to ensure open strategic autonomy; stresses the importance of assessing the full cost of the entire nuclear energy life cycle, including construction, operation, security, environmental and health impacts, waste management and decommissioning; notes the existing and ongoing reliance on foreign providers, with approximately 97 % of the EU’s natural uranium supply in 2022 coming from oversea sources[33] and stresses the need to diversify  uranium and nuclear fuel supply sources and to follow the Euratom Supply Agency’s recommendation in developing reliable supply chains to meet the growing demand for nuclear and new nuclear technologies; notes, in this regard, the European Investment Bank’s recent decision to renew its support for strengthening European uranium enrichment capacities; underlines that small modular reactors (SMRs) and advanced modular reactors (AMRs) have the potential to enhance energy security by providing low-carbon power; notes, however, that the technology is not yet fully developed; welcomes the announced assessment of the possibility of streamlining licensing practices for new nuclear energy technologies such as SMRs;

    11. Recognises that renewable energy constitutes an enabler of energy autonomy and long-term security of supply; stresses that renewables are essential in delivering energy security as they already constitute the main source of home-grown energy for the EU; highlights the importance of maximising the use of existing renewable capacities, particularly by tackling the issue of curtailment, as grid congestion in the EU curtailed over 12 TWh of renewable electricity in 2023, resulting in an additional 4.2 million tons of CO₂ emissions[34]; notes that renewables have already helped to reduce EU dependence on Russian gas as they accounted for 25 % of the energy and 45 % of the electricity consumed in the EU in 2023; reaffirms the importance of sustained EU support for the development and deployment of established renewable technologies, such as solar, wind power, geothermal and heat pumps; reiterates the necessity of policy and investment support for less developed or emerging sectors in order to accelerate the deployment of renewable technologies that are the most relevant given their national and local circumstances, such as innovative geothermal technologies, biomethane, solar thermal, marine energy, tidal energy, osmotic energy and concentrated solar power; expresses concern that, without targeted support policies, some innovative technologies may fail to reach commercialisation in a timely manner, and therefore calls on the Member States to support their research, demonstration, market adoption and scale-up; calls on the Commission to present an investment plan for these renewable technologies;

    12. Notes, in particular, the potential of geothermal energy, estimated to reach 510 GW by 2035 at a capacity factor of 80-90 %; highlights the vast untapped resources in certain EU regions and calls on the Commission to deliver on Parliament’s call to support the development of geothermal energy, including through the establishment of risk mitigation instruments;

    13. Asks the IEA to conduct an analysis to assess the possibilities for using EU natural gas resources; notes that domestic EU natural gas production dropped by more than a third between 2020 and 2023 and that this decline is expected to continue with no significant near-term increase in the production of green gases, including biogas and biomethane, in the EU; notes that Draghi’s report highlights that while progressively decarbonising and moving to hydrogen and green gases in line with RED III and REPowerEU as a transitional measure, domestic natural gas production – where deemed justified by individual Member States – could also play a role in contributing to security of supply and avoiding exposure to negative geopolitical developments;

    14. Highlights that diversification is vital to mitigate the risk of supplier dominance in a changing geopolitical context; believes the EU needs to strengthen international partnerships with reliable suppliers of energy, raw materials and clean-tech components in all regions of the world, and, in particular, with European Economic Area countries;

    15. Underlines that enhancing energy security requires a holistic approach, notably through improving energy efficiency in key end-use energy sectors, such as buildings and industry, promoting energy savings, boosting investment in research and development, and ensuring meaningful citizen participation, all of which are essential to achieving a resilient, sustainable and inclusive energy system;

    16. Calls on the Commission to be mindful of future military capability and mobility needs in the development of the EU’s energy system; notes, with concern, that the EU is highly import-dependent for crude oil and petroleum products; calls on the Commission to prepare a comprehensive strategy on liquid fuels in order to ensure their readily available access for the military in a crisis situation, and to reduce dependencies on vulnerable import chains and unreliable producers, particularly thorough the development of advanced synthetic fuels (such as sustainable aviation fuels and e-fuels) in Europe;

    17. Draws attention to the Niinistö report’s recommendation on the need for further work on priority dual-use transport corridors for civilian and defence-related logistical needs, and on the expansion of fuel supply chains for the armed forces along these corridors, as well as stockpiling and strategic reserves of energy, that could be particularly useful for the regions with insufficiently developed pipeline infrastructure and fuel storage; calls, in this respect, on the Commission to review the Oil Stocks Directive in the light of recent geopolitical shifts and the military readiness needs in order to strengthen energy security and resilience against emerging military risks;

    18. Acknowledges the rapidly accelerating energy demand driven by the digital sector, particularly the substantial energy requirements of data centres and artificial intelligence systems; stresses that this trend highlights the urgent need for robust energy efficiency policies and underscores the importance of the EU proactively pursuing sustainable, forward-looking solutions to meet this growing demand while safeguarding the resilience of its energy system;

    A resilient energy infrastructure

    19. Notes that infrastructure bottlenecks impede the benefits of sector integration and aggravate the threats to energy security; underlines the importance of investing in new energy networks, including cross-border interconnectors and offshore grids, and optimising existing infrastructure to increase capacity using grid-enhancing technologies (GETs) while reducing new infrastructure needs, in order to enable the integration of renewables and other new generation facilities, close price gaps, improve the overall system efficiency and foster solidarity among the Member States in the event of an energy crisis; emphasises the need for technically sound infrastructure planning that takes into account geographical and natural characteristics while ensuring long-term viability and avoiding the creation of stranded assets;

    20. Calls on the Commission to urgently assess areas where interconnectors are insufficient so as to achieve the current 15 % interconnection target as set out in Regulation (EU) 2018/1999[35]; stresses the importance of Projects of Common Interest (PCIs) in facilitating the efficient and secure flow of electricity across Member States and regions, thereby strengthening cross-border integration and energy solidarity within the EU; acknowledges the role of the Connecting Europe Facility for Energy (CEF-E) in completing the above investments and reiterates its call for its funding to be significantly increased when proposing the next multiannual financial framework;

    21. Calls on the Member States to accelerate permitting procedures for electricity installations and networks; notes that excessively long permitting procedures could create legal uncertainty, undermining resource adequacy by delaying the implementation of critical projects – whether for repowering or revamping existing generation sites, or for developing transmission, distribution, or storage infrastructure; welcomes the positive progress made regarding provisions adopted in the latest revision of the Renewable Energy Directive and the Emergency Regulation on Permitting[36] to accelerate, streamline and simplify permit-granting procedures;

    22. Recalls that climate change continues to worsen, placing increasing stress on the energy system due to extreme weather events, such as heat waves, that lead to thermal power plant shutdowns, droughts that reduce generation output, and severe storms, floods and fires that damage electricity grids and gas pipelines; stresses that the impact of climate change on generation assets, networks and consumption patterns should be better integrated into the modelling and preparedness of energy infrastructure; emphasises the need for resilient energy system planning, incorporating climate-adaptive strategies such as advanced cooling technologies, grid flexibility, decentralised renewable generation and strengthened infrastructure protections; highlights the importance of integrating a climate-proofing plan, grounded in an initial risk-based assessment, into energy projects from the earliest stages of development;

    23. Calls on the Commission to build on Directive (EU) 2022/2557[37] on the resilience of critical entities by facilitating its full and harmonised implementation through the provision of best practices, guidance materials and methodologies, and cross-border training activities and exercises to support Member States, competent authorities and critical energy entities;

    24. Emphasises the need to invest in the protection and resilience of energy infrastructure against human-caused threats, such as military, hybrid and cyber attacks; expresses concern about recent sabotage incidents in the Baltic Sea and calls for stronger EU-level action to protect the EU’s critical energy infrastructure, including cross-border connections with non-EU countries, such as subsea pipelines and cables, offshore wind farms and interconnections, designed to support the most impacted Member States, and to complement national measures; welcomes, in this regard, the joint communication on the EU Action Plan on Cable Security;

    25. Notes that the decentralisation of the energy system, that both strengthens resilience and facilitates the energy transition, and increased diversity of sources and autonomy, reduce reliance on centralised power plants, minimise outage risks, enhance grid stability, and enable quicker recovery from disruptions; emphasises at the same time that the increased number of remote and dispersed sources of energy, energy storage and new connections require enhanced measures to ensure robust infrastructure protection;

    26. Calls on the Commission to draw on the lessons learned from the war in Ukraine, particularly the critical role of electricity interconnection, microgrids, distributed solar power, wind power and battery storage in ensuring greater resilience of the electricity grid against military attacks, including cyberattacks, drones and missiles; commends Ukraine’s sustained efforts to maintain the functionality and safety of its energy system in the face of Russia’s war of aggression, and underscores that supporting Ukraine also entails helping to safeguard the soundness of its national electrical grid;

    27. Notes, with concern, that small distributed energy resources (DERs) connected to the internet, such as inverters, are not covered by appropriate conformity assessment procedures under cybersecurity legislation, such as the Cyber Resilience Act[38], and since they can be remotely controlled and their software updated by the manufacturer, which, in many cases, are non-trusted vendors, they could give these non-trusted vendors control over EU electricity grids; urges the Commission to establish mandatory risk assessments for DERs based on the country of origin, ensuring that devices controlled from jurisdictions with potential security concerns are subject to strict oversight and localisation requirements; calls for enhanced resilience in European supply chains by promoting EU-based manufacturing of DERs and fostering alliances with trusted international partners; highlights the need for an adequate number of professionals specialised in cybersecurity and close coordination among Member States to address these vulnerabilities;

    28. Calls on energy companies that manage critical infrastructure to work closely with the EU Agency for Cybersecurity and equip themselves with the most advanced cybersecurity tools; considers that cooperation with NATO in the field of cybersecurity should be strengthened in order to counter hybrid threats to Europe’s energy security;

    29. Notes that the Member States need to do their utmost to increase their resilience, which encompasses the ability to prevent, protect against, respond to, resist, mitigate, absorb, accommodate and recover from incidents, taking into full account the interdependence of the EU energy market and the potential domino effect that infrastructure failures in one country may have across the Union; underlines, in particular, the need to strengthen the recovery aspect, which could be achieved through an efficient European repair and response mechanism and national and regional operational plans, which could serve as an important element of the EU’s deterrence strategy; notes the importance of EU solidarity in responding to potential infrastructure incidents, ensuring coordinated action and mutual support among Member States;

    30. Recalls that energy infrastructure constitutes a particularly sensitive sector in need of protection against foreign interests; urges the Member States and the Commission to address security risks associated with foreign investment in and acquisitions of energy infrastructure; expresses concern about a series of potentially sensitive foreign investments, particularly in grids; welcomes, in this regard, the ongoing revision of the Foreign Investment Screening Regulation[39] as a timely step towards adopting a stringent strategic approach to the development and oversight of European energy infrastructure;

    31. Stresses that energy security should include the supply of key clean technologies, components and critical raw materials and notes the need for their diversified sourcing; calls for increased support for the EU’s grid manufacturing industry as a strategic pillar of the energy transition, with particular emphasis on ensuring a fair and competitive regulatory environment for European manufacturers, while exploring the potential for local content requirements to strengthen energy security, supply chain resilience and industrial competitiveness; calls for an update of the Public Procurement Framework to simplify and reduce the administrative burden for grid operators to access the needed grid technologies;

    32. Emphasises the importance of integrating circularity principles into the design of critical infrastructure and equipment, and calls for increased support for their implementation, with the goal of reducing the EU’s dependence on imports of foreign raw materials and enhancing resource efficiency;

    Phase out of Russian energy supplies

    33. Highlights that the challenges posed by a lack of solidarity in the EU and by some Member States prioritising particular interests have made the whole continent aware of the dangers of dependence on an unreliable energy supplier weaponising energy exports; underlines that the lessons learned from Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine need to be at the core of future EU actions, particularly highlighting the critical importance of a united European response in order to eliminate perilous dependencies in energy supplies;

    34. Underlines that the EU has made advances in reducing its energy dependence thanks largely to the REPowerEU plan and the 16 sanctions packages, leading to a decline in imports of Russian gas (pipeline and LNG) from 45 % of total EU gas imports in 2021 to 19 % as of 2024;

    35. Expresses deep concern that the EU still maintains its reliance on Russian gas and, moreover, has recently seen an increase, with imports rising by 18 % in 2024 and continuing to grow in 2025[40]; notes that in 2024 alone, Member States purchased an estimated EUR 7 billion worth of Russian LNG, and since Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, the EU has imported EUR 200 billion worth of Russian oil and gas – totally[41] fuelling Russia’s war machine;

    36. Welcomes the publication of a roadmap for phasing out Russian energy imports, which must pave the way for their definitive end as soon as possible;

    37. Welcomes the stepwise prohibition of Russian gas imports proposed by the Commission; stresses the need to introduce an EU-wide ban on all Russian natural gas imports by 2027 at the latest, and on new contracts and existing spot contracts by the end of 2025; insists that the Member States, including those currently benefiting from targeted derogations for Russian oil imports, should ultimately phase out these imports by 2027 at the latest; welcomes the upcoming legislative proposals in this regard and calls on the Commission to explore the use of all available transitional instruments that could lead to the end of Russian fossil fuel imports by 2027, such as the introduction of a regular quota system for Russian gas imports into the EU and the introduction of a ceiling price for Russian LNG, following an assessment of market and price impacts; calls on the Commission to provide EU companies with effective and legally sound toolkits to facilitate their efforts to get out of long-term contracts with Russian suppliers without incurring penalties;

    38. Calls on the Member States to include gas deliveries to the EU from the Yamal LNG and Arctic LNG 2 terminals in the scope of EU sanctions and the respective sanctioning of the singular fleet of ice-class LNG carriers linked to the Yamal LNG project; notes that sanctioning LNG carriers would be highly effective, as there is a limited number of ice-class LNG carriers in the world; stresses that the above actions would require adequate assessments of the legal and economic impacts on the European companies concerned and to ensure their ability to exit contracts;

    39. Commends the inclusion of the nuclear supply chain in the roadmap; notes, with concern, that Russian nuclear fuel remains present in the EU market, including through indirect supply chains, and that in 2023, 23.5 % of the uranium consumed in the EU came from Russia and 30.1 % of the uranium used in the EU’s nuclear fleet was enriched by Russia; notes that while domestic providers are ramping up capacity in their European facilities to meet increased demand, as utilities proactively move away from Russian supply, clear policy decisions are urgently required at EU and national level to address the above vulnerabilities in the nuclear supply chain; calls therefore for support for projects within the Union that contribute to greater autonomy and security of nuclear fuel supply;

    40. Expresses concern that official data does not provide a complete picture of Russian energy imports and their final destination, as relabelled Russian oil and gas continue to enter the EU market; notes with regret that this, in some cases, occurs with the acquiescence of the state actors involved;

    41. Agrees that an adequate assessment of the amount of Russian energy imports is a prerequisite for phasing out this dependence; regrets the continued whitewashing of Russian energy imports and stresses the need for greater transparency in the EU energy market; calls on the Member States to publish data on the origin of imported, exported and consumed Russian gas, and urges the application of all measures against the whitewashing of Russian energy imports; notes that relevant reporting obligations laid down under Regulation (EU) 2024/1787 on methane emissions reduction in the energy sector can contribute to achieving this goal;

    42. Welcomes the upcoming proposals for transparency, monitoring and traceability mechanisms, as the effective implementation of sanctions depends on compatible control mechanisms in all Member States; underscores the urgent need to develop a legal mechanism to ensure the transparency and traceability of natural gas originating in Russia and exported to the EU as liquefied natural gas and by pipeline, and eventually to cover oil imports; stresses that this mechanism should be extended to energy imports from other destinations in the future; considers that the mechanism would require cooperation between various services, including EU competition services, the Agency for the Cooperation of Energy Regulators (ACER) and national customs authorities; asks the Member States to consider strengthening the criminal investigation powers of national customs authorities to ensure the effectiveness of the above mechanism and introducing sufficient deterrent measures and fines, such as adequate financial penalties for sanctions evasion;

    43. Stresses the need to adopt a legal framework for diversification, requiring each Member State to prepare, in a coordinated manner and through the appropriate competent authorities, an exit plan for Russian energy sources and to support and oversee the preparation and implementation of specialised exit plans at the level of undertakings active in their respective energy sectors; considers that these plans should include domestic production and demand reduction dimensions;

    44. Strongly condemns the calls for a return to Russian energy imports as part of the peace settlement in Ukraine; firmly rejects the idea of the possible certification of the Nord Stream 2 pipeline and insists on the complete decommissioning of Nord Stream pipelines; warns against the EU falling back into dependency on an unreliable supplier and calls on the Commission and the Member States to develop safeguards against this, such as a countersignature by the Commission on any potential contracts with Russia or the mandatory use of the AggregateEU platform for this type of purchase;

    45. Recalls that energy is a fundamental necessity; emphasises that the phase out of Russian energy imports must be a collective effort, ensuring that no Member State, company or household is left behind; emphasises that Member States are not equally positioned to phase out Russian energy imports in the same manner, and therefore urges strong solidarity among them, alongside appropriate support measures from the Commission to ensure a fair and coordinated transition;

    46. Notes that, in the near-term, there is the need to replace phased out Russian energy imports with reliable non-EU sources and urges the Commission therefore to propose measures that ensure their sufficient substitution from trusted partners; stresses, however, that Russian energy supplies should not be replaced by new dependencies in supplies, and therefore that, in the long term, energy imports should be progressively reduced through effective measures to support decarbonisation, electrification and energy efficiency and savings in the sectors where it is possible and cost-efficient, as well as through the development of domestic energy production in line with the REPowerEU plan;

    47. Emphasises that energy dependence on Russia also should not be replaced by new dependencies on individual suppliers of energy technologies, components or critical raw materials;

    Revision of security of supply framework

    48. Welcomes the upcoming revision of the Security of Supply architecture including the Gas Security of Supply Regulation and the Electricity Risk Preparedness Regulation, and other relevant legislation; considers that the new EU security of supply architecture should reflect such fundamental shifts as increasing cross-sectoral integration of the energy system, the new geopolitical landscape, the profound changes in supply routes, the impact of climate change, as well as changes in the maturity of energy technologies reflected in shifts of levelised costs of energy and the opportunities this presents for the energy transition;

    49. Highlights that energy efficiency plays a critical role in enhancing the security of energy supply by reducing overall energy demand, lowering dependency on energy imports and increasing system resilience; considers that the new security of supply framework should be broadened to reflect a new way of looking at the security of energy supply, based not only on energy sources, but also on the energy efficiency first principle, energy savings, cost efficiency, as well as the ability to produce different types of energy domestically; notes that, in the near-term, the Union should concentrate on effective and solid weaning of Russian energy imports without loopholes, including through securing alternatives supplies from reliable partners and better use of existing infrastructure, while in parallel continuing to develop domestic alternatives to imported energy products, where possible; stresses, nevertheless, the imperative to develop a future-proof security of supply architecture that systematically reduces dependence on external actors, notably by advancing energy efficiency, promoting energy savings, enhancing circularity and ensuring the sustained growth of home-grown clean energy production and well-protected decentralised energy infrastructure;

    50. Emphasises the need to prioritise the resilience of energy infrastructure, drawing on the lessons learned from Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine, the targeted attacks on its energy systems and the benefits of decentralised energy systems; considers that new energy assets should be ‘resilient by design’, including to possible military threats and extreme weather events;

    51. Stresses the need for greater cooperation among all actors on the resilience of energy infrastructure to both climate impacts and human-caused threats; insists that the protection of this infrastructure requires greater involvement of governments, including through public-private partnerships; welcomes, in this regard, the Niinistö report recommendation to engage with the private sector in institutionalising de-risking efforts, cross-sector stress tests and proactive security measures; asks the Commission to ensure that such cooperation is reflected in plans covering incident management and recovery, and is subject to regular exercises; notes that the Union’s preparedness strategy includes actions to strengthen public-private partnerships and calls on the Commission to further develop relevant specific measures for the energy sector in the review of the security of supply architecture;

    52. Notes the need to accommodate in the security of supply architecture the integration of renewable and low-carbon gases, such as biomethane and hydrogen; recalls that the Hydrogen Strategy already recognised the role that renewable and low-carbon hydrogen production can play in providing flexibility and storage in an integrated energy system with a high share of renewables; calls on the Commission to recognise the complementarities between hydrogen and electricity in the future Electrification Action Plan, in line with energy sector integration, and to set clear conditions for the ramp-up of hydrogen to contribute to the energy transition, particularly in hard-to-abate sectors;

    53. Stresses the need to include affordability risks in national risk assessments; calls for transparency on the implementation of national risk-preparedness measures to increase trust between the Member States; notes the advantages of greater coherence on protected consumer categories (consistent categories and gradation of disconnection priority for grid users) to allow coordinated consumer load-shedding plans to be defined, including plans to support vulnerable households affected by, or at risk of, energy poverty during an energy crisis;

    54. Highlights the need for a unified, resilient and strategically coordinated energy policy; emphasises that as the EU energy markets become more integrated, energy security is increasingly becoming a shared responsibility of the Member States, thus requiring solidarity and coordination in order to prevent unilateral actions that could undermine the security of the entire EU; warns that a unilateral decision by a single actor to enter into a harmful energy agreement with a non-EU country could expose the whole EU to renewed energy crises, price volatility and geopolitical pressure;

    55. Notes the need for stronger coordination between the Member States on the decommissioning of ageing generation units with cross-border impact, as well as on withdrawal from the system of generation capacity in order to ensure that alternative installations have been completed and are in operation, as this affects the availability and affordability of energy in neighbouring countries;

    56. Underlines that data-driven technologies should positively impact energy security management; recognises the importance of comprehensive energy information and data in identifying and responding to evolving energy security threats and in infrastructure planning, and calls for improved coordination in the collection of such information and data;

    57. Calls on the Commission to include in the security of supply proposal technical provisions for the standardisation and interoperability of critical components of the EU’s energy system, particularly electrical transformers, to ensure that a lack of standardisation does not hinder European solidarity;

    58. Welcomes the establishment by the European Network of Transmission System Operators for Electricity (ENTSO-E) of a new Task Force on the Security of Critical Infrastructure, aimed at analysing and proposing recommendations on the topic of security of critical infrastructure; stresses the importance of incorporating lessons learned from Ukraine’s experience, including the valuable expertise of the dedicated unit within the Ukrainian Transmission System Operator (TSO) tasked with identifying and mitigating threats to critical infrastructure; calls on the Commission to collaborate closely with ENTSO-E in delivering a comprehensive and systemic assessment of threats to the EU electricity grid, to be completed by 2026;

    °

    ° °

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

     

    MIL OSI Europe News

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Answer to a written question – Protecting and respecting Europe’s cultural identity within the EU institutions – P-001372/2025(ASW)

    Source: European Parliament

    EU institution staff are recruited from all Member States. Each staff member brings their own cultural background under the banner united in diversity. The EU institutions strive to build a working environment where everyone feels included.

    The European University Institute (EUI) is an intergovernmental organisation. As such, it is created and regulated by an international treaty — the Convention Setting up the EUI — signed by its contracting states.

    According to Article 1(1)(b) of the High Council Decision N. 10/2020 of 15 December 2020[1], a representative of the European Parliament, a representative of the European Commission and a representative of the Council of the European Union shall take part in meetings of the High Council but shall not have the right to vote.

    The Commission is not aware of any intention on the part of the contracting states to amend the Convention.

    • [1] https://www.eui.eu/Documents/web2021/high-council-decision-10-2020-rules-of-procedure-of-the-high-council.pdf.
    Last updated: 30 June 2025

    MIL OSI Europe News

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Answer to a written question – Protecting and respecting Europe’s cultural identity within the EU institutions – P-001372/2025(ASW)

    Source: European Parliament

    EU institution staff are recruited from all Member States. Each staff member brings their own cultural background under the banner united in diversity. The EU institutions strive to build a working environment where everyone feels included.

    The European University Institute (EUI) is an intergovernmental organisation. As such, it is created and regulated by an international treaty — the Convention Setting up the EUI — signed by its contracting states.

    According to Article 1(1)(b) of the High Council Decision N. 10/2020 of 15 December 2020[1], a representative of the European Parliament, a representative of the European Commission and a representative of the Council of the European Union shall take part in meetings of the High Council but shall not have the right to vote.

    The Commission is not aware of any intention on the part of the contracting states to amend the Convention.

    • [1] https://www.eui.eu/Documents/web2021/high-council-decision-10-2020-rules-of-procedure-of-the-high-council.pdf.
    Last updated: 30 June 2025

    MIL OSI Europe News

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Missions – AFET ad-hoc delegation to Uruguay and Argentina – 26-28 May 2025 – 26-05-2025 – Committee on Foreign Affairs

    Source: European Parliament

    AFET ad-hoc delegation to Uruguay and Argentina © Image used under license from Adobe Stock

    A delegation of seven Members of the Committee on Foreign Affairs (AFET), led by Chair David McAllister, travelled to Uruguay and Argentina from 26 to 29 May 2025. Members engaged in high-level discussions regarding the EU-Mercosur Partnership Agreement which was concluded last December in Montevideo, Uruguay. The findings from this visit will contribute to the preparatory work for the consent procedure on the political and cooperation aspects of the Agreement, for which AFET is responsible.

    More broadly, this mission allowed to exchange views on bilateral, regional and multilateral cooperation, as well as geopolitical issues such as Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine, the situation in the Middle East, and China’s expanding influence in Latin America.

    MIL OSI Europe News

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Missions – AFET ad-hoc delegation to the United Kingdom – 28-30 October 2024 – 28-10-2024 – Committee on Foreign Affairs

    Source: European Parliament

    European Union and UK © Image used under the license from Adobe Stock

    A seven-member strong delegation of the Committee on Foreign Affairs (AFET) travelled to the United Kingdom from 28 to 30 October 2024. This was the first official visit of the Committee abroad in this parliamentary term. The delegation discussed possibilities for strengthening of the EU-UK partnership, in particular in foreign and security affairs.

    This visit was also an opportunity to exchange views on issues of global and regional significance such as the Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine, the situation in the Middle East and tensions in the Indo-Pacific.

    MIL OSI Europe News

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Missions – AFET ad-hoc delegation to the United Kingdom – 28-30 October 2024 – 28-10-2024 – Committee on Foreign Affairs

    Source: European Parliament

    European Union and UK © Image used under the license from Adobe Stock

    A seven-member strong delegation of the Committee on Foreign Affairs (AFET) travelled to the United Kingdom from 28 to 30 October 2024. This was the first official visit of the Committee abroad in this parliamentary term. The delegation discussed possibilities for strengthening of the EU-UK partnership, in particular in foreign and security affairs.

    This visit was also an opportunity to exchange views on issues of global and regional significance such as the Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine, the situation in the Middle East and tensions in the Indo-Pacific.

    MIL OSI Europe News

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Missions – AFET ad-hoc delegation to Moldova – 25-27 February 2025 – 25-02-2025 – Committee on Foreign Affairs

    Source: European Parliament

    AFET Ad-hoc delegation to Moldova – 25-27 February 2025 © Image used under license from Adobe Stock

    Members met with Moldovan President Maia Sandu, Speaker of the Parliament Igor Grosu, several government members, including Moldovan Deputy Prime Minister and Foreign Affairs Minister Mihai Popșoi, Deputy Prime Minister for European Integration of Moldova Cristina Gherasimov, Deputy Prime Minister for Reintegration Oleg Serebrian and Deputy Prime Minister for Economic Development and Digitalization Dumitru Alaiba, as well as parliamentarians and representatives of civil society and think tanks.

    The AFET delegation reaffirmed support for the ongoing reforms of the Moldovan government that aim to bring the country closer to the EU and highlighted the opportunities to achieve economic growth and a tangible improvement in people’s livelihoods through the implementation of the Reform and Growth Plan for Moldova.

    MIL OSI Europe News

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Missions – AFET ad-hoc delegation to Moldova – 25-27 February 2025 – 25-02-2025 – Committee on Foreign Affairs

    Source: European Parliament

    AFET Ad-hoc delegation to Moldova – 25-27 February 2025 © Image used under license from Adobe Stock

    Members met with Moldovan President Maia Sandu, Speaker of the Parliament Igor Grosu, several government members, including Moldovan Deputy Prime Minister and Foreign Affairs Minister Mihai Popșoi, Deputy Prime Minister for European Integration of Moldova Cristina Gherasimov, Deputy Prime Minister for Reintegration Oleg Serebrian and Deputy Prime Minister for Economic Development and Digitalization Dumitru Alaiba, as well as parliamentarians and representatives of civil society and think tanks.

    The AFET delegation reaffirmed support for the ongoing reforms of the Moldovan government that aim to bring the country closer to the EU and highlighted the opportunities to achieve economic growth and a tangible improvement in people’s livelihoods through the implementation of the Reform and Growth Plan for Moldova.

    MIL OSI Europe News

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Germany: Largest EIB financing for EWE – over 2,600 km of new underground power lines and more than 1,100 substations for Lower Saxony’s energy transition

    Source: European Investment Bank

    EIB

    The European Investment Bank (EIB) and EWE AG announced the largest EIB loan that EWE has ever received at a ceremony marking the 25th anniversary of the EIB’s Berlin office today.

    A long-term credit facility of up to €450 million was finalised at an event attended by German federal government ministers, project partners and stakeholders.

    This will support investment totalling more than €700 million between 2025 and 2028. The programme includes the laying of more than 2,600 kilometres of new underground power lines and the construction and modernisation of over 1,100 substations, constituting another major step forward for energy infrastructure and energy security in northern Germany.

    EWE Chief Financial Officer Frank Reiners said:

    “We are pleased to further develop our partnership with the EIB. This financing will help supercharge our investments in grid expansion and digitalisation. This will enable us to rapidly and securely integrate more renewable energy into the power grid and strengthen the security of supply in our regions, thereby making them more attractive for new industrial developments.”

    EIB Vice-President Nicola Beer added:

    “What many people do not know is that the most important energy-transition investments are often right under our feet. With over 2,600 km of new underground power lines and more than 1,100 new and modernised substations, we are working with EWE to build a hidden backbone for a more secure energy supply and expanded use of renewable energy throughout northern Germany. Today’s signature of the EIB’s largest-ever financing for EWE at the 25th anniversary event for our Berlin office – attended by high-ranking representatives from politics and business – sends a strong signal for the future of energy supply in Germany. 2024 was a record year for EIB support for the energy grid and this project shows how we are actively shaping Europe’s green future.”

    Hidden infrastructure – the backbone of the energy transition

    Investing in power grids is at the heart of the European energy transition. The massive expansion of renewable energy makes high-performance, flexible grids vital to adding new wind and solar power systems, switching to electrical power for heat and transport and ensuring secure, reliable supply for households and industry. Around 95% of the electricity fed into EWE’s power grid in Lower Saxony comes from renewable sources. The investments will enable an additional 3 gigawatts (GW) of renewable generation capacity to be connected by 2028, representing an important contribution to German and European climate targets.

    2024: A record year for EIB power grid investment

    2024 was a record year for EIB support for power-grid investment across Europe. As the EU climate bank, the EIB has a long track record of financing key energy infrastructure projects making decarbonisation, economic growth and energy-security possible. In recent years, the EIB has financed grid modernisation and expansion in Germany, France, Spain, Italy, Poland and many other EU Member States, laying the foundations for a sustainable, interconnected European energy market.

    Contributing to national and EU objectives

    EWE’s investment programme is fully aligned with Germany’s national energy and climate plan, which foresees an 80% share of renewable energy in electricity use by 2030. It also supports the REPowerEU initiative by expanding clean-energy integration, cutting emissions and strengthening energy supply. A total of 40% Sof the investments will go to cohesion regions, promoting economic and social cohesion.

    The EIB – a reliable partner for Europe’s energy transition

    The EIB’s long-term, flexible financing provides a stable basis on which EWE can implement its investment plans, diversifies sources of funding and sends a positive signal to capital markets. As an anchor investor, the EIB is mobilising additional public and private capital for critical infrastructure projects.

    Background information

    EIB

    The European Investment Bank is the world’s largest multilateral lender for climate action projects, supporting initiatives that promote sustainable growth, innovation and social cohesion in the European Union and beyond.

    EWE

    EWE AG is one of Germany’s leading energy and infrastructure companies, operating electricity, gas, water supply and telecommunications networks in Lower Saxony and beyond.

    MIL OSI Europe News