NewzIntel.com

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

Category: Ukraine

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Press release – Survey confirms Europe’s citizens want the EU to protect them and act in unity

    Source: European Parliament

    The European Parliament’s Winter 2025 Eurobarometer survey, released today, highlights historic levels of approval for EU membership linked to peace and security.

    European Parliament President Roberta Metsola said: “Two thirds of Europeans want the EU to play a greater role in their protection. This is a clear call for action which we will answer. Europe needs to be stronger so that our citizens feel safer. The European Parliament will ensure that every proposal put forward is bold and ambitious enough to match the serious level of threat Europe faces. Europe must step up today, or it risks being stepped over tomorrow.”

    66% of EU citizens want the EU to take a more important role in protecting them against global crises and security risks. This view is particularly strong amongst younger respondents to the survey. At the national level, results for a stronger role of the EU range from 87% in Sweden to 47% in Romania and 44% in Poland.

    Almost three quarters of EU citizens (74%) believe their country has benefited from being a member of the EU. This is the highest result ever recorded in a Eurobarometer survey for this question since it was first asked in 1983. Fitting the current context, respondents mention the EU’s contribution to maintaining peace and strengthening security (35%) as the main reason why membership is considered beneficial.

    In addition, there is wide agreement among EU citizens that EU Member States should be more united to face current global challenges (89%) and that the European Union needs more means to deal with the challenges ahead (76%).

    Citizens expect the EU to strengthen security and defence and to enhance competitiveness

    In a rapidlychanging geopolitical environment, defence and security (36%) as well as competitiveness, economy and industry (32%) are identified as the areas on which the EU should focus most to reinforce its position in the world. These are also the topics that featured high on last week’s European Council with Parliament’s President calling for faster action and bolder ambition. While the results for defence and security have remained stable compared to February/March 2024, those for competitiveness, economy and industry have increased by five points. These two areas are followed by energy independence (27%), food security and agriculture (25%) and education and research (23%).

    Economic and security issues are also at the forefront when it comes to the topics citizens want the European Parliament to address as a priority. Four in ten Europeans mention inflation, rising prices and the cost of living (43%), followed by the EU’s defence and security (31%), the fight against poverty and social exclusion (31%) and support to the economy and the creation of new jobs (29%). Inflation, rising prices and the cost of living is a main priority across all age groups and with peak results recorded in Portugal (57%), France (56%), Slovakia (56%), Croatia (54%) and Estonia (54%).

    As shown by the EP’s previous survey, inflation and the cost of living had already played a major role as a driving force in the last European elections and the economic situation continues to be a main concern for many Europeans. A third (33%) expect their standard of living to decrease in the next five years, seven points more than in June-July 2024. This is the case for 53% of French respondents (+8 pp) and 47% of Germans (+15 pp).

    Peace and democracy remain EU core values

    Looking at the values Europeans would like the European Parliament to defend, peace (45%), democracy (32%) and the protection of human rights in the EU and worldwide (22%) come first. The results for this question have remained stable, underlining citizens steadfast support for the EU’s founding values and principles.

    Two-thirds of citizens support a stronger role for the EP

    As historic trend lines show, in moments of crisis citizens look to the EU for decisive actions and solutions. When the EU is perceived as coming together and delivering results, support indicators are high – which is currently the case.  50% of respondents have a positive image of the EU. In the last decade, this positive perception was only higher once (at 52%), in spring 2022 in the aftermath of the Russian invasion of Ukraine. The positive image of the EP is stable at a high level (41%). A few months into the legislative term, over six in ten (62%) citizens would like to see the European Parliament play a more important role, a six- percentage point increase compared to February-March 2024, a few months before the June 2024 European elections.

    Full results can be found here.

    Background   

    The European Parliament’s Winter 2025 Eurobarometer survey was carried out between 09 January and 04 February 2025 in all 27 EU Member States. The survey was conducted face-to-face, with video interviews used additionally in Czechia, Denmark, Finland, Malta, Netherlands, and Sweden. 26.354 interviews were conducted in total and EU results are weighted according to the size of the population in each country.

    MIL OSI Europe News –

    March 26, 2025
  • MIL-OSI: Valeura Energy Inc.: Another Year of Record Results in 2024

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    SINGAPORE, March 25, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Valeura Energy Inc. (TSX:VLE, OTCQX:VLERF) (“Valeura” or the “Company”) reports its financial and operating results for the three month period and year ended December 31, 2024.

    The complete reporting package for the Company, including the audited financial statements and associated management’s discussion and analysis (“MD&A”) and the 2024 annual information form (“AIF”), are being filed on SEDAR+ at www.sedarplus.ca and posted to the Company’s website at www.valeuraenergy.com.

    2024 Operational Highlights

    • Production increased by 12% year-over-year to 22,825 bbls/d(1) on the back of a full year of drilling operations and development of the Nong Yao C Field;
    • 100% success rate in exploration and appraisal activities with discoveries at Niramai, Wassana North, and Nong Yao D;
    • Company’s first full year of operations completed with no significant health, safety, or environment incidents; and
    • Reduced greenhouse emissions intensity by approximately 20% compared to 2023 baseline.

    2024 Financial Highlights

    • Generated revenue of US$679 million, with average price realisation of US$81/bbl;
    • Delivered Adjusted EBITDAX of US$378 million(2) and adjusted cashflow from operations of US$273 million(2);
    • Strengthened the balance sheet with record high year-end cash position of US$259 million(3) and zero debt;
    • Reduced asset retirement obligation (“ARO”) by 54% since assuming operatorship in Q1, 2023;
    • Completed internal restructuring to optimise operational and financial aspects of the Thai III petroleum concessions; and
    • Implemented share buyback programme through a Normal Course Issuer Bid for up to 10% of the public float.

    2024 Reserves Highlights

    • Record high year-end reserves: 32 MMbbl proved (1P), 50 MMbbl proved plus probable (2P) and 60 MMbbl proved plus probable plus possible (3P) reserves;
    • Delivered 2P reserves replacement ratio of 245%, even after production increase of 12%;
    • Increased 2P reserves and extended the end of field life (“EOFL”) at every field;
    • Grew 2P net present value (NPV10) before tax to US$934 million and US$753 million after tax(4);
    • Considering year-end 2024 cash position, increased 2P net asset value after tax to US$1,012 million, equating to C$13.6 per share(5); and
    • Doubled contingent resources to 48 MMbbls compared to year-end 2023(6).

    (1) Working interest share production before royalties.
    (2) Non-IFRS financial measure or non-IFRS ratio – see “Non-IFRS Financial Measures and Ratios” section in the Company’s MD&A.
    (3) Includes restricted cash of $22.8 million.
    (4) Discount rate 10%.
    (5) Proved plus probable (2P) NPV10 plus net cash at December 31, 2024, assuming $/C$ exchange rate of 1.435, and 106.65 million shares outstanding as of December 31, 2024.
    (6) Unrisked best estimate (2C) contingent resources.

    Dr. Sean Guest, President and CEO commented:

    “Our first full year of operations in Thailand were a success across all areas of our business and a trophy for value creation.  We have attained record production, record cash flow, and replaced nearly 2.5x the reserves we produced, all while continuing to strengthen our financial position.  Our business is stronger and has a longer line of sight than ever before.

    Continued drilling throughout 2024 added 20 new production wells, including those we drilled to develop the new Nong Yao C field, making Nong Yao the largest and most profitable asset in our portfolio.  We’ve also had success with the drill bit on both appraisal and exploration which has significantly increased the number of future development well locations.  This successful drilling, combined with detailed reservoir studies has resulted in a 32% increase in 2P reserves to 50 million bbls.  Moreover, the economic life of each of our fields has moved further into the future, such that all fields are now expected to remain economic beyond 2030. 

    We are focussed relentlessly on value, and with the combination of an increase in the net present value of our 2P reserves, and the record cash position of US$259 million at year-end, the net asset value of our business is now more than one billion US dollars.  On a per share basis, that equates to over C$13/share, meaning an investment in Valeura’s shares continues to represent an excellent value proposition. 

    In addition to growing both the value and longevity of our existing portfolio, we continue to pursue several other avenues for growth, including exciting exploration opportunities, and potential merger and acquisition targets.”

    Financial and Operating Results Summary

        Three months ended  Year ended
        December 31, 2024 December 31, 2023 Delta December 31, 2024 December 31, 2023 Delta
    Oil Production(1) (‘000 bbls) 2,403 1,763 +36% 8,354 5,825 43%
    Average Daily Oil Production(1) (bbls/d) 26,109 19,165 +36% 22,825 20,440(2) +12%
    Average Realised Price (US$/bbl) 76.7 85.5 (10%) 81.3 84.3 (4%)
    Oil Volumes Sold (‘000 bbls) 2,948 1,987 +48% 8,349 5,854 +43%
    Oil Revenue (US$’000) 226,148 169,909 +33% 678,794 493,457 +38%
    Net Income (US$’000) 213,983 23,480 +811% 240,797 244,313 (1%)
    Adjusted EBITDAX(3) (US$’000) 132,402 96,679 +37% 377,985 230,672 +64%
    Adjusted Pre-Tax Cashflow from Operations(3) (US$’000) 133,612 88,326 +51% 356,627 238,661 +49%
    Adjusted Cashflow from Operations(3) (US$’000) 107,134 56,023 +107% 272,641 152,375 +79%
    Operating Expenses (US$’000) 55,607 49,622 +12% 186,407 180,192 +3%
    Adjusted Opex(3) (US$’000) 54,668 51,818 +6% 214,891 165,077 +30%
    Operating Expenses per bbl (US$/bbl) 18.9 25.0 (25%) 22.3 30.9 (28%)
    Adjusted Opex per bbl(3) (US$/bbl) 22.8 29.4 (22%) 25.7 28.3 (9%)
    Adjusted Capex(3) (US$’000) 38,870 30,374 +28% 134,258 103,733 +29%
    Weighted average shares outstanding – basic (‘000 shares) 106,955 102,652 +4% 105,778 99,227 +7%
        As at Comparison
        December 31, 2024 December 31, 2023 %
    Cash & Cash equivalents(4) (US$’000) 259,354 151,165 +72%
    Adjusted Net Working Capital(3) (US$’000) 205,735 118,143 +74%
    Shareholder’s Equity (US$’000) 528,283  284,178 +86%

     
    (1) Working interest share production before royalties.

    (2) Average daily oil production of 20,440 bbls/d represents the average production from closing of the Mubadala Acquisition on March 22, 2023 to December 31, 2023 (285 days).
    (3) Non-IFRS financial measure or non-IFRS ratio – see “Non-IFRS Financial Measures and Ratios” section in the Company’s MD&A.
    (4) Includes restricted cash of US$22.8 million at December 31, 2024 and restricted cash of US$17.3 million at December 31, 2023.

    Financial Update

    The Company’s Q4 2024 oil production averaged 26,109 bbls/d (working interest share before royalties), representing a 36% increase from Q4 2023.  Full year 2024 oil production averaged 22,825 bbls/d, 12% higher than 2023.  This growth was primarily driven by production from the Wassana field, which was not in production for most of 2023 and the Nong Yao C development, which came online in August 2024.  Oil sales for Q4 2024 were 2.9 million bbls, compared to 2.0 million bbls in Q4 2023.  For the full year 2024, oil sales totalled 8.4 million bbls, up 43% from 5.8 million bbls in 2023.  The increase is due to higher production rates in 2024, coupled with the fact that in 2023 the Company had only 285 days of production operations (following closing of the Mubadala acquisition on March 22, 2023).

    The Company generated Q4 2024 revenue of US$226.1 million, a 33% increase from Q4 2023.  Full year 2024 revenue was US$678.8 million, representing a 38% increase from 2023.  Q4 2024 price realisations averaged US$76.7/bbl, achieving a US$2.0/bbl premium to the Brent benchmark.  Full year 2024 price realisations averaged US$81.3/bbl, reflecting a US$0.5/bbl premium to Brent.  Valeura reported Q4 2024 Adjusted EBITDAX (a non-IFRS measure which is more fully described in the “Non-IFRS Financial Measures and Ratios” section of the MD&A) of US$132.4 million, up 37% from Q4 2023, while full year 2024 Adjusted EBITDAX increased 64% to US$378.0 million.

    The Company demonstrated improved operational efficiency with Q4 2024 Adjusted Opex (a non-IFRS measure which is more fully described in the “Non-IFRS Financial Measures and Ratios” section of the MD&A) of US$22.8/bbl, down from US$29.4/bbl in Q4 2023.  Full year 2024 Adjusted Opex decreased to US$25.7/bbl from US$28.3/bbl in 2023.  Operating expenses for Q4 were US$18.9/bbl compared to US$25.0/bbl in Q4 2023, and US$22.3/bbl for the full 2024 versus US$30.9/bbl in 2023. These improved unit costs were driven primarily by increased production from the low-cost Nong Yao field, which has become the Company’s largest production source.

    Valeura incurred total petroleum tax income and special remuneratory benefit tax of US$68.3 million and US$29.2 million respectively during the full year 2024, compared to US$71.2 million and US$15.1 million in the previous year.   The Company stands to benefit from a more efficient tax structure in 2025 as a result of the corporate restructuring which was completed in November 2024. This will result in Petroleum income tax loss carry-forwards that were previously associated with only the Wassana asset now being applied to all of the Company’s Thai III petroleum concessions, being Wassana, Nong Yao, and Manora.

    The Company recorded Net income for the year of US$240.8 million following the recognition of deferred tax assets from the tax consolidation.

    As of December 31, 2024, Valeura had a strong cash position of US$259.4 million, including US$22.8 million in restricted cash.  The Company continues to operate with no current or non-current debt.  Valeura remains well-positioned for both organic reinvestment opportunities and potential strategic acquisitions.

    Operations Update and Outlook

    During Q4 2024, the Company had ongoing production operations on all of its Gulf of Thailand fields, comprised of the Jasmine, Nong Yao, Manora, and Wassana fields.  The Company has had one drill rig working continuously on contract since Q1 2023 full-time.

    Oil production averaged 26.1 mbbls/d during Q4 2024 (Valeura’s working interest share, before royalties).

    Jasmine/Ban Yen

    Oil production before royalties from the Jasmine/Ban Yen field, in Licence B5/27 (100% operated interest) averaged 8.5 mbbls/d during Q4 2024, an increase of 12% from Q3 2024.  Increased production rates reflect the start-up of five new wells drilled as part of an infill drilling programme, with the last three wells coming onstream in late November 2024.  In addition to adding new production, the Jasmine programme also evaluated several secondary appraisal targets which will be the subject of further infill development drilling in due course. 

    Although the Jasmine field is the most mature asset in the Company’s portfolio, ongoing drilling success underscores the field’s ability to continue serving as a key source of cash generation for the business.  The Q4 Jasmine drilling results have been included in the Company’s reserves evaluation for the year-ended December 31, 2024, and contributed to a further extension in the field’s economic life, which on a 2P reserves basis, now lasts into mid 2031. 

    In February 2025 the drill rig returned to the Jasmine field where it has begun executing a seven-well infill campaign.  In total 10 development and appraisal wells are currently planned for the Jasmine field in 2025 and one exploration well at the Ratree prospect.  In addition, a workover rig is currently operating on the field completing two workovers.

    The low-BTU gas generator was delivered to the Jasmine B platform in Q1 2025 and is expected to be commissioned and operational in Q2 2025.  This creates an opportunity to significantly reduce greenhouse gas emissions from this platform as well as to reduce operating costs by using a waste gas stream for power generation.

    Nong Yao

    At the Nong Yao field, in Licence G11/48 (90% operated working interest), Valeura’s working interest share production before royalties averaged 11.1 mbbls/d, an increase of 18% from Q3 2024.  Q4 production rates benefitted from a full quarter of operations at the Nong Yao C field extension, which came online in August 2024. 

    Performance from Nong Yao C is continuing in line with the Company’s expectations.  The Nong Yao field is now the Company’s largest source of production.  In addition, it also has the Company’s lowest per unit Adjusted Opex and its oil fetches a premium to the Brent benchmark.  As a result, Nong Yao is the Company’s most cash generative asset.

    In 2025, nine development wells are planned across the three Nong Yao platforms.  This programme is expected to commence in late Q2 2025. 

    Wassana

    Oil production at the Wassana field, in Licence G10/48 (100% operated interest), averaged 4.3 mbbls/d (before royalties), an increase of 55% over Q3 2024.  The increase reflects the effect of a full quarter of normal operations at the field, as compared to Q3 2024, during which the Company conducted a one-month precautionary suspension of production while performing underwater inspection work.  There was no drilling on the Wassana field in Q4 and no further drilling is planned at this location for 2025.

    Valeura has completed the front end engineering and design work for the potential redevelopment of the Wassana field.  Detailed contracting and procurement work commenced in late Q4 2024 to validate cost assumptions for the project.  Valeura expects to consider a final investment decision in early Q2 2025. 

    Manora

    At the Manora field, in Licence G1/48 (70% operated working interest), Valeura’s working interest share of oil production before royalties averaged 2.2 mbbls/d, a decrease of 11% from Q3 2024.  During Q4, the Company began a five-well infill drilling campaign on the Manora field, including both production-oriented infill development wells and appraisal targets.  The programme was completed in Q1 2025 and for the month of March to date, working interest share production before royalties has averaged 2.9 mbbls/d.  In addition, several appraisal targets were evaluated, giving rise to between three and five potential future drilling targets, which will be further evaluated for inclusion in a future drilling programme.

    Türkiye

    The Company had no active operations in Türkiye during Q4 2024, however it continues to hold an interest in a potentially large deep gas play in the Thrace basin in the northwest part of the country.  In 2024 the Company received official confirmation that it’s leases and licences covering the play had been extended into 2025, and more recently the Company was granted an additional one-year extension, bringing the expiry date to June 27, 2026.  Following the current period, Valeura may apply for a further two-year extension for appraisal purposes, and has engaged the government in discussions to that effect. 

    The Company believes the Thrace basin deep gas play could be a source of significant value in the longer term.  Valeura intends to farm out a portion of its interest to a new partner in order to jointly pursue the next phase of appraisal work. 

    Reserves and Resources Summary

    The results of Valeura’s third-party independent reserves and resources assessment for its Thailand assets as of December 31, 2024 were announced on February 13, 2025.  Below are summary tables associated with the reserves.

    Summary of Reserves Replacement, Value and Field Life
     
      Gross (Before Royalties) 2P Reserves, Working Interest Share End of Field Life 2P NPV10 After Tax (US$ million)
    Fields December 31, 2023
    (MMbbl)
    2024 Production
    (MMbbl)
    Additions
    (MMbbl)
    December 31, 2024
    (MMbbl)
    Reserves Replacement Ratio (%) NSAI 2023 Report NSAI 2024 Report December 31, 2023 December 31, 2024
    Jasmine 10.4 (2.9) 9.2 16.8 324% Dec 2028 Aug 2031 81.8 163.9
    Manora 2.2 (0.9) 2.1 3.4 223% Jul 2027 Apr 2030 21.2 45.7
    Nong Yao 12.4 (3.1) 7.7 16.9 245% Dec 2028 Dec 2033 185.6 416.1
    Wassana 12.9 (1.4) 1.5 12.9 102% Jun 2032 Dec 2035 139.9 126.6
    Total 37.9 (8.4) 20.5 50.0 245%     428.5 752.2
    Summary of NPV and NAV
     
      1P NPV10 2P NPV10 3P NPV10
    Before Tax After Tax Before Tax After Tax Before Tax After Tax
    NPV10 (US$ million) 360.7 358.6 933.9 752.2 1,339.1 990.2
    Cash at December 31, 2024 (US$ million)(1) 259.4 259.4 259.4 259.4 259.4 259.4
    Net Asset Value (US$ million) 620.1 618.0 1,193.3 1,011.6 1,598.5 1,249.6
    Common shares (million)(2) 106.65 106.65 106.65 106.65 106.65 106.65
    Estimated NAV per basic share (C$ per share)(3) 8.3 8.3 16.1 13.6 21.5 16.8

     
    (1) Cash at December 31, 2024 of US$259.4 million, debt nil.

    (2) Issued and outstanding common shares as of December 31, 2024
    (3) US$/C$ exchange rate of 1.435 as at December 31, 2024

    Webcast

    Valeura’s management team will host an investor and analyst webcast at 08:00 Calgary / 14:00 London / 21:00 Bangkok / 22:00 Singapore on Wednesday, March 26, 2025 to discuss today’s announcement.  Please register in advance via the link below.

    Registration link:  https://events.teams.microsoft.com/event/aa5e4d6a-cb5f-46da-ab85-0976e3600c84@a196a1a0-4579-4a0c-b3a3-855f4db8f64b

    As an alternative, an audio only feed of the event is available by phone using the Conference ID and dial-in numbers below.

    Thailand: +66 2 026 9035,,922648874#
    Singapore: +65 6450 6302,,922648874#
    Canada: (833) 845-9589,,922648874#
    Türkiye: 0800 142 034779,,922648874#
    United States: (833) 846-5630,,922648874#
    United Kingdom: 0800 640 3933,,922648874#

    Phone conference ID: 922 648 874#

    For further information, please contact:

    Valeura Energy Inc. (General Corporate Enquiries)                       +65 6373 6940
    Sean Guest, President and CEO
    Yacine Ben-Meriem, CFO
    Contact@valeuraenergy.com  

    Valeura Energy Inc. (Investor and Media Enquiries)              +1 403 975 6752 / +44 7392 940495
    Robin James Martin, Vice President, Communications and Investor Relations
    IR@valeuraenergy.com

    Contact details for the Company’s advisors, covering research analysts and joint brokers, including Auctus Advisors LLP, Canaccord Genuity Ltd (UK), Cormark Securities Inc., Research Capital Corporation, and Stifel Nicolaus Europe Limited, are listed on the Company’s website at www.valeuraenergy.com/investor-information/analysts/.

    About the Company

    Valeura Energy Inc. is a Canadian public company engaged in the exploration, development and production of petroleum and natural gas in Thailand and in Türkiye. The Company is pursuing a growth-oriented strategy and intends to re-invest into its producing asset portfolio and to deploy resources toward further organic and inorganic growth in Southeast Asia. Valeura aspires toward value accretive growth for stakeholders while adhering to high standards of environmental, social and governance responsibility.

    Additional information relating to Valeura is also available on SEDAR+ at www.sedarplus.ca.

    Oil and Gas Advisories

    Reserves and contingent resources disclosed in this news release are based on an independent evaluation conducted by the incumbent independent petroleum engineering firm, NSAI with an effective date of December 31, 2024. The NSAI estimates of reserves and resources were prepared using guidelines outlined in the Canadian Oil and Gas Evaluation Handbook and in accordance with National Instrument 51-101 – Standards of Disclosure for Oil and Gas Activities. The reserves and contingent resources estimates disclosed in this news release are estimates only and there is no guarantee that the estimated reserves and contingent resources will be recovered.

    This news release contains a number of oil and gas metrics, including “NAV”, “reserves replacement ratio”, “RLI”, and “end of field life” which do not have standardised meanings or standard methods of calculation and therefore such measures may not be comparable to similar measures used by other companies. Such metrics are commonly used in the oil and gas industry and have been included herein to provide readers with additional measures to evaluate the Company’s performance; however, such measures are not reliable indicators of the future performance of the Company and future performance may not compare to the performance in previous periods.

    “NAV” is calculated by adding the estimated future net revenues based on a 10% discount rate to net cash, (which is comprised of cash less debt) as of December 31, 2024.  NAV is expressed on a per share basis by dividing the total by basic common shares outstanding. NAV per share is not predictive and may not be reflective of current or future market prices for Valeura.

    “Reserves replacement ratio” for 2024 is calculated by dividing the difference in reserves between the NSAI 2024 Report and the NSAI 2023 Report, plus actual 2024 production, by the assets’ total production before royalties for the calendar year 2024.

    “RLI” is calculated by dividing reserves by management’s estimated total production before royalties for 2025.

    “End of field life” is calculated by NSAI as the date at which the monthly net revenue generated by the field is equal to or less than the asset’s operating cost.

    Reserves

    Reserves are estimated remaining quantities of commercially recoverable oil, natural gas, and related substances anticipated to be recoverable from known accumulations, as of a given date, based on the analysis of drilling, geological, geophysical, and engineering data, the use of established technology, and specified economic conditions, which are generally accepted as being reasonable. Reserves are further categorised according to the level of certainty associated with the estimates and may be sub-classified based on development and production status.

    Proved reserves are those reserves that can be estimated with a high degree of certainty to be recoverable. It is likely that the actual remaining quantities recovered will exceed the estimated proved reserves.

    Developed reserves are those reserves that are expected to be recovered from existing wells and installed facilities or, if facilities have not been installed, that would involve a low expenditure (e.g., when compared to the cost of drilling a well) to put the reserves on production.

    Developed producing reserves are those reserves that are expected to be recovered from completion intervals open at the time of the estimate. These reserves may be currently producing or, if shut in, they must have previously been on production, and the date of resumption of production must be known with reasonable certainty.

    Developed non-producing reserves are those reserves that either have not been on production, or have previously been on production, but are shut in, and the date of resumption of production is unknown.

    Undeveloped reserves are those reserves expected to be recovered from known accumulations where a significant expenditure (e.g., when compared to the cost of drilling a well) is required to render them capable of production. They must fully meet the requirements of the reserves classification (proved, probable, possible) to which they are assigned.

    Probable reserves are those additional reserves that are less certain to be recovered than proved reserves. It is equally likely that the actual remaining quantities recovered will be greater or less than the sum of the estimated proved plus probable reserves.

    Possible reserves are those additional reserves that are less certain to be recovered than probable reserves. It is unlikely that the actual remaining quantities recovered will exceed the sum of the estimated proved plus probable plus possible reserves. There is a 10% probability that the quantities actually recovered will equal or exceed the sum of the estimated proved plus probable plus possible reserves.

    The estimated future net revenues disclosed in this news release do not necessarily represent the fair market value of the reserves associated therewith.

    The estimates of reserves and future net revenue for individual properties may not reflect the same confidence level as estimates of reserves and future net revenue for all properties, due to the effects of aggregation.

    Contingent Resources

    Contingent resources are those quantities of petroleum estimated, as of a given date, to be potentially recoverable from known accumulations using established technology or technology under development, but which are not currently considered to be commercially recoverable due to one or more contingencies. Contingencies are conditions that must be satisfied for a portion of contingent resources to be classified as reserves that are: (a) specific to the project being evaluated; and (b) expected to be resolved within a reasonable timeframe.

    Contingent resources are further categorised according to the level of certainty associated with the estimates and may be sub‐classified based on a project maturity and/or characterised by their economic status. There are three classifications of contingent resources: low estimate, best estimate and high estimate. Best estimate is a classification of estimated resources described in the Canadian Oil and Gas Evaluation Handbook as the best estimate of the quantity that will be actually recovered; it is equally likely that the actual remaining quantities recovered will be greater or less than the best estimate. If probabilistic methods are used, there should be at least a 50 percent probability that the quantities actually recovered will equal or exceed the best estimate.

    The project maturity subclasses include development pending, development on hold, development unclarified and development not viable. The contingent resources disclosed in this news release are classified as either development unclarified or development not viable.

    Development unclarified is defined as a contingent resource that requires further appraisal to clarify the potential for development and has been assigned a lower chance of development until commercial considerations can be clearly defined. Chance of development is the likelihood that an accumulation will be commercially developed.

    Conversion of the development unclarified resources referred to in this news release is dependent upon (1) the expected timetable for development; (2) the economics of the project; (3) the marketability of the oil and gas production; (4) the availability of infrastructure and technology; (5) the political, regulatory, and environmental conditions; (6) the project maturity and definition; (7) the availability of capital; and, ultimately, (8) the decision of joint venture partners to undertake development.

    The major positive factor relevant to the estimate of the contingent development unclarified resources referred to in this news release is the successful discovery of resources encountered in appraisal and development wells within the existing fields. The major negative factors relevant to the estimate of the contingent development unclarified resources referred to in this news release are: (1) the outstanding requirement for a definitive development plan; (2) current economic conditions do not support the resource development; (3) limited field economic life to develop the resources; and (4) the outstanding requirement for a final investment decision and commitment of all joint venture partners.

    Development not viable is defined as a contingent resource where no further data acquisition or evaluation is currently planned and hence there is a low chance of development, there is usually less than a reasonable chance of economics of development being positive in the foreseeable future. The major negative factors relevant to the estimate of development not viable referred to in this news release are: (1) current economic conditions do not support the resource development; and (2) availability of technical knowledge and technology within the industry to economically support resource development.

    If these contingencies are successfully addressed, some portion of these contingent resources may be reclassified as reserves.

    Of the best estimate 2C contingent resources estimated in the NSAI 2024 Report, on a risked basis: 74% of the estimated volumes are light/medium crude oil, with the remainder being heavy oil; 77% are categorised as Development Unclarified, with the remainder being Development Not Viable.  Development Unclarified 2C resources have been assigned an average chance of development for the four fields ranging from 30% to 50% depending on oil type, while 2C Development Not Viable resources have been assigned an average chance of development ranging from 16% to 17%.

    Resources Project
    Maturity Subclass
    Light and Medium Crude Oil
    (Development Unclarified)
    Chance of Development (%)
    Unrisked Risked
    Gross (Mbbl) Net (Mbbl) Gross (Mbbl) Net (Mbbl)
    Contingent Low Estimate (1C) Development Unclarified 8,267 7,334 3,108 2,742 38 %
    Contingent Best Estimate (2C) Development Unclarified 14,178 12,538 4,227 3,728 30 %
    Contingent High Estimate (3C) Development Unclarified 21,072 18,644 5,289 4,673 25 %
    Resources Project
    Maturity Subclass
    Heavy Crude Oil
    (Development Unclarified)
    Chance of Development (%)
    Unrisked Risked
    Gross (Mbbl) Net (Mbbl) Gross (Mbbl) Net (Mbbl)
    Contingent Low Estimate (1C) Development Unclarified 7,807 7,358 4,045 3,813 52 %
    Contingent Best Estimate (2C) Development Unclarified 10,641 10,029 5,325 5,018 50 %
    Contingent High Estimate (3C) Development Unclarified 14,524 13,689 6,560 6,182 45 %
    Resources Project
    Maturity Subclass
    Light and Medium Crude Oil
    (Development Not Viable)
    Chance of Development (%)
    Unrisked Risked
    Gross (Mbbl) Net (Mbbl) Gross (Mbbl) Net (Mbbl)
    Contingent Low Estimate (1C) Development Not Viable 11,294 10,502 1,694 1,575 15 %
    Contingent Best Estimate (2C) Development Not Viable 21,539 19,965 3,652 3,319 17 %
    Contingent High Estimate (3C) Development Not Viable 33,503 30,964 5,363 4,802 16 %
    Resources Project
    Maturity Subclass
    Heavy Crude Oil
    (Development Not Viable)
    Chance of Development (%)
    Unrisked Risked
    Gross (Mbbl) Net (Mbbl) Gross (Mbbl) Net (Mbbl)
    Contingent Low Estimate (1C) Development Not Viable 2,069 1,950 310 293 15 %
    Contingent Best Estimate (2C) Development Not Viable 2,091 1,971 341 321 16 %
    Contingent High Estimate (3C) Development Not Viable 3,003 2,830 815 768 27 %

    The NSAI estimates have been risked, using the chance of development, to account for the possibility that the contingencies are not successfully addressed.  Due to the early stage of development for the development unclarified resources, NSAI did not perform an economic analysis of these resources; as such, the economic status of these resources is undetermined and there is uncertainty that any portion of the contingent resources disclosed in this new release will be commercially viable to produce.

    Glossary   

    bbl barrels of oil
    Mbbl thousand barrels of oil
    MMbbl  million barrels of oil
       

    Advisory and Caution Regarding Forward-Looking Information

    Certain information included in this news release constitutes forward-looking information under applicable securities legislation. Such forward-looking information is for the purpose of explaining management’s current expectations and plans relating to the future. Readers are cautioned that reliance on such information may not be appropriate for other purposes, such as making investment decisions. Forward-looking information typically contains statements with words such as “anticipate”, “believe”, “expect”, “plan”, “intend”, “estimate”, “propose”, “project”, “target” or similar words suggesting future outcomes or statements regarding an outlook.

    Forward-looking information in this news release includes, but is not limited to, the profitability of the Nong Yao asset, relative to rest of the Company’s portfolio; the increase in the number of future development well locations; the estimated net asset value of the Company; the belief that an investment in Valeura’s shares represents an excellent value proposition; Valeura’s expectation that it will benefit from a more efficient tax structure as a result of the corporate restructuring; the inclusion of appraisal-led drilling targets in further infill development drilling programmes; the ability for Jasmine to continue serving as a key source of cash generation; timing to commission the low-BTU gas generator and to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and operating costs; planned drilling and well workovers in 2025; timing to consider a final investment decision on the Wassana field redevelopment project; and the Company’s belief that the Thrace basin deep gas play could be a source of significant value in the longer term.  In addition, statements related to “reserves” and “resources” are deemed to be forward-looking information as they involve the implied assessment, based on certain estimates and assumptions, that the resources can be discovered and profitably produced in the future.

    Although the Company believes the expectations and assumptions reflected in such forward-looking information are reasonable, they may prove to be incorrect.

    Forward-looking information is based on management’s current expectations and assumptions regarding, among other things: political stability of the areas in which the Company is operating; continued safety of operations and ability to proceed in a timely manner; continued operations of and approvals forthcoming from governments and regulators in a manner consistent with past conduct; ability to achieve extensions to licences in Thailand and Türkiye to support attractive development and resource recovery; future drilling activity on the required/expected timelines; the prospectivity of the Company’s lands; the continued favourable pricing and operating netbacks across its business; future production rates and associated operating netbacks and cash flow; decline rates; future sources of funding; future economic conditions; the impact of inflation of future costs; future currency exchange rates; interest rates; the ability to meet drilling deadlines and fulfil commitments under licences and leases; future commodity prices; the impact of the Russian invasion of Ukraine; the impact of conflicts in the Middle East; royalty rates and taxes; management’s estimate of cumulative tax losses being correct; future capital and other expenditures; the success obtained in drilling new wells and working over existing wellbores; the performance of wells and facilities; the availability of the required capital to funds its exploration, development and other operations, and the ability of the Company to meet its commitments and financial obligations; the ability of the Company to secure adequate processing, transportation, fractionation and storage capacity on acceptable terms; the capacity and reliability of facilities; the application of regulatory requirements respecting abandonment and reclamation; the recoverability of the Company’s reserves and contingent resources; future growth; the sufficiency of budgeted capital expenditures in carrying out planned activities; the impact of increasing competition; the availability and identification of mergers and acquisition opportunities; the ability to successfully negotiate and complete any mergers and acquisition opportunities; the ability to efficiently integrate assets and employees acquired through acquisitions; global energy policies going forward; international trade policies; future debt levels; and the Company’s continued ability to obtain and retain qualified staff and equipment in a timely and cost efficient manner. In addition, the Company’s work programmes and budgets are in part based upon expected agreement among joint venture partners and associated exploration, development and marketing plans and anticipated costs and sales prices, which are subject to change based on, among other things, the actual results of drilling and related activity, availability of drilling, offshore storage and offloading facilities and other specialised oilfield equipment and service providers, changes in partners’ plans and unexpected delays and changes in market conditions. Although the Company believes the expectations and assumptions reflected in such forward-looking information are reasonable, they may prove to be incorrect.

    Forward-looking information involves significant known and unknown risks and uncertainties. Exploration, appraisal, and development of oil and natural gas reserves and resources are speculative activities and involve a degree of risk. A number of factors could cause actual results to differ materially from those anticipated by the Company including, but not limited to: the ability of management to execute its business plan or realise anticipated benefits from acquisitions; the risk of disruptions from public health emergencies and/or pandemics; competition for specialised equipment and human resources; the Company’s ability to manage growth; the Company’s ability to manage the costs related to inflation; disruption in supply chains; the risk of currency fluctuations; changes in interest rates, oil and gas prices and netbacks; the risk that the Company’s tax advisors’ and/or auditors’ assessment of the Company’s cumulative tax losses varies significantly from management’s expectations of the same; potential changes in joint venture partner strategies and participation in work programmes; uncertainty regarding the contemplated timelines and costs for work programme execution; the risks of disruption to operations and access to worksites; potential changes in laws and regulations, including international treaties and trade policies; the uncertainty regarding government and other approvals; counterparty risk; the risk that financing may not be available; risks associated with weather delays and natural disasters; and the risk associated with international activity. See the most recent annual information form and management’s discussion and analysis of the Company for a detailed discussion of the risk factors.

    Certain forward-looking information in this news release may also constitute “financial outlook” within the meaning of applicable securities legislation. Financial outlook involves statements about Valeura’s prospective financial performance or position and is based on and subject to the assumptions and risk factors described above in respect of forward-looking information generally as well as any other specific assumptions and risk factors in relation to such financial outlook noted in this news release. Such assumptions are based on management’s assessment of the relevant information currently available, and any financial outlook included in this news release is made as of the date hereof and provided for the purpose of helping readers understand Valeura’s current expectations and plans for the future. Readers are cautioned that reliance on any financial outlook may not be appropriate for other purposes or in other circumstances and that the risk factors described above or other factors may cause actual results to differ materially from any financial outlook.

    The forward-looking information contained in this news release is made as of the date hereof and the Company undertakes no obligation to update publicly or revise any forward-looking information, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise, unless required by applicable securities laws. The forward-looking information contained in this news release is expressly qualified by this cautionary statement.

    This news release does not constitute an offer to sell or the solicitation of an offer to buy securities in any jurisdiction, including where such offer would be unlawful. This news release is not for distribution or release, directly or indirectly, in or into the United States, Ireland, the Republic of South Africa or Japan or any other jurisdiction in which its publication or distribution would be unlawful.

    Neither the Toronto Stock Exchange nor its Regulation Services Provider (as that term is defined in the policies of the Toronto Stock Exchange) accepts responsibility for the adequacy or accuracy of this news release.

    This information is provided by Reach, the non-regulatory press release distribution service of RNS, part of the London Stock Exchange. Terms and conditions relating to the use and distribution of this information may apply. For further information, please contact rns@lseg.com or visit www.rns.com.

    The MIL Network –

    March 25, 2025
  • MIL-OSI Video: UN peace operations, Gaza & other topics – Daily Press Briefing (24 March 2025) | United Nations

    Source: United Nations (Video News)

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

    Highlights:
    – Security Council
    – Gaza
    – Occupied Palestinian Territory
    – Lebanon/Peacekeeping
    – Lebanon/Humanitarian
    – Ukraine
    – Democratic Republic Of The Congo
    – Sudan
    – Afghanistan
    – Libya
    – Rohingya Refugees
    – International Days
    – General Assembly Event
    – Upcoming Briefings
    – Noon Briefing Guest

    SECURITY COUNCIL
    The Secretary-General spoke to the Security Council this morning during a special session on UN peace operations.
    He reminded council members that UN peace operations safeguard people and communities in some of the most desperate places on earth, adding that they represent a critical tool at the Council’s disposal to maintain international peace and security.
    At their best, he said, they show how, when the UN comes together to address challenges, the burden is diminished on individual countries. But, Mr. Guterres added that peace operations face serious barriers that demand new approaches.
    The Secretary-General said that work is now underway to review all forms of peace operations, as requested by Member States in the recently adopted Pact for the Future.
    He said the review will build on the analysis presented in the New Agenda for Peace and it will be informed by the first comprehensive study of the history of special political missions in the 80 years of this organization and that report which will be released soon.
    The review will also help inform efforts – through the UN@80 initiative – to find efficiencies and improvements across our work, in light of the continued funding challenges we face as an organization.

    GAZA
    In the past week, Israel carried out devastating strikes on Gaza, claiming the lives of hundreds of civilians, including United Nations personnel, with no humanitarian aid being allowed to enter the Gaza Strip since early March.
    As a result, the Secretary-General has taken the difficult decision to reduce the United Nations’ footprint in Gaza, even as humanitarian needs soar and our concern over the protection of civilians intensifies.
    The United Nations is not leaving Gaza. We remain committed to continuing to provide aid that civilians depend on for their survival and protection.
    More than three weeks ago, the Israeli Government cut off the entry of humanitarian aid into Gaza – which is the longest such suspension since 7 October 2023.
    Israeli officials have indicated that they intend to continue their military activities in Gaza.
    Based on the information that is currently available, the strikes hitting a UN compound in Deir Al Balah on 19 March were caused by an Israeli tank shell. The strikes claimed the life of a UN colleague from Bulgaria and left six others – from France, Moldova, North Macedonia, Palestine and the United Kingdom – with severe injuries, some of them life-altering.
    The location of this UN compound was well known to all the parties to the conflict. I reiterate that all parties to the conflict are bound by international law to protect the inviolability of United Nations premises. Without this, our colleagues face intolerable risks as they work to save the lives of civilians.
    The Secretary-General strongly condemns these strikes and demands a full, thorough and independent investigation into this incident.
    All parties must comply fully with international law at all times. Civilians must be respected and they must be protected. The denial of lifesaving aid must end. The hostages must be released immediately and unconditionally.
    All States must use their leverage to stop the conflict and ensure respect for international law – by applying diplomatic and economic pressure and combating impunity.
    The Secretary-General renews his urgent call for the restoration of the ceasefire to bring an end to the anguish.

    Full Highlights: https://www.un.org/sg/en/content/noon-briefing-highlight?date%5Bvalue%5D%5Bdate%5D=24%20March%202025

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R_V-u7ye6jM

    MIL OSI Video –

    March 25, 2025
  • MIL-OSI: Shell accelerates strategy to deliver more value with less emissions

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    March 25, 2025 – Shell (LON/NYSE: SHEL, AMST: SHELL) will today present to investors at its Capital Markets Day 2025 the next steps in the execution of its strategy. Shell is strengthening its commitment to value creation and maintaining its focus on performance, discipline and simplification.

    ‘’We have made significant progress against all of the targets we set out at our Capital Markets Day in 2023. Thanks to the outstanding efforts of our people, we are transforming Shell to become simpler, more resilient and more competitive,’’ said CEO Wael Sawan. ‘‘We want to become the world’s leading integrated gas and LNG business and the most customer-focused energy marketer and trader, while sustaining a material level of liquids production. Today we are raising the bar across our key financial targets, investing where we have competitive strengths and delivering more for our shareholders.’’

    Today Shell announces that it will:

    • Enhance shareholder distributions from 30-40% to 40-50% of cash flow from operations (CFFO) through the cycle1, continuing to prioritise share buybacks2, while maintaining a 4% per annum progressive dividend policy.
    • Increase the structural cost reduction target from $2-3 billion by the end of 2025 to a cumulative $5-7 billion by the end of 2028, compared to 20221.
    • Invest for growth while maintaining capital discipline, with spend lowered to $20-22 billion per year for 2025-20281.
    • Grow free cash flow3 (FCF) per share by more than 10% per year through to 20301.
    • Maintain the climate targets and ambition set out in Shell’s Energy Transition Strategy 2024.

    To deliver more value with less emissions Shell will:

    • Reinforce our leadership position in liquefied natural gas (LNG) by growing sales by 4-5% per year through to 2030.
    • Grow top line production across our combined Upstream and Integrated Gas business by 1% per year to 2030, sustaining our 1.4 million barrels per day of liquids production to 2030 with increasingly lower carbon intensity.
    • Drive cash flow resilience and higher returns in our Downstream and Renewables & Energy Solutions businesses:
      • Pursue focused growth in our high-return Mobility and Lubricants businesses.
      • Leverage competitive strengths to drive profitable and scalable businesses across our lower carbon platforms, where we expect to have up to 10% of capital employed by 2030.
      • Unlock more value from our strong portfolio of Chemicals assets by exploring strategic and partnership opportunities in the US, and both high-grading and selective closures in Europe, enabling the business to prosper whilst improving returns and reducing capital employed by 2030.

    Shell will continue to deliver more value with less emissions, growing in areas where we have competitive strengths, and providing a compelling investment case for our shareholders, now, and into the future.

    Notes to editors:

    1 Non-GAAP measure, for reconciliations see www.shell.com/cmd25 this includes the definition of cash capex which in 2024 was $21 billion compared to a range of $22-25 billion per year as announced at CMD23.
    2 Subject to Board approval as well as shareholder approval at the 2025 Annual General Meeting. 
    3 Price normalised organic free cashflow, excluding working capital and derivative movements.

    Cautionary Note

    The companies in which Shell plc directly and indirectly owns investments are separate legal entities. In this announcement “Shell”, “Shell Group” and “Group” are sometimes used for convenience to reference Shell plc and its subsidiaries in general. Likewise, the words “we”, “us” and “our” are also used to refer to Shell plc and its subsidiaries in general or to those who work for them. These terms are also used where no useful purpose is served by identifying the particular entity or entities. ‘‘Subsidiaries’’, “Shell subsidiaries” and “Shell companies” as used in this announcement refer to entities over which Shell plc either directly or indirectly has control. The terms “joint venture”, “joint operations”, “joint arrangements”, and “associates” may also be used to refer to a commercial arrangement in which Shell has a direct or indirect ownership interest with one or more parties.  The term “Shell interest” is used for convenience to indicate the direct and/or indirect ownership interest held by Shell in an entity or unincorporated joint arrangement, after exclusion of all third-party interest. 

    This announcement contains forward-looking statements (within the meaning of the U.S. Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995) concerning the financial condition, results of operations and businesses of Shell. All statements other than statements of historical fact are, or may be deemed to be, forward-looking statements. Forward-looking statements are statements of future expectations that are based on management’s current expectations and assumptions and involve known and unknown risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results, performance or events to differ materially from those expressed or implied in these statements. Forward-looking statements include, among other things, statements concerning the potential exposure of Shell to market risks and statements expressing management’s expectations, beliefs, estimates, forecasts, projections and assumptions. These forward-looking statements are identified by their use of terms and phrases such as “aim”; “ambition”; ‘‘anticipate’’; “aspire”, “aspiration”, ‘‘believe’’; “commit”; “commitment”; ‘‘could’’; “desire”; ‘‘estimate’’; ‘‘expect’’; ‘‘goals’’; ‘‘intend’’; ‘‘may’’; “milestones”; ‘‘objectives’’; ‘‘outlook’’; ‘‘plan’’; ‘‘probably’’; ‘‘project’’; ‘‘risks’’; “schedule”; ‘‘seek’’; ‘‘should’’; ‘‘target’’; “vision”; ‘‘will’’; “would” and similar terms and phrases. There are a number of factors that could affect the future operations of Shell and could cause those results to differ materially from those expressed in the forward-looking statements included in this announcement, including (without limitation): (a) price fluctuations in crude oil and natural gas; (b) changes in demand for Shell’s products; (c) currency fluctuations; (d) drilling and production results; (e) reserves estimates; (f) loss of market share and industry competition; (g) environmental and physical risks, including climate change; (h) risks associated with the identification of suitable potential acquisition properties and targets, and successful negotiation and completion of such transactions; (i) the risk of doing business in developing countries and countries subject to international sanctions; (j) legislative, judicial, fiscal and regulatory developments including tariffs and regulatory measures addressing climate change; (k) economic and financial market conditions in various countries and regions; (l) political risks, including the risks of expropriation and renegotiation of the terms of contracts with governmental entities, delays or advancements in the approval of projects and delays in the reimbursement for shared costs; (m) risks associated with the impact of pandemics, regional conflicts, such as the Russia-Ukraine war and the conflict in the Middle East, and a significant cyber security, data privacy or IT incident; (n) the pace of the energy transition; and (o) changes in trading conditions. No assurance is provided that future dividend payments will match or exceed previous dividend payments. All forward-looking statements contained in this announcement are expressly qualified in their entirety by the cautionary statements contained or referred to in this section. Readers should not place undue reliance on forward-looking statements. Additional risk factors that may affect future results are contained in Shell plc’s Form 20-F for the year ended December 31, 2024 (available at www.shell.com/investors/news-and-filings/sec-filings.html and www.sec.gov). These risk factors also expressly qualify all forward-looking statements contained in this announcement and should be considered by the reader.  Each forward-looking statement speaks only as of the date of this announcement, March 25, 2025. Neither Shell plc nor any of its subsidiaries undertake any obligation to publicly update or revise any forward-looking statement as a result of new information, future events or other information. In light of these risks, results could differ materially from those stated, implied or inferred from the forward-looking statements contained in this announcement.

    Also, in this announcement we may refer to Shell’s “net carbon intensity” (NCI), which includes Shell’s carbon emissions from the production of our energy products, our suppliers’ carbon emissions in supplying energy for that production and our customers’ carbon emissions associated with their use of the energy products we sell. Shell’s NCI also includes the emissions associated with the production and use of energy products produced by others which Shell purchases for resale. Shell only controls its own emissions. The use of the terms Shell’s “net carbon intensity” or NCI is for convenience only and not intended to suggest these emissions are those of Shell plc or its subsidiaries.

    Shell’s operating plan and outlook are forecasted for a three-year period and ten-year period, respectively, and are updated every year. They reflect the current economic environment and what we can reasonably expect to see over the next three and ten years. Accordingly, the outlook reflects our Scope 1, Scope 2 and NCI targets over the next ten years. However, Shell’s operating plan and outlook cannot reflect our 2050 net-zero emissions target, as this target is outside our planning period. Such future operating plans and outlooks could include changes to our portfolio, efficiency improvements and the use of carbon capture and storage and carbon credits. In the future, as society moves towards net-zero emissions, we expect Shell’s operating plans and outlooks to reflect this movement. However, if society is not net zero in 2050, as of today, there would be significant risk that Shell may not meet this target.

    This announcement may contain certain forward-looking non-GAAP measures such as adjusted earnings and divestments. We are unable to provide a reconciliation of these forward-looking non-GAAP measures to the most comparable GAAP financial measures because certain information needed to reconcile those non-GAAP measures to the most comparable GAAP financial measures is dependent on future events some of which are outside the control of Shell, such as oil and gas prices, interest rates and exchange rates. Moreover, estimating such GAAP measures with the required precision necessary to provide a meaningful reconciliation is extremely difficult and could not be accomplished without unreasonable effort. Non-GAAP measures in respect of future periods which cannot be reconciled to the most comparable GAAP financial measure are calculated in a manner which is consistent with the accounting policies applied in Shell plc’s consolidated financial statements. See the document named “Comparable GAAP measures and non-GAAP measures reconciliation” available on our Capital Markets Day 2025 page on shell.com for presentation of the most comparable GAAP measures, definitions and further details of historic non-GAAP measures and other metrics used throughout this announcement. 

    The information presented in this announcement do not reflect IFRS 18, Presentation and Disclosure in Financial Statements (“IFRS 18”), which will be effective from reporting periods beginning on or after January 1, 2027. IFRS 18 will have no impact on recognition and measurement. From Shell’s initial impact assessment, it has concluded that the impact will be limited to disclosure and presentation in the Consolidated Financial Statements. The primary change will be that the share of profit from joint ventures and associates will be classified in the Consolidated Statement of Income under the investing category (income generated by the investment) instead of the operating category. As a result of this change, the dividends received from joint ventures and associates will be reclassified in the Consolidated Statement of Cash Flows from cash flow from operating activities to cash flow from investing activities.

    The contents of websites referred to in this announcement do not form part of this announcement.

    We may have used certain terms, such as resources, in this announcement that the United States Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) strictly prohibits us from including in our filings with the SEC. Investors are urged to consider closely the disclosure in our Form 20-F, File No 1-32575, available on the SEC website www.sec.gov.

    Contacts:
    – Sean Ashley, Company Secretary
    – Media: International +44 (0) 207 934 5550; Americas: https://www.shell.us/about-us/news-and-insights/media/submit-an-inquiry.html

    LEI number of Shell plc: 21380068P1DRHMJ8KU70
    Classification: Inside Information

    The MIL Network –

    March 25, 2025
  • MIL-OSI: Middlefield Canadian Income PCC – Annual Financial Report

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    Middlefield Canadian Income PCC (the “Company”)

    Including Middlefield Canadian Income – GBP PC (the “Fund”), a cell of the Company

    Registered No:  93546

    Legal Entity Identifier: 2138007ENW3JEJXC8658

    ANNUAL FINANCIAL REPORT

    The Company hereby announces the publication of its full unedited annual financial report for the year ended 31 December 2024 (the “AFR”).

    In accordance with Listing Rule 6.4.1, a copy of the AFR has been submitted to the National Storage Mechanism and it will shortly be available for inspection at https://data.fca.org.uk/#/nsm/nationalstoragemechanism.

    The AFR is also available from the ‘Trust Documents’ section of the Company’s website: https://middlefield.com/funds/uk-funds/middlefield-canadian-income-trust/

    Enquiries:

    Secretary

    JTC Fund Solutions (Jersey) Limited

    Tel.: 01534 700000

    Dean Orrico

    President

    Middlefield International Limited

    Tel.: 01203 7094016

    END OF ANNOUNCEMENT

    Middlefield Canadian Income Trust

    Annual Report and Accounts

    For the year ended 31 December 2024

    LON: MCT

    Focusing on high levels of stable and increasing income together with capital growth, this Fund invests in high quality, Canadian large capitalisation businesses. Middlefield Limited, the Fund’s investment manager, is a private and independent firm located in Toronto, Canada, and is regulated by the Ontario Securities Commission.

    Financial Highlights

    2024 DIVIDENDS PAID

    5.3p per share

    1.325p per share quarterly

    5.5p per share New Dividend Guidance for 20251

    YIELD

    4.6%

    SHARE PRICE

    116.00p

    NAV PER SHARE

    134.05p

    NET ASSETS

    £142.7m

    1. This is a target only and does not constitute, nor should it be interpreted as, a profit forecast.

    Why Middlefield Canadian Income PCC?

    Who is this fund for?

    This Fund is for long-term investors seeking dividends and capital appreciation from a diversified portfolio of stable, profitable businesses domiciled primarily in Canada.

    Reasons to buy

    Unique

    The UK’s only listed Canadian equity fund focused on high income – admitted to the FTSE UK All-Share Index in 2011.

    Proven

    Outperformance over the period since inception in 2006. The Fund’s total return for 2024 was 20.6 per cent versus the benchmark total return of 7.6 per cent.

    Diversification

    UK investors are underexposed to Canadian equities – Canada is one of the largest investable economies in the developed world.

    High Income

    Canadian equities offer a higher yield compared to other developed markets. MCT has consistently paid dividends in excess of 5p per share per annum since 2017 and increased its dividend in 2023, 2024 and 2025.

    Stability

    Canada is a member of the G7 and offers one of the most stable political and financial systems in the world.

    Governance

    Experienced Board of Directors with an independent majority, re-elected annually by shareholders to protect their interests.

    A member of the Association of Investment Companies

    Further details about the Company, including the latest annual and half yearly financial reports, fact sheets and stock exchange announcements, are available on the website at www.middlefield.co.uk/mcit.htm

    Contents

    Strategic Report

    Key Information                                                                                                                                            4

    Historical Performance                                                                                                                                 5

    Chairman’s Statement                                                                                                                                  6

    Investment Manager’s Report                                                                                                                     11

    Top Holdings                                                                                                                                                13

    ESG Policy                                                                                                                                                   16

    Business Model                                                                                                                                            22

    Biographies                                                                                                                                                   26

    Corporate Information                                                                                                                                   29

    Report of the Directors                                                                                                                                  36

    Corporate Report

    Statement of Directors’ Responsibilities                                                                                                        40

    Directors’ Remuneration Report                                                                                                                    41

    Corporate Governance Statement                                                                                                                43

    Report of the Audit Committee                                                                                                                      48

    General Shareholder Information                                                                                                                  51

    General Data Key Investor Document and Related Data                                                                             52

    Independent Auditor’s Report on the Fund                                                                                                   53

    Financial Statements

    Statement of Financial Position of the Fund                                                                                                  60

    Statement of Comprehensive Income of the Fund                                                                                        61

    Statement of Changes in Redeemable Participating Preference Shareholders’ Equity of the Fund             62

    Statement of Cash Flows of the Fund                                                                                                           63

    Notes to the Financial Statements of the Fund                                                                                             64

    Independent Auditor’s Report on the Company                                                                                            81

    Statement of Financial Position of the Company                                                                                          84

    Notes to the Financial Statements of the Company                                                                                     85

    Definitions                                                                                                                                                     86

    Alternative Performance Measures                                                                                                               87

    Key Information

    This Fund invests in larger capitalisation Canadian and U.S. high yield equities with a focus on companies that pay and grow dividends.

    Exposure to Key Canadian Themes & Industries

    Canadian companies are amongst the world leaders across the real estate, financial and energy and power sectors.

    Real Estate

    Canada has had the highest population growth rate in the developed world. Immigration tailwinds and a highly educated workforce are expected to support ongoing demand for real estate in Canada. Middlefield is one of the top real estate investors in Canada with over 40 years of experience and $450M+ in AUM across real estate strategies.

    Financials

    One of the world’s most sophisticated and well-capitalised banking systems, Canada’s banks are well-positioned to consistently grow their dividends over time. Canadian financials have historically demonstrated less volatility than peers during periods of market uncertainty.

    Energy and Power

    North American energy is expected to play a vital role in energy security and the energy transition over the coming decades. Its domestic power market benefits from an abundance of renewable energy sources and robust demand for electricity driven by immigration, growing corporate demand, and improving global accessibility.

    Key Data as at 31 Dec 2024

    Historical Performance

    As at 31 December 2024

    Performance Since Inception to 31 December 2024

    As at 31 December 2024

    Notes:

    1.        Net asset value total returns (in Sterling, net of applicable withholding taxes, fees, and including the reinvestment of dividends).

    2.         The Fund’s benchmark, the S&P/TSX Composite High Dividend Index (“Benchmark”), has been currency adjusted to reflect the Canadian Dollar (“CAD”) returns from inception to October 2011 (while the Fund was CAD hedged) and Sterling (“GBP”) returns thereafter.

    3.        Prior to 31 October 2024, the Fund’s Benchmark as well as the S&P/TSX Composite Index, were calculated gross of withholding tax. Beginning 31 October 2024, the Benchmark and the S&P/TSX Composite Index are calculated net of a 15% withholding tax and all period returns have been restated on this basis.

    Recent Performance 1 Mth 3 Mth 6 Mth YTD 1 Year
    Share Price -10.8% 3.6% 15.3% 20.6% 20.6%
    NAV -4.2% 2.6% 12.9% 15.1% 15.1%
    Benchmark -4.7% 1.1% 7.7% 7.6% 7.6%
    S&P/TSX Composite -4.5% 4.2% 9.9% 13.5% 13.5%
    Long-Term Performance 3 Year

    annualised

    5 year

    annualised

    7 Year

    annualised

    10 year

    annualised

    Since Inception annualised1
    Share Price 4.3% 8.2% 7.2% 6.7% 6.8%
    NAV 3.3% 7.2% 6.8% 7.4% 7.2%
    Benchmark 5.2% 7.9% 6.9% 7.1% 6.1%
    S&P/TSX Composite 6.4% 9.8% 8.3% 8.4% 6.4%
    Long-Term Performance 3 Year cumulative 5 year cumulative 7 Year cumulative 10 year cumulative Since Inception cumulative1
    Share Price 13.5% 48.3% 62.8% 90.8% 239.0%
    NAV 10.2% 41.9% 58.1% 104.1% 262.7%
    Benchmark 16.4% 46.3% 59.2% 97.6% 199.1%
    S&P/TSX Composite 20.5% 59.3% 74.6% 124.4% 215.0%

    Sources: Middlefield, Bloomberg. As at 31 December 2024.

    Past performance is not a guide to the future. The price of investments and the income from them may fall as well as rise and investors may not get back the full amount invested. All price information is indicative only.

    Total returns including the reinvestment of dividends for all returns. Fund returns are net of fees.

    Composite of monthly total returns for the S&P/TSX Income Trust Index from inception to 31 December 2010 and the S&P/TSX Composite High Dividend Index (formerly named the S&P TSX Equity Income Index).

    Currency adjusted to reflect CAD$ returns from inception of MCT to Oct 2011 and GBP returns thereafter since MCT was CAD$ hedged from inception to Oct 2011

    Prior to 31 October 2024, the Fund’s Benchmark, as well as the S&P/TSX Composite Index, were calculated gross of withholding tax. Beginning 31 October 2024, the Benchmark and the S&P/TSX Composite Index are calculated net of a 15% withholding tax and all period returns have been restated on this basis.

    Chairman’s Statement

    Michael Phair

    Chairman

    It is my pleasure to introduce the 2024 Annual Financial Report for Middlefield Canadian Income PCC (“MCT” or the “Company”) and its closed-ended cell known as Middlefield Canadian Income – GBP PC (the “Fund”). The Fund invests primarily in dividend-paying Canadian equities, with the objective of providing shareholders with a high level of dividend as well as capital growth over the longer term.

    Investment Performance

    The Fund delivered very good relative performance in 2024. MCT generated total returns of 20.6 per cent on its share price and 15.1 per cent on net assets, both of which were higher than the benchmark total return of 7.6 per cent. Financials, Energy, and Utilities were all positive contributors primarily due to sector allocation and stock selection gains. The Investment Manager believes that 2024 represented the early stages of a sustained outperformance following a period of challenging market conditions for the Fund’s core sectors. In January 2025, the Fund’s dividend was increased from 5.3p to 5.5p per share per annum.

    Over 2024, the discount to net asset value at which the Fund’s shares traded narrowed from -16.8 per cent at the start of the year to -13.5 per cent at the end. The discount moved to within -6 per cent at the beginning of December 2024 which coincided with the share price increasing to 131.25p, a high point for the year. This increase reflected the buying activity by Saba Capital Management L.P. (“Saba”) which first announced a notifiable holding in the Fund’s shares in April 2024, and which has announced further increases in its holding since such date. Saba’s current total interest in the Fund’s shares (comprising its direct and indirect exposure) is estimated to be 29 per cent. Recent developments regarding Saba are discussed below under “Engagement with Saba”.

    Investment Management

    The Board has regular contact with the Investment Manager, Middlefield Limited, to discuss portfolio strategy and review its investment approach, gearing and sector allocations. We remain satisfied that the Investment Manager is applying the strategy consistently and professionally and are confident that the Investment Manager’s outlook and the Fund’s corresponding positioning are capable of delivering good performance over time.

    Middlefield Limited, the Fund’s Investment Manager, has 45 years of investing experience. The Investment Manager uses an actively managed strategy, allowing it to take advantage of market dislocations across Canada and the U.S. In 2024, Canada was ahead of other developed countries in reducing their policy rates after sustained downward trends in inflation. Meanwhile, the U.S. Federal Reserve’s monetary policy remained restrictive for longer. In light of the high levels of cash flow and dividends that Canadian equities offer, and the valuation discounts at which they trade relative to U.S. companies, the Board remains supportive of the Investment Manager’s decision to be substantially invested in Canadian equities. In Q4 2024, against the backdrop of an improving outlook for the Canadian economy as well as a peaking of 10-year government bond yields in the U.S. and Canada, the Fund increased its exposure in Canadian energy from c. 19 per cent to c. 22 per cent which remains above the benchmark, while Real Estate remains the most overweight sector in the Fund relative to the benchmark.

    Shareholder Engagement

    Increasing investor interest in the Fund remains one of the Board’s highest priorities. The Board continues to promote the Company through the Investment Manager’s investor relations initiative, which is dedicated to keeping our shareholders well-informed, especially in times of market turmoil. The Investment Manager provides regular updates through commentaries and articles to get their perspectives directly. This content is accessible on the Investment Manager’s website, where it generates regular insights into the portfolio’s outlook and the decision-making process: Middlefield Canadian Income Trust Content. In addition, the Trust remains engaged with Kepler Partners. Kepler Partners continues to introduce the Investment Manager to new investors throughout London and its surrounding regions, while consistently producing research aimed at raising the profile of the Fund. Kepler Partner’ coverage of the Fund can be accessed at: Middlefield Canadian Income Research. The Board also works with Buchanan, a public relations firm tasked with enhancing the Fund’s reputation among retail investors. The Fund’s ongoing press engagements are featured on our website under “Featured Press”. Alternatively, prospective investors can subscribe to email updates on the Fund’s website to be updated regularly: Middlefield Canadian Income Trust | Middlefield Group.

    Fund Sector Weights Compared to Benchmark as at 31 December 2024

    Sector Allocation MCT Benchmark Over/Underweight
    Financials 27.3% 30.0% -2.7%
    Energy 22.4% 15.0% 7.4%
    Real Estate 18.5% 4.4% 14.1%
    Pipelines 16.9% 15.8% 1.1%
    Utilities 9.5% 13.8% -4.3%
    Materials 2.8% 5.4% -2.6%
    Communication Services 2.6% 10.4% -7.8%
    Consumer Discretionary 0.0% 3.0% -3.0%
    Industrials 0.0% 0.8% -0.8%
    Consumer Staples 0.0% 0.8% -0.8%
    Health Care 0.0% 0.7% -0.7%
    Information Technology 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
    Total 100.0% 100.0%  

    Source: Middlefield, Bloomberg

    The background to the Fund’s performance is explained in depth by Mr Dean Orrico in the Investment Manager’s accompanying report.

    Engagement with Saba

    Since the Fund’s year end, on 10 February 2025 the Fund, together with three other UK-listed closed-end funds, received a requisition notice from Saba, marking the second phase of Saba’s recent activist campaign in the UK-listed closed-end fund sector. The first phase commenced on 18 December 2024 with Saba requisitioning general meetings at seven UK-listed closed-end funds, proposing resolutions (each of which later failed) to remove the current independent directors of those seven funds and replace them with Saba’s own appointees, with a view to also terminating the management contracts and, in due course, replacing the investment managers with Saba.

    The requisition notice received by the Fund on 10 February 2025 was for the approval by shareholders of the taking of all necessary steps to implement a scheme or process by which shareholders would become (or have the option to become) shareholders of a UK-listed open-ended investment company (or similar open-ended investment vehicle) implementing a substantially similar strategy to the Fund. Such scheme or process could entail shareholders rolling into an existing or newly established UK-listed open-ended investment company (or similar open-ended investment vehicle), in either case managed by the Fund’s existing investment manager or one of its affiliates.

    Following consultation with a number of the Fund’s largest shareholders including Saba, and following constructive discussions with Saba, on 21 February 2025 the Fund announced that Saba had agreed to withdraw its requisition notice for a period of 60 days to enable the Fund and its advisers to formulate proposals that are in the best interests of all shareholders.

    At the current time, the Board is in the process of considering a number of strategic options in the best interests of shareholders as a whole. A further announcement regarding future proposals which the Fund may put to shareholders will be made in due course.

    Gearing

    The Fund reports its gearing relative to net and total assets in its monthly fact sheet. Gearing relative to total assets was consistent throughout 2024. This compares to the Fund’s upper gearing limit of 25 per cent. of its total assets at the time of drawdown. Net gearing, which represents borrowings as a percentage of net assets, is the AIC standard measure of gearing. Net gearing at the start of the year was 17.2 per cent and ended the period on 31 December 2024 at 19.3 per cent.

    The cost of borrowing has come down in 2024 due to the Bank of Canada cutting rates by a total of 175 basis points throughout the year. We anticipate further declines in borrowing costs as the BoC is expected to continue its easing cycle in 2025. The Board continues to believe the use of gearing is warranted at prevailing interest rates due to an expected total return that exceeds total borrowing costs. The Board will continue to weigh the benefits of gearing against the costs and monitor the spread between interest expenses and the yield of the portfolio to ensure the use of leverage remains in the best interest of shareholders. On 3 April 2024, the credit facility was amended to replace Banker’s Acceptances with CORRA (Canadian Overnight Repo Rate Average administered and published by the Bank of Canada) loans.

    Earnings and Dividends

    In light of the excess revenue earnings generated by the Fund this year, together with the prospect of dividend growth from the underlying portfolio, the Board approved a 0.2p increase to the annual dividend target in early 2025 to 5.5p for 2025. This is a target only and should not constitute, nor should it be interpreted as a profit forecast.

    Quarterly interim dividends each of 1.325p per share were paid on 31 January 2024, 30 April 2024, 31 July 2024 and 31 October 2024 representing a 1.92 per cent. increase to quarterly payments made in 2023.

    Consistent dividend growth is a core consideration for the Fund’s security selection process and factored into the Board’s decision to increase the dividend. The Company’s revenue earnings per share totalled 5.61p for the current year, reflecting a dividend coverage ratio of 1.06. This compares to dividend coverage ratios of 1.07 in 2023 and 1.16 in 2022. The Board regularly reviews the Fund’s dividend coverage and, subject to market conditions as well as the Fund’s earnings, it will continue to consider whether further dividend increases are warranted in the future.

    Directors’ Remuneration

    For 2024, the directors’ remuneration remained at £36,000 per annum for the chairman of the Board, £32,000 per annum for the chairman of the audit committee and £29,000 per annum for all other directors bar Mr Orrico, who has waived his entitlement for remuneration for acting as a director. The last increase was on 1 July 2023.

    Related Party Transactions

    The Company’s related parties are its directors and the Investment Manager. There were no related party transactions (as defined in the Listing Rules) during the year under review, nor up to the date of this report. Details of the remuneration paid to the directors and the Investment Manager during the year under review are shown in note 13.

    Material Events

    Save for the Saba requisition and the Board’s ongoing consideration of future strategic options for the Company following engagement with Saba as referred to above, the Board is not aware of any significant event or transaction which has occurred between 1 January 2025 and the date of publication of this statement which could have a material impact on the financial position of the Fund.

    Company and Fund Annual General Meetings

    At each of the Company and Fund Annual General Meetings held on 13 June 2024, all resolutions, relating to both ordinary business and special business were duly passed.

    Board Composition and Succession Planning

    The Board frequently reviews its succession planning strategy and has taken multiple steps in recent years to refresh its composition. We are pleased with the significant progress made to ensure the highest standards of good corporate governance. These steps include the appointment of four new nonexecutive directors over the past five years: Mr Michael Phair (on 13 June 2019), Ms Kate Anderson (on 12 April 2021), Ms Janine Fraser (on 13 September 2022) and Mr Andrew Zychowski (on 30 June 2023).

    The Board currently comprises five nonexecutive directors, of whom four are independent and 40 per cent are female, including the senior independent director.

    Contact

    Shareholders can write to the Company at its registered office or by email to the Secretary at middlefield.cosec@ JTCGroup.com.

    Principal Risks and Uncertainties

    Trade policy uncertainty will remain a persistent overhang in the coming months, affecting business confidence, capital investment, and supply chain planning across North America. With the looming USMCA renegotiation deadline and ongoing discussions around tariffs, businesses face heightened risks when making strategic decisions. Companies reliant on cross-border trade may hesitate to expand operations, allocate capital, or engage in M&A, given the potential for new trade barriers and shifting regulatory frameworks. This uncertainty could lead to reduced investment and prolonged supply chain inefficiencies, ultimately weighing on economic growth and corporate earnings.

    Additionally, although discussions to date between the Board and Saba have been constructive, uncertainty remains over how the Company will proceed going forwards. The Board remains mindful of the need to act at all times in the best interests of shareholders as a whole and wishes to avoid future engagement in costly and time-consuming activist shareholder campaigns.

    Despite inflation moderating in 2024, the risk of an upside surprise in inflation remains a key concern. Stickier inflation could erode consumer purchasing power and increase the cost of borrowing, stifling economic activity. Persistently high inflation could delay further rate cuts from central banks, which could exacerbate financial stress, leading to higher delinquency rates and weaker household consumption.

    The combination of expanding fiscal policies and easing monetary conditions could further strain government balance sheets in 2025. Canada and the US continue to run large fiscal deficits, with rising debt levels fuelling concerns about long-term sustainability. Increased government borrowing costs, especially in a higher-for-longer rate environment, could lead to investors demanding higher risk premiums and increased volatility in bond markets and sovereign credit ratings.

    Geopolitical concerns in 2024 centred on the wars in Ukraine and the Middle East, trade policy between the US and its trading partners, and a change in leadership in Canada and U.S. Although there are efforts to reach a ceasefire in both Ukraine and Israel, these conflicts all have the potential to disrupt global trade routes, commodity prices, and investor sentiment. The risk of further escalation could lead to supply shocks in energy markets, driving up commodity prices and putting renewed pressure on inflation. In addition, strained US-China relations – particularly over trade, technology and Taiwan – could introduce market volatility, affecting global supply chains and investment flows.

    Managing Risks

    The Board places significant emphasis on the Company’s risk assessment and the management of substantial risks. The Board prioritises this aspect, guided by its evaluation of the risks inherent in the Company’s operations. It oversees the controls implemented by the Board, the Investment Manager and other service providers. These evaluations and oversight activities are documented in the Company’s business risk matrix assessment, which remains an effective instrument for identifying and tracking primary risks.

    The directors consider the principal risks of the Company to be those risks, or a combination thereof, that may materially threaten the Company’s ability to meet its investment objectives, its solvency, liquidity or viability. In assessing the principal risks, the directors consider the Company’s exposure to and likelihood of factors that they believe would result in significant erosion of value, such as the possibility of a recession, the ability of Canada to diversify its economy away from natural resources, ongoing geopolitical tensions, the impact of climate change risk on investee companies, foreign exchange rates and the impact of higher interest rates on the Company and investor sentiment.

    At the time of this report, trade policy uncertainty, interest rates, and geopolitical tensions continue to have an impact on markets at both macro and micro levels. Growing geopolitical tensions can increase the risk of supply chain shocks and spikes in commodity prices. While the long-term severity and the impact on the Company’s principal risks and viability cannot currently be predicted with any accuracy, it is expected that a prolonged war in the Middle East would have detrimental effects on market sentiment, which could affect the Company’s asset values.

    Outlook

    Canada is well-positioned for economic resilience and market outperformance, supported by a lower rate environment, strong corporate fundamentals, and favourable structural tailwinds across key sectors. 2024 served as a strong base for the Fund’s core sector exposures, and we expect to build on that momentum. Canadian equities continue to offer attractive valuations, robust earnings growth, and compelling risk-adjusted returns relative to global peers. MCT remains strategically positioned to capitalise on these trends, with its core exposure in financials, real estate, energy, pipelines, and utilities – sectors that are well insulated from external trade policy uncertainty and provide strong income generation, stability, and long-term growth potential. The Fund does not hold significant exposure to industries most vulnerable to tariffs, such as manufacturing, autos, and materials, reducing its reliance on unpredictable trade negotiations.

    Despite having similar expected earnings growth over the next two years, Canadian equities continue to trade at steep valuation discounts to US stocks. With a circa 4.5 per cent dividend yield, the Fund also provides a stable and growing stream of income to investors in the form of quarterly distributions. We believe the current valuation discount embedded in Canadian equities offers a compelling entry point into high-quality Canadian companies. We continue to advocate that UK investors seeking North American equity exposure should allocate capital to Canada.

    We look forward to an ongoing dialogue with shareholders in order to inform our decision making process going forward and to enable us to continue to act in the best interests of all shareholders.

    Michael Phair

    Chairman

    24 March 2025

    Middlefield Group is a private and independent asset manager focused on equity income investment strategies. Located in Toronto, Canada, the company oversees a suite of funds, many of which have been recognised for excellence in various investment categories. Middlefield specialises in managing diversified equity income strategies for UK and Canadian investors with a particular focus on delivering stable distributions and capital appreciation over the long term.

    Investment Manager’s Report

    Dean Orrico

    2024 was an exceptional year for MCT unitholders, as we look to build on the momentum for continued growth into 2025. Despite both the TSX Composite and S&P 500 closing near all-time highs, many areas of the market, such as dividend payers and small-caps, did not meaningfully participate in the 2024 market rally. Technology and communication services stocks led to the upside while cyclical and value sectors lagged. In British Pounds, shares in the Fund generated a total return of 20.6 per cent and a NAV total return of 15.1 per cent. In local currency, the S&P 500, NASDAQ Composite, and the TSX Composite returned 25 per cent, 30 per cent and 22 per cent, respectively. The TSX lagged the S&P 500 by 3 per cent in 2024, due to its lower exposure to technology stocks and greater weighting to cyclical and value sectors. The Fund’s benchmark is more concentrated in higher-yielding dividend stocks and returned 9.6 per cent, lagging the TSX by nearly 12 per cent. Price-to-earnings multiples remain depressed for the TSX, resulting in a 4x multiple discount relative to the S&P 500.

    We are encouraged by several trends that emerged in mid-2024. Firstly, the Bank of Canada (BoC) began its first rate-cutting cycle in 4 years through a series of rate cuts totalling 175 basis points. Meanwhile, 10-year bond yields fell by more than 100 basis points from their 2023 highs as inflation concerns abated. Second, market breadth improved as companies and sectors that lagged throughout 2023 and H1’2024 benefitted from a relief rally. We believe this market broadening could represent the early stages of a prolonged recovery in dividend-paying stocks that should continue throughout 2025.

    In British Pounds, the Fund’s net asset value generated a total return of 15.1 per cent. Stock selection within the energy sector was the biggest contributor to performance in 2024 following a difficult 2023 period, with Enbridge and TC Energy among the Top 5 biggest contributors to performance. Utilities were the next biggest contributor, with Capital Power generating a total return of 77.9 per cent due to its strategy to supply power for upcoming AI data centres in Canada. Capital Power remains a large overweight position relative to the benchmark and has been a consistent Top 10 holding in the Fund.

    President Trump’s second term has introduced significant trade policy uncertainty. Despite all the trade noise, Canada’s economy remains on sound footing and is compelling for investors seeking attractive valuations and higher levels of income. While the scale and scope of potential US tariffs remain unpredictable, the Fund is well-positioned due to its diversification across resilient, high-quality sectors. With a focus on Canadian financials, pipelines, and REITs, the Fund is largely insulated from more tariff-targeted manufacturing industries, such as steel, aluminium, autos, and lumber. Similar to President Trump’s first term, we believe rational economic interests will prevail and the USMCA trade agreement will ultimately be renegotiated with minimal impact on Canadian equities. The U.S. represents over 75 per cent of Canadian exports and is an extremely important end-market for these sectors. US, Canada, and Mexico share over $1.5 trillion in annual trade, supporting 17+ million jobs across the three economies. This trilateral trade flow is one of the largest in the world, underscoring the significance of the USMCA agreement in maintaining economic stability in North America. Given this deep integration, renegotiations will likely aim to preserve trade stability rather than disrupt it.

    The Canadian federal election which has been called for 28 April 2025, will be a key event to watch with potential positive implications for economic policy, trade, and capital markets. A Canada-first mentality is gaining traction, emphasizing deregulation, pro-business policies, and strengthening domestic industries. A more conservative, business-friendly government could lead to increased investment in key sectors such as energy infrastructure, along with streamlined regulatory processes to encourage economic growth. In addition, diversifying trade partnerships beyond the US could present significant opportunities for Canadian pipeline and energy companies. These developments could also lead to increased foreign investment in Canada, strengthening the Canadian dollar. However, trade policy negotiations will bring uncertainty in the markets, particularly if US protectionist policies weigh on exports.

    Our base assumption remains that Canadian inflation will continue trending lower throughout 2025, supported by slowing immigration, easing supply chain pressures, and a more accommodative monetary policy stance from central banks. Over the past year, both the BoC and the Fed have seen meaningful progress in reducing inflation which has prompted rate cuts. However, deregulation, increased fiscal spending, and tax relief in the US could reintroduce inflationary pressures by stimulating aggregate demand, business investment, and consumer spending. While these policies are beneficial for long-term growth, they could delay or slow the pace of rate cuts if inflation proves to be stickier than expected. The balance between continued disinflation and the potential for reaccelerating inflation will be a key theme for policymakers in the year ahead.

    We remain constructive on the Canadian real estate sector in 2025. Although there was a strong rally in REIT unit prices during Q3, we saw a reversal after 10-year yields began climbing again. Investor sentiment for the broader real estate sector is inflecting and we are now seeing foreign buyers of Canadian REITs after a prolonged disconnect between fundamentals and valuations. With bond yields declining and central banks cutting rates further, we believe certain REITs are extremely well-positioned to outperform. Canadian REITs continue trading at an approximate 25 per cent discount to NAV.

    We expect quality REITs that generate stable and growing cash flows to narrow this discount throughout 2025. For these reasons, real estate remains the Fund’s largest active sector weight relative to the Benchmark. The Fund’s core real estate exposure areas include necessity-based retail, apartments, industrial, and seniors housing.

    Energy was among the Fund’s biggest contributors to performance in 2024 and remains a high-conviction investment theme for 2025. Energy represents 22 per cent of the portfolio, which outweighs the benchmark by 7.4 per cent. As geopolitical tensions mount, energy security has become a paramount issue for many countries. Canada’s oil and natural gas reserves rank in the top five globally, positioning the Canadian energy sector for consistent growth for decades. The recently completed Trans Mountain Expansion project will help unlock this growth potential by increasing capacity for crude oil transportation by an additional 590,000 barrels per day. In addition, LNG Canada, the largest private infrastructure project in Canada’s history, will become operational later this year. With an export capacity of 1.8 Bcf/d, LNG Canada will provide Canadian gas producers with a material boost to production egress. These large infrastructure projects are expected to stimulate significant investments from energy producers as well as midstream companies that will need to add necessary processing and handling capabilities.

    Financials represented 28 per cent of the Fund and remained the largest sector exposure in 2024. The decision stemmed from our growing confidence in the economic landscape both in Canada and the U.S, increasing corporate and investor sentiment as well as a pickup in capital markets activity. As the Bank of Canada began cutting rates mid-2024, Canadian banks rallied in Q3 after posting solid earnings results and improved sentiment. The banks remain well capitalised above regulatory minimums and are now strategically deploying capital to support organic growth. Credit concerns have been abating as we are past the peak in provisions for credit losses. The banks have prudently been building their capital reserves to ensure they remain well-equipped in the event of widespread credit defaults. With bond yields having fallen approximately 80 basis points from their April 2024 peak, and strengthening underwriting standards, we have become less concerned by this risk but continue to monitor credit quality closely. The Fund has been diversifying its exposure to financials by adding insurance companies and asset managers to the portfolio. These positions will expose the Fund to different revenue streams and geographies. Our highest weighted names remain Bank of Montreal, Royal Bank of Canada, and CIBC, all of which have well-capitalised balance sheets and fully covered dividends.

    The Fund had 9.5 per cent of the portfolio allocated to utilities at the end of 2024, below the Benchmark weight of 13.8 per cent. This underweight positioning was additive to performance. Despite its traditionally defensive characteristics, the sector lagged the TSX last year by 9.6 percentage points, with a total return of 8.6 per cent (local currency). Independent power producers did most of the heavy lifting, while regulated utilities and renewables significantly lagged. We expect the rest of the sector to re-rate over time as interest rates decline. The surging demand for electricity to power new data centres is a positive trend and we remain bullish on the sector’s long-term growth prospects. Our preferred picks in the sector include AltaGas, Capital Power, and Brookfield Renewables.

    Top Holdings

    Top Holdings as at 31 December 2024

    Company Sector % of Equities
    Tourmaline Oil

    Tourmaline is Canada’s largest natural gas producer and one of North America’s top suppliers of low-cost energy. The company operates high quality assets in the Montney and Deep Basin formations, leveraging its scale and strong balance sheet to maintain industry leadership. Tourmaline has also built a solid track record of dividend growth while paying out frequent special dividends over the last few years driven by their strong cash flow generation and commitment to growing shareholder returns.

    Energy 4.8%
    Enbridge Inc.

    Enbridge is one of the largest energy infrastructure companies in North America with an extensive delivery network of crude oil, natural gas, natural gas liquids and renewable energy. The company also provides gas utility services in Ontario, Quebec, and New Brunswick. It is actively investing in low carbon technologies such as solar, wind and hydroelectric power generation facilities. Enbridge’s goal is to achieve net-zero emissions by 2050 and reduce its greenhouse gas emissions by 30% by 2025.

    Pipelines 4.7%
    Bank of Montreal

    Bank of Montreal, which was founded in 1817, has grown to be Canada’s fourth largest bank. For over two centuries, BMO has maintained a consistent record of dividend payments. It has a well-established commercial banking business that it plans to grow through new product offerings and superior customer experience. BMO conducts its business in the US through its subsidiary, BMO Harris Bank which has over 500 branches.

    Financials 3.9%
    Canadian Natural Resource Ltd.

    Canadian Natural Resource is one of the largest independent producers of oil and natural gas in Canada. The company is focused on maximising shareholder value through a combination of organic growth initiatives, dividend payments and share buybacks. It has grown its dividend by approximately 23% per annum over the past 5 years and has never cut its dividend.

    Energy 3.8%
    Royal Bank of Canada

    Established in 1864, RBC stands as Canada’s largest bank by market capitalization. With a robust presence globally, RBC excels in providing diverse financial products and services through branches, ATMs, and cutting-edge online platforms. Renowned for its customer-centric approach, RBC’s strategic focus on the Capital Markets division enhances its standing, making the bank a key player in international finance.

    Financials 3.7%
    TC Energy

    TC Energy is a leading North American energy infrastructure company, operating natural gas, liquids pipelines, and power generation assets. It owns and operates over 93,300 km of natural gas pipelines across Canada, the U.S, and Mexico, supplying ~25% of North America’s natural gas demand. In addition, it operates power generation assets, including nuclear and renewable energy, contributing to a diversified portfolio. The company generates revenue through long-term take-or-pay contracted agreements which provide stable cash flows with minimal commodity price exposure.

    Pipelines 3.5%

    CIBC

    CIBC is one of Canada’s Big Six banks, providing a range of personal, business, and institutional banking services. The bank operates across four key segments, including Personal Banking, Commercial Banking & Wealth Management, as well as Capital Markets. The bank boasts a significant presence in Canada and U.S banking, with a growing U.S commercial lending business.

    Financials 3.4%
    AGF Management

    AGF Management is a global asset management firm, providing investment solutions across mutual funds, ETFs, and alternative investments. In recent years, it has expanded into private credit and alternatives, positioning itself for higher-margin growth. As funds flow out of savings accounts and back into equity markets post-rate cutting cycle, the active asset management industry will face meaningful tailwinds.

    Financials 3.4%
    Manulife Financial

    Founded in 1887, Manulife Financial is a leading insurance provider in Canada’s financial sector. Offering a comprehensive range of financial solutions, the company operates through a widespread network and digital platforms. With a focus on insurance, wealth management, and investments, Manulife’s commitment to innovation and customer satisfaction cements its prominent position in the global financial landscape.

    Financials 3.4%
    Pembina Pipelines Corp.

    Pembina is a well-established and reputable transportation and midstream service provider with over 65 years of operational history. Its assets are diversified across the hydrocarbon value chain, including pipelines, gathering & processing, and NGL midstream operations in Canada and the US. The company is actively investing in low-carbon and sustainability solutions such as carbon capture and storage to offset greenhouse gas emissions.

    Pipelines 3.1%

    Outlook

    Global markets face heightened uncertainty, driven by elevated geopolitical risks, shifting monetary policy, and trade tensions. Despite these challenges, Canada remains well-positioned for outperformance in 2025, underpinned by attractive valuations, strong fundamentals, and structural tailwinds in key sectors, including energy, real estate, and financials. The TSX Composite continues to trade at a 7 turns discount to the S&P 500, representing an attractive entry point for investors seeking dividend growth, capital discipline and resilient earnings.

    While trade policies remain unpredictable, the Fund is well-diversified across resilient, high-quality, service-based sectors that are less exposed to tariffs. Canada is benefitting from deregulation, a more pro-business environment, and a shift in fund flows towards value and cyclical sectors as markets continue to broaden. The AI-driven expansion will require vast energy infrastructure to support data centre growth, creating significant opportunities for pipeline and utility companies – sectors where the Fund has substantial exposure.

    Canadian corporations continue to prioritize shareholder returns, with record dividend payouts and share buybacks, a trend that is expected to persist. The Fund remains focused on high-quality companies with strong free cash flow generation and ability to grow their dividends. MCT’s portfolio emphasises high dividend paying stocks which have a long track record of consistently increasing dividends. Over the past five years, dividends received by the Fund on its portfolio have increased by 8.2 per cent per annum, exceeding the 7.5 per cent per annum growth rate for the Benchmark.

    Middlefield Limited

    Date 24 March 2025

    ESG

    Environment, Social and Governance (“ESG”) Policy and Stewardship Principles: ESG Policy

    As Investment Manager, Middlefield Limited (“Middlefield”) has a duty to maximise investment returns for the shareholders of the Fund without undue risk of loss. Middlefield does this within the investment limits of the Fund’s investment mandate. Although the Fund is not an ESG-focused or sustainable fund, Middlefield incorporates ESG considerations into its investment process to aid decision making, identify potential risks and opportunities and to enhance long-term, risk-adjusted returns. Stephen Erlichman, one of the foremost experts on governance in Canada, serves as Chair, ESG for Middlefield to augment its ESG capabilities and processes.

    It is Middlefield’s responsibility to employ a disciplined investment process that seeks to identify attractive investment opportunities and evaluate material risks that could impact portfolio returns. Middlefield believes that ESG factors have become an important component of a thorough investment analysis and that the integration of ESG factors will result in a more comprehensive understanding of a company’s strategy, culture and sustainability. Consistent with these objectives, Middlefield integrates ESG considerations into its investment process and these considerations are significant factors in selecting portfolio companies for its ESG-focused mandates. Our current ESG integration process includes the following:

    1.        Middlefield incorporates ESG scores and other ESG data in its multi-disciplined investment process to evaluate investments. Its methodology includes a qualitative review and assignment of ESG scores to individual holdings. Each company is analysed on an absolute basis and measured relative to its peers. The ESG scores and other ESG data are not the sole factors that govern its investment decisions, however, but rather constitute part of the information it reviews and considers alongside its fundamental, quantitative and qualitative research.

    2.        The ESG scoring framework considers the average ESG scores from several reputable third-party data providers. In addition, it cross-references potential investments with the constituents of relevant ESG indices to assess their eligibility in ESG-focused mandates. The data providers it has chosen to incorporate into its ESG analysis currently are Sustainalytics, S&P, Bloomberg and Refinitiv.

    3.        ESG considerations also are integrated into our investment process by, among other things:

    •        reviewing companies’ public disclosure, including annual reports, proxy circulars, and, if available, sustainability or ESG reports;

    conducting research and analysis on companies’ ESG policies and practices;

    obtaining third party research on companies;

    engaging with companies, including from time to time having discussions with management teams (both before purchasing shares for the portfolios and while our portfolios own such shares) on topics such as what initiatives and strategies have been put in place by the companies to deal with ESG considerations material to such companies; and

    monitoring shareholder meetings and voting proxies.

    Middlefield’s approach to ESG integration may evolve over time as more ESG and sustainability research and data become available.

    In addition to Middlefield’s integration of ESG considerations into its investment process Middlefield has adopted Stewardship Principles and activities which are complementary to its ESG integration process.

    Middlefield’s Stewardship Principles

    Middlefield, as a Canadian asset manager, understands it has the responsibility to be an effective steward of the assets it manages for its clients in order to enhance the value of those assets for the benefit of its clients. The Canadian Coalition for Good Governance (“CCGG”) has published a set of seven stewardship principles which have become recognised as Canada’s stewardship code for institutional asset owners and asset managers.

    Middlefield believes that CCGG’s stewardship principles should be tailored for asset managers depending on various factors, such as the size of the asset manager and the type of assets managed. Set out below are CCGG’s seven stewardship principles and a description of how Middlefield, as an independent Canadian asset manager whose predominant assets are public and private investment funds that invest in Canadian and international equities, carries out or intends to carry out such principles.

    Principle 1.

    Develop an approach to stewardship: Institutional investors should develop, implement and disclose their approach to stewardship and how they meet their stewardship responsibilities.

    Middlefield integrates stewardship into its investment process. Such integration includes:

    a procedure for voting proxies (see Principle 3);

    monitoring companies (see Principle 2);

    engaging with companies (see Principle 4);

    •        outsourcing stewardship activities (by, inter alia, utilising a proxy advisory firm to assist in monitoring companies and voting proxies);

    reporting to its clients (as required by law); and

    managing potential conflicts of interest (via Middlefield’s Independent Review Committee mandated by National Instrument 81-107, as well as Middlefield’s Code of Conduct).

    Principle 2.

    Monitor companies: Institutional investors should monitor the companies in which they invest.

    Middlefield monitors the companies in which it invests, including as follows:

    it reviews companies’ public disclosures, including annual reports and proxy circulars;

    it conducts research and analysis on companies;

    it obtains third party research on companies;

    it engages with companies (see Principle 4); and

    it monitors formal shareholder meetings and, if there is a particularly important matter and it believes it is practical and appropriate to do so, it attends formal shareholder meetings.

    Principle 3.

    Report on voting activities: Institutional investors should adopt and publicly disclose their proxy voting guidelines and how they exercise voting rights.

    Middlefield exercises voting rights attached to the securities held by the funds it manages as follows:

    •        Middlefield uses the following proxy voting guidelines:

    proxies will be voted in a manner that seeks to enhance the long-term sustainable value of the funds it manages; and

    proxies will be voted in a manner consistent with leading Canadian and international corporate governance practices.

    •        on routine matters, Middlefield generally supports management and the board unless there are unusual circumstances; and

    Middlefield uses the services of a proxy advisory firm to assist in voting proxies. Middlefield assesses the voting recommendations of the proxy advisory firm but Middlefield also monitors leading Canadian and international corporate governance practices. Middlefield does not automatically follow the recommendations of the proxy advisory firm, but in most cases, it votes as recommended. Middlefield retains ultimate responsibility for all proxy voting decisions.

    In addition, the public funds managed by Middlefield follow the proxy voting requirements of Part 10 of National Instrument 81-106 in regard to establishing policies and procedures for proxy voting and in regard to preparing and disclosing their proxy voting records.

    Principle 4.

    Engage with companies: Institutional investors should engage with portfolio companies.

    Middlefield engages with portfolio companies as follows:

    Middlefield engages with management of portfolio companies regularly, both before shares are purchased for the funds it manages and also while its funds own shares of the portfolio companies; and

    When Middlefield believes it is warranted, it may escalate engagement activities by engaging with directors, by voting against or withholding votes from directors or by voting against companies’ “say on pay” resolutions.

    Principle 5.

    Collaborate with other institutional investors: Institutional investors should collaborate with other institutional investors where appropriate.

    Middlefield collaborates with other institutional investors through investor associations to which Middlefield belongs.

    Principle 6.

    Work with policy makers: Institutional investors should engage with regulators and other policy makers where appropriate.

    Middlefield’s professional advisors, such as the law firms and accounting firms it retains, assist to keep it up to date on developments that are material to it as an asset manager. It utilises its professional advisors, and it also relies on the organisations to which it belongs, to engage on its behalf with regulators and policy makers where appropriate.

    Principle 7.

    Focus on long-term sustainable value: Institutional investors should focus on promoting the creation of long-term sustainable value.

    Middlefield focuses on a portfolio company’s long-term success and sustainable value creation, including as follows:

    Middlefield focuses on a company’s management and strategy, as well as its risks (both company specific and systemic); and

    Middlefield considers environmental, social and governance factors that are relevant to a company and integrates such factors into its investment activities.

    ESG Case Studies

    Canadian Imperial Bank (3.41% of the portfolio as at 31 December 2024)

    Summary:

    Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce (CIBC) is Canada’s 5th largest bank and serves retail, commercial, wealth management, and capital market clients. The company’s enterprise-wide regulatory program aims to enhance alignment with market practice and regulatory requirements. The company has received various accolades and recognition for its sustainability initiatives and commitment to sustainability.

    Highlights:

    •        Ranked #3 in North American Project Financial Renewables by IJ Global

    •        Built a leading renewables franchise focused on providing clients with expert guidance and access to the required capital

    •        CIBC Foundation continues to demonstrate purpose in action and supporting causes that are important to clients and communities

    Top ESG Issues:

    •        Strengthening cybersecurity and anti-money laundering standards remain a key issue for the financial services sector in North America

    •        Implementing the right policies and procedures to address current and emerging ESG priorities, including artificial intelligence, financed emissions, and sustainable finance

    ESG Ranking Relative to the Fund’s Benchmark:

    Sources: S&P, Sustainalytics, Bloomberg.

    Choice Properties REIT (2.22% of the portfolio as at 31 December 2024)

    Summary:

    Choice Properties REIT invests in necessity-based retail, commercial, industrial, mixed-use, and residential properties across Canada. The Choice Cares program aims to develop a strong culture of philanthropy, diversity, equity, and inclusion. Choice was also named one of Greater Toronto’s Top Employers (2023 and 2024) in recognition of their mentorship and benefit enhancement programs.

    Highlights:

    •        Achieved the first CAGBC Zero Carbon Building Design certification to be awarded to a retail property

    •        Maintained GRESB 4-star rating for second year (scored 82 on a 100-point scale), and continued to receive “low” Sustainalytics ESG risk rating

    •        Developed a Social Impact Framework that aligns with their core business and promotes local economic development and social cohesion at the neighbourhood level

    Top ESG Issues:

    •        Addressing affordability needs by developing mixed-use and community-driven projects

    •        Implementing green building standards as well as reducing energy and water consumption across its real estate portfolio

    ESG Ranking Relative to the Fund’s Benchmark:

    Sources: S&P, Sustainalytics, Bloomberg.

    Business Model

    The Company’s Status

    Middlefield Canadian Income – GBP PC is a protected cell of Middlefield Canadian Income PCC, a Jersey-incorporated protected cell company.

    The Fund is a closed-ended fund, whose shares have been admitted to the Official List of the FCA and to trading on the London Stock Exchange’s Main Market for listed securities. The Fund is regulated in Jersey by the Jersey Financial Services Commission (“JFSC”).

    JTC Fund Solutions (Jersey) Limited acts as the Company’s secretary and administrator. The Fund’s NAV is calculated using the bid prices of the securities held within its portfolio. The Company publishes the NAV of a share in the Fund on a daily basis.

    Investment Objective and Policy2

    The Fund seeks to provide shareholders with a high level of dividends as well as capital growth over the longer term. The Fund intends to pay dividends on a quarterly basis each year.

    Investment Portfolio

    The Fund seeks to achieve its investment objective by investing predominantly in the securities of companies and REITs domiciled in Canada and listed on a Canadian Stock Exchange that the Investment Manager believes will provide an attractive level of distributions, together with the prospect for capital growth. It is expected that the Fund’s portfolio will generally comprise between 35 and 70 investments.

    The Fund may also hold cash or cash equivalents.

    The Fund may utilise derivative instruments including index-linked notes, contracts for differences, covered options and other equity-related derivative instruments for the purposes of efficient portfolio management.

    The Fund will at all times invest and manage its assets in a manner which is consistent with the objective of spreading investment risk.

    Investment restrictions

    The Fund will not at the time of making an investment:

    have more than 10 per cent. of the value of its portfolio assets invested in the securities of any single issuer; or

    have more than 50 per cent. of the value of its portfolio assets comprised of its ten largest security investments by value; or

    have more than 40 per cent. of the value of its portfolio assets invested in securities listed on a recognised stock exchange outside Canada; or

    (d)        have more than 10 per cent. of the value of its portfolio assets invested in securities listed on a recognised stock exchange outside Canada and the United States; or

    (e)        have more than 10 per cent. of the value of its portfolio assets invested in unquoted securities; or

    (f)        purchase securities on margin or make short sales of securities or maintain short positions in excess of 10 per cent. of the Fund’s NAV.

    Hedging

    The Board reserves the right to employ currency hedging but, other than in exceptional circumstances, does not intend to hedge.

    Gearing

    The Fund has the power to borrow up to 25 per cent. of the value of its total assets at the time of drawdown. In the normal course of events, and subject to Board oversight, the Fund is expected to employ gearing in the range of 0 to 20 per cent. of the value of its total assets in order to enhance returns. Net gearing, which represents net borrowings as a percentage of net assets, is the AIC standard measure of gearing. At year end, the Fund’s net gearing was 19.3 per cent.

    Promoting the Company’s Success – Section 172 Statement

    The AIC Code requires that the Company should understand the views of the Company’s key stakeholders and describe in the annual report how their interests and the matters set out in section 172 of the UK’s Companies Act 2006 have been considered in Board discussions and decision-making.

    The Company has no employees and all of the directors are non-executive, so the Board considers that its key stakeholders are its shareholders, its service providers, society, the government, and regulators.

    The Board’s engagement with stakeholders is described in the section “Engagement with Stakeholders” below.

    The Board considers that the Company, as an externally-managed investment trust, with no employees, premises, nor manufacturing or other physical operations, therefore has no material, direct impact on the community and the environment. However, the Board considers social, community, environmental and human rights matters to be of significant importance and, in this respect, takes soundings from the Investment Manager as to how these matters are taken into consideration in respect of portfolio construction and its ongoing management. The Investment Manager is tasked with assessing how companies deal with and report on social and environmental risks and issues specific to the industry. It aims to incorporate ESG criteria into the Investment Manager’s processes when making stock selection decisions and promoting ESG disclosure.

    The Investment Manager is mindful of the impact which it can have upon shaping the consideration given to ESG matters by the Fund’s investee companies. In addition to considering ESG matters in portfolio construction decisions, the Investment Manager conducts ongoing investee company monitoring, and this engagement process may include voting and communication with management and company board members. Although the Company does not take a controlling stake in its investees, the Board also considers the interests of those stakeholders and oversees the activities of the Investment Manager, as explained in this Section 172 Statement. The Board ascribes to the highest standards of business conduct and has policies in place to ensure compliance with all applicable laws and regulations. In this respect, it also interacts with governmental organisations providing public services for society, and financial services regulators (such as the FCA and JFSC). In addition to monitoring the Company’s compliance with its own obligations, the Management Engagement Committee also monitors compliance by its service providers with their own obligations and; the work of the Management Engagement Committee during the year is explained in more detail later in this report on pages 46 and 47.

    The Company has an unlimited life and as described in detail in the Company’s viability statement, the Board considers the prospects of the Company for at least the next three years whenever it considers the Company’s long-term sustainability. All strategic decisions are therefore taken with the long-term success of the Company in mind and the Board takes external advice whenever it considers that such would be beneficial to its decision-making process, primarily from its retained service providers (including legal counsel), but also from other external consultants.

    The Board encourages openness and transparency and promotes proactive compliance with new regulations. The Company, through its Investment Manager and Administrator, files Jersey regulatory statistics on a quarterly basis and assists the Administrator in collecting data for provision to the JFSC to conduct a national risk assessment of money laundering and terrorist financing threats to Jersey.

    Engagement with Stakeholders

    As regards the Board’s engagement with shareholders, all shares in issue rank pari passu, all shareholders are treated equally. and no shareholder receives preferential treatment. When making decisions of relevance to shareholders, the Board considers first and foremost the likely consequences of its decisions in light of its duty to act in the best interests of the Company and shareholders as a whole.

    In addition to the regular reporting provided by key service providers, the Board’s primary formal engagement with its service providers is via the Management Engagement Committee, which issues questionnaires to all of its service providers and considers the detailed feedback received on an annual basis, reporting to the Board on its conclusions. The services provided by the key third-party service providers are critical to the ongoing operational performance of the Company. The Board believes that fostering constructive and collaborative relationships with the Company’s service providers will assist in their promotion of the success of the Company for the benefit of all shareholders.

    Management

    The Company is an Alternative Investment Fund (“AIF”) in accordance with the provisions of the AIFMD. For the purposes of the AIFMD, which was implemented into UK law with effect from 22 July 2013, the Company has been classified as a non-EU AIF managed by a non-EU AIFM. As such, the Company is not subject to the full scope of the AIFMD and therefore does not incur additional costs, such as those incurred in having to appoint a depositary, that would have been applicable had it been deemed to be managed by an EU AIFM.

    The Board is responsible for setting the Company’s Investment Objective and Investment Policy, subject to shareholders’ approval of any proposed material changes, and has a schedule of investment matters reserved for the directors’ resolution. The Board has contractually delegated to external agencies the management of the investment portfolio, the custodial services and the day-to-day accounting and secretarial requirements. Each of these contracts is only entered into after proper consideration by the Board of the quality of services being offered.

    The Board also receives and considers, together with representatives of the Investment Manager, reports in relation to the operational controls of the Investment Manager, Administrator, Custodian and Registrar. These reviews identified no issues of significance.

    The Board meets at least quarterly to review the overall business of the Company and to consider matters specifically reserved for its review. At these meetings, the Board monitors the investment performance of the Fund. The directors also review the Fund’s activities every quarter to ensure that it adheres to the Fund’s investment objective and policy or, if appropriate, to consider changes to that policy. Additional ad hoc reports are received as required and directors have access at all times to the advice and services of the Secretary, which is responsible for guiding the Board on procedures and applicable rules and regulations.

    Relationship with the Investment Manager and Performance

    The Company has no employees, premises, assets other than financial assets or operations. The Board engages reputable third-party suppliers with established track records to deliver day-to-day operations. The most important of these is the Investment Manager, which is responsible for the management of the Company’s assets in accordance with its investment objective and policy. The Board maintains a close working relationship with the Investment Manager and holds it to account for the smooth running of the Company’s day-to-day business. There is continuous engagement and dialogue between Board meetings, with communication channels remaining open and information, ideas and advice flowing freely between the Board and the Investment Manager.

    The Board retains responsibility for decisions over corporate strategy, corporate governance, risk and internal control assessment, determining the overall limits and restrictions of the portfolio and in respect of gearing and asset allocation, investment performance monitoring, dividend policy and setting marketing budgets.

    The Investment Manager and Investment Advisor promote the Company with the support of the Corporate Broker and the Board makes additional funds available to support marketing activities aimed at raising the profile of the Company among investors in the UK.

    As the Investment Manager holds the overall day-to-day relationship with the Company’s other third-party suppliers, the Board places reliance on the Investment Manager in this regard. The Board is confident that the Investment Manager has developed and maintains good working relationships with all of the Company’s third-party suppliers. To ensure the chosen service providers continue to deliver the expected level of service, the Board receives regular reports from them, evaluates the control environments in place at each service provider and formally assesses their appointment annually.

    By doing so, the Board seeks to ensure that the key service providers continue to be appropriately remunerated to deliver the level of service that it demands of them.

    The Company has appointed the Investment Manager as its AIFM. The Investment Manager is regulated by the Ontario Securities Commission. The Company has a formal schedule of the areas of decision making reserved for the Board and those over which the Investment Manager has discretion, and it is available for inspection on the Company’s website.

    A review of the Investment Manager’s performance is included in the Chairman’s Statement and the Investment Manager’s Report. The Board receives formal reports from the Investment Manager at each of its Board meetings, at which meetings representatives of the Investment Manager are present to answer the Board’s questions.

    Such reporting and the ensuing discussions cover all areas within the Investment Manager’s remit, including portfolio performance, portfolio risk, asset allocation and gearing, compliance with the Company’s investment objective and policy and investment restrictions and the outlook for the market and the Company’s prospects, as well as a comparison with the Company’s peer group provided by the Company’s corporate broker. In between meetings, the Investment Manager provides updates to the directors on any material events. The Investment Manager’s performance is assessed on an ongoing basis and includes the Fund’s performance relative to appropriate benchmarks and its peer groups.

    The Board and Investment Manager also discuss the marketing and investor relations work performed by the Investment Manager and Investment Advisor, which is an affiliate of the Investment Manager, in each quarterly Board meeting. The Investment Advisor and the Investment Manager are paid an additional fee for investor relations services totalling the lesser of 15 basis points of the market value of the Fund or £200,000 per annum, with the fee to be calculated daily based on the closing market value of the Fund and payable quarterly in arrears, and its performance is measured by reference to an agreed set of metrics.

    The Board has delegated voting on matters proposed to the Company by its investees and a report on the Investment Manager’s institutional voting policy for the Company is included in the Directors’ Report. The Board and the Investment Manager also consider social, community, environmental and human rights issues to be important and a report on the Investment Manager’s policies for the Company is also included in the Directors’ Report.

    As required by the Listing Rules and recommended by the AIC Code, the following additional information is provided:

    During the year under review and up to the date of this report, Middlefield Limited has acted as the Company’s discretionary investment manager. Middlefield International Limited (“the Investment Advisor”) provides investment advisory services to the Company and the Investment Manager. The Company pays an annual fee of 0.70 per cent. of NAV to the Investment Manager to cover its services and those provided to it by the Investment Advisor and the agreement can be terminated by either party on 90 days’ written notice. The Investment Manager and Investment Advisor are also paid an additional fee for investor relations services as previously mentioned and disclosed in note 2u.

    Having reviewed the investment management and advisory services provided by the Investment Manager and the Investment Advisor and having regard to the Fund’s investment performance since the Fund’s launch in May 2006, the directors are of the view that the portfolio should remain managed by the Investment Manager for the foreseeable future.

    Biographies

    As at 31 December 2024, the Board of Directors comprised five non-executive directors, four of whom were independent of the Investment Manager and its affiliates.

    Directors

    Michael Phair, Chair

    Mr. Phair has over 30 years’ investment banking experience at World Bank Group, Rothschild and UBS with a focus on privatisations, telecoms and media. He has lived and worked in Canada, Latin America, the United States, Europe and is a British citizen and resident in London since 1988. He is the Founder, former CEO and currently director of REG (UK) Ltd. which is a leading software solutions provider for counter-party risk management in the UK and global insurance market. He is the Chair of Children and Families Across Borders, a UK-based charity which is part of the International Social Services Network operating in over 130 countries worldwide. A successful private equity investor, Mr. Phair is the former Managing Member of Boston Capital Management (VP) LLC.

    Kate Anderson

    Ms Anderson, until 1st April 2025, is a managing partner of Voisin Law in Jersey. Ms Anderson intends to take up a new position in the legal profession in Jersey in due course. Her regulatory and funds practice specialises in the legal, regulatory and corporate governance aspects of investment funds, holding companies and managers. In recent years she has joined a number of working groups related to these areas, including the consultation group for the restatement of the Jersey Law of Contract, the working group tasked with updating the Limited Partnership (Jersey) Law to improve its functionality when used with funds and the Jersey Finance Community of Interest group on sustainable investment. Since 2008 Ms Anderson has sat on a number of collective investment fund and fund manager/ general partner boards.

    Janine Fraser

    Ms. Fraser, through her company, Harmony Business Partnering in Jersey, provides financial expertise and professional training. She is a member of the Institute of Directors and a Fellow of the Association of Chartered Certified Accountants. She also holds a Master’s Degree in E-Commerce from the University of Westminster.

    With over a decade of experience as a group financial controller at Triton Partners, an international investment firm, and extensive global experience in various sectors, including retail, merchant banking, travel, manufacturing, and oil, Ms. Fraser brings a wealth of industry knowledge to her role from her previous positions at RBS, Lloyds TSB, Hill Samuel, and British Airways.

    Dean Orrico

    Mr Orrico, President, Chief Executive Officer of Middlefield Limited and President of Middlefield International Limited, has been employed by the firm since 1996.

    Mr Orrico is currently responsible for overseeing the creation and ongoing management of all of Middlefield’s investment funds including mutual funds, Toronto and London Stock Exchange-listed funds and flow-through funds. He graduated with a Bachelor of Commerce degree from the Rotman School of Management (University of Toronto) and holds an MBA from the Schulich School of Business (York University). Mr Orrico is a registered Portfolio Manager.

    Mr Orrico has developed expertise in both equity and fixed income securities. Having spent many years managing equity portfolios and meeting with international companies and investors, Mr Orrico has overseen the diversification of Middlefield’s portfolios into global equity income securities.

    Andrew Zychowski

    Mr Zychowski has over 30 years’ investment banking experience, providing corporate advisory services to investment company boards. Until June 2019, he was the Head of the Investment Companies corporate department at Canaccord Genuity Limited. Prior to that he was the Head of the Investment Companies corporate department at Dresdner Kleinwort. Mr Zychowski is currently a non-executive director of The Ralph Veterinary Referral Centre Plc, a state of the art, multidisciplinary, small animal specialist referral veterinary hospital and Digital 9 Infrastructure plc which is traded on the London Stock Exchange and is in managed wind-down, with the objective to realise all existing assets in the company in an orderly manner. He is a qualified accountant and holds a BSc in Physics from Imperial College.

    Corporate Information

    Registered Office

    28 Esplanade

    St Helier

    Jersey JE2 3QA

    Directors

    Michael Phair (Chairman)

    Kate Anderson (SID)

    Janine Fraser

    Dean Orrico

    Andrew Zychowski

    Service Providers

    Administrator and Secretary

    JTC Fund Solutions (Jersey) Limited

    28 Esplanade

    St. Helier

    Jersey, JE2 3QA

    Investment Advisor

    Middlefield International Limited

    288 Bishopsgate

    London, EC2M 4QP

    Investment Manager

    Middlefield Limited

    Suite 3100

    8 Spadina Ave

    Toronto, Ontario

    Canada, M5V 0S8

    Legal Advisers

    In Jersey

    Carey Olsen Jersey LLP

    47 Esplanade

    St. Helier

    Jersey, JE1 0BD

    In Canada

    Fasken Martineau DuMoulin LLP

    Bay Adelaide Centre

    Box 20, Suite 2400

    333 Bay Street

    Toronto, Ontario

    Canada, M5H 2T6

    Broker and Corporate Advisor

    Investec Bank plc

    30 Gresham Street

    London, EC2V 7QP

    Custodian

    RBC Investor Services Trust

    155 Wellington Street West 2nd Floor

    Toronto, Ontario

    Canada, M5V 3L3

    Registrar

    MUFG Corporate Markets (Jersey) Limited

    12 Castle Street

    St. Helier

    Jersey, JE2 3RT

    CREST Agent, UK Paying Agent and Transfer Agent

    MUFG Corporate Markets

    Central Square

    29 Wellington Street

    Leeds, LS1 4DL

    Independent Auditor

    RSM Channel Islands (Audit) Limited

    13-14 Esplanade

    St Helier

    Jersey, JE4 9RJ

    Marketing Agent

    Kepler Partners LLP

    70 Conduit Street

    London

    W1S 2GF

    Financial Calendar

    Annual Results

    Announced March 2025

    Dividend Payment Dates

    Last Business Day of January, April, July and October

    Annual General Meetings

    19 June 2025

    Half-Yearly Results

    Announced September 2025

    Information Sources

    For more information about the Company and Fund, visit the website www.middlefield.co.uk

    Managing Risks

    The Company’s risk assessment and the way in which significant risks are managed is a key focus for the Board. It is guided by the Board’s assessment of the risks arising in the Company’s operations and identification and oversight of the controls exercised by the Board and its delegates, the Investment Manager and other service providers. This information is documented in the Company’s business risk matrix, a valuable tool for identifying and monitoring principal risks.

    The directors consider the primary risks facing the Company as those that could substantially jeopardise its capacity to achieve its investment objectives, maintain solvency, liquidity, or viability. In evaluating these key risks, the directors analyse the Company’s vulnerability to various factors that could lead to significant devaluation, such as potential recession, geopolitical instability, commodity price shocks, persistent inflation, supply chain interruptions, the effects of climate risk on investee firms, foreign exchange fluctuations, the consequences of restrictive monetary policies, and the influence of increased interest rates on both the Company and investor sentiment.

    At the time of this report, trade policy uncertainty and geopolitical tensions are having an impact at both macro and micro levels. While the long-term severity and the impact on the Company’s principal risks and viability cannot currently be predicted with any accuracy, it is expected that an escalation in ongoing geopolitical conflicts and severe trade restrictions would have detrimental effects.

    Strategy Risks

    Risk Mitigants Change from 2024
    Macroeconomic and political environment

    Unfavourable changes to the macro political and economic environment including global trade tensions, and climate risk pressures, causes the investment objective to become obsolete with reduced investor demand.

    The Board has established guidelines to ensure that the investment policy is pursued by the Investment Manager. The Board reviews the Investment Manager’s compliance with the agreed investment restrictions, investment performance and risk against investment objectives and strategy, the portfolio’s risk profile and appropriate strategies employed to mitigate any negative impact of substantial changes in markets. Trade policy uncertainty
    Inflation and Interest Rates

    Inflation has been trending lower but has the potential to re-accelerate. Central banks have been loosening monetary policy after obtaining evidence that inflation continues trending downwards.

    The Investment Manager monitors the portfolio daily and considers the portfolio’s sensitivity to interest rates. The Investment Manager also monitors the borrowing rates and weighs the benefits of gearing against its costs. Inflation outlook has improved

    Rates continue their downward trend

    Share price discount to NAV

    Continued trading of the Fund’s share price at a level below that of its NAV reflects a lack of liquidity and/or lack of investor interest in the Fund’s shares. A share price discount to NAV will prevent the Fund from growing via the issue of additional shares and may cause a persistent discount to widen further. The Fund’s level of discount has been significant for a prolonged period and a lack of demand for the Fund’s shares has provided the opportunity for an activist investor to acquire a significant stake in the Fund over a relatively short period of time.

    The Board, the Investment Manager and Broker monitor the share price and level of discount on a regular basis.

    During the year, the Board, the Investment Manager and Broker have spent considerable time engaging with existing and potential shareholders to understand investors’ needs and best interests and to help improve investor interest in the Fund’s shares. This included liaising directly with Saba, as the Fund’s largest shareholder, and holding constructive talks with Saba and existing shareholders to address investor concerns and adapt to shareholder needs.

    In assessing whether to conduct buybacks, the directors take into account market factors, the discounts of comparable funds and the size of the Fund and the shrinkage in its asset base which would necessarily result from the Fund repurchasing its own shares.

    Saba becoming the largest shareholder of the Fund.
    Gearing

    The utilisation of gearing increases the impacts of adverse movements in equity prices or interest rates and may require the Company to liquidate positions at inopportune times in order to maintain the correct levels of gearing.

    The Company maintains a prudent level of gearing and the loan to value ratio is monitored on a daily basis as part of the valuation process, so that in falling markets the Company will be able to take proactive steps to reduce gearing to avoid breaching its investment policy and any loan to value covenants. Unchanged
    Shareholder Activism

    A failure to adapt to changes in the market and investor demand might leave the Company exposed to the risk of further shareholder dissatisfaction, activism, and influence.

    The Board, Investment Manager and Broker engage directly with shareholders to understand investors’ needs and best interests.

    The Investment Manager and Broker regularly monitor movements in the Fund’s share register.

    Saba becoming the largest shareholder of the Fund

    Portfolio Risks

    Risk Mitigants Change from 2024  
    Regulatory & Legal Risks

    The Company is primarily focused on Canadian companies that may have operations in, or be exposed to, regulatory risks in many other countries. These have the potential of negatively impacting the efficiency and structure of the Company.

    The Investment Manager and the Board are kept abreast of changes to all relevant laws by the Company’s legal and tax advisers, secretary, Administrator and Auditor. Unchanged
    Income/Dividend

    The Company sets its target dividend at a rate it expects to earn from the dividends received from its underlying equity investments based upon robust modelling and assumptions.

    Failure by those investments to meet expectations due to, for example, decreased operating margins, changes in tax treatment of dividends, increased borrowing costs or poor underlying performance, may prevent the Company from being able to meet its target dividend.

    The Investment Manager’s allocation process seeks to select investments capable of producing strong reliable dividends and future capital growth across a diverse range of sectors. Day to day risk management techniques seek to diversify risk and monitor high levels of volatility. The Board monitors the income received on investments and available for distribution prior to the declaration of each dividend. Unchanged  

    Operational Risks

    Risk Mitigants Change from 2024
    Key man Risks

    The Company is reliant on key individuals of the Investment Manager to meet its investment objective and for growing the Company’s shareholder base.

    The Company’s portfolio is managed by a team of investment professionals led by Dean Orrico and Rob Lauzon. Unchanged
    Service provider performance

    The Company is reliant on the performance, safe custody of assets and data and internal controls of its service providers for its day-to-day activities. Poor performance or failure to meet their contractual obligations, including the absence of adequate business continuity plans and data and cyber security, could negatively impact the operations, reputation, governance and cost efficiency of the Company.

    Due diligence is carried out on all service providers prior to their appointment, with their level of service monitored continually and assessed formally by the Management Engagement Committee on an annual basis.

    The Board monitors the performance of the Investment Manager at every Board meeting and otherwise as appropriate.

    Unchanged

    Financial Risks

    Risk Mitigants Change from 2024
    Market Risks

    The Company may generate a loss on its investments at realisation due to adverse movements in their share prices, currency or interest rate movements.

    The directors monitor the Investment Manager’s compliance with the Company’s stated investment policy and review the investment performance. Unchanged
    Liquidity Risk

    The Company may hold positions, long or short, in securities that may not be able to be sold or bought quickly enough so as to prevent or minimise a loss.

    The Fund primarily invests in securities that are readily realisable, mainly issued by Canadian companies and REITS listed on a Canadian Stock Exchange and are actively traded. Unchanged

    Emerging Risks

    Tensions in the Middle East remain a key geopolitical risk, impacting global markets and supply chains. The events have led to regional instability, with concerns of a broader conflict involving the US, Iran, and other regional powers. Although there are current diplomatic efforts to reach a ceasefire in both Ukraine and Israel, these conflicts have the potential to disrupt global trade routes, commodity prices, and investor sentiment. The US has increased sanctions on Iranian-linked groups while also seeking to prevent direct conflict with Iran. As we’re currently witnessing, long-term stability will require diplomatic engagement, economic incentives, and security assurances to prevent further escalation. A resolution could help tame commodity price volatility, restore trade flows, and ease investor concerns over prolonged geopolitical uncertainty.

    In July 2024, the unwinding of the FX carry trade triggered a sharp selloff in global markets. Investors had been borrowing in low-yielding currencies, particularly the Japanese Yen, to fund investments in higher-yielding assets, taking advantage of Japan’s ultra-low-interest rate environment. However, speculation that the Bank of Japan (BOJ) would tighten monetary policy and allow interest rates to rise led to a sudden surge in the Yen. As a result, investors were forced to unwind their positions, causing widespread deleveraging and significant volatility across asset classes. The BOJ’s measured approach to adjust policies prevented further panic, but investors remain cautious of further FX-driven volatility.

    The 2024 election cycle was one of the most consequential in recent history and reshaped global trade policies, leadership dynamics, and economic strategies, driving market volatility. While some elections reinforced political continuity, others led to major shifts in international relations, trade agreements, and economic policies. In the US, Trump’s return to office signalled a shift toward protectionist trade policies, deregulation, and energy independence, with renewed emphasis on tariffs, border security, and reshoring manufacturing. His administration’s approach to China, Mexico, and Canada has already introduced trade policy uncertainty, including the temporary threat of 25% tariffs on Canadian and Mexican imports. Markets reacted with heightened volatility, particularly in trade-exposed sectors, as investors assessed the long-term impact of potential USMCA renegotiations and increased trade restrictions. Looking ahead, the 2025 Canadian federal election could reshape economic policies and business sentiment. A pro-business environment, conservative leadership shift could accelerate deregulation and foster a more investment-friendly environment. With rising protectionist rhetoric in the US, Canada’s focus may shift towards strengthening non-US trade relationships. As global political landscapes evolve, markets will continue to navigate shifting policies, impacting investment strategies in the year ahead.

    Emerging risks, along with all other risks the directors have identified the Company to be exposed to, are monitored via the Company’s risk register. During the year, as part of their regular review and assessment of risk, the directors have considered the ongoing discussions with Saba and the potential impact of the requisition on the Fund’s future structure. The fund is a closed-ended investment fund and thus is not required to comply with LR 6.6.1R(13) or LR 6.6.8R due to LR11.4.22R.

    Going Concern and Viability

    The performance of the investments held by the Fund over the reporting year is reflected in the Statement of Comprehensive Income and in notes 3 and 22 to the financial statements and the outlook for the future is described in the Chairman’s Report and the Investment Manager’s Report. The Company’s financial position, its cash flows and liquidity position are set out in the financial statements and the Company’s financial risk management objectives and policies, details of its financial instruments and its exposures to market price risk, credit risk, liquidity risk, interest rate risk, currency risk and country risk are set out at note 16 to the financial statements. The Company’s long-term viability and assessment of longer-term risks to which the Company is exposed are also reported upon in the Company’s long-term viability statement included below.

    The financial statements have been prepared on a going concern basis, supported by the directors’ current assessment of the Company’s position based on the following factors:

    •        ongoing shareholder interest in the continuation of the Fund;

    •        the Fund has sufficient liquidity in the form of cash assets to meet all on-going expenses;

    •        should the need arise, the directors have the option to reduce dividend payments in order to positively affect the Fund’s cash flows;

    •        the Fund’s investments in Canadian and U.S. securities are readily realisable to meet liquidity requirements, if necessary; and

    •        assuming the Fund’s trading in a security represented 30% of the average daily trading volume of that security, 100% of portfolio’s holdings can be liquidated in under 5 working days.

    Based on the above, in the opinion of the directors, there is a reasonable expectation that the Company has adequate resources to continue in operational existence for the foreseeable future.

    The directors have also considered the application of the SORP for Financial Statements of Investment Trust Companies and Venture Capital Trusts, whereby the going concern basis of preparation of the financial statements is considered appropriate until a vote is passed to discontinue the Fund or Company. There is no requirement under the Company’s and Fund’s articles of association to propose any continuation vote in respect of either the Company as a whole or the Fund itself and the directors have no intention of proposing any continuation vote in the foreseeable future, subject to unforeseen future events. For these reasons, the financial statements have been prepared using the going concern basis.

    The accompanying financial statements have been prepared on a going concern basis, which assumes the Company will continue to operate and meet its obligations as they fall due. However, the Company’s ability to continue as a going concern is subject to material uncertainty. Since the Company’s year end, on 10 February 2025 the Company, together with three other UK-listed closed-end funds, received a requisition notice from Saba, marking the second phase of Saba’s recent activist campaign in the UK-listed closed-end fund sector. The first phase commenced on 18 December 2024 with Saba requisitioning general meetings at seven UK-listed closed-end funds, proposing resolutions (each of which later failed) to remove the current independent directors of those seven funds and replace them with Saba’s own appointees, with a view to also terminating the management contracts and, in due course, replacing the investment managers with Saba. The requisition notice received by the Company on 10 February 2025 was for the approval by shareholders of the taking of all necessary steps to implement a scheme or process by which shareholders would become (or have the option to become) shareholders of a UK-listed open-ended investment company (or similar open-ended investment vehicle) implementing a substantially similar strategy to the Company. Such scheme or process could entail shareholders rolling into an existing or newly established UK-listed open-ended investment company (or similar open-ended investment vehicle), in either case managed by the Company’s existing investment manager or one of its affiliates. Following consultation with a number of the Company’s largest shareholders including Saba, and following constructive discussions with Saba, on 21 February 2025 the Company announced that Saba had agreed to withdraw its requisition notice for a period of 60 days to enable the Company and its advisers to formulate proposals that are in the best interests of all shareholders. At the current time, the Board is in the process of considering a number of strategic options in the best interests of shareholders as a whole. A further announcement regarding future proposals which the Company may put to shareholders will be made in due course. Although the Board is confident that the Company will have sufficient financial resources to meet its obligations due within twelve months from the date of approval of the financial statements, the uncertain future outcome of the Board’s deliberations indicates the existence of a material uncertainty that may cast significant doubt on the Company’s ability to continue as a going concern. Nevertheless, the Board believes that it is appropriate to continue to adopt the going concern basis in preparing the financial statements.

    Viability Statement

    Provision 36 of the AIC Code includes a recommendation that the directors publish a long-term viability statement and this statement is intended to meet that requirement.

    The Board of directors regularly assesses the viability of the Company for at least the three years following the date of that review. The Board believes that this three-year period remains the appropriate period over which to assess the Company’s viability because the Company’s shareholders and other stakeholders desire long-term certainty as to the Company’s viability. The Board does not consider it feasible to anticipate with any reasonable degree of certainty the viability of the Company for a period longer than three years. In considering the Company’s viability, the Board considers the Company’s current position and the principal and emerging risks to which it is exposed, as set out on pages 30 to 33, the viability of its investment objective and policy, market risks, the ongoing charges ratio, the liquidity of its investments, the ability to use hedging as a portfolio management tool, gearing and the reduction in reliance of the Canadian economy on energy as it diversifies into promising growth industries, such as healthcare and technology.

    The Board considers the impacts on the Company’s business plan and viability if severe principal and emerging risks are applied. Certain financial risks were considered under a scenario analysis that stress tests the portfolio against historic market shocks, including the 2008 Lehman Default, the 2011 Debt Ceiling Crisis and the 2015 Greece Financial Crisis. It is expected that the value of the Fund’s total investments as at 31 December 2024 would have experienced drawdowns of 22.7 per cent, 13.0 per cent and 1.5 per cent, respectively. Strategy, portfolio and market risks were also considered under a stress tested scenario where adverse movements in currency of 15 per cent are experienced, operating expenses increase by 20 per cent and gearing is reduced to zero due to higher interest rates. Under this scenario, the Fund’s revenue is expected to decline by approximately £1,629,698, its net profit is expected to decline by £1,161,351 and the dividend coverage of the Fund is expected to decline to 84 per cent. This analysis is relative to fiscal 2024 results and incorporates the dividend increase announced in January 2025.

    The directors have made a robust assessment of principal risks and, together with the Company’s Investment Manager, have adopted procedures and strategies to mitigate these risks. The Fund has an established Investment Policy, which has been approved and is monitored by the directors. The Investment Manager regularly updates the directors on the Company’s portfolio and the overall status of the market. The directors engage tax accountants to perform an investment trust test (for compliance with the requirement to distribute at least 85% of investment income received) on an annual basis). A solvency test is also undertaken (in compliance with Jersey company law) before any dividend is declared.

    Notwithstanding the ongoing uncertainty caused by geopolitical events, higher interest rates and inflation, if the Company’s income, expenses and dividends remain substantially unchanged in 2024 and 2025, the Company will hold sufficient cash to pay all of its expenses and the current rate of dividends for at least the next 12 months following the date of approval of this annual financial report. In addition, the Board reviews the liquidity of the Company’s investments on a quarterly basis and the Company’s investment portfolio remains extremely liquid. The Board is confident, based on its regular monitoring of liquidity, that additional cash can be raised very quickly if needed through sale of investments.

    The Fund has a credit facility agreement with RBC whereby RBC provides the credit facility, with a maximum principal amount of the lesser of CAD 75,000,000 and 25 per cent. of the total asset value of the Fund. Based on the Fund’s total assets of GBP 172,062,473 as at 31 December 2024, a decrease in total assets of GBP 56,481,233, or 32.83 per cent of assets, would be required for the principal amount to exceed 25 per cent of the total asset value of the fund.

    In 2024, the level of net gearing was kept relatively consistent at an average level of 15.9 per cent. At the year -end it stood at 16.2 percent on a gross basis and 19.3 per cent net.

    Following careful consideration and analysis of all material risk factors, the Board acknowledged the ongoing uncertainty as set out under the going concern and viability statement on page 33 and believes that the Company remains viable for the foreseeable future.

    Key Performance Indicators At each Board meeting, the Board considers several performance measures to assess the Company’s success in achieving its objectives. The key performance indicators (KPIs) used to measure the progress and performance of the Company, and which are comparable to other investment trusts, are set out below.

    In addition, the Board regularly reviews the performance of the portfolio from both a net asset value and share price perspective and compares this against various companies and indices. The Board also reviews the performance of the portfolio against its benchmark; the S&P TSX High Dividend Index. Information on the Company’s performance is given in the Chairman’s Statement and Investment Manager’s Report.

    Key performance indicator 2024

    Value

    2023

    Value

    NAV per share 134.05 pence 121.55 pence
    NAV total return performance for the year 15.1% (1.4%)
    Benchmark Index* 7.6% 3.9%
    Share price 116 pence 101.10 pence
    Discount to NAV (13.47%) (16.84%)
    Dividend paid in the year 5.3 pence 5.2 pence
    Ongoing charges** 1.30% 1.33%

    * S&P/TSX High Dividend Index, total return basis.

    ** refer to page 42.

    Borrowings

    At 31 December 2024, the amount drawn down under the credit facility was CAD 52 million (GBP equivalent at amortised cost of £28,884,872). For further details, please refer to Note 14. Loan Payable on page 71.

    Future Developments

    Details of the main trends and factors likely to affect the future development, performance and position of the Company’s business can be found in the Investment Manager’s Report on pages 11 to 15. Further details as to the risks affecting the Company are set out on pages 30 to 33.

    Environmental, Social and Governance Matters (‘ESG’)

    The Board and the Investment Manager believe that companies should operate in a socially responsible manner. Day-to-day decisions regarding the Company’s investment portfolio have been delegated to the Investment Manager. While MCT is not explicitly focused on ESG or sustainability, it acknowledges the increasing importance that non-financial factors including social and environmental issues can have on the share price, as well as the reputation of companies. Specialists at the Investment Manager are responsible for evaluating how companies address and report on social and environmental risks specific to their industries. Their goal is to integrate ESG criteria into the Investment Manager’s decision-making processes for stock selection and to promote ESG disclosure. The Investment Manager is mindful of its influence on the consideration of ESG matters by the Fund’s investee companies. Alongside portfolio construction decisions, the Investment Manager continuously monitors investee companies for ESG compliance. Company monitoring, including engagement processes such as voting and communication with management and Company board members, is part of the Investment Manager’s responsibilities. The Investment Manager’s ESG policy can be found on pages 16 to 18.

    Institutional Voting Policy

    The Company’s policy is that a decision on whether to vote on matters proposed by its investees is to be based on the nature of the matter being proposed. In the ordinary course of business, voting decisions have been delegated to the Investment Manager.

    The Investment Manager’s proxy voting policies are designed to be general in nature and the Investment Manager aims to exercise its proxy voting on all securities held. When exercising voting rights, the Investment Manager will generally vote with management of the issuer. For each proxy, the Investment Manager incorporates research and considers the recommendations provided by Glass Lewis, the Investment Manager’s proxy advisor, in exercising its voting rights. All proxy UK voting is conducted through Glass Lewis Viewpoint and /proxy voting is a key element of the Investment Manager’s stewardship of the assets it manages, which is adjunct to the integration of ESG factors into its investment process.

    On a monthly basis, the Investment Manager’s portfolio managers generate a list of issuers whose weightings represent more than 3% of the Fund’s net assets at the month-end preceding the voting date. For each of these issuers, the Investment Manager will record comments which support the rationale for the proxy decision made. For example, comments would be registered in Glass Lewis Viewpoint if the Investment Manager’s proxy voting decision differs from the recommendation from management or Jersey Glass Lewis. Copies of all proxy records are retained and available in Glass Lewis Viewpoint.

    Board Diversity and Experience

    The Company’s affairs are overseen by a Board comprised of five non-executive directors, two of whom are female. The directors’ biographies are included on pages 26 to 27 above, demonstrating the diversity of their experience including, but not limited to, investment management, corporate governance, corporate law, banking, accounting and audit and ESG matters.

    The directors regularly consider the leadership needs and specific skills required to manage the Company’s affairs in the best interests of its shareholders and other stakeholders and take account of diversity recommendations in their succession planning. The Board is cognisant of the requirements of listing rule 6.6.6R (9) and the tables below provide the relevant data required by listing rules 6.6.6R (9) to (11) and annex 1R to listing rule 6. The Board is not yet fully compliant with these rules, because none of the directors is from a minority ethnic background, but will continue to work towards compliance in a structured and orderly manner. The directors have decided that in future, in order to reach a broader range of diverse candidates, they will consider using one or more UK external search agents to assist with the search for new directors.

    The following table represents the gender identity of the Board as of the date of approval of this annual financial report and includes the information required by Listing Rule 6.6.6(9) and Annex 1 to Listing Rule 6, this data having been obtained by polling the directors:

      Number of Board Members Percentage of the Board Number of Senior Positions on the Board (CEO, CFO, SID and Chair) Number in Executive Management Percentage of Executive Management
    Men 3 60% 1 N/A – No executive Management N/A – No executive Management
    Women 2 40% 1 N/A – No executive Management N/A – No executive Management
    Not specified/prefer not to say 0 0% 0 N/A – No executive Management N/A – No executive Management

    The following table represents the ethnic background of the Board as of the date of approval of this annual financial report and includes the information required by Listing Rule 6.6.6(10) and Annex 1 to Listing Rule 6, this data having been obtained by polling the directors:

      Number of Board Members Percentage of the Board Number of Senior Positions on the Board (CEO, CFO, SID and Chair) Number in Executive Management Percentage of Executive Management
    White British or other White (including minority-white groups) 5 100% 2 N/A – No executive Management N/A – No executive Management
    Mixed/Multiple Ethnic Groups 0 0% 0 N/A – No executive Management N/A – No executive Management
    Asian/Asian British 0 0% 0 N/A – No executive Management N/A – No executive Management
    Black/African/
    Caribbean/ Black British
    0 0% 0 N/A – No executive Management N/A – No executive Management
    Other ethnic group, including Arab 0 0% 0 N/A – No executive Management N/A – No executive Management
    Not specified/prefer not to say 0 0% 0 N/A – No executive Management N/A – No executive Management

    REPORT OF DIRECTORS

    The Directors present their report and the audited financial statements of the Company for the year ended 31 December 2024.

    Results and Dividend Policy

    The results for the year are shown in the Statement of Comprehensive Income on page 61 and related notes on pages 64 to 80. Four interim dividends of 1.325 pence per share were declared and paid on account during the year ended 31 December 2024. In early 2025, a dividend of 1.375 pence per share was paid on 31 January 2025.

    The Board is aware of the current circumstances surrounding inflation, higher interest rates and the evolving geopolitical landscape and their significant impact on economies and financial markets. As a result, we will be keeping the future level of dividends under close review.

    Currently, we remain confident that our dividend can be paid based on the solvency and future viability of the Fund.

    In light of the excess revenue earnings generated by the Fund this year, together with the prospect of dividend growth from the underlying portfolio, the board approved a 0.2p increase to the total dividends payable in 2025. This results in a new dividend rate of 5.5 pence per share per annum payable in 2025 on a quarterly basis in equal instalments. These figures are targets only and do not constitute, nor should they be interpreted as, a profit forecast.

    In addition, this is a target only and should not be treated as an assurance or guarantee of performance. If the Company’s results permit it, the Board may consider further increases to the rate of dividends paid to shareholders at the appropriate time.

    The current dividend rate of 1.375 pence per share per quarter is expected to be supported by dividend and interest income earned by the Fund.

    Directors’ Conflicts of Interest

    A director must avoid a situation where he or she has or might have a direct or indirect interest that either conflicts with or has the potential to conflict with the Company’s interests. The Company’s and Fund’s Articles of Association give the directors authority to authorise potential conflicts of interest and there are safeguards in place which will apply whenever the directors decide that such are necessary or desirable. Firstly, only directors who have no interest in the matter being considered are able to vote upon the relevant decision, and secondly, in voting on the decision, the directors must act in a way they consider, in good faith, will be in the best interests of the Company. The directors can impose limits or conditions when giving authorisation if they consider this to be appropriate.

    The directors declare any potential conflicts of interest to the Board at each Board meeting. Any actual or potential conflicts of interest are entered into the Company’s register of such conflicts, which register is reviewed regularly by the Board. The register of conflicts of interest is kept at the Company’s registered office. The directors advise the Secretary as soon as they become aware of any new actual or potential conflicts of interest or any material changes to an existing conflict.

    Share Capital

    The Fund has the power to issue an unlimited number of shares of no par value which may be issued as redeemable participating preference shares or otherwise and which may be denominated in Sterling or any other currency.

    There are currently 2 Management Shares of no par value in the Company (issued on incorporation) and 124,682,250 Fund Shares in issue. As at 31 December 2024, 18,235,000 (2023: 18,195,000) Fund Shares were held in treasury. Since the financial year end and up to the date of this report, no Fund Shares had been sold out of or repurchased into treasury, and there remain 18,235,000 Fund Shares held in treasury, which may in future be sold out of treasury to satisfy market demand. Accordingly, the number of Fund Shares in issue and with voting rights attached is currently 106,447,250 (2023: 106,487,250) and this figure may be used by shareholders as the denominator for calculations by which they will determine if they are required to notify their interest in, or a change to their interest in, the Company under FCA’s Disclosure Guidance and Transparency Rules.

    Further issues and Repurchases of Fund Shares

    The Fund’s Articles of Association provide the Board of directors with authority to issue further Fund Shares without seeking shareholders’ approval, although, unless otherwise authorised by shareholders, such Fund Shares must be issued on a pre-emptive basis. However, at the Cell AGM held on 13 June 2024, the Fund’s shareholders authorised the issue or sale out of treasury of Fund Shares representing up to 10 per cent. of the Fund’s issued share capital as at the date of the Cell AGM on a non-pre-emptive basis. Such issues or sales will only be effected in the event of investor demand which cannot be met through the market and will only be conducted at a price equal to or above the prevailing NAV.

    The aforementioned authority expires on the earlier of 30 September 2025 or the conclusion of the next Cell AGM.

    The Fund’s Articles of Association also provide the Board of directors with authority to repurchase Fund Shares, provided that such repurchases are made with shareholders’ prior approval.

    At the Cell AGM held on 13 June 2024, the Fund’s shareholders authorised the Board to make market purchases of up to 15,962,438 Fund Shares (representing 14.99 per cent. of the Fund’s issued share capital as at the date of the Cell AGM), provided that no such purchases may be made at a price above the prevailing net asset value per Fund Share on the date of any such purchase.

    The aforementioned authority also expires on the earlier of 30 September 2025 or the conclusion of the next Cell AGM.

    At the next Cell AGM, the Board will be seeking renewal of its authority to issue or sell out of treasury additional Fund Shares and to make market acquisitions of Fund Shares. The Fund conducted two share buybacks during 2024, The Board believes that it is important to retain the authority to buyback where appropriate (which, in turn is likely to depend on, inter alia, the prevailing discount rating of the Fund Shares, the financial resources that the Company has at its disposal, liquidity levels in the Fund Shares and the size of the Company). Buybacks can confer several benefits on remaining shareholders: they are accretive to NAV and can provide additional useful liquidity.

    Holdings in the Company’s Shares

    As at the year end and as at 28 February 2025, being the most recent practicable date prior to the publication of this Annual Financial Report, the Company had received notification in accordance with the Financial Conduct Authority’s Disclosure and Transparency Rule 5 of the following interests in 5 per cent or more of the Fund’s issued share capital with voting rights attached, where the Board has been advised that the holder retains a holding in excess of 5 per cent.

    Name Redeemable Participating

    Preference Shares

    31 December 2024

    31

    31 December 2024

    Redeemable Participating

    Preference Shares

    31 December 2024

    Redeemable Participating

    Preference Shares

    28 February 2025

      Number of Shares % of Shares in issue Number of Shares
    Saba Capital Management, L.P.* 31,048,865 29.12% 31,048,865

    M&G PLC

    9,794,162

    9.20%

    9,794,162

    JP Morgan Chase & Co NIL NIL 5,479,118

    * Of the 29.1% holding disclosed by Saba Capital Management L.P. 17.6% interest is held via total return swaps and the counterparty to such swaps may be separately disclosed in the table and result in double disclosure of such shares

    Fund Shares are redeemable at the sole option of the directors and therefore classified as equity in the Statement of Financial Position.

    Reappointment of Auditor

    RSM Channel Islands (Audit) Limited has expressed its willingness to continue in office as auditor and a resolution to re-appoint it will be proposed at the Company’s and Fund’s forthcoming AGMs.

    Related Party Transactions

    The Company’s related parties are its directors and the Investment Manager. There were no related party transactions (as defined in the Listing Rules) during the year under review, nor up to the date of this report. Details of the remuneration paid to the directors and the Investment Manager during the year under review are shown in note 13.

    Annual General Meetings (‘AGMs’)

    This year’s AGMs will be held on 19 June 2025. Shareholders are welcome to attend the AGMs in person. The AGM Notices and details of the resolutions to be proposed are being sent to shareholders with this annual financial report. Shareholders can also write to the Company for further details at its registered office or by e-mail to the Secretary at Middlefield.Cosec@JTCGroup.com.

    Directors’ Statement as to Disclosure of Information to the Auditor

    Each of the persons who is a director at the date of approval of this annual financial report confirms that:

    •         so far as the director is aware, there is no relevant audit information of which the Company’s auditor is unaware; and

    •        the director has taken all steps that he should have taken as a director in order to make himself aware of any relevant audit information and to establish that the Company’s auditor is aware of that information.

    Approval

    This Strategic Report was approved by the Board on 24 March 2025 and is signed on their behalf by:

    Michael Phair        Andrew Zychowski

    Director        Director

    Corporate Governance

    Statement of Directors Responsibilities

    Directors’ Responsibility Statement

    The directors are responsible for preparing the annual financial report in accordance with applicable law and regulations. The Companies (Jersey) Law 1991, as amended (the “Companies Law”) requires the directors to prepare financial statements for each financial year which gives a true and fair view of the state of affairs of the Company and Fund as at the end of the financial year and of the profit or loss for that year. The directors have elected to prepare the financial statements under UK-adopted IFRS.

    International Accounting Standard 1 requires that financial statements present fairly for each financial period the Company’s and Fund’s financial position, financial performance and cash flows. This requires the faithful representation of the effects of transactions, other events and conditions in accordance with the definitions and recognition criteria for assets, liabilities, income and expenses set out in the International Accounting Standards Board’s ‘Framework for the preparation and presentation of financial statements’. In virtually all circumstances, a fair presentation will be achieved by compliance with all applicable IFRS. However, directors are also required to:

    •        properly select and apply accounting policies;

    •        present information, including accounting policies, in a manner that provides relevant, reliable, comparable and understandable information;

    •        provide additional disclosures when compliance with the specific requirements in IFRS are insufficient to enable users to understand the impact of particular transactions, other events and conditions on the Company’s and Fund’s financial position and performance; and

    •        make an assessment on the Company’s and Fund’s ability to continue as a going concern.

    The directors are responsible for keeping proper accounting records that disclose with reasonable accuracy at any time the financial position of the Company and enable them to ensure that the financial statements comply with the Companies Law. They are also responsible for safeguarding the assets of the Company and Fund, and hence for taking reasonable steps for the prevention and detection of fraud and other irregularities.

    The directors are responsible for the maintenance and integrity of the corporate and financial information included on the Company’s website www.middlefield.co.uk.

    Legislation in Jersey and the United Kingdom governing the preparation and dissemination of financial statements may differ from legislation in other jurisdictions. Having taken advice from the Audit Committee, the Board considers the report and accounts, taken as a whole, as fair, balanced and understandable and that it provides the information necessary for shareholders to assess the Company’s and Fund’s performance, business model and strategy.

    We confirm that to the best of our knowledge:

    1.        the financial statements, prepared in accordance with under UK-adopted IFRS, give a true and fair view of the assets, liabilities, financial position and profit or loss of the Company and Fund;

    2.        the Chairman’s Statement, Investment Manager’s Report and notes to the financial statements incorporated herein by reference include a fair review of the development, performance and position of the Company and Fund, together with a description of the principal risks and uncertainties that it faces; and

    3.        the annual report and financial statements, taken as a whole, are fair, balanced and understandable and provide the information necessary for shareholders to assess the Company’s and Fund’s position and performance, business model and strategy.

    By order of the Board:

    Michael Phair        Andrew Zychowski

    Director                Director

    Date: 24 March 2025

    Directors’ Remuneration Report

    Remuneration Report

    Remuneration policy

    The Company’s remuneration policy is designed to ensure that the remuneration of directors is set at a reasonable level commensurate with the duties and responsibilities of each director and the time commitment required to carry out their roles effectively. Remuneration will be such that the Company and Fund are able to attract and retain directors of appropriate experience and quality. The fees paid to directors will reflect the experience of the Board as a whole, will be fair, and will take account of the responsibilities attaching to each role given the nature of the Company’s interests, as well as the level of fees paid by comparable investment trusts and companies.

    Directors will be reimbursed for travel and subsistence expenses incurred in attending meetings or in carrying out any other duties incumbent upon them as directors of the Company or Fund. The level of directors’ fees paid will not exceed the limit set out in the Company’s and Fund’s Articles of Association.

    Directors’ Remuneration

    No director has a service contract with the Company or Fund and details of the directors’ fees are disclosed in note 13. The non-executive directors each earned the following fees in the 2024 and 2023 financial years:

    Director 2024 Fees 2023 Fees
    Philip Bisson (Resigned 1 June 2023) – £10,440
    Dean Orrico – –
    Richard Hughes (Resigned 1 June 2023) – £11,275
    Michael Phair £36,000 £33,500
    Kate Anderson £29,000 £27,000
    Janine Fraser £29,000 £27,000
    Andrew Zychowski (Appointed 30 June 2023) £32,000 £16,000

    Mr Orrico has waived his entitlement for remuneration for acting as a director, because of his employment by the Investment Manager. The directors receive no other remuneration or benefits from the Company other than the fees stated above. The directors are paid out of pocket expenses for attendance at Board meetings and for any other expenditure they incur when acting on the Company’s behalf.

    The remuneration of each director is determined by the Nomination and Remuneration Committee, with each director abstaining from discussion of and voting upon their own remuneration. When the directors’ remuneration is being considered, the Nomination and Remuneration Committee takes into account various factors including, but not limited to, the Company’s and individual directors’ performance, as well as each director’s time commitment to their role. To date, no external remuneration consultant has been appointed.

    For the year under review, the directors’ remuneration was set at £36,000 per annum for the chairman of the Board, £32,000 per annum for the chairman of the audit committee and £29,000 for all other directors bar Mr Orrico, who has waived his entitlement to remuneration for acting as a director.

    Shareholders’ Views

    The Board welcomes the opportunity to discuss matters of remuneration with shareholders at the Company’s and Fund’s AGMs or at any investor forum that may be held during the year.

    Letters of Appointment

    All directors are non-executive. Every director has a letter of appointment and the letters of appointment are available for inspection on the Company’s website.

    Directors’ Interests in Shares

    The interests as at 28 February 2025, 31 December 2024 and 2023 of the directors who served on the Board and their connected persons during the year were as follows:

      28 February 2025
    Fund Shares
    31 December 2024
    Fund Shares
    31 December 2023
    Fund Shares
    Dean Orrico 220,000 220,000 220,000
    Middlefield Limited (a company connected with Dean Orrico) 170,000 170,000 –
    Michael Phair (current Chairman) 70,000 70,000 70,000
    Andrew Zychowski (appointed 30 June 2023) 50,000 50,000 50,000
    Danuta Zychowska (a person connected to Andrew Zychowski) 83,000 83,000 83,000
    Kate Anderson – – –
    Janine Fraser – – –

    Directors’ dividends

    The following dividends were paid to Directors during the year as well as persons connected to the Directors.

      31 December 2024
    Dividend
    GBP
    31 December 2023
    Dividend
    GBP
    Philip Bisson (resigned 1 June 2023) – –
    Philean Trust Company Limited (a company connected with Philip Bisson until 1 June 2023) – 11,731
    Probitas Trust Company Limited (a company connected with Philip Bisson until 1 June 2023) – 3,900
    Beg Kaleh Services Limited (a company connected with Philip Bisson until 1 June 2023) – 3,848
    Beg Kaleh Pension Limited (a company connected with Philip Bisson until 1 June 2023) – 28,418
    Dean Orrico 11,660 11,440
    Middlefield Limited (A PCA of Mr Orrico and the Manager of the Company) 6,758 –
    Richard Hughes (resigned 1 June 2023) – 2,637
    Cheng Sim Hughes (a person connected to Richard Hughes until 1 June 2023) – 650
    Michael Phair (current Chairman) 3,710 3,640
    Andrew Zychowski (appointed 30 June 2023) 2,650 2,600
    Danuta Zychowska (a person connected to Andrew Zychowski) 4,399 4,316
    Kate Anderson – –
    Janine Fraser – –

    Ongoing Charges

    The below table shows the annualised ongoing charges that relate to the management of the Fund as a single percentage of the average NAV over the same year. In terms of the AIC’s methodology, ongoing charges are those expenses of a type which are likely to recur in the foreseeable future, whether charged to capital or revenue, and which relate to the operation of the Fund as a collective investment fund, excluding the costs of acquisition/disposal of investments, financing charges and gains/losses arising on investments.

      Ongoing
    charges (%)
    31 December 2024 1.30
    31 December 2023 1.33

    Applicable Corporate Governance Codes

    The Board is committed to achieving and demonstrating high standards of corporate governance. The Board is advised on all governance matters by the Secretary and has access to independent professional advice at the Company’s expense where it is judged necessary.

    As an overseas closed-ended investment fund which has been admitted to the Official List of the FCA and to trading on the London Stock Exchange’s Main Market for Listed Securities, the Company is required by listing rule 6.6.6R (5) and (6), as modified by listing rule 11.7.7R, to report how the Company has applied the Principles set out in the UK Corporate Governance Code (the “UK Code”) and whether the Company has complied throughout the accounting period with all relevant provisions of the UK Code and, if it has not complied with all provisions, those provisions with which it has not complied and its reasons for non-compliance.

    The AIC, of which the Company is a member, has published the AIC Code, which has been endorsed by the FRC and supported by the JFSC. The FRC has confirmed that, by following the AIC Code, investment company boards should fully meet their obligations in relation to the UK Code and paragraph LR 6.6.6 of the Listing Rules.

    The UK Code is available for download from the FRC’s web-site www.frc.org.uk and the AIC Code is available for download from the AIC’s website www.theaic.co.uk. Both of these documents can also be provided by the Secretary by e-mail upon request.

    Statement of Compliance

    The Board has considered the principles and recommendations of the AIC Code. The AIC Code addresses all the principles set out in the UK Code, as well as setting out additional principles and recommendations on issues that are of specific relevance to the Company. The Board considers that reporting against the principles and recommendations of the AIC Code provides better information to shareholders.

    The directors believe that the Company has complied with the provisions of the AIC Code, where appropriate, and that it has complied throughout the year with the provisions where the requirements are of a continuing nature.

    Responsibilities of the Board

    The Board is responsible for setting the Company’s Investment Objective and Investment Policy, subject to shareholders’ approval of any proposed material changes, and has a schedule of investment matters reserved for the directors’ resolution. The Board has contractually delegated to external agencies the management of the investment portfolio, the custodial services and the day-to-day accounting and secretarial requirements. Each of these contracts is only entered into after proper consideration by the Board of the quality of services being offered.

    Internal Controls

    The directors are responsible for overseeing the effectiveness of the Company’s risk management and internal control systems, which are designed to ensure that proper accounting records are maintained, that the financial information on which business decisions are made and which is issued for publication is reliable, and that the assets of the Company are safeguarded. However, such a system can only be designed to manage rather than eliminate the risk of failure to achieve business objectives and therefore can only provide reasonable and not absolute assurance against material misstatement or loss.

    Having reviewed the Company’s risk management and internal control systems and on the advice of the Audit Committee, the Board believes that they continue to be effective and that no changes thereto are necessary or desirable at this juncture. Because the Company delegates its day-to-day operations to third parties and has no employees, having reviewed the effectiveness of the internal control systems of the Administrator on a quarterly basis and having regard to the role of its external auditor, the Board does not consider that there is a need for the Company to establish its own internal audit function. The Administrator does however provide the Company’s compliance officer, who monitors the Company’s compliance with applicable laws and regulations and reports directly to the Board of directors on a quarterly basis.

    The Company receives reports from the Secretary and Administrator relating to its activities. Documented contractual arrangements are in place with the Secretary and Administrator, which define the areas where the Company has delegated authority to it. The Secretary ensures that the directors receive accurate, timely and clear information from all service providers.

    Directors

    Appointment, Retirement and Tenure

    As Mr Orrico is not independent of the Investment Manager, he is required by the FCA’s Listing Rules to submit himself for re-election annually. In addition, in accordance with the provisions of the AIC Code, and PIRC’s published guidance, all directors will continue to offer themselves for annual re-election for the foreseeable future.

    As the Company is a Jersey-regulated entity, the appointment of any new director is subject to the JFSC’s confirmation that they have no objection to such director’s appointment. It is also a regulatory requirement that the Company have at least two Jersey resident directors. Therefore, for so long as there are only two Jersey resident directors in office, any Jersey resident director who retires or whose re-election is not approved at a Company and Cell AGM will therefore remain in office until such time as a replacement Jersey-resident director acceptable to the JFSC has been appointed.

    The Board is of the view that length of service does not automatically compromise the independence or contribution of directors of an investment company, where continuity and experience can be a benefit to the Board. Furthermore, the Board agrees with the view expressed in the AIC Code that long-serving directors should not be prevented from forming part of an independent majority or from acting as Chairman. Consequently, no limit had previously been imposed on the directors’ overall length of service.

    However, the Board has noted that the AIC considers that directors who have served on the Board for more than nine years may not be independent and that certain corporate governance advisory bodies believe that directors should not serve more than nine years on an investment company’s Board. Therefore, in the spirit of best corporate governance, the Board has decided that any remunerated, independent director appointed in 2018 or thereafter shall only serve for a maximum of nine years before being required to retire from office.

    As stated in previous annual financial reports, the Board has recognised the merits of refreshing its composition as well as planning for future succession. The Board intends to continue evolving its composition on a periodic basis and has agreed a succession plan for the directors with over nine years of service. The Board’s advance planning for the retirement of directors ensures an orderly transition process that maintains an appropriate balance of skills and relevant experience. The Board has used open advertising in the past. The directors have decided that in future, in order to reach a broader range of diverse candidates, it will also consider using one or more UK external search agents to assist with the search for new directors.

    As required by the FCA’s Listing Rules, full biographical details of any additional directors appointed will be announced and he or she will stand for re-election at the next subsequent Company and Cell Meeting convened after their appointment and annually thereafter.

    Independence

    For the period 1 January 2024 to the date of this report, the Board consisted of five members, all of whom were non-executive. Mr Orrico is a director of Middlefield Limited, the Investment Manager and President of the Investment Advisor. All the directors, apart from Mr Orrico, are considered to be independent of the Investment Manager and free of any business or other relationship that could influence their ability to exercise independent judgement. The Board believes that Mr Orrico’s investment management experience as well as his first-hand knowledge of the Canadian economic and investment sector adds considerable value to the Company.

    The Board believes that Ms Anderson, Ms Fraser, Mr Phair and Mr Zychowski are independent in character and judgement and that their experience and knowledge of the specialised sector in which the Company operates adds significant strength to the Board. M Phair was also considered to be independent upon his appointment as Chairman. The directors believe that the Board has a balance of skills and experience which enable it to provide effective strategic leadership and proper governance of the Company. Information about the directors, including their relevant experience, can be found on pages 26 to 27.

    In accordance with the recommendations of the AIC Code, Ms Kate Anderson acted as Senior Independent Director. In-line with the AIC’s recommendation, Ms Anderson provides a sounding board for the chair and serves as an intermediary for the other directors and shareholders. She is responsible for coordinating a regular meeting, at least annually and on other occasions as necessary, of the non-executive directors (excluding the chair), to appraise the chair’s performance.

    Induction and Ongoing Training

    Although no formal training in corporate governance is given to directors, the directors are kept appraised of corporate governance issues through bulletins and training materials provided from time to time by the Secretary and the AIC.

    Directors’ Insurance

    The Company purchases directors’ and officers’ liability insurance cover at a level which is considered appropriate for the Company.

    Meeting Attendance

    The Board meets at least quarterly to review the overall business of the Company and to consider matters specifically reserved for its review. At these meetings, the Board monitors the investment performance of the Fund. The directors also review the Fund’s activities every quarter to ensure that it adheres to the Fund’s investment objective and policy or, if appropriate, to consider changes to that policy. Additional ad hoc reports are received as required and directors have access at all times to the advice and services of the Secretary, which is responsible for guiding the Board on procedures and applicable rules and regulations.

    The Board also receives and considers, together with representatives of the Investment Manager, reports in relation to the operational controls of the Investment Manager, Administrator, Custodian and Registrar. These reviews identified no issues of significance.

    The table below summarises the directors’ attendance at each type of meeting held during the year.

      Quarterly
    Board
    Ad hoc
    Board
    Audit
    Committee
    Nomination and
    Remuneration
    Committee
    Management
    Engagement
    Committee
    Dividend
    Committee**
    No. of meetings in the Year 4 2 4 2 1 4
    Dean Orrico* 4 2 4 2 1 0
    Janine Fraser*** 4 2 4 2 1 3
    Michael Phair 4 2 4 2 1 1
    Kate Anderson*** 4 2 4 2 1 0
    Andrew Zychowski 4 2 4 2 1 3

    *        Mr Orrico attended meetings of the Committees as an observer, not a member or participant.

    **        The quorum for a meeting of the Dividend Committee is one director physically present in the UK.

    ***        Ms Anderson and Ms Fraser attended as observers at the ad hoc Board meeting on 7 May 2024.

    The Board’s Committees

    Performance Evaluation

    The directors recognise the importance of the AIC Code in terms of evaluating the performance of the Board as a whole, its respective Committees and individual directors. After the year end, the performance of the Board, Committees of the Board and individual directors was assessed in terms of:

    •        attendance at Board and Committee Meetings;

    •        the independence of individual directors;

    •        the ability of individual directors to make an effective contribution to the Board and Committees of the Board, together with the diversity of skills and experience each director brings to meetings;

    •        the Board’s ability to effectively challenge the Investment Manager’s recommendations, suggest areas of debate and fix timetables for debates on the future strategy of the Company; and

    •        the Board’s diversity in terms of gender, social and ethnic backgrounds and cognitive and personal strengths and weaknesses.

    The directors concluded that the performance evaluation process had proven successful, with the Board, the Chairman, the Committees of the Board and the individual directors scoring well in all areas. The Board and the Committees of the Board continued to be effective, each director’s behaviour continued to be aligned to the Company’s purpose, values and strategy and the individual directors continued to demonstrate commitment to their respective roles and responsibilities. Although the Board did not procure an externally facilitated Board evaluation during the year under review, the directors will consider doing so at the appropriate time in the future.

    The Board also reviews its own policies and procedures on a periodic basis, as well as the terms of reference of its committees, to ensure that they serve to further the Company’s purpose and that they are aligned with the Company’s values and strategy. The Board with the support of the Secretary reviewed all of their policies, procedures and the terms of reference, all of which were updated (as applicable) to meet the recommendations of the AIC Code and concluded that they continued to be in a satisfactory form.

    Committees of the Board

    Audit Committee

    On 26 May 2010 an Audit Committee was established. The current members are Andrew Zychowski (Chairman), Michael Phair, Kate Anderson and Janine Fraser. Notwithstanding that Mr Phair is Chairman of the Board, he was independent on appointment and the Board considers that his experience and knowledge is of great value to the Audit Committee. A separate report from the Audit Committee is included at pages 48 to 50.

    Nomination and Remuneration Committee

    The Board has also established a Nomination and Remuneration Committee, which meets when necessary. At the present time, the current members are all the directors of the Company bar Mr Orrico, and their summary biographical details are set out on pages 26 to 27.

    The Chairman of the Nomination and Remuneration Committee is Andrew Zychowski or, failing him, any member of the Nomination and Remuneration Committee present within the United Kingdom other than the Chairman of the Company. The Board believes it is appropriate for all members of the Board (excluding Mr Orrico) to be on the Nomination and Remuneration Committee, because the directors work together collegiately, and each brings a different perspective to the Nomination and Remuneration Committee’s discussions.

    The key terms of reference of the Nomination and Remuneration Committee are set out below.

    •        The Committee oversees the process of identifying and nominating prospective directors.

    •        The Committee considers and monitors the level and structure of remuneration of the directors of the Company and the Fund.

    •        The Committee considers the need to appoint external remuneration consultants.

    •        The Committee is authorised, in consultation with the Secretary, where necessary to fulfil its duties, to obtain outside legal or other professional advice, including the advice of independent remuneration consultants, to secure the attendance of external advisors at its meetings, if it considers this necessary, and to obtain reliable up-to-date information about remuneration in other companies, all at the expense of the Fund.

    •        The Committee considers the overall levels of insurance cover for the Company, including directors’ and officers’ liability insurance.

    •        The Committee conducts a process annually to evaluate the performance of the Board and its individual directors.

    •        The Committee considers such other topics as directed by the Board.

    The Board believes that, subject to any exception explained in this report and the nature of the Company as an investment fund, it has complied with the applicable provisions of the AIC Code throughout the year. The Board has noted the recommendations of the AIC relating to Board diversity. Although the Board does not have a formal written policy on diversity and inclusion, the Board, advised by the Nomination and Remuneration Committee, considers diversity, including the balance of skills, knowledge, diversity (including gender) and experience amongst other factors when reviewing the composition of the Board and appointing new directors, but does not consider it appropriate to establish targets or quotas in this regard. Board diversity is carefully considered and will continue to be considered in the future.

    When considering the proposed appointment of new directors, the Nomination and Remuneration Committee receives full biographical information on all candidates and considers all matters which it considers relevant, including their experience and ability to devote sufficient time to the Company’s business. The process also takes into account numerous other factors including, but not limited to, each candidate’s experience, gender, social and ethnic background and personal strengths and weaknesses. Each director is interviewed by the Nomination and Remuneration Committee as part of the Board’s evaluation of prospective candidates. After their appointment, each director seeks the Board’s consent before taking on any other significant external appointments.

    Management Engagement Committee

    The Board established a Management Engagement Committee at its meeting held on 20 November 2013. In addition to regular reporting and engagement at Board meetings with its service providers, the Board formally reviews all service providers via the Management Engagement Committee. At the present time, the Management Engagement Committee’s members are all the directors of the Company bar Mr Orrico, who does not sit on the Management Engagement Committee because of the perceived conflict that his role as President of the Investment Advisor could present.

    The Chairman of the Management Engagement Committee is Andrew Zychowski or, failing him, any member of the Management Engagement Committee present within the United Kingdom other than the Chairman of the Company. For the purposes of transacting business, a quorum of the Management Engagement Committee is not less than two members of the Management Engagement Committee and all meetings must take place in the UK.

    The Board believes it is appropriate for all independent members of the Board to be on the Management Engagement Committee, because the directors work together collegiately and each brings a different perspective to the Management Engagement Committee’s discussions.

    Duties

    The Management Engagement Committee’s key duty is to review the performance by service providers of their duties and the terms of all agreements for the provision of services that the Company has entered into or will in future enter into.

    The Management Engagement Committee meets at least annually to specifically consider the ongoing management, administrative and secretarial and investment management requirements of the Company. The Management Engagement Committee receives self- evaluation questionnaires provided by all service providers, which include reporting on each service provider’s opinion of the quality of services provided by the Company’s other service providers, and the Board also receives detailed compliance reporting from the Company’s compliance officer, which the Management Engagement Committee takes into account when reviewing the services provided. The quality and timeliness of reports to the Board are also taken into account and the overall management of the Company’s affairs by the Investment Manager is considered. Based on its recent review of activities, and taking into account the performance of the portfolio, the other services provided by the key service providers, and the risk and governance environment in which the Company operates, the Board believes that the retention of the current key service providers on the current terms of their appointment remains in the best interests of the Company and its shareholders.

    The Board regularly reviews the performance of the services provided by these companies. A summary of the terms of the agreements with the Secretary, the Investment Manager and the Investment Advisor are set out in note 1 to the financial statements. After due consideration of the resources and reputations of those parties, the Board believes it is in the interests of shareholders to retain the services of all three providers for the foreseeable future.

    Terms of Reference of Committees

    The Terms of Reference of the Audit Committee, the Nomination and Remuneration Committee and the Management Engagement Committee are all available on the Company’s website and are also available for inspection at the Company’s registered office during normal business hours.

    Bribery Act 2010

    The Company has no employees. The Board has considered the Bribery Act 2010 and confirmed its zero tolerance of bribery and corruption in its business activities. It has received assurances from the Company’s main service providers that they will maintain adequate safeguards to protect against any form of bribery and corruption by their employees and agents.

    Criminal Finances Act 2017

    The Board has also considered the Criminal Finances Act 2017 and has received assurances from the Company’s main service providers that they will maintain adequate safeguards to protect against any form of illegal activities under this legislation, including the facilitation of tax evasion.

    Relations with Shareholders

    Shareholder relations are given a high priority by the Board, Investment Manager and Secretary. The primary medium through which the Company communicates with its shareholders is through the annual and half-yearly financial reports, which aim to provide shareholders with a full understanding of the Company’s activities and results. The information is supplemented by the daily publication of the NAV of the Fund Shares, monthly factsheets and information on the Company’s website operated by the Investment Manager. Shareholders have the opportunity to address questions to the Chairman and the Committees of the Board at the AGMs each year. Shareholders can also write to the Company at its registered office or by e-mail to the Secretary at Middlefield.Cosec@JTCGroup.com

    The Chairman is available and meets with major shareholders to discuss aspects of investment performance, governance and strategy and to listen to shareholders’ views, in order to help develop a balanced understanding of their issues and concerns. General presentations are given by the Investment Manager to both shareholders and analysts follow the publication of the annual financial results. In addition, the Investment Manager maintains a regular schedule of meetings throughout the year with major shareholders and keeps the Board updated with the outcome of such meetings.

    Report of the Audit Committee

    This report of the Audit Committee has been prepared with reference to the AIC Code. Established in 2010, the Audit Committee reports formally to the main Board at least twice each year. In accordance with written terms of reference, its delegated duties and responsibilities are reviewed and reapproved annually. The function of the Audit Committee is to ensure that the Company maintains high standards of integrity, financial reporting and internal controls.

    The members do not have any links with the Company’s Auditor. They are also independent of the management teams of the Investment Manager, the Administrator and all other service providers. The Audit Committee meets formally no less than twice a year in London and on an ad hoc basis if required.

    The Audit Committee considers the financial reporting by the Company and the Fund, the internal controls, and relations with the Company’s and the Fund’s Auditor. In addition, the Audit Committee reviews the independence and objectivity of the Auditor. The Committee meets at least twice a year to review the internal financial and non-financial controls, to approve the contents of the interim and annual reports and financial statements and to review accounting policies. Representatives of the Auditor attend the Committee meeting at which the draft Annual Financial Reports are reviewed and can speak to Committee members without the presence of representatives of the Investment Manager. The audit program and timetable are drawn up and agreed with the Auditor in advance of the financial year end. Items for audit focus are discussed, agreed and given particular attention during the audit process. The Auditor reports to the Committee on these items, among other matters. This report is considered by the Committee and discussed with the Auditor and the Investment Manager prior to approval and signature of the Annual Financial Report.

    The Audit Committee is authorised by the Board to investigate any activity within its terms of reference and to consult with outside legal or other independent professional advisers when deemed necessary in order to adequately discharge their duties and responsibilities, which include:

    •        Considering the appointment, resignation or dismissal of the Auditor and their independence and objectivity, particularly in circumstances where non-audit services have been provided.

    •        Reviewing the cost effectiveness of the external audit from time to time.

    •        Reviewing and challenging the half-yearly and Annual Financial Reports, focusing particularly on changes in accounting policies and practice, areas of accounting judgement and estimation, significant adjustments arising from audit or other review and the going concern assumption.

    •        Providing advice to the Board on whether the Annual Financial Report, taken as a whole, is fair balanced and understandable and provides the information necessary for shareholders to assess the company’s position and performance, business model and strategy.

    •        Reviewing compliance with accounting standards and law and regulations including the Companies (Jersey) Law 1991 and the FCA’s Listing and Disclosure Guidance and Transparency Rules.

    •        Completing regular risk management reviews of internal controls, which include the review of the Fund’s Risk Register.

    •        Reviewing the effectiveness of the Company’s system of internal controls, including financial, operating, compliance, fraud and risk management controls and making and reporting to the Board any recommendations that may arise.

    •        Considering the major findings of internal investigations and making recommendations to the Board on appropriate action.

    •        Ensuring that arrangements exist whereby service providers and management may raise concerns over irregularities in financial reporting or other matters in confidence and that such concerns are independently investigated and remediated with appropriate action.

    The Audit Committee, having reviewed the effectiveness of the internal control systems of the Administrator on a quarterly basis, and having regard to the role of the Auditor, does not consider that there is a need for the Company or Fund to establish its own internal audit function. The Administrator does however provide the Company’s compliance officer, who monitors the Company’s compliance with applicable laws and regulations and reports directly to the Board of directors on a quarterly basis.

    Some of the principal duties of the Audit Committee are to consider the appointment of the Auditor, to discuss and agree with the Auditor the nature and scope of the audit, to review the scope of and to discuss the results and the effectiveness of the audit and the independence and objectivity of the Auditor, to review the Auditor’s letter of engagement and management letter and to analyse the key procedures adopted by the Company’s outsourced service providers including the Administrator and Custodian. The Audit Committee is responsible for monitoring the financial reporting process and the effectiveness of the Company’s and its service provider’s internal control and risk management systems. The Company’s risk assessment focus and the way in which significant risks are managed is a key area for the Committee. Work here was driven by the Committee’s assessment of the risks arising in the Company’s operations and identification of the controls exercised by the Board and its delegates, the Investment Manager and other service providers. These are recorded in the Company’s business risk matrix which continues to serve as an effective tool to highlight and monitor the principal risks.

    The Board also received and considered, together with representatives of the Investment Manager, reports in relation to the operational controls of the Investment Manager, Administrator, Custodian and Registrar. These reviews identified no issues of significance. The risks relating to the Company (including the Fund) are discussed by the directors and documented in detail in the minutes of each meeting.

    The Audit Committee is also responsible for overseeing the Company’s relationship with the Auditor, including making recommendations to the Board on the appointment and re-appointment of the Auditor and its remuneration.

    Significant Matters

    The significant matters that were subject to specific consideration in 2024 by the Committee and consultation with the Auditor where necessary were as follows:

    Valuation and ownership of securities

    There is a risk that the securities are incorrectly valued due to factors including low volume traded securities and errors in third party prices.

    Valuation of securities – at each valuation point, a price tolerance check is run.

    The following exceptions require further investigation:

    •        Prices outside the stated tolerance levels: Price movements need to be justified to underlying support.

    •        Stale prices: These need to be traced and agreed to support to ensure prices are not stale. Stale prices are escalated as per the pricing policy after being static for more than 7 days.

    •        Zero prices: Prices for these securities need to be investigated and added if applicable.

    There is also the risk that the securities are not directly owned by the Fund, which may be caused by errors in the recording of trade transactions.

    Ownership of securities – at each valuation point a stock reconciliation is performed, which entails tracing and agreeing the stock holding at valuation point to the Custodian records.

    Any differences are investigated.

    All new trades are traced and agreed to the contract note.

    Allocation to Capital and Revenue

    The Directors have made the critical judgement to allocate a proportion of management fees and finance to capital. This has been allocated 60% to capital and 40% to revenue.

    This has been done in accordance with the Association of Investment Companies’ Statement of Recommended Practice for Investment Trusts Companies.

    The Audit Committee challenged the allocation of charges between capital and revenue by comparing it with the policies of other companies in the AIC North American sector who allocate charges to both capital and revenue. MCT has a somewhat higher allocation to revenue than the peer group. Since MCT is the highest yielding fund in the sector, the Audit Committee considered the allocation to be appropriate following this review and discussion of the separate analysis provided by the Investment Manager.

    Compliance with Regulatory Requirements

    JTC Fund Solutions (Jersey) Limited as administrator works with the Board of directors to ensure that the Fund complies with its obligations under all applicable laws and regulations including, but not limited to:

    •        The Companies (Jersey) Law 1991

    •        The FCA’s listing rules, prospectus and disclosure guidance and transparency rules

    •        The AIC Code of Corporate Governance and

    •        The JFSC’s Codes of Practice for Certified Funds

    •        The Jersey Listed Fund Guide

    Going Concern

    The financial statements are prepared using the going concern basis based on the directors’ assessment that:

    •        The investment portfolio consists of listed investments that are highly realizable

    •        The Fund has sufficient liquidity in cash to meet all on-going expenses and repayments of external borrowings

    •        The directors have the option to reduce dividend payments if the need arises

    The Investment Manager monitors the Fund’s investment portfolio daily and invests in listed securities that can be liquidated in a relatively short period of time. The Board monitors the Fund’s portfolio on a quarterly basis.

    Auditor and Audit

    The Auditor was first appointed on 1 October 2020 following a detailed tender process and the Auditor is subject to annual reappointment by shareholders at each Company AGM and Cell AGM. The Audit Committee considers the nature, scope and results of the Auditor’s work and monitors the independence of the Auditor. Formal reports are received at Board meetings from the Auditor on an interim and annual basis relating to the extent of their work. The work of the Auditor in respect of any significant audit issues and consideration of the adequacy of that work is discussed. The Audit Committee is pleased to report there have been no concerns regarding their performance or independence.

    The Audit Committee assesses the effectiveness of the audit process. The Audit Committee receives a report from the Auditor which covers the principal matters that have arisen from the audit.

    The Audit Committee meets with the Investment Manager and Administrator to discuss the extent of audit work completed to ensure all matters of risk are covered and assesses the quality of the draft financial statements prepared by the Administrator and examines the interaction between the Investment Manager and the Auditor to resolve any potential audit issues.

    The Audit Committee has an active involvement and oversight of the preparation of both half yearly and annual financial reports and recommends for the purposes of the production of these financial reports that valuations are prepared by the management team of the Administrator. These valuations are a critical element in the Company’s financial reporting and the Audit Committee questions them thoroughly.

    Ultimate responsibility for reviewing and approving the annual financial report remains with the Board.

    Andrew Zychowski

    Director

    Date: 24 March 2025

    General Shareholder Information

    AIFMD Disclosures

    In accordance with the AIFMD, the AIFM is required to disclose specific information in relation to the following aspects of the Company’s management:

    Leverage and borrowing

    Leverage is defined as any method by which the Company increases its exposure through borrowing or the use of derivatives. ‘Exposure’ is defined in two ways – ‘gross method’ and ‘commitment method’ – and the Company must not exceed maximum exposures under both methods. ‘Gross method’ exposure is calculated as the sum of all positions of the Company (both positive and negative), that is, all eligible assets, liabilities and derivatives, including derivatives held for risk reduction purposes. ‘Commitment method’ exposure is also calculated as the sum of all positions of the Company (both positive and negative), but after netting off derivative and security positions as specified by the Directive.

    For the gross method, the following has been excluded:

    •        the value of any cash and cash equivalents which are highly liquid investments held in the base currency of the AIF that are readily convertible to a known amount of cash, subject to an insignificant risk of changes in value;

    •        that remain in cash or cash equivalent as defined above and where the amounts of that payable are known. The total amount of leverage calculated as at 31 December 2024 is as follows:

    Gross method: 139.35% (31 December 2023: 130.13%)

    Commitment method: 139.35% (31 December 2023: 130.13%)

    Liquidity

    The Investment Manager’s policy is that the Company should normally be close to fully invested (i.e. with liquidity of 5% or less) but this is subject to the need to retain liquidity for the purpose of the efficient management of the Company in accordance with its objectives. There may therefore be occasions when there will be higher levels of liquidity, for example following the issue of shares or the realisation of investments. This policy has been applied consistently throughout the review period and as a result the Investment Manager has not introduced any new arrangements for managing the Company’s liquidity.

    Risk management policy note

    Please refer to note 16, Financial instruments, in the Notes to the financial statements on pages 72 to 76 for risk management policies, where the current risk profile of the Company and the risk management systems employed by the Investment Manager to manage those risks are set out.

    AIFM Remuneration

    A total of 8 staff employed by the AIFM are engaged in managing the Fund. The compensation paid to these beneficiaries during the year under review was £275,000, split roughly equally between fixed and variable compensation. The Fund has no agreement to pay any carried interest to the AIFM.

    General Data Key Investor

    åDocument and Related Data

    The Company has produced an EU Key Information Document (the “KID”), as required by the Packaged Retail and Insurance-Based Investment Products Regulations (the “PRIIPs Regulations”) and a UK KID under the UK’s amended version of the PRIIPs Regulations, together with a European PRIIPs Template and a European MiFID Template, all of which are available on the Company’s website.

    The PRIIPs Regulations require the preparation and publication of the KID. Investors should note that the methodology for calculating the risks, costs and potential returns cited in the KID are prescribed by the PRIIPs Regulations. However, the methodology is considered by many market participants, including the AIC, to be flawed and future risks and returns may not transpire to be as cited in the KID. The Board therefore recommends that investors not make any investment or divestment decision based on the information contained in the KID.

    Non-Mainstream Pooled Investment (‘NMPI’) Status

    The Company currently conducts its affairs to maintain its status as an “excluded security” for the purposes of the FCA’s rules on “non-mainstream pooled investments” and intends to continue to do so. The Fund Shares are therefore excluded from the FCA’s restrictions which apply to non-mainstream pooled investments.

    Performance Details/Share Price Information

    Details of the Company’s share price and the net asset value per Fund Share can be found on the London Stock Exchange’s website. The net asset value is calculated and published daily, on the basis of the bid price of securities at closing.

    Consumer Duty Value Assessment

    Middlefield International Limited (“MIL”), as advisor to Middlefield Canadian Income PCC (“MCT”), has prepared an assessment of fair value based on the FCA’s guidelines which includes consideration of the fund’s relative performance, investment process, costs and charges, quality of service, comparable market rates and economies of scale. Based on this assessment, MIL has concluded that MCT is providing value to its investors. The assessment of value can be found on the website under Other Reports and Filings www.middlefield.co.uk.

    Independent Auditor’s Report

    TO THE MEMBERS OF MIDDLEFIELD CANADIAN INCOME – GBP PC, A CELL OF MIDDLEFIELD CANADIAN INCOME PCC

    Opinion

    We have audited the financial statements of Middlefield Canadian Income – GBP PC (the “Fund”), which comprise the Statement of Financial Position as at 31 December 2024, and the Statement of Comprehensive Income, Statement of Changes in Redeemable Participating Preference Shareholder’s Equity and Statement of Cash Flows for the year then ended, and notes 1 to 22 to the financial statements, including a summary of significant accounting policies. The financial reporting framework that has been applied in their preparation is applicable law and UK-adopted International Financial Reporting Standards (‘IFRS’).

    In our opinion the financial statements of Middlefield Canadian Income – GBP PC, a cell of Middlefield Canadian Income PCC:

    give a true and fair view of the state of the Fund’s affairs as at 31 December 2024 and of its profit for the year then ended;

    have been properly prepared in accordance with UK-adopted IFRS; and

    have been prepared in accordance with the Companies (Jersey) Law 1991.

    Separate opinion in relation to IFRS as adopted by the European Union

    As explained in note 2a, in addition to complying with the Listing Rules obligation to apply UK-adopted IFRS, the Fund has also applied IFRSs as adopted by the European Union.

    In our opinion the financial statements give a true and fair view of the financial position of the Fund as at 31 December 2024 and of its financial performance and cash flows for the year then ended in accordance with IFRS as adopted by the European Union.

    Basis for opinion

    We conducted our audit in accordance with International Standards on Auditing (UK) (‘ISAs (UK)’) and applicable law. Our responsibilities under those standards are further described in the Auditor’s responsibilities for the audit of the financial statements section of our report. We are independent of the Fund in accordance with the ethical requirements that are relevant to our audit of the financial statements in Jersey, including the FRC’s Ethical Standard as applied to listed public interest entities, and we have fulfilled our other ethical responsibilities in accordance with these requirements. We believe that the audit evidence we have obtained is sufficient and appropriate to provide a basis for our opinion.

    Our approach to the audit

    Our audit was scoped by obtaining an understanding of the Fund and its environment, including internal control, and assessing the risks of material misstatement. Audit work to respond to the risks of material misstatement was performed directly by the audit engagement team.

    Our consideration of the control environment

    The Fund has appointed JTC Fund Solution (Jersey) Limited to provide the accounting function. The accounting function has been subcontracted to JTC Fund Solutions (RSA) Pty Ltd (“JTC SA”). We have obtained JTC SA’s ISAE 3402 controls assurance report for the period 1 April 2023 to 31 March 2024 which summarises the suitability of design and implementation and operating effectiveness of controls. We have reviewed the report and considered the controls relevant to the accounting functions undertaken by JTC SA for the Fund in order to rely on controls. As the reporting date of the Fund is 31 December 2024, we have obtained correspondence issued by JTC SA confirming that there have not been any material changes to the internal control environment nor any material deficiencies in the internal controls to this date.

    Key audit matters

    Key audit matters are those matters that, in our professional judgment, were of most significance in the audit of the financial statements and include the most significant assessed risks of material misstatement (whether or not due to fraud) identified by us, including those which had the greatest effect on: the overall audit strategy; the allocation of resources in the audit; and directing the efforts of the engagement team. These matters were addressed in the context of our audit of the financial statements as a whole, and in forming our opinion thereon, and we do not provide a separate opinion on these matters.

    In addition to the matter described in the ‘material uncertainty related to going concern’ below, in arriving at our audit opinion, the key audit matter was as follows:

    Key Audit Matter How our scope addressed this matter

    Ownership and valuation of Securities

    The Fund’s securities (see note 3 and the schedule of securities) are included at fair value of £169,952,944 (2023: £146,643,502). The portfolio is made up of securities actively traded on recognised markets which are measured at fair value based on market prices and other prices determined with reference to observable inputs.

    Although all of the securities are listed and have quoted market pricing data available which is used to value the securities, there is a risk of material misstatement that the securities may be incorrectly valued due to stale prices, low trading volumes or errors reported in third party prices. Where securities are not regularly traded there is a greater risk of material misstatement that the quoted price is not reflective of fair value and this should be taken into consideration in management’s assessment. Valuation has a significant impact on the net asset value of the Fund.

    There is a risk that securities, a record of which is maintained by a third-party custodian, are not directly owned by the Fund.

    Securities are held by the custodian. Ensuring that the custodian records all the securities correctly under the Fund’s name is critical since the investment portfolio represents the principal element of the financial statements, being the single largest asset on the Statement of Financial Position.

    Our procedures on the valuation of securities included:

    understanding the relevant controls around valuation;

    testing 100% of the valuations of securities by agreeing the prices directly to independent third-party sources;

    considering the trading history of securities to determine whether they have been frequently traded, and values at which they have been traded to consider whether the year-end prices are stale.

    Our procedures on ownership of securities included:

    obtaining an understanding of the relevant controls around custody of securities;

    agreeing the holdings to independent third-party confirmations provided by the Fund’s custodian;

    reviewing the ISAE 3402 controls assurance report of the custodian to consider the controls relevant to the custodial function.

    Key observations
    Based on the procedures, we concluded that the ownership and valuation of securities are appropriate.

    Our application of materiality

    We define materiality as the magnitude of misstatement in the financial statements that makes it probable that the economic decisions of a reasonably knowledgeable person would be changed or influenced. We use materiality both in planning the scope of our audit work and in evaluating the results of our work.

    Based on our professional judgement, we determined materiality for the financial statements as a whole as follows:

    Materiality £2,870,000 (2023: £2,470,000).

    Basis for determining materiality – Approximately 1.6% of the Fund’s total assets (2023: 1.6%).

    Rationale for the benchmark applied – The reason for using total assets is that the key users of the financial statements are primarily focused on the valuation of the Fund’s assets. This approach remains consistent with the prior year.

    Performance materiality

    We set performance materiality at a level lower than materiality to reduce the probability that, in aggregate, uncorrected and undetected misstatements exceed the materiality for the financial statements as a whole. Performance materiality was set at 75% of materiality for the 2024 audit (2023: 75%). In determining performance materiality, we considered our understanding of the entity, including our assessment of the overall control environment.

    Independent Auditor’s Report continued

    Our application of materiality (continued)

    Error reporting threshold

    We agreed with the Audit Committee that we would report to them all audit differences in excess of £140,000 (2023: £120,000), as well as differences below that threshold that, in our view, warranted reporting on qualitative grounds. We also report to the Audit Committee on disclosure matters that we identified when assessing the overall presentation of the financial statements.

    Material uncertainty relating to going concern

    We draw attention to note 2n to the financial statements which indicates that the Fund’s ability to continue as a going concern is dependent on the outcome of the directors review of a number of strategic options for the future of the Fund, as described in note 2n. As stated in note 2n, these events presented by the directors indicate that a material uncertainty exists that may cast significant doubt on the Fund’s ability to continue as a going concern. Our opinion is not qualified in respect of this matter.

    Given the material uncertainty identified by the directors, we considered going concern to be a key audit matter.

    In auditing the financial statements, we have concluded that the directors’ use of the going concern basis of accounting in the preparation of the financial statements is appropriate.

    Our evaluation of the directors’ assessment of the Fund’s ability to continue to adopt the going concern basis of accounting, and in response to the key audit matter, included:

    Considering the appropriateness of the directors’ conclusion in relation to the matters described in 2n and discussing this with the board;

    Review of the directors’ statement in note 2n and their identification of any material uncertainties to the Fund’s ability to continue over a period of at least twelve months from the date of approval of the financial statements;

    Consideration as part of our risk assessment of the nature of the Fund, its business model and related risks including where relevant the requirements of the applicable financial reporting framework and the system of internal control; and

    Evaluation of the directors’ assessment of the Fund’s ability to continue as a going concern, including challenging the underlying data and key assumptions used to make the assessment, and evaluation of the directors’ plans for future actions in relation to their going concern assessment.

    Other than the above, based on the work we have performed, we have not identified any material uncertainties, other than as disclosed in note 2n, relating to events or conditions that, individually or collectively, may cast significant doubt on the Fund’s ability to continue as a going concern for a period of at least twelve months from the date of approval of the financial statements.

    In relation to the Fund’s reporting on how it has applied Listing Rule 6.6.6R and Listing rule 11.7.7R, we have nothing material to add or draw attention to in relation to the director’ statement in the financial statements about whether the directors considered it appropriate to adopt the going concern basis of accounting.

    Our responsibilities and the responsibilities of the directors with respect to going concern are described in the relevant sections of this report.

    Other information

    The other information comprises the information included in the annual report, other than the financial statements and our auditor’s report thereon. The directors are responsible for the other information contained within the annual report. Our opinion on the financial statements does not cover the other information and, except to the extent otherwise explicitly stated in our report, we do not express any form of assurance conclusion thereon. Our responsibility is to read the other information and, in doing so, consider whether the other information is materially inconsistent with the financial statements or our knowledge obtained in the audit or otherwise appears to be materially misstated. If we identify such material inconsistencies or apparent material misstatements, we are required to determine whether there is a material misstatement in the financial statements or a material misstatement of the other information. If, based on the work we have performed, we conclude that there is a material misstatement of this other information, we are required to report that fact.

    We have nothing to report in respect of these matters.

    Independent Auditor’s Report continued

    Matters on which we are required to report by exception

    We have nothing to report in respect of the following matters where the Companies (Jersey) Law 1991 requires us to report to you if, in our opinion;

    adequate accounting records have not been kept; or

    the financial statements are not in agreement with the accounting records and returns; or

    proper returns adequate for our audit have not been received from branches not visited by us; or

    we have not received all the information and explanations we require for our audit.

    Corporate governance statement

    The Listing Rules require us to review the directors’ statement in relation to going concern, longer-term viability and that part of the Corporate Governance Statement relating to the Fund’s compliance with the provisions of the Listing Rule 6.6.6R specified for our review.

    Based on the work undertaken as part of our audit, we have concluded that each of the following elements of the Corporate Governance Statement and Corporate Information is materially consistent with the financial statements or our knowledge obtained during the audit:

    Directors’ statement with regards the appropriateness of adopting the going concern basis of accounting and any material uncertainties identified set out on pages 33 to 34;

    Directors’ explanation as to its assessment of the entity’s prospects, the period this assessment covers and why the period is appropriate set out on pages 33 to 34;

    Directors’ statement on fair, balanced and understandable set out on page 48;

    Board’s confirmation that it has carried out a robust assessment of the emerging and principal risks set out on pages 30 to 34;

    The section of the annual report that describes the review of effectiveness of risk management and internal control systems set out on page 48; and

    The section describing the work of the audit committee set out on pages 48 to 50.

    Responsibilities of directors

    As explained more fully in the directors’ responsibilities statement, the directors are responsible for the preparation of the financial statements and for being satisfied that they give a true and fair view, and for such internal control as the directors determine is necessary to enable the preparation of financial statements that are free from material misstatement, whether due to fraud or error.

    In preparing the financial statements, the directors are responsible for assessing the Fund’s ability to continue as a going concern, disclosing as applicable, matters related to going concern and using the going concern basis of accounting unless the directors either intend to liquidate the Fund or to cease operations, or have no realistic alternative but to do so.

    Auditor’s responsibilities for the audit of the financial statements

    Our objectives are to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements as a whole are free from material misstatement, whether due to fraud or error, and to issue an auditor’s report that includes our opinion. Reasonable assurance is a high level of assurance, but is not a guarantee that an audit conducted in accordance with ISAs (UK) will always detect a material misstatement when it exists. Misstatements can arise from fraud or error and are considered material if, individually or in the aggregate, they could reasonably be expected to influence the economic decisions of users taken on the basis of these financial statements.

    Independent Auditor’s Report continued

    Auditor’s responsibilities for the audit of the financial statements (continued)

    As part of an audit in accordance with ISAs (UK), we exercise professional judgement and maintain professional scepticism throughout the audit. We also:

    Identify and assess the risks of material misstatement of the financial statements, whether due to fraud or error, design and perform audit procedures responsive to those risks, and obtain audit evidence that is sufficient and appropriate to provide a basis for our opinion. The risk of not detecting a material misstatement resulting from fraud is higher than the one resulting from error, as fraud may involve collusion, forgery, intentional omissions, misrepresentations, or the override of internal control.

    Obtain an understanding of internal control relevant to the audit in order to design audit procedures that are appropriate in the circumstances, but not for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the effectiveness of the Fund’s internal control.

    Evaluate the appropriateness of accounting policies used and the reasonableness of accounting estimates and related disclosures made by the directors.

    Conclude on the appropriateness of the directors’ use of the going concern basis of accounting and, based on the audit evidence obtained, whether a material uncertainty exists related to events or conditions that may cast significant doubt on the Fund’s ability to continue as a going concern. If we conclude that a material uncertainty exists, we are required to draw attention in our auditors’ report to the related disclosures in the financial statements or, if such disclosures are inadequate, to modify our opinion. Our conclusions are based on the audit evidence obtained up to the date of our auditors’ report. However, future events or conditions may cause the Fund to cease to continue as a going concern.

    Evaluate the overall presentation, structure and content of the financial statements, including the disclosures, and whether the financial statements represent the underlying transactions and events in a manner that achieves fair presentation.

    We communicate with those charged with governance regarding, among other matters, the planned scope and timing of the audit and significant audit findings, including any significant deficiencies in internal control that we identify during our audit.

    The extent to which the audit was considered capable of detecting irregularities, including fraud

    Irregularities, including fraud, are instances of non-compliance with laws and regulations. We design procedures in line with our responsibilities, outlined above, to detect material misstatements in respect of irregularities, including fraud. The extent to which our procedures are capable of detecting irregularities, including fraud is explained below.

    The objectives of our audit are to obtain sufficient appropriate audit evidence regarding compliance with laws and regulations that have a direct effect on the determination of material amounts and disclosures in the financial statements, to perform audit procedures to help identify instances of non-compliance with other laws and regulations that may have a material effect on the financial statements, and to respond appropriately to identified or suspected non-compliance with laws and regulations identified during the audit.

    In relation to fraud, the objectives of our audit are to identify and assess the risk of material misstatement of the financial statements due to fraud, to obtain sufficient appropriate audit evidence regarding the assessed risks of material misstatement due to fraud through designing and implementing appropriate responses and to respond appropriately to fraud or suspected fraud identified during the audit.

    However, it is the primary responsibility of management, with the oversight of those charged with governance, to ensure that the entity’s operations are conducted in accordance with the provisions of laws and regulations and for the prevention and detection of fraud.

    In identifying and assessing risks of material misstatement in respect of irregularities, including fraud, we:

    obtained an understanding of the nature of the industry and sector, including the legal and regulatory frameworks that the Fund operates in and how the Fund is complying with the legal and regulatory frameworks;

    inquired of management, and those charged with governance, about their own identification and assessment of the risks of irregularities, including any known actual, suspected, or alleged instances of fraud;

    discussed matters about non-compliance with laws and regulations and how fraud might occur including assessment of how and where the financial statements may be susceptible to fraud having obtained an understanding of the effectiveness of the control environment; and

    reviewed minutes of the Board and other Committees.

    Independent Auditor’s Report continued

    The extent to which the audit was considered capable of detecting irregularities, including fraud (continued)

    We also obtained an understanding of the legal and regulatory frameworks that the Fund operates in, focusing on provisions of those laws and regulations that had a direct effect on the determination of material amounts and disclosures in the financial statements. The key laws and regulations we considered in this context included UK-adopted IFRS, Companies (Jersey) Law 1991, Codes of Practice for Certified Funds, Listing and Disclosure Transparency Rules and the AIC Code of Corporate Governance. The audit procedures performed included:

    a review of the financial statement disclosures and testing to supporting documentation;

    completion of disclosure checklists to identify areas of non-compliance; and

    review of the financial statement disclosures by a specialist in the Listing and Disclosure Transparency Rules.

    The area that we identified as being susceptible to material misstatement due to fraud was management override of controls. The audit procedures performed included:

    testing the appropriateness of journal entries and other adjustments;

    undertaking analytical procedures to identify unusual or unexpected relationships;

    assessing whether the judgements made in determining accounting estimates, in particular in respect of the fair value of securities and the split between capital and revenue, are indicative of a potential bias; and

    evaluation of the business rationale of any significant transactions that are unusual or outside the normal course of business.

    Owing to the inherent limitations of an audit there is an unavoidable risk that some material misstatement of the financial statements may not be detected, even though the audit is properly planned and performed in accordance with ISAs (UK). However, the principal responsibility for ensuring that the financial statements are free from material misstatement, whether caused by fraud or error, rests with the directors who should not rely on the audit to discharge those functions.

    In addition, as with any audit, there remains a higher risk of non-detection of fraud, as this may involve collusion, forgery, intentional omissions, misrepresentations, or the override of internal controls. Our audit procedures are designed to detect material misstatement. We are not responsible for preventing non-compliance or fraud and cannot be expected to detect non-compliance with all laws and regulations.

    Other matters which we are required to address

    Following the recommendation of the audit committee, we were appointed by the Board of directors on 1 October 2020 to audit the financial statements for the year ending 31 December 2020 and subsequent financial periods. The period of total uninterrupted engagement is 5 years, covering the years ended 31 December 2020 to 2024.

    No non-audit services have been provided to the Fund and we remain independent of the Fund in conducting our audit.

    Our audit opinion is consistent with our reporting to the audit committee we are required to provide in accordance with ISAs (UK).

    Use of our report

    This report is made solely to the Fund’s members, as a body, in accordance with Article 113A of the Companies (Jersey) Law 1991. Our audit work has been undertaken so that we might state to the Fund’s members those matters we are required to state to them in an auditor’s report and for no other purpose. To the fullest extent permitted by law, we do not accept or assume responsibility to anyone other than the Fund and the Fund’s members as a body, for our audit work, for this report, or for the opinions we have formed.

    Philip Crosby

    For & on behalf of

    RSM Channel Islands (Audit) Limited

    Chartered Accountants and Recognized Auditors

    Jersey, C.I.

    Date: 24 March 2025

    Financial Statements

    Statement of Financial Position of the Fund

    As at 31 December 2024

      Notes 2024
    GBP
    2023
    GBP
    Current assets      
    Securities (at fair value through profit or loss) 3 & 22 169,952,944 146,643,502
    Accrued dividend income   743,674 632,412
    Prepayments   20,324 21,787
    Cash and cash equivalents         4 1,345,531 4,433,118
        172,062,473 151,730,819
    Current liabilities      
    Other payables and accruals         5 (434,929) (388,493)
    Interest payable           (48,282) (71,270)
    Loan payable         14 (28,884,872) (21,831,966)
        (29,368,083) (22,291,729)
    Net assets   142,694,390 129,439,090
    Equity attributable to equity holders      
    Stated capital         6 49,661,314 49,704,414
    Retained earnings   93,033,076 79,734,676
    Total Shareholders’ equity           142,694,390 129,439,090
    Net asset value per redeemable participating preference share (pence) 7 134.05 121.55

    The financial statements and notes on pages 60 to 80 were approved by the directors on 24 March 2025 and signed on behalf of the Board by:

    Michael Phair        Andrew Zychowski

    Director        Director

    The accompanying notes on pages 64 to 80 form an integral part of these financial statements.

    Statement of Comprehensive Income of the Fund

    For the year ended 31 December 2024

      Notes Revenue
    GBP
    Capital
    GBP
    2024
    Total
    GBP
    2023
    Total
    GBP
    Revenue          
    Dividend income 8 9,017,257 – 9,017,257 9,004,249
    Interest income 8 85,246 – 85,246 91,389
    Net movement in the fair value of securities (at fair value through profit or loss) 9 – 12,852,158 12,852,158 (6,799,595)
    Net movement on foreign exchange   – 1,579,028 1,579,028 698,809
    Total revenue   9,102,503 14,431,186 23,533,689 2,994,852
    Expenditure          
    Investment management fees 2o 375,146 562,719 937,865 916,770
    Custodian fees 2l 16,316 – 16,316 15,323
    Corporate Broker’s fees 2m 67,175 – 67,175 65,483
    Directors’ fees and expenses   146,631 – 146,631 154,809
    Legal and professional fees   11,697 – 11,697 6,558
    Audit fees   39,000 – 39,000 39,000
    Tax fees           6,948 – 6,948 7,560
    Registrar’s fees   49,496 – 49,496 44,779
    Administration and secretarial fees 2k 133,981 – 133,981 130,967
    General expenses   160,156 – 160,156 190,771
    Investor relations fee 2u 173,211 – 173,211 170,748
    Operating expenses   1,179,757 562,719 1,742,476 1,742,768
    Net operating profit before finance costs   7,922,746 13,868,467 21,791,213 1,252,084
    Finance costs 2r (602,287) (903,431) (1,505,718) (1,570,018)
    Profit/(loss) before tax   7,320,459 12,965,036 20,285,495 (317,934)
    Withholding tax expense 12 (1,343,801) – (1,343,801) (1,341,655)
    Net profit/(loss) after taxation   5,976,658 12,965,036 18,941,694 (1,659,589)
    Profit/(loss) per redeemable participating preference share – basic and diluted (pence)         10 5.61 12.18 17.79 (1.56)

    The total column of this statement represents the Fund’s Statement of Comprehensive Income, prepared in accordance with UK- adopted IFRS. There are no items of other comprehensive income, therefore net profit/(loss) after taxation is the total comprehensive income. The supplementary revenue and capital columns are both prepared in accordance with the Statement of Recommended Practice issued by the AIC as disclosed in note 2a. All items in the above statement derive from continuing operations. No operations were acquired or discontinued in the year.

    There are £nil (2023: £nil) earnings attributable to the management shares.

    The accompanying notes on pages 64 to 80 form an integral part of these financial statements.

    Statement of Changes in Redeemable Participating Preference Shareholders’ Equity of the Fund

    For the year ended 31 December 2024

      Notes Stated Capital
    Account
    GBP
    Retained
    Income
    GBP
    Total
    GBP
    At 1 January 2023   49,704,414 86,931,602 136,636,016
    Loss for the year   – (1,659,589) (1,659,589)
    Dividends 11 – (5,537,337) (5,537,337)
    At 31 December 2023   49,704,414 79,734,676 129,439,090
    Buyback of shares during year 6 (43,100) – (43,100)
    Profit for the year   – 18,941,694 18,941,694
    Dividends 11 – (5,643,294) (5,643,294)
    At 31 December 2024   49,661,314 93,033,076 142,694,390

    The accompanying notes on pages 64 to 80 form an integral part of these financial statements.

    Statement of Cash Flows of the Fund

    For the year ended 31 December 2024

               2024 2023
             Notes GBP GBP
    Cash flows from operating activities      
    Net profit/(loss) after taxation           18,941,694 (1,659,589)
    Adjustments for:      
    Net movement in the fair value of securities (at fair value through profit or loss)         9 (12,852,158) 6,799,595
    Realised gains on foreign exchange         2p (1,401,441) (1,345,395)
    Unrealised (gains)/losses on foreign exchange         2p (177,587) 646,586
    Payment for purchases of securities           (64,019,103) (46,058,637)
    Proceeds from sale of securities           53,561,820 55,587,931
    Operating cash flows before movements in working capital           (5,946,775) 13,970,491
    Increase in receivables           (109,799) (24,452)
    Increase/(decrease) in payables and accruals           23,448 (152,089)
    Net generated (used in)/from operating activities           (6,033,126) 13,793,950
    Cash flows generated used in financing activities      
    Repayments of borrowings                   (352,730,557) (236,205,147)
    Buyback of shares          6 (43,100) –
    New bank loans raised           361,474,806 230,999,895
    Dividends paid         11 (5,643,294) (5,537,337)
    Net cash generated from/(used in) financing activities           3,057,855 (10,742,589)
    Net (decrease)/increase in cash and cash equivalents           (2,975,271) 3,051,361
    Cash and cash equivalents at the beginning of the year           4,433,118 1,523,392
    Effect of foreign exchange rate changes           (112,316) (141,635)
    Cash and cash equivalents at the end of the year           1,345,531 4,433,118
    Cash and cash equivalents made up of:      
    Cash at bank         4 1,345,531 4,433,118

    The accompanying notes on pages 64 to 80 form an integral part of these financial statements.

    Notes to the Financial Statements of the Fund

    For the year ended 31 December 2024

    1.        General Information

    The Company is a closed-ended investment company incorporated in Jersey on 24 May 2006 and is regulated for Financial Services Business by the JFSC. The Company has one closed-ended cell, Middlefield Canadian Income – GBP PC, also referred to as the “Fund”. The Fund seeks to provide shareholders with a high level of dividends as well as capital growth over the longer term. The Fund intends to pay dividends on a quarterly basis each year. The Fund seeks to achieve its investment objective by investing predominantly in the securities of companies and REITs domiciled in Canada and the U.S. that the Investment Manager believes will provide an attractive level of distributions, together with the prospect for capital growth. In 2015, shareholders also approved an amendment to the Investment Policy to increase the percentage of the value of portfolio assets which may be invested in securities listed on recognised stock exchanges outside Canada to up to 40 per cent.

    The address of the Company’s registered office is 28 Esplanade, St. Helier, Jersey JE2 3QA, Channel Islands.

    The Fund’s shares have been admitted to the Official List of the FCA and to trading on the London Stock Exchange’s Main Market for listed securities.

    The Company and Fund have no employees.

    The functional and presentational currency of the Company and the Fund is Pounds Sterling (‘GBP’) as the Fund is trading on the London Stock Exchange’s Main Market.

    2.        Summary of Material Accounting Policy Information

    a.        Basis of preparation

    The financial statements of the Fund have been prepared on the historical cost basis, except for the measurement at fair value of investments and derivatives, and in accordance with UK-adopted IFRS and interpretations issued by the IFRSIC. The preparation of the Financial Statements in conformity with IFRS requires the directors to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities and disclosures of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of the Financial Statements and the reported amounts of revenues and expenses during the reporting year. Although these estimates are based on management’s best knowledge of current events and actions, actual results may ultimately differ from those estimates.

    Where presentational guidance set out in the SORP Financial Statements of Investment Trust Companies and Venture Capital Trusts (July 2022) issued by the AIC is consistent with the requirements of IFRS, the directors have prepared the Financial Statements on a basis compliant with the recommendations of the SORP. The supplementary information which analyses the Statement of Comprehensive Income between items of a revenue and a capital nature is presented in accordance with the SORP.

    The financial statements are prepared in accordance with UK-adopted IFRS as required by the UK Listing and the Disclosure Guidance and Transparency Rules. Companies (Jersey) Law 1991 prescribes which generally accepted accounting principles are allowed to be adopted by Jersey market traded companies in the preparation of their annual financial statements.

    Critical accounting estimates and judgements

    The preparation of the Financial Statements in conformity with IFRS requires the use of certain critical accounting estimates. It also requires management to exercise its judgement in the process of applying the accounting policies.

    The following are the critical judgements that the directors have made in the process of applying the accounting policies that have the most significant effect on the amounts recognised in the financial statements.

    Expenses have been charged to the Statement of Comprehensive Income and shown in the revenue column. Management fees and finance costs have been allocated 60% to capital and 40% to revenue. This is in accordance with the Board’s expected long-term split of returns, in the form of capital gains and income respectively, from the investment portfolio.

    There were no judgements made in relation to the fair value of the investments, as all investments are quoted.

    Adoption of new standards and amendments

    The following amendments to existing standards that are effective for the first time for the financial period beginning 1 January 2024 that have had an immaterial impact on the Company and the Fund:

    Disclosure of Accounting Policies (Amendments to IAS 1 and IFRS Practice Statement 2)

    The Company has adopted the amendments to IAS 1 for the first time in the current period. The amendments change the requirements in IAS 1 regarding disclosure of accounting policies. The amendments replace all instances of the term ‘significant accounting policies’ with ‘material accounting policy information’. Accounting policy information is material if, when considered together with other information included in an entity’s financial statements, it can reasonably be expected to influence decisions that the primary users of general purpose financial statements make on the basis of those financial statements.

    The supporting paragraphs in IAS 1 are also amended to clarify that accounting policy information that relates to immaterial transactions, other events or conditions is immaterial and need not be disclosed. Accounting policy information may be material because of the nature of the related transactions, other events or conditions, even if the amounts are immaterial. However, not all accounting policy information relating to material transactions, other events or conditions is itself material.

    The IASB has also developed guidance and examples to explain and demonstrate the application of the ‘four-step materiality process’ described in IFRS Practice Statement 2.

    Amendments to IAS 1 Classification of Liabilities as Current or Non-current

    The group has adopted the amendments to IAS 1, published in January 2020, for the first time in the current year.

    The amendments affect only the presentation of liabilities as current or non-current in the statement of financial position and not the amount or timing of recognition of any asset, liability, income or expenses, or the information disclosed about those items.

    The amendments clarify that the classification of liabilities as current or non-current is based on rights that are in existence at the end of the reporting period, specify that classification is unaffected by expectations about whether an entity will exercise its right to defer settlement of a liability, explain that rights are in existence if covenants are complied with at the end of the reporting period, and introduce a definition of ‘settlement’ to make clear that settlement refers to the transfer to the counterparty of cash, equity instruments, other assets or services.

    Amendments to IAS 1 Presentation of Financial Statements Non-current Liabilities with Covenants

    The group has adopted the amendments to IAS 1, published in November 2022, for the first time in the current year. The amendments specify that only covenants that an entity is required to comply with on or before the end of the reporting period affect the entity’s right to defer settlement of a liability for at least twelve months after the reporting date (and therefore must be considered in assessing the classification of the liability as current or non-current). Such covenants affect whether the right exists at the end of the reporting period, even if compliance with the covenant is assessed only after the reporting date (e.g. a covenant based on the entity’s financial position at the reporting date that is assessed for compliance only after the reporting date). The IASB also specifies that the right to defer settlement of a liability for at least twelve months after the reporting date is not affected if an entity only has to comply with a covenant after the reporting period. However, if the entity’s right to defer settlement of a liability is subject to the entity complying with covenants within twelve months after the reporting period, an entity discloses information that enables users of financial statements to understand the risk of the liabilities becoming repayable within twelve months after the reporting period. This would include information about the covenants (including the nature of the covenants and when the entity is required to comply with them), the carrying amount of related liabilities and facts and circumstances, if any, that indicate that the entity may have difficulties complying with the covenants.

    The Company has adopted the amendments to IAS 8 for the first time in the current year. The amendments replace the definition of a change in accounting estimates with a definition of accounting estimates. Under the new definition, accounting estimates are “monetary amounts in financial statements that are subject to measurement uncertainty”. The definition of a change in accounting estimates was deleted.

    There are no other standards, interpretations or amendments to the existing standards that are not yet effective that would be expected to have a significant impact on the Company.

    New standards and interpretations not yet effective and have not been adopted early by the Company

    •        Amendments to IAS 21, ‘The Effects of Changes in Foreign Exchange Rates: Lack of exchangeability’. (effective periods commencing on or after 1 January 2025 for IFRS).

    •        Amendments to IFRS 9 and IFRS 7 ‘Amendments to the Classification and Measurement of Financial Instruments’. (effective periods commencing on or after 1 January 2026 for IFRS).

    •        IFRS 18 ‘Presentation and Disclosure in Financial Statements’. (effective periods commencing on or after 1 January 2027 for IFRS).

    There are no other standards, interpretations or amendments to existing standards that are not yet effective that would be expected to have a significant impact on the Company.

    b.        Financial instruments

    Financial instruments carried on the Statement of Financial Position include securities, accrued dividend income, cash at bank, loan payable, other payables and accruals. The particular recognition methods adopted are disclosed in the individual policy statements associated with each item.

    Disclosures about financial instruments to which the Fund is a party are provided in Note 16.

    c.        Securities

    Investments in listed securities have been classified as fair value through profit or loss securities and are those securities intended to be held for a short period of time but which may be sold in response to needs for liquidity or changes in interest rates. These are held at fair value through profit or loss, as they are managed and the performance evaluated on a fair value basis.

    Fair value through profit or loss securities are initially recognised as at fair value, which is taken to be the cost. The securities are subsequently re-measured at fair value based on quoted bid prices on the stock exchange at the reporting date. Gains and losses arising from changes in the fair value of these securities are recognised in profit or loss as they arise.

    All purchases and sales of investments and trading securities that require delivery within the time frame established by regulation or market convention (“regular way” purchases and sales) are recognised at the trade date, which is the date on which the Fund commits to purchase or sell the asset. In cases which are not within the time frame established by regulation or market convention, such transactions are recognised on the settlement date. Any change in fair value of the asset to be received is recognised between the trade date and the settlement date.

    d.        Receivables

    Trade and other receivables are recognised when the Fund becomes a party to the contractual provisions of the receivables. They are measured, at initial recognition, at fair value plus transaction costs, if any. They are subsequently measured at amortised cost. The amortised cost is the amount recognised on the receivable initially, minus principal repayments, plus cumulative amortisation (interest) using the effective interest method (except for short term receivables where the recognition of interest would be immaterial) of any difference between the initial amount and the maturity amount, adjusted for any loss allowance.

    e.        Cash and cash equivalents

    Cash includes amounts held in interest bearing accounts. Cash and cash equivalents comprise bank balances and cash held by the Fund. The carrying value of these assets approximates their fair value.

    f.        Prepayments

    Prepayments comprise amounts paid in advance including, but not limited to, payments for insurance, listing fees and AIC membership fees. Payments are expensed to the Statement of Comprehensive Income over the period for which the Fund is receiving the benefit of these expenditures.

    g.        Provisions

    A provision is recognised when the Fund has a legal or constructive obligation as a result of a past event, and it is probable that an outflow of economic benefits will be required to settle the obligations.

    h.        Share capital

    Redeemable participating preference shares are only redeemable at the sole option of the directors, participate in the net income of the Fund during its life and are classified as equity in line with IAS 32 Financial Instruments: Presentation (see Note 6). Buyback shares are measured at cost and deducted from equity. Transaction costs relating to buyback shares do not form part of cost of the buyback shares.

    i.        Net asset value per redeemable participating preference share

    The NAV per redeemable participating preference share is calculated by dividing the net assets attributable to redeemable participating preference shareholders included in the Statement of Financial Position by the number of redeemable participating preference shares in issue at the year end.

    j.        Issue costs

    The expenditure directly attributable to the launch of the Fund’s shares and all other costs incurred on the launch and subsequent issues of the Fund’s shares are written off immediately against proceeds raised.

    k.        Administration and secretarial fees

    Under the provisions of the Administration Agreement dated 18 August 2011 between the Fund and JTC Fund Solutions (Jersey) Limited as Administrator, the Administrator is entitled to a fee for administrative and secretarial services payable by the Fund quarterly in arrears at a rate of 0.10 per cent. per annum of the average NAV of the Fund calculated over the relevant quarterly period.

    l.        Custodian fees

    The Custodian was appointed as Custodian of the Fund’s assets on 6 October 2011. The Fund pays the Custodian 0.01 per cent. per annum of the Fund’s NAV, accrued for at each valuation date.

    m.        Corporate Broker’s fees

    The Fund pays the Corporate Broker quarterly in arrears at a rate of 0.05 per cent. per annum of the average NAV of the Fund calculated over the relevant period.

    n.        Going concern

    In the opinion of the directors, the Company and the Fund have adequate resources to continue in operational existence for the foreseeable future being at least the next twelve months from the approval of these financial statements. For this reason, the Financial Statements have been prepared using the going concern basis.

    The directors considered, inter alia, the following factors:

    •        ongoing shareholder interest in the continuation of the Fund;

    •        the Fund has sufficient liquidity in the form of cash assets to meet all on-going expenses;

    •        should the need arise, the directors have the option to reduce dividend payments in order to positively affect the Fund’s cash flows; and

    •        the Fund’s investments in Canadian and U.S. securities are readily realisable to meet liquidity requirements, if necessary.

    The directors appreciate the severity of the current economic environment and continue to assess, in conjunction with the Investment Manager and the Investment Advisor, the situation and how it may impact the Company in the short and long term. The directors consider the Company to be well placed to withstand any significant adverse shocks and assume the going concern basis to be appropriate.

    The accompanying financial statements have been prepared on a going concern basis, which assumes the Company will continue to operate and meet its obligations as they fall due. However, the Company’s ability to continue as a going concern is subject to material uncertainty.

    Since the Company’s year end, on 10 February 2025 the Company, together with three other UK-listed closed-end funds, received a requisition notice from Saba, marking the second phase of Saba’s recent activist campaign in the UK-listed closed-end fund sector. The first phase commenced on 18 December 2024 with Saba requisitioning general meetings at seven UK-listed closed-end funds, proposing resolutions (each of which later failed) to remove the current independent directors of those seven funds and replace them with Saba’s own appointees, with a view to also terminating the management contracts and, in due course, replacing the investment managers with Saba.

    The requisition notice received by the Company on 10 February 2025 was for the approval by shareholders of the taking of all necessary steps to implement a scheme or process by which shareholders would become (or have the option to become) shareholders of a UK-listed open-ended investment company (or similar open-ended investment vehicle) implementing a substantially similar strategy to the Company. Such scheme or process could entail shareholders rolling into an existing or newly established UK-listed open-ended investment company (or similar open-ended investment vehicle), in either case managed by the Company’s existing investment manager or one of its affiliates.

    Following consultation with a number of the Company’s largest shareholders including Saba, and following constructive discussions with Saba, on 21 February 2025 the Company announced that Saba had agreed to withdraw its requisition notice for a period of 60 days to enable the Company and its advisers to formulate proposals that are in the best interests of all shareholders.

    At the current time, the Board is in the process of considering a number of strategic options in the best interests of shareholders as a whole. A further announcement regarding future proposals which the Company may put to shareholders will be made in due course. Although the Board is confident that the Company will have sufficient financial resources to meet its obligations due within twelve months from the date of approval of the financial statements, the uncertain future outcome of the Board’s deliberations indicates the existence of a material uncertainty that may cast significant doubt on the Company’s ability to continue as a going concern. Nevertheless, the Board believes that it is appropriate to continue to adopt the going concern basis in preparing the financial statements.

    o.        Investment management fees

    The Investment Manager is entitled to a management fee payable by the Fund quarterly in arrears at a rate of 0.70 per cent. per annum of the average NAV of the Fund calculated over the relevant quarterly period.

    Investment management fees for the year ended 31 December 2024 total £937,865 (31 December 2023: £916,770). The fee is split between the Investment Manager and the Investment Advisor at a ratio of 0.60 per cent: 0.10 per cent of the 0.70 per cent fee.

    Investment management fees have been split 60% to capital and 40% to revenue (see note 2a for further details regarding the allocation of the management fees).

    p.        Foreign currency translation

    Monetary assets and liabilities denominated in foreign currencies are translated into Pound Sterling at exchange rates in effect at the reporting date. Realised and unrealised gains and losses on foreign currency transactions are charged or credited to the Statement of Comprehensive Income as foreign currency gains and losses. The cost of investments, and income and expenditure are translated into Pound Sterling based on exchange rates on the date of the transaction. Realised gains on foreign exchange currency transactions totalled £1,401,441 for the year (2023: gains of £1,309,333). Realised gains on forward exchange contracts totalled £ nil (2023: gains of £36,062). Unrealised gains on foreign currency translations totalled £177,587 (2023: losses of £646,586).

    q.        Revenue recognition

    Dividend income arises from equity investments held and is recognised on the date investments are marked ‘ex-dividend’. Where the Company elects to receive dividends in the form of additional shares rather than cash, the equivalent to the cash dividend is recognised as income in revenue and any excess in value of the shares received over this is recognised in capital. Dividend income is shown gross of withholding tax. Interest income arises from cash and cash equivalents and quoted bonds and is recognised in the Statement of Comprehensive Income using the effective interest method.

    Special dividends are reviewed on a case by case basis in determining whether the dividend is to be treated as revenue or capital. Amounts recognised as revenue will form part of the distributable revenue. Amounts recognised as capital are included in realised gains. The tax accounting treatment follows the treatment of the principal amount.

    r.        Loan payable and finance costs

    Loan payable is initially measured at fair value and is subsequently measured at amortised cost using the effective interest rate method. The effective interest rate method is a method of calculating the amortised cost of a financial liability and of allocating interest expense over the relevant period. The effective interest rate is the rate that exactly discounts estimated future cash payments through the expected life of the financial liability or, where appropriate, a shorter period, to the net carrying amount on initial recognition.

    s.        Related parties

    Related parties are individuals and companies who have the ability, directly or indirectly, to control the other party or exercise significant influence over the other party in making financial and operating decisions (see Note 13).

    t.        Business and geographical segments

    The directors are of the opinion that the Fund is engaged in a single segment of business investing predominantly in securities and REITs domiciled in Canada and the U.S. to which the Fund is solely exposed and therefore no segmental reporting is provided.

    u.        Investor relations fee

    The Investment Advisor and Investment Manager are paid an additional fee for investor relations services totalling as the lesser of 15 basis points of the market value of the Fund or £200,000 per annum, with the fee to be calculated daily based on the closing market value of the Fund and payable quarterly in arrears.

    Investor relations fee for the year ended 31 December 2024 total £173,211 (31 December 2023: £170,748).

    3.        Securities (at fair value through profit and loss)

      2024 2023
      GBP GBP
    Quoted/listed Equities 169,952,944 146,643,502

    Please refer to Note 22 for the Schedule of Investments.

    4.        Cash and cash equivalents

      2024 2023
      GBP GBP
    Cash at bank 1,345,531 4,433,118

    Cash and cash equivalents comprise cash held by the Fund and bank balances with an original maturity of three months or less. The carrying value of these assets approximates their fair value.

    5.        Other payables and accruals

      2024 2023
      GBP GBP
    Investment management fees (Note 13) 254,113 220,372
    Corporate Broker’s fees 18,151 15,741
    Audit fees 39,000 39,000
    Administration fees 36,302 31,481
    General expenses 17,970 22,334
    Registrar’s fees 10,286 9,466
    Tax service fees 6,894 6,840
    Custodian fees 3,560 3,148
    Investor relations fee (Note 13) 48,653 40,111
      434,929 388,493

    6.        Stated capital

    The authorised share capital of the Fund is split into two management shares of no par value and an unlimited number of redeemable participating preference shares of no par value, the latter of which are attributable solely to the Fund.

      No. of shares GBP
    Management shares issued    
    2 management shares of no par value issued at 100.00 pence each 2 2
    At 31 December 2024 and 2023 2 2
    Redeemable participating preference shares issued (excluding shares held in treasury)    
    At 31 December 2023 106,487,250 49,704,412
    28 August 2024, 20,000 shares of no par value repurchased at £ 1.075 each (20,000) (21,500)
    30 August 2024, 20,000 shares of no par value repurchased at £ 1.08 each (20,000) (21,600)
    At 31 December 2024 106,447,250 49,661,312
    Total   49,661,314

    The holders of redeemable participating preference shares are entitled to receive in proportion to their holdings, all of the revenue profits of the Fund (including accumulated revenue reserves).

    Each redeemable participating preference shareholder is entitled to one vote for each share held, provided all amounts payable in respect of that share have been paid.

    Management shares are non-redeemable, have no right in respect of the accrued entitlement, and have no right to participate in the assets of the Fund on a winding-up. In all other respects, the management shares have the same rights and restrictions as redeemable participating preference shares. Each management share entitles the holder to one vote for each share held.

    Redeemable participating preference shares are redeemed at the absolute discretion of the directors. Since redemption is at the discretion of the directors, in accordance with the provisions of IAS 32, the redeemable participating preference shares are classified as equity. The Fund will not give effect to redemption requests in respect of more than 25 per cent. of the shares then in issue, or such lesser percentage as the directors may decide.

    At the year end, there were 18,235,000 (31 December 2023: 18,195,000) treasury shares in issue. Treasury shares have no value and no voting rights.

    FCA regulation of ‘non-mainstream pooled investments’

    On 1 January 2014, the FCA introduced rules relating to the restrictions on the retail distribution of unregulated collective investment schemes and close substitutes (non-mainstream pooled investments). UK investment trusts are excluded from these restrictions, as are other “excluded securities” as defined by the FCA.

    As reported in last year’s annual report, the Board believes that the Company’s shares are “excluded securities” under the FCA’s definitions of such and, as a result, the FCA’s restrictions on retail distribution do not apply. This status is reviewed annually and the Board intends to conduct the Company’s affairs to retain such status for the foreseeable future.

    Retained Earnings

    This reserve records all net gains and losses and transactions with owners not recorded elsewhere. This reserve is available for distribution to the shareholders. Dividends paid to shareholders are recognised directly in this reserve.

    7.        Net asset value per redeemable participating preference share

    The NAV per share of 134.05p (31 December 2023: 121.55p) is based on the net assets at the year end of £142,694,390 (31 December 2023: £129,439,090) and on 106,447,250 redeemable participating preference shares, being the number of redeemable participating preference shares in issue at the year end (31 December 2023: 106,487,250 shares).

    8.        Dividend and interest income

          2024  
      Revenue Capital Total 2023
      GBP GBP GBP GBP
    Interest Income 85,246 – 85,246 91,389
    Dividend income 9,017,257 – 9,017,257 9,004,249
      9,102,503 – 9,102,503 9,095,638

    9.        Net movement in the fair value of securities

          2024  
      Revenue Capital Total 2023
      GBP GBP GBP GBP
    Gains on sale of securities – 5,635,000 5,635,000 608,988
    Gains/(losses) on the revaluation of securities at year end – 7,217,158 7,217,158 (7,408,583)
    Net movement in the fair value of securities (at fair value through profit or loss) – 12,852,158 12,852,158 (6,799,595)

    10.        Profit/(loss) per redeemable participating preference share – basic and diluted

    Basic profit/(loss) per redeemable participating preference share is calculated by dividing the net profit attributable to redeemable participating preference shares of £18,941,694 (31 December 2023: £1,659,589 loss) by the weighted average number of redeemable participating preference shares outstanding during the year of 106,473,698 shares (31 December 2023: 106,487,250 shares). The allocation between revenue and capital can be found on the Statement of Comprehensive Income of the Fund on page 61.

    11.        Dividends

    Dividends of 1.325 pence per share were paid on a quarterly basis during the year in the months of January, April, July and October being 5.3 pence per share for the year and totalling £5,643,294 (31 December 2023: £5,537,337). On 31 January 2025 a dividend of £1,463,650 was paid of 1.375 pence per share. In accordance with the requirements of IFRS, as this was approved on 2 January 2025, being after the reporting date, no accrual was reflected in the 2024 Financial Statements for this amount of £1,463,650 (31 December 2023: £1,410,956).

    Dividends payable in respect of the financial year, which is the basis on which the requirements of Section 1158/1159 of the Corporation Tax Act 2010 are considered (see note 12) comprise the dividends paid in April, July and October of the financial year together with the dividend paid in January following the financial year end. For 2024 these dividends amounted to 5.35 pence per share (for 2023: 5.225 pence per share)

    12.        Taxation

    The Fund is subject to UK corporation tax at a rate of 25% (2023: 19% for three months and 25% for nine months of the year). The Company adopted UK tax residency on 11 October 2011. Since that date the Company has been managed in such a way as to be able to meet the conditions for approval as an investment trust under Section 1158 of the Corporation Tax Act 2010. As an investment trust, all capital gains are exempt from UK corporation tax. On 7 December 2012, the Company received approval from HM Revenue & Customs to be treated as an investment trust in accordance with Section 1158 of the Corporation Tax Act 2010 and will seek to remain so approved.

    The Fund incurred £1,343,801 (2023: £1,341,655) of withholding tax on foreign dividends during the year and this expense has been included in the Statement of Comprehensive Income.

    13.        Related party transactions

    The directors are regarded as related parties and key management personnel. Total directors’ fees earned during the year amounted to £126,000 of which £Nil was due at year end (2023: £125,215 of which £Nil was due at the year end). Each non-executive director, other than Mr. Orrico, earned a fee of £29,000 in respect of the financial year (2023: £29,000), the Chairman earned a fee of £36,000 (2023: £36,000) and the Chairman of the Audit Committee £32,000 (2023: £32,000). Mr Orrico waived any right to charge a fee in 2024 and 2023.

    The directors held an interest in shares and received dividends during the year. Their interest in shares and the dividends received during the year are disclosed within the Directors’ Remuneration Report.

    The Investment Advisor and Investment Manager are also regarded as a related party due to common ownership. Total management fees paid during the year amounted to £937,865 (2023: £916,770), of which £254,113 (2023: £220,372) was outstanding at 31 December 2024.

    The Investment Advisor and Investment Manager are also paid an additional fee for investor relations services. The fee for the year ended 31 December 2024 amounted to £173,211 (31 December 2023: £170,748), of which £48,653 (2023: £40,111) was outstanding at 31 December 2024.

    The fees for the above are all arm’s length transactions.

    14.        Loan payable

    The Fund has a credit facility agreement with RBC whereby RBC provides a credit facility, with a maximum principal amount of the lesser of CAD 75,000,000 and 25 per cent. of the total asset value of the Fund. The credit facility was amended on 3 April, 2024 to replace Banker’s Acceptances with CORRA (Canadian Overnight Repo Rate Average administered and published by the Bank of Canada) loans.

    At 31 December 2024, the amount drawn down under the credit facility was CAD 52,000,000 (GBP equivalent at amortised cost of £28,884,872) (31 December 2023: CAD 37,000,000 (GBP equivalent at amortised cost of £21,831,966)). The loan value of CAD 52,000,000 was made up of three loans as follows:

    Issue date Maturity date Loan amount
    12 December 2024 13 January 2025 CAD10,000,000
    16 December 2024 15 January 2025 CAD10,000,000
    18 December 2024 18 February 2025 CAD32,000,000

    As at 31 December 2024, the interest paid on the Banker’s Acceptance and Term CORRA loans totalled £1,458,822 (year ended 31 December 2023 [Banker’s Acceptance only]: £1,388,175) with £48,282 accrued at year end.

    Interest on Prime Loans is Prime Rate minus 0.35 per cent. In the case of Term CORRA loans, the Term CORRA rate plus 0.60 per cent. per annum is payable.

    15.        Security agreement

    In connection with entry into the credit facility agreement, the Fund has entered into a general security agreement with RBC, pursuant to which the Fund has granted RBC interests in respect of collateral, being all present and future personal property, including the securities portfolio, as security for the Fund’s obligations under the credit facility agreement.

    16.        Financial instruments

    Fair values

    The carrying amounts of the investments, accrued income, other receivables, cash and cash equivalents, loan payable and other payables approximate their fair values.

    Management of capital

    The Investment Manager manages the capital of the Fund in accordance with the Fund’s Investment Objectives and Policy.

    The capital structure of the Fund consists of proceeds from the issue of preference shares, loans and reserve accounts. The Investment Manager manages and adjusts its capital in response to general economic conditions, the risk characteristics of the underlying assets and working capital requirements. Generally speaking, the Fund will reduce leverage when investments are likely to decrease in value and will increase leverage when investment appreciation is anticipated. In order to maintain or adjust its capital structure, the Fund may borrow or repay debt under its Credit Facility or undertake other activities deemed appropriate under the specific circumstances. The Fund and the Company do not have any externally imposed capital requirements. However, the Fund is subject to bank covenants in respect of leverage and complied with those covenants for the whole of both 2024 and 2023.

    Investment and trading activities

    It is intended that the Fund will continue throughout its life to be primarily invested in a Canadian and U.S. equities portfolio. In 2015, the percentage of the value of portfolio assets which may be invested in securities listed on a recognised stock exchange outside Canada was increased to up to 40 per cent. At year end, 4.36% of the portfolio was invested in securities outside of Canada.

    The Fund’s investing activities expose it to various types of risk that are associated with the financial instruments and markets in which it invests. The most important types of financial risk to which the Fund is exposed are market price risk, interest rate risk and currency risk.

    Credit risk

    Credit risk is the risk that an issuer or counterparty may be unable or unwilling to meet a commitment that it has entered into with the Fund.

    The Fund’s principal financial assets are bank balances and cash, other receivables and investments as set out in the Statement of Financial Position which represents the Fund’s maximum exposure to credit risk in relation to the financial assets. The credit risk on bank balances is limited because the counterparties are banks with high credit ratings of A, A- and BBB+ assigned by Standard and Poor’s rating agency. All transactions in listed securities are settled upon delivery using approved brokers.

    The risk of default is considered minimal as delivery of securities sold is only made once the broker has received payment. Payment is made on a purchase once the securities have been received by the broker. The trade will fail if either party fails to meet its obligations. Where the Investment Manager makes an investment in debt or corporate securities, the credit rating of the issuer is taken into account to manage the Company’s exposure to risk of default. Investments in debt or corporate securities are across a variety of sectors and geographical markets, to avoid concentration of credit risk.

    The Fund’s maximum exposure to credit risk is the carrying value of the assets on the Statement of Financial Position.

    Market price risk

    Market price risk is the risk that the fair value or future cash flows of a financial instrument will fluctuate because of changes in market prices (other than those arising from interest rate risk or currency risk), whether those changes are caused by factors specific to the individual financial instrument or its issuer, or factors affecting similar financial instruments traded in the market. The Fund’s exposure to market price risk is comprised mainly of movements in the value of the Fund’s investments.

    It is the business of the Investment Manager to manage the portfolio and borrowings to achieve the best returns. The directors manage the risk inherent in the portfolio by monitoring, on a formal basis, the Investment Manager’s compliance with the Company’s stated Investment Policy and reviewing investment performance.

    Country risk

    On 17 January 2012, the FRC released “Responding to the increased country and currency risk in financial reports”. This update from the FRC included guidance on responding to the increased country and currency risk as a result of funding pressures on certain European countries, the curtailment of capital spending programs (austerity measures) and regime changes in the Middle East.

    The Fund invests primarily in Canadian and U.S. securities. The Investment Manager monitors the Company’s exposure to foreign currencies on a daily basis. The Board has reviewed the disclosures and believes that no additional disclosures are required because the Canadian and U.S. economies are stable.

    Fair value measurements

    IFRS 13 establishes a fair value hierarchy that prioritizes the inputs to valuation techniques used to measure fair value. The hierarchy gives the highest priority to unadjusted quoted prices in active markets for identical assets or liabilities (Level 1 measurements) and the lowest priority to unobservable inputs (Level 3 measurements). The three levels of the fair value hierarchy under IFRS 13 are as follows:

    •        Level 1 fair value measurements are those derived from quoted prices (unadjusted) in active markets for identical assets or liabilities; or

    •        Level 2 fair value measurements are those derived from inputs other than quoted prices included within Level 1 that are observable for the asset or liability, either directly (that is, as prices) or indirectly (that is, derived from prices); or

    •        Level 3 fair value measurements are those derived from valuation techniques that include inputs for the asset or liability that are not based on observable market data (that is, unobservable inputs).

    The level in the fair value hierarchy within which the fair value measurement is determined on the basis of the lowest level input that is significant to the fair value measurement in its entirety. For this purpose, the significance of an input is assessed against the fair value measurement in its entirety. If a fair value measurement uses observable inputs that require significant adjustment based on unobservable inputs, that measurement is a level 3 measurement. Assessing the significance of a particular input to the fair value measurement in its entirety requires judgment, considering factors specific to the asset or liability.

    The determination of what constitutes ‘observable’ requires significant judgment by the Directors. The Directors consider observable data to be that market data that is readily available, regularly distributed or updated, reliable and verifiable, not proprietary, and provided by independent sources that are actively involved in the relevant market.

    The following tables present the Fund’s financial instruments by level within the valuation hierarchy as of 31 December 2024 and 31 December 2023:

      Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Total
    31 December 2024 GBP GBP GBP GBP
    Financial assets        
    Securities (at fair value through profit or loss) 169,952,944 – – 169,952,944
             
      Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Total
    31 December 2023 GBP GBP GBP GBP
    Financial assets        
    Securities (at fair value through profit or loss) 146,643,502 – – 146,643,502

    The Fund holds securities that are traded in active markets. Such financial instruments are classified as Level 1 of the IFRS 13 fair value hierarchy. There were no transfers between Level 1, 2 and 3 in the year.

    Market Price sensitivity

    At 31 December 2024, if the market prices of the securities had been 30% higher with all other variables held constant, the increase in net assets attributable to holders of redeemable participating preference shares for the year would have been £50,985,883 (2023: £43,993,051) higher, arising due to the increase in the fair value of financial assets at fair value through profit or loss.

    At 31 December 2024, if the market prices of the securities had been 30% lower with all other variables held constant, the decrease in net assets attributable to holders of redeemable shares for the year would have been equal, but opposite, to the figures stated above.

    Interest rate risk

    Interest rate risk is the risk that the fair value or future cash flows of a financial instrument will fluctuate because of changes in market interest rates.

    The Fund’s interest rate sensitive assets and liabilities mainly comprise cash and cash equivalents, debt securities and loan payable. The cash and cash equivalents are subject to floating rates and are considered to be part of the investment strategy of the Fund. No other hedging is undertaken in respect of this interest rate risk.

    There were no fixed rate assets or liabilities at 31 December 2024 and 31 December 2023.

    The following table details the Fund’s exposure to interest rate risk at 31 December 2024 and 31 December 2023:

      Floating rate assets
      Weighted   Weighted  
      average interest 2024 average interest 2023
      at year end GBP at year end GBP
    Assets        
    Floating rate assets        
    Cash and cash equivalents * 1,345,531 * 4,433,118
        1,345,531   4,433,118

    *        Interest on bank balances is not material to the financial statements and are based on prevailing bank base rates.

      Floating rate liabilities
      2024 2023
      GBP GBP
    Liabilities    
    Floating rate liabilities    
    Loan payable (See Note 14) 28,884,872 21,831,966
      28,884,872 27,831,966

    The above analysis excludes short-term debtors and creditors as all material amounts are non-interest bearing.

    Interest rate sensitivity analysis

    At 31 December 2024, had interest rates been 50 basis points higher and all other variables were held constant, the Company’s net assets attributable to redeemable participating preference shares for the year would have decreased by £137,697 (31 December 2023: £86,994) due to an increase in interest payable on the loan and to a lesser extent an increase in interest earnings on cash and cash equivalents.

    Liquidity risk

    Liquidity risk is the risk that the Fund cannot meet its liabilities as they fall due. The Fund’s primary source of liquidity consists of cash and cash equivalents, securities at fair value through profit or loss and the credit facility.

    The Fund’s investments are considered to be readily realisable, predominantly issued by Canadian and U.S. companies and REITs listed on a Canadian Stock Exchange and actively traded.

    As at 31 December 2024, the Fund’s ability to manage liquidity risk was as follows:

      Less than   3 months to More than  
      1 month 1-3 months 1 year 1 year Total
      GBP GBP GBP GBP GBP
    Assets          
    Securities (at fair value through profit or loss) 169,952,944 – – – 169,952,944
    Accrued dividend income 719,453 24,221 – – 743,674
    Cash and cash equivalents 1,345,531 – – – 1,345,531
      172,017,928 24,221 – – 172,042,149
    Liabilities          
    Other payables and accruals (434,929) – – – (434,929)
    Interest payable (21,788) (26,494) – – (48,282)
    Loan payable (11,109,566) (17,775,306) – – (28,884,872)
      (11,566,283) (17,801,800) – – (29,368,083)
      160,451,645 (17,777,579) – – 142,674,066

    As at 31 December 2023, the Fund’s ability to manage liquidity risk was as follows:

      Less than   3 months to More than  
      1 month 1-3 months 1 year 1 year Total
      GBP GBP GBP GBP GBP
    Assets          
    Securities (at fair value through profit or loss) 146,643,502 – – – 146,643,502
    Other receivables 557,895 74,517 – – 632,412
    Cash and cash equivalents 4,433,118 – – – 4,433,118
      151,634,515 74,517 – – 151,709,032
    Liabilities          
    Other payables and accruals (388,493) – – – (388,493)
    Interest payable (71,270) – – – (71,270)
    Loan payable (21,831,966) – – – (21,831,966)
      (22,291,729) – – – (22,291,729)
      129,342,786 74,517 – – 129,417,303

    Currency risk

    The Fund is denominated in GBP, whereas the Fund’s principal investments are denominated in CAD and USD. Consequently, the Fund is exposed to currency risk. The Fund’s policy is therefore to actively monitor exposure to currency risk. The Board reserves the right to employ currency hedging but, other than in exceptional circumstances, does not intend to hedge. The Board considers that exposure was significant at the year end. The fund does not employ any derivative contracts to hedge against exposure to currency risk in line with the decision of the board of directors.

    The Fund’s net exposure to CAD currency at the year end was as follows:

      2024 2023
      GBP GBP
    Assets    
    Securities (at fair value through profit or loss) 169,952,944 146,643,502
    Cash and cash equivalents 757,724 4,193,885
    Accrued income 743,674 632,412
      171,454,342 151,469,799
      2024 2023
      GBP GBP
    Liabilities    
    Loan payable 28,884,872 21,831,966
    Interest payable 48,282 71,270
    General expenses – –
      28,933,154 21,903,236

    The Fund’s net exposure to USD currency at the year end was as follows:

      2024 2023
      GBP GBP
    Assets    
    Securities (at fair value through profit or loss) – –
    Cash and cash equivalents 101,771 82,692
      101,771 82,692

    Sensitivity analysis

    At 31 December 2024, had GBP strengthened against the CAD by 5%, with all other variables held constant, the decrease in net assets attributable to shareholders would amount to approximately £7,126,059 (31 December 2023: £6,478,328). Had GBP weakened against the CAD by 5%, this would amount to an increase in net assets attributable to shareholders of approximately £7,126,059 (31 December 2023: £6,478,328).

    At 31 December 2024, had GBP strengthened against the USD by 5%, with all other variables held constant, the decrease in net assets attributable to shareholders would amount to approximately £5,088 (31 December 2023: £4,135). Had GBP weakened against the USD by 5%, this would amount to an increase in net assets attributable to shareholders of approximately £5,088 (31 December 2023: £4,135).

    17.        Cash Flow statement reconciliation of financing activities

          Non-cash changes  
            Foreign    
      1 January     exchange Fair value 31 December
      2024 Cash flows Acquisition movements changes 2024
      GBP GBP GBP GBP GBP GBP
    Financial liabilities held at amortized cost 21,831,966 8,744,249 – (1,691,343) – 28,884,872
    Total 21,831,966 8,744,249 – (1,691,343) – 28,884,872
          Non-cash changes  
            Foreign    
      1 January     exchange Fair value 31 December
      2023 Cash flows Acquisition movements changes 2023
      GBP GBP GBP GBP GBP GBP
    Financial liabilities held at amortized cost 27,877,663 (5,205,252) – (840,445) – 21,831,966
    Total 27,877,663 (5,205,252) – (840,444) – 21,831,966

    18.        Post year end events

    On 2 January 2025, the Company declared a quarterly dividend of 1.375 pence per share. The ex-dividend date was 9 January 2025 and the record date was 10 January 2025. On 31 January 2025, the dividend of £1,463,650 was paid.

    No redeemable preference shares were purchased by the Company subsequent to year end.

    The loan of CAD 10,000,000 maturing on 13 January 2025, was renewed with a current maturity date of 14 April 2025.

    The loan of CAD 10,000,000 maturing on 15 January 2025, was renewed with a current maturity date of 14 April 2025.

    The loan of CAD 32,000,000 maturing on 18 February 2025, was renewed with a maturity date of 18 March 2025. On 18 March 2025, CAD 2,000,000 was paid down, and CAD 30,000,000 was renewed with a maturity date of 17 April 2025.

    These loans are expected to be renewed for another 30-60 days upon their respective maturities.

    Since the Company’s year end, on 10 February 2025 the Company, together with three other UK-listed closed-end funds, received a requisition notice from Saba, marking the second phase of Saba’s recent activist campaign in the UK-listed closed-end fund sector. The first phase commenced on 18 December 2024 with Saba requisitioning general meetings at seven UK-listed closed-end funds, proposing resolutions (each of which later failed) to remove the current independent directors of those seven funds and replace them with Saba’s own appointees, with a view to also terminating the management contracts and, in due course, replacing the investment managers with Saba. The requisition notice received by the Fund on 10 February 2025 was for the approval by shareholders of the taking of all necessary steps to implement a scheme or process by which shareholders would become (or have the option to become) shareholders of a UK-listed open-ended investment company (or similar open-ended investment vehicle) implementing a substantially similar strategy to the Company. Such scheme or process could entail shareholders rolling into an existing or newly established UK-listed open-ended investment company (or similar open-ended investment vehicle), in either case managed by the Company’s existing investment manager or one of its affiliates. Following consultation with a number of the Company’s largest shareholders including Saba, and following constructive discussions with Saba, on 21 February 2025 the Company announced that Saba had agreed to withdraw its requisition notice for a period of 60 days to enable the Company and its advisers to formulate proposals that are in the best interests of all shareholders. At the current time, the Board is in the process of considering a number of strategic options in the best interests of shareholders as a whole. A further announcement regarding future proposals which the Fund may put to shareholders will be made in due course.

    19.        Controlling party

    In the directors’ opinion there is no ultimate controlling party.

    20.        Contingent Liabilities

    At 31 December 2024 there were no contingent liabilities, guarantees or financial commitments (2023: £nil)

    21.        Going Concern and Material Uncertainty

    The accompanying financial statements have been prepared on a going concern basis, which assumes the Company will continue to operate and meet its obligations as they fall due. However, the Company’s ability to continue as a going concern is subject to material uncertainty.

    Since the Company’s year end, on 10 February 2025 the Company, together with three other UK-listed closed-end funds, received a requisition notice from Saba, marking the second phase of Saba’s recent activist campaign in the UK-listed closed-end fund sector. The first phase commenced on 18 December 2024 with Saba requisitioning general meetings at seven UK-listed closed-end funds, proposing resolutions (each of which later failed) to remove the current independent directors of those seven funds and replace them with Saba’s own appointees, with a view to also terminating the management contracts and, in due course, replacing the investment managers with Saba.

    The requisition notice received by the Company on 10 February 2025 was for the approval by shareholders of the taking of all necessary steps to implement a scheme or process by which shareholders would become (or have the option to become) shareholders of a UK-listed open-ended investment company (or similar open-ended investment vehicle) implementing a substantially similar strategy to the Company. Such scheme or process could entail shareholders rolling into an existing or newly established UK-listed open-ended investment company (or similar open-ended investment vehicle), in either case managed by the Company’s existing investment manager or one of its affiliates.

    Following consultation with a number of the Company’s largest shareholders including Saba, and following constructive discussions with Saba, on 21 February 2025 the Company announced that Saba had agreed to withdraw its requisition notice for a period of 60 days to enable the Company and its advisers to formulate proposals that are in the best interests of all shareholders.

    At the current time, the Board is in the process of considering a number of strategic options in the best interests of shareholders as a whole. A further announcement regarding future proposals which the Company may put to shareholders will be made in due course. Although the Board is confident that the Company will have sufficient financial resources to meet its obligations due within twelve months from the date of approval of the financial statements, the uncertain future outcome of the Board’s deliberations indicates the existence of a material uncertainty that may cast significant doubt on the Company’s ability to continue as a going concern. Nevertheless, the Board believes that it is appropriate to continue to adopt the going concern basis in preparing the financial statements.

    22.        Schedule of Investments – Securities (at fair value through profit or loss)

    As at 31 December 2024

          Bid-Market    
        Book Cost Value % of % of
    Description Shares/Units GBP GBP Net Assets Portfolio
    Equities          
    Bermuda – Quoted Investments 4.36%          
    (2023: 0%)          
    Utilities:          
    Brookfield Infrastructure          
    Partners L.P. 180,000 4,337,056 4,523,371 3.17% 2.66%
    Brookfield Renewable Partners L.P. 160,000 3,079,282 2,890,265 2.03% 1.70%
        7,416,338 7,413,636 5.20% 4.36%
    Canada – Quoted Investments 95.64%          
    (2023: 100%)          
    Materials:          
    Nutrien Ltd. 135,000 5,334,935 4,814,331 3.37% 2.83%
    Energy:          
    ARC Resources Ltd. 160,000 2,043,557 2,311,679 1.62% 1.36%
    Canadian Natural Resources Ltd. 265,000 3,505,545 6,521,038 4.57% 3.84%
    Cenovus Energy Inc. 140,000 1,724,436 1,694,542 1.19% 1.00%
    Paramount Resources Ltd. 160,000 2,419,480 2,812,942 1.97% 1.66%
    Parkland Corporation 120,000 2,301,990 2,164,366 1.52% 1.27%
    Peyto Exploration & Development Corp. 365,000 2,684,145 3,467,018 2.43% 2.04%
    Suncor Energy Inc. 100,000 2,432,647 2,844,049 1.99% 1.67%
    Topaz Energy Corp. 315,000 2,923,886 4,852,075 3.40% 2.85%
    Tourmaline Oil Corp. 220,000 8,765,732 8,103,429 5.68% 4.77%
    Whitecap Resources Inc. 575,000 3,149,422 3,251,492 2.28% 1.91%
        31,950,840 38,022,630 26.65% 22.37%
    Financials:          
    AGF Management Limited Class B 975,000 4,654,905 5,762,532 4.04% 3.39%
    Bank of Montreal 85,000 5,280,172 6,576,197 4.61% 3.87%
    Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce 115,000 3,533,767 5,794,555 4.06% 3.41%
    Manulife Financial Corporation 235,000 3,183,396 5,759,310 4.04% 3.39%
    National Bank of Canada 45,000 2,113,561 3,269,295 2.29% 1.92%
    Power Corporation of Canada 155,000 3,483,393 3,852,936 2.70% 2.27%
    Royal Bank of Canada 65,000 4,915,407 6,256,102 4.38% 3.68%
    The Bank of Nova Scotia 105,000 4,189,715 4,499,791 3.15% 2.65%
    The Toronto-Dominion Bank 108,000 4,803,184 4,591,162 3.22% 2.70%
        36,157,500 46,361,880 32.49% 27.28%
    Pipelines:          
    Enbridge Inc. 235,000 6,421,061 7,956,255 5.58% 4.68%
    Gibson Energy Inc. 385,000 5,489,785 5,220,302 3.66% 3.07%
    Keyera Corp. 150,000 1,980,830 3,648,659 2.56% 2.15%
    Pembina Pipeline Corporation 180,000 3,827,050 5,310,262 3.72% 3.12%
    South Bow Corporation 35,000 516,704 658,492 0.46% 0.39%
    TC Energy Corporation 160,000 4,921,769 5,941,396 4.16% 3.50%
        23,157,199 28,735,366 20.14% 16.91%
    Power and Utilities:          
    Alta gas Ltd. 200,000 2,877,589 3,711,706 2.60% 2.18%
    Capital Power Corporation 140,000 2,463,033 4,943,646 3.46% 2.91%
        5,340,622 8,655,352 6.06% 5.09%
    Real Estate:          
    Allied Properties Real Estate Investment Trust 165,000 1,741,388 1,567,282 1.10% 0.92%
    Chartwell Retirement Residences 525,000 3,300,753 4,388,973 3.08% 2.58%
    Choice Properties Real Estate Investment Trust 510,000 3,933,239 3,767,809 2.64% 2.22%
    Dream Industrial Real Estate Investment Trust 480,000 3,416,733 3,143,563 2.20% 1.85%
    First Capital Real Estate Investment Trust 400,000 4,133,660 3,755,033 2.63% 2.21%
    Granite Real Estate Investment Trust 50,000 1,901,782 1,915,011 1.34% 1.13%
    Nexus Industrial Real Estate Investment Trust 510,000 2,422,787 2,175,697 1.52% 1.28%
    RioCan Real Estate Investment Trust 390,000 3,566,552 3,947,118 2.77% 2.32%
    Sienna Senior Living Inc. 360,000 3,065,893 3,119,566 2.19% 1.84%
    SmartCentres Real Estate Investment Trust 275,000 3,609,356 3,730,315 2.61% 2.19%
        31,092,143 31,510,367 22.08% 18.54%
    Telecommunications:          
    BCE Inc. 240,000 8,116,899 4,439,382 3.11% 2.62%
    Total Equities   148,566,476 169,952,944 119.10% 100.00%
    Total investments (2024)   148,566,473 169,952,944 119.10% 100.00%
    Total investments (2023)   132,440,939 146,643,502 113.28% 100.00%

    Independent Auditors’ Report

    To the Shareholders of Middlefield Canadian Income PCC (The “Company”)

    Opinion

    We have audited the financial statements of Middlefield Canadian Income PCC (the “Company”), which comprise the Statement of Financial Position as at 31 December 2024, and notes 1 to 4 to the financial statements, including a summary of significant accounting policies. The financial reporting framework that has been applied in their preparation is applicable law and UK-adopted International Financial Reporting Standards (‘IFRS’).

    In our opinion the financial statements:

    give a true and fair view of the state of affairs of the Company as at 31 December 2024 and of its results for the year then ended;

    have been properly prepared in accordance with UK-adopted IFRS; and

    have been prepared in accordance with the Companies (Jersey) Law 1991.

    Separate opinion in relation to IFRS as adopted by the European Union

    As explained in note 1, in addition to complying with the Listing Rules obligation to apply UK-adopted IFRS, the Fund has also applied IFRS as adopted by the European Union.

    In our opinion the financial statements give a true and fair view of the financial position of the Fund as at 31 December 2024 and of its financial performance and cash flows for the year then ended in accordance with IFRS as adopted by the European Union.

    Basis for opinion

    We conducted our audit in accordance with International Standards on Auditing (UK) (‘ISAs (UK)’) and applicable law. Our responsibilities under those standards are further described in the Auditor’s responsibilities for the audit of the financial statements section of this report. We are independent of the Company in accordance with the ethical requirements that are relevant to our audit of the financial statements in Jersey, including the FRC’s Ethical Standard, and we have fulfilled our other ethical responsibilities in accordance with these requirements. We believe that the audit evidence we have obtained is sufficient and appropriate to provide a basis for our opinion.

    Material uncertainty relating to going concern

    We draw attention to note 2n to the financial statements of the Fund which indicates that the Company’s ability to continue as a going concern is dependent on the outcome of the directors review of a number of strategic options for the future of the Fund and Company as described in note 2n. As stated in note 2n these events presented by the directors indicate that a material uncertainty exists that may cast significant doubt on the Company’s ability to continue as a going concern. Our opinion is not qualified in respect of this matter.

    In auditing the financial statements, we have concluded that the directors’ use of the going concern basis of accounting in the preparation of the financial statements is appropriate.

    Our evaluation of the directors’ assessment of the Company’s ability to continue to adopt the going concern basis of accounting, included:

    Considering the appropriateness of the directors’ conclusion in relation to the matters described in 2n and discussing this with the board;

    Review of the directors’ statement in note 2n and their identification of any material uncertainties to the Company’s ability to continue over a period of at least twelve months from the date of approval of the financial statements;

    Consideration as part of our risk assessment of the nature of the Company, its business model and related risks including where relevant the requirements of the applicable financial reporting framework and the system of internal control; and

    Evaluation of the directors’ assessment of the Company’s ability to continue as a going concern, including challenging the underlying data and key assumptions used to make the assessment, and evaluation of the directors’ plans for future actions in relation to their going concern assessment.

    Other than the above, based on the work we have performed, we have not identified any material uncertainties, other than as disclosed in note 2n to the financial statements of the Fund, relating to events or conditions that, individually or collectively, may cast significant doubt on the Company’s ability to continue as a going concern for a period of at least twelve months from the date of approval of the financial statements.

    Our responsibilities and the responsibilities of the directors with respect to going concern are described in the relevant sections of this report.

    Other information

    The directors are responsible for the other information. Our opinion on the financial statements does not cover the other information and we do not express any form of assurance conclusions thereon.

    In connection with our audit of the financial statements, our responsibility is to read the other information and, in doing so, consider whether the other information is materially inconsistent with the financial statements or our knowledge obtained in the audit or otherwise appears to be materially misstated. If we identify such material inconsistencies or apparent material misstatements of this other information, we are required to report that fact.

    Independent Auditors’ Report continued

    Other information (continued)

    We have nothing to report in this regard.

    Matters on which we are required to report by exception

    We have nothing to report in respect of the following matters where the Companies (Jersey) Law 1991 requires us to report to you if, in our opinion;

    adequate accounting records have not been kept; or

    the financial statements are not in agreement with the accounting records and returns; or

    proper returns adequate for our audit have not been received from branches not visited by us; or

    we have not received all the information and explanations we require for our audit.

    Responsibilities of directors

    As explained more fully in the Statement of Directors’ Responsibilities set out on page 40, the directors are responsible for the preparation of the financial statements in accordance with UK-adopted IFRS and for being satisfied that they give a true and fair view, and for such internal control as the directors determine is necessary to enable the preparation of financial statements that are free from material misstatement, whether due to fraud or error.

    In preparing the financial statements, the directors are responsible for assessing the Company’s ability to continue as a going concern, disclosing, as applicable, matters related to going concern and using the going concern basis of accounting unless the directors either intend to liquidate the Company or to cease operations, or have no realistic alternative but to do so.

    Auditor’s responsibilities for the audit of the financial statements

    Our objectives are to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements as a whole are free from material misstatement, whether due to fraud or error, and to issue an auditor’s report that includes our opinion. Reasonable assurance is a high level of assurance, but is not a guarantee that an audit conducted in accordance with ISAs (UK) will always detect a material misstatement when it exists. Misstatements can arise from fraud or error and are considered material if, individually or in the aggregate, they could reasonably be expected to influence the economic decisions of users taken on the basis of these financial statements.

    As part of an audit in accordance with ISAs (UK), we exercise professional judgement and maintain professional scepticism throughout the audit. We also:

    Identify and assess the risks of material misstatement of the financial statements, whether due to fraud or error, design and perform audit procedures responsive to those risks, and obtain audit evidence that is sufficient and appropriate to provide a basis for our opinion. The risk of not detecting a material misstatement resulting from fraud is higher than the one resulting from error, as fraud may involve collusion, forgery, intentional omissions, misrepresentations, or the override of internal control.

    Obtain an understanding of internal control relevant to the audit in order to design audit procedures that are appropriate in the circumstances, but not for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the effectiveness of the Company’s internal control.

    Evaluate the appropriateness of accounting policies used and the reasonableness of accounting estimates and related disclosures made by the directors.

    Conclude on the appropriateness of the directors’ use of the going concern basis of accounting and, based on the audit evidence obtained, whether a material uncertainty exists related to events or conditions that may cast significant doubt on the Company’s ability to continue as a going concern. If we conclude that a material uncertainty exists, we are required to draw attention in our auditors’ report to the related disclosures in the financial statements or, if such disclosures are inadequate, to modify our opinion. Our conclusions are based on the audit evidence obtained up to the date of our auditors’ report. However, future events or conditions may cause the Company to cease to continue as a going concern.

    Evaluate the overall presentation, structure and content of the financial statements, including the disclosures, and whether the financial statements represent the underlying transactions and events in a manner that achieves fair presentation.

    We communicate with those charged with governance regarding, among other matters, the planned scope and timing of the audit and significant audit findings, including any significant deficiencies in internal control that we identify during our audit.

    Independent Auditors’ Report continued

    To the Shareholders of Middlefield Canadian Income PCC (The “Company”)

    The extent to which the audit was considered capable of detecting irregularities, including fraud

    Irregularities, including fraud, are instances of non-compliance with laws and regulations. We design procedures in line with our responsibilities, outlined above, to detect material misstatements in respect of irregularities, including fraud. The extent to which our procedures are capable of detecting irregularities, including fraud is explained below.

    The objectives of our audit are to obtain sufficient appropriate audit evidence regarding compliance with laws and regulations that have a direct effect on the determination of material amounts and disclosures in the financial statements, to perform audit procedures to help identify instances of non-compliance with other laws and regulations that may have a material effect on the financial statements, and to respond appropriately to identified or suspected non-compliance with laws and regulations identified during the audit.

    In relation to fraud, the objectives of our audit are to identify and assess the risk of material misstatement of the financial statements due to fraud, to obtain sufficient appropriate audit evidence regarding the assessed risks of material misstatement due to fraud through designing and implementing appropriate responses and to respond appropriately to fraud or suspected fraud identified during the audit.

    However, it is the primary responsibility of the directors to ensure that the entity’s operations are conducted in accordance with the provisions of laws and regulations and for the prevention and detection of fraud.

    We obtained an understanding of the legal and regulatory frameworks that the entity operates in, focusing on provisions of those laws and regulations that had a direct effect on the determination of material amounts and disclosures in the financial statements. This included compliance with Companies (Jersey) Law 1991.

    Our testing included:

    enquiries of the directors regarding known or suspect instances of non-compliance with laws and regulations;

    enquiries of the directors regarding known or suspect instances of irregularities, including fraud;

    undertaking analytical procedures to identify unusual or unexpected relationships;

    review of minutes of meetings throughout the year;

    testing the appropriateness of journal entries and other adjustments; and

    agreement of the financial statement disclosures to underlying supporting documentation.

    Owing to the inherent limitations of an audit there is an unavoidable risk that some material misstatement of the financial statements may not be detected, even though the audit is properly planned and performed in accordance with ISAs (UK). However, the principal responsibility for ensuring that the financial statements are free from material misstatement, whether caused by fraud or error, rests with the directors who should not rely on the audit to discharge those functions.

    In addition, as with any audit, there remains a higher risk of non-detection of fraud, as this may involve collusion, forgery, intentional omissions, misrepresentations, or the override of internal controls. Our audit procedures are designed to detect material misstatement. We are not responsible for preventing non-compliance or fraud and cannot be expected to detect non-compliance with all laws and regulations.

    Use of our report

    This report is made solely to the Company’s shareholders as a body, in accordance with Article 113A of the Companies (Jersey) Law 1991. Our audit work has been undertaken so that we might state to the Company’s shareholders those matters we are required to state to them in an auditor’s report and for no other purpose. To the fullest extent permitted by law, we do not accept or assume responsibility to anyone other than the Company and the Company’s shareholders as a body, for our audit work, for this report, or for the opinions we have formed.

    Philip Crosby

    For & on behalf of

    RSM Channel Islands (Audit) Limited

    Chartered Accountants and Recognised Auditors

    Jersey, C.I.

    Date 24 March 2025

    Statement of Financial Position of the Company

    As at 31 December 2024

        2024 2023
      Notes GBP GBP
    Current assets      
    Other receivables   2 2
    Net assets   2 2
    Equity attributable to equity holders      
    Stated capital 2 2 2
    Total Shareholders’ equity   2 2

    The financial statements and notes on pages 84 to 85 were approved by the directors on 24 March 2025 and signed on behalf of the Board by:

    Michael Phair        Andrew Zychowski

    Director                Director

    Notes to the Financial Statements of the Company

    For the year ended 31 December 2024

    1.        Basis of accounting

    The separate financial statements of the Company have been prepared showing results of the Company only. They have been prepared in accordance with UK-adopted IFRS in accordance with the accounting policies set out in Note 2 to the financial statements of the Fund.

    The financial statements of the Fund have been prepared on the historical cost basis, except for the measurement at fair value of investments and derivatives, and in accordance with UK-adopted IFRS and interpretations issued by the IFRSIC.

    A separate Statement of Comprehensive Income, Statement of Changes in Equity and Cash Flow Statement have not been prepared as there have been no results or cash flows for the Company for this year or the preceding year.

    There are no standards and interpretations in issue but not effective that the directors believe would or might have a material impact on the financial statements of the Company.

    Judgements and estimates used by the directors

    The preparation of financial statements in compliance with IFRS requires the directors to make judgements, estimates and assumptions that affect the application of policies and reported amount of assets and liabilities, income and expenses. The estimates and associated liabilities are based on historical experience and various other factors that are believed to be reasonable under the circumstances, the results of which form the basis of making the judgements about carrying values of assets and liabilities that are not readily apparent. For the purposes of these financial statements, there were no specific areas in which judgement was exercised and no estimation was required by the directors.

    2.        The Company’s stated capital

    The authorised share capital of the Company is split into two management shares of no par value.

      No. of shares GBP
    Management shares issued    
    At 31 December 2024 and 2023 2 2

    3.        Taxation

    The Company adopted UK tax residency on 11 October 2011. Since that date, the Company has been managed in such a way as to be able to meet the conditions for approval as an investment trust under Section 1158 of the Corporation Tax Act 2010. Accordingly, no UK tax has been provided for. On 7 December 2012, the Company received approval from HM Revenue & Customs to be treated as an investment trust in accordance with Section 1158 of the Corporation Tax Act 2010 and will seek to remain so approved.

    4.        Ultimate holding company

    The ultimate holding company is Middlefield Limited.

    Definitions

    AGM                                        Annual General Meeting

    AIC                                          The Association of Investment Companies

    AIC Code                                The AIC Code of Corporate Governance published in February, 2019

    AIF                                          Alternative investment fund

    AIFM                                       Alternative investment fund manager

    AIFMD                                     Alternative Investment Fund Managers Directive

    Annual Financial Report          Annual report and financial statements

    Auditor                                     RSM Channel Islands (Audit) Limited

    Benchmark                              The S&P TSX Composite High Dividend Index

    CAD                                        Canadian Dollar

    Cell or Fund                            Middlefield Canadian Income – GBP PC

    Cell AGM                                 An annual general meeting of the holders of Fund Shares

    Company or MCT                   Middlefield Canadian Income PCC

    CORRA                                  Canadian Overnight Repo Rate Average administered and published by the Bank of Canada

    Credit Facility                         The on-demand credit facility with RBC

    ESG                                       Environmental, Social and Governance

    EU                                         European Union

    FCA                                       Financial Conduct Authority

    FRC                                       Financial Reporting Council

    Fund Shares                          The redeemable participating preference shares of no par value in the Fund

    GBP                                      Great British Pounds or Sterling

    IFRSIC                                  International Financial Reporting Standards Interpretations Committee

    IFRS                                      International Financial Reporting Standards

    JFSC                                     Jersey Financial Services Commission

    Listing Rules                         The listing rules made by the FCA under Part VI of the Financial Services and Market Authority

    NAV                                       Net Asset Value of the Company in GBP

    Prime Loan                           Loans to which the Prime Rate can be applied

    Prime Rate                            Annual interest rate set by Canada’s major banks and financial institutions

    RBC                                      Royal Bank of Canada

    REIT                                     Real estate investment trust

    SID                                       Senior Independent Director

    SORP                                   Statement of recommended practice

    Term CORRA loan                The amount drawn under the Credit Facility

    UK Code                                The 2019 UK Corporate Governance Code published by the FRC in July 2018

    USMCA                                  Free trade agreement between the United States, Mexico and Canada

    2        LR.11.2.6: No more than 10% of the Company’s total assets may be invested in other listed closed-ended investment companies unless such investment companies themselves have published investment policies to invest no more than 15% of their total assets in other closed-ended investment companies, in which case the limit is 15%.

    Alternative Performance Measures

    An APM is a measure of performance or financial position that is not defined in applicable accounting standards and cannot be directly derived from the financial statements. The Company’s APMs are set out below and are cross-referenced where relevant to the financial inputs used to derive them as contained in other sections of the Annual Report.

    Benchmark

    The Company’s Benchmark index, used for performance comparative purposes, is the S&P/TSX Composite High Dividend Index. Prior to 31 October 2024, the Benchmark was calculated gross of withholding tax. Beginning 31 October 2024, the Benchmark is calculated net of a 15% withholding tax in sterling terms with dividends reinvested.

    Discount or Premium

    Investment trust shares can frequently trade at a discount to NAV. This occurs when the share price (based on the mid-market share price) is less than the NAV and investors may therefore buy shares at less than the value attributable to them by reference to the underlying assets. The discount is the difference between the share price and the NAV, expressed as a percentage of the NAV.

    Net Asset Value (NAV) per Redeemable Participating Preference Share

    This is the value of the Company’s assets attributable to one redeemable participating preference share. It is calculated by dividing ‘equity shareholders’ funds’ by the total number of redeemable participating preference shares in issue (excluding treasury shares).

    Gearing/(Net Cash)

    Investment companies can borrow to purchase additional investments. This is called ‘gearing’. It allows investment companies to take advantage of a long-term view on a sector or to take advantage of a favourable situation or a particularly attractive stock without having to sell existing investments. Gearing works by magnifying a company’s performance. If a company ‘gears up’ and then markets rise and returns on the investments outstrip the costs of borrowing, the overall returns to investors will be even greater. But if markets fall and the performance of the assets in the portfolio is poor, then losses suffered by the investor will also be magnified. The Company may achieve gearing through borrowings or the effect of gearing through an appropriate balance of equity capital and borrowings.

    Ongoing Charges

    Ongoing charges are those expenses of a type which are likely to recur in the foreseeable future, whether charged to capital or revenue, and which relate to the operation of the investment company as a collective fund. Ongoing charges are based on costs incurred in the year as being the best estimate of future costs and include the annual management charge.

    Yield

    The yield is the amount of cash (in percentage terms) that is returned to the owners of the security, in the form of interest or dividends received from it. Normally, it does not include price variations, distinguishing it from performance (with dividends reinvested).

    LONDON, ENGLAND

    Middlefield International Limited

    288 Bishopsgate

    London, England

    EC2M 4QP

    Telephone +44 (0) 20 7814 6644

    Fax +44 (0) 20 7814 66 11

    TORONTO, CANADA

    Middlefield Group

    Suite 3100

    8 Spadina Ave

    Toronto, Ontario

    Canada M5V 0S8

    Telephone 001 (416) 362-0714

    www.middlefield.co.uk

    The MIL Network –

    March 25, 2025
  • MIL-OSI China: Ukraine conflict brings EU-US ties to historic low

    Source: China State Council Information Office

    The recent U.S.-brokered Russia-Ukraine peace talks highlighted growing divisions between Washington and Brussels, bringing trans-Atlantic relations to a historic low, an Italian geopolitical analyst has said.

    Sergio Fabbrini, a political science professor at Rome’s LUISS University, told Xinhua that the exclusion of Europe from the talks underscores the EU’s declining influence in resolving the Russia-Ukraine conflict, due in large part to the bloc’s lack of unified foreign policy coordination.

    “This episode reveals the European Union’s structural weakness,” he said during a university conference on Monday. “Without a central authority to speak for all members, the bloc struggles to assert itself on the global stage, particularly when the U.S. chooses to act unilaterally.”

    This institutional fragmentation, he said, coincides with the skeptical view of U.S. President Donald Trump’s administration of the EU. The U.S. president has repeatedly characterized the EU as “an institution designed to undermine American interests rather than bolster global security.”

    Fabbrini emphasized the fundamental divergence in how both sides perceive the Ukraine crisis. “For Europe, this is an existential security threat happening on our doorstep. For Washington, it’s a geopolitical calculation involving great powers,” he said.

    The professor warned that the current tensions mark “one of the worst crises in trans-Atlantic history,” urging Europe to develop more independent diplomatic capacity.

    “Geographical reality demands that Europe take greater responsibility for its own security architecture while maintaining equilibrium between national interests and collective European stability,” he said. 

    MIL OSI China News –

    March 25, 2025
  • MIL-Evening Report: The ICC showed its might by arresting Rodrigo Duterte. Its reputation will take longer to fix

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Yvonne Breitwieser-Faria, Lecturer in International Law, Curtin University

    Only five days after the arrest warrant against former Philippines President Rodrigo Duterte was issued, he was apprehended and immediately put on a plane to The Hague to face charges before the International Criminal Court (ICC).

    The prompt action – and the fact he is the first former Asian head of state before the ICC – have been heralded as “a pivotal moment for the court”.

    While this is a rare success story in the court’s tumultuous history, many challenges remain. The successful arrest of one defendant will unfortunately do little to change negative perceptions of the court or remove the many obstacles it faces in prosecuting cases.

    A long history of criticism

    The ICC was conceived as a “court of last resort” in 1998 under the Rome Statute, the treaty that established it. The aim was to try individuals accused of war crimes, crimes against humanity, genocide and aggression in cases where a state’s domestic courts refuse or are unable to do so.

    Shortly after it began its work in 2002, however, the ICC faced criticism for its perceived focus on Africa.

    In more recent years, it has also been criticised for its limited effectiveness, its perceived hypocrisy, and a lack of support from major powers, such as the US, China and Russia, which are not members.

    The court has long faced a public relations crisis it may never be able to resolve. When it does not investigate a potential case, it is said to be ineffective. And when it does initiate investigations, it is often said to be biased or acting beyond its capabilities.

    Putin and Netanyahu

    Currently, the ICC has 12 ongoing investigations, mostly in Africa and Asia. It has issued 56 arrest warrants, half of which have yet to be executed.

    As the focus of the court is limited to those who bear the greatest responsibility for international crimes, the cases frequently involve high-profile individuals.

    Current arrest warrants, for example, have been issued against Russian President Vladimir Putin on charges of allegedly deporting Ukrainian children to Russia and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu for alleged war crimes committed in Gaza.

    These two cases have been among the court’s most controversial. Critics say the ICC lacks jurisdiction because:

    • the alleged crimes did not occur in their own states
    • their states are not parties to the Rome Statute
    • the UN Security Council did not refer these cases to the ICC for investigation.

    Others have accused the court of selective prosecution and bias for pursuing a case against Netanyahu, specifically, instead of prioritising cases in states run by dictators, such as Syria.

    And some complain the court should be focusing on crimes allegedly committed by Western leaders in places like Iraq.

    Indicting leaders of states raises additional legal challenges. International law dictates that heads of state enjoy immunity in other states’ courts – unless this immunity is expressly waived by their own governments.

    The ICC defends its actions as fair. It argues it does have jurisdiction in the cases against Putin and Netanyahu because the alleged crimes took place in Ukraine and Palestine, two states who have explicitly accepted its jurisdiction.

    And Article 27 of the Rome Statute says the ICC can exercise jurisdiction over people with state immunity, although it’s debatable whether this must be first waived for leaders of states not party to the Rome Statute.

    Cooperation remains key

    The ICC is not only constrained by these complex legal questions, but also by the limited cooperation of states around the world.

    It relies on close cooperation with its 125 state parties, among others. But some states have been reluctant or even refused to cooperate with the court in executing the arrest warrants of controversial figures.

    For example, Putin was not arrested when he visited Mongolia, an ICC member, last year, in part, because Mongolia relies heavily on Russian energy. South Africa similarly refused to arrest Sudanese dictator Omar al-Bashir when he visited in 2015.

    Even when state parties do cooperate, the political fallout can impact the court’s reputation.

    Following Duterte’s arrest last week, a Filipino senator (the sister of the current president) launched an urgent investigation to ensure due process was followed and Duterte’s legal rights were upheld and protected. She acknowledged the arrest has “has deeply divided the nation”.

    The lack of support from the US – arguably, still the world’s most powerful democracy – remains a perennial problem, as well.

    While the US has generally supported the court’s mandate over the years, it has been wary of its jurisdiction over American citizens and those of its allies accused of crimes. Last month, President Donald Trump authorised new sanctions against ICC officials in an attempt to paralyse the international organisation.

    Although 79 states did declare their support for the ICC following the sanctions, the Trump adminstration’s rejection of the court’s jurisdiction, legitimacy and authority has had significant consequences for its operations.

    It remains to be seen how the case against Duterte will play out. Securing a conviction is not assured.

    However, his arrest demonstrates the court can fulfil its mandate and remain a relevant force in the fight against the gravest of crimes. It is also a significant moment for the families of those killed during Duterte’s rule, who have long sought justice for their loved ones.

    Yvonne Breitwieser-Faria does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

    – ref. The ICC showed its might by arresting Rodrigo Duterte. Its reputation will take longer to fix – https://theconversation.com/the-icc-showed-its-might-by-arresting-rodrigo-duterte-its-reputation-will-take-longer-to-fix-252509

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

    March 25, 2025
  • MIL-OSI China: US-Russia Riyadh talks end, joint statement expected tomorrow

    Source: China State Council Information Office

    The new round of talks between Russian and U.S. delegations concluded on Monday after some 12 hours, according to Russian news agency RIA Novosti.

    A joint statement following the talks will be published on Tuesday, RIA Novosti reported, citing a source familiar with the venue of the talks.

    According to Riyadh-based Al Arabiya News, the U.S. delegation is led by Andrew Peek, a senior director at the White House National Security Council, and Michael Anton, a senior official from the State Department.

    Russia is represented by Grigory Karasin, chair of the Federation Council’s Foreign Affairs Committee and a former diplomat, along with Sergei Beseda, an advisor to the director of the Federal Security Service, Al Arabiya News said.

    The talks, mainly focused on reaching a Black Sea ceasefire deal before securing a broader agreement, followed a meeting between the United States and Ukraine in Saudi Arabia on Sunday.

    Last week, U.S. President Donald Trump held phone talks with Russian President Vladimir Putin and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky on Tuesday and Wednesday, respectively. 

    MIL OSI China News –

    March 25, 2025
  • MIL-OSI USA: ICYMI: Shaheen Discusses Foreign Affairs, Trump Tariffs, Her Decision to Not Seek Reelection and More on WMUR’s CloseUp

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for New Hampshire Jeanne Shaheen

    Published: 03.24.2025

    (Manchester, NH) – On Sunday, U.S. Senator Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH), Ranking Member of the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee, joined Adam Sexton on WMUR’s CloseUp to discuss ongoing global affairs such as Russia’s war in Ukraine, as well as pressing issues in New Hampshire including the harmful impacts of President Trump’s tariffs and Republican-led threats to federal services. The Senator also detailed her decision to not seek reelection. The first segment can be found here and the second segment can be found here.   

    Key quotes from Senator Shaheen below: 

    On threats to U.S. leadership abroad:  

    • “Both ceasefires that this President is talking about taking credit for are falling apart already. The ceasefire in Israel with Gaza has already fallen apart. The ceasefire that he’s trying to broker with Russia has already fallen apart.” 
    • “[Elon Musk] came up with this brilliant idea to get rid of USAID and so has undermined so many of our efforts that help us compete with China around the world. Our efforts that keep Americans safe because we’re tracking epidemics in places like Africa. That promote democracy efforts in countries where, if we’re not there China comes in and takes up that vacuum that we’ve left. So, I think he’s totally misguided, and he has no real understanding of what it means for the United States to be a leader in the world.”  

    On the harmful impact of President Trump’s tariffs on Granite State businesses:  

    • “I was at C&J[…] yesterday. He’s had to cancel more than half of his bus order for new busses that are made in Canada because he’s concerned about the additional cost.” 
    • “I was up north on Wednesday in the North Country, talking to Littleton town officials who were talking about visitors coming down to New Hampshire who they’re concerned are not going to be here, about small businesses that are worried they are not expanding because they’re worried about the inability to have the relationship that they have had with Canada.” 

    On Elon Musk and DOGE’s gutting of federal services: 

    • “We are in this economic mess because of the decisions that President Trump is making about tariffs, about the uncertainty that he’s created, about the chaos that he’s created in Washington, about the layoffs that he’s doing and I want to keep people focused on that.” 
    • “The fact is, Donald Trump, in his campaign said he was going to do something about grocery prices. He was going to do something about inflation. He was going to do something about high energy costs. He was going to do something about the cost of rental housing and he was going to address mortgage rates. He was going to end the war in Ukraine on the first day. He’s done none of those things.” 

    On her decision not to seek reelection: 

    • “It’s time to think about what else I might want to do. I’m not going to leave trying to make a difference in New Hampshire and [I’ll] still be engaged, but it will be nice to have a little more flexibility to do some other things.” 

    MIL OSI USA News –

    March 25, 2025
  • MIL-OSI China: Europe concerned over marginalization in Ukraine peace process

    Source: China State Council Information Office

    As U.S.-Ukraine and U.S.-Russia delegations held separate talks in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, on Sunday and Monday, growing concerns are emerging in Europe over its marginalization in the peace negotiations.

    Ukrainian Defense Minister Rustem Umerov described Sunday’s talks as “productive and focused,” noting that “key points including energy” were addressed. Umerov, who led the Ukrainian delegation, emphasized that Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky’s goal is “to secure a just and lasting peace” for Ukraine and Europe at large.

    On Monday, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said that Moscow and Washington share a “desire and readiness” to pursue a peaceful settlement. He noted that the talks covered various technical issues, including a potential resumption of the Black Sea Initiative.

    However, the absence of European representation at the talks has sparked concern among officials and analysts. From discussions on the Black Sea to broader peace efforts, some European observers warn that critical decisions are being made without European input.

    A Financial Times newsletter on Monday reported that officials from Romania and Bulgaria, two Black Sea nations, privately voiced concern over significant shifts in the region’s status quo, arguing such changes could impact their security without giving them a say.

    In an article published Monday, Salvador Sanchez Tapia, professor of conflict analysis and international security at Spain’s University of Navarra, wrote: “Europe has been left out of negotiating efforts … This disregard shows how little the continent matters to its North American partner.”

    He added that, lacking the capacity to support Ukraine as the United States once did, Europe may have little choice but to accept Washington’s approach while still attempting to make its voice heard.

    Former German diplomat Rudiger Ludeking echoed these concerns in an interview with German media, saying that since U.S. President Donald Trump’s return to office, diplomatic engagement between Washington and Moscow, as well as with Kiev, has intensified, largely bypassing NATO, the European Union (EU), and major European powers. He warned that “the EU could be the loser” in these negotiations.

    While some European voices express frustration, others view the talks as a potential step toward de-escalation.

    Balazs Orban, political director of Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban, welcomed the truce discussions, saying that changing circumstances would eventually compel Europe and policymakers in Brussels to adopt a more pragmatic stance. He warned that if the EU maintains its current position, it risks falling behind and becoming increasingly sidelined in the peace process.

    In an interview with local N1 Television on Monday, former Croatian Foreign Minister Miro Kovac expressed optimism over the White House’s mention of a possible ceasefire by Easter, saying such a development would allow people to “stop dying because it no longer makes sense.”

    MIL OSI China News –

    March 25, 2025
  • MIL-OSI: Satellogic Reports 2024 Financial Results and Business Update

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    Revenue up 28% to $12.9 million in 2024

    Redomicile to U.S. Nears Completion; Set to Accelerate Market Opportunities

    Completed $10 Million Private Placement

    Entered into $50 Million At-The-Market (ATM) Program

    NEW YORK, March 24, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Satellogic Inc. (NASDAQ: SATL), a leader in sub-meter resolution Earth Observation (“EO”) data collection, today provided a business update and financial results for the year ended December 31, 2024.

    “The second half of 2024 was highlighted by commercial milestones, including a pivotal agreement with Maxar Intelligence granting them exclusive rights to task Satellogic’s high-revisit constellation and use our cost-effective satellite imagery to support national security missions for the U.S. Government and select U.S. partners internationally.” said Satellogic CEO, Emiliano Kargieman.

    “Additionally, we were selected by NASA as one of eight recipients of NASA’s Commercial SmallSat Data Acquisition Program (CSDA) On-Ramp1 Multiple Award contract, with a maximum cumulative value of $476 million for all award winners. We have begun work on our first task order with NASA, an 18-month, seven figure award that will allow NASA researchers to utilize Satellogic data for critical earth science imagery analysis. This award highlights Satellogic’s commitment to delivering high-quality Earth observation data to advance scientific research and enhance life on Earth,” said Kargieman.

    “In 2024, we have made good progress in raising capital to further invest in the business. In December we announced the private placement of $10 million made by a single institutional investor and the filing of a $150 million shelf registration statement and the entry into a $50 million ATM program. We are pleased to have successfully completed this private placement, which positions us for continued growth as we advance our mission and continue our focus on our U.S. strategy, the National Security market, and our global Space Systems opportunities. The shelf registration statement and ATM program allow for future flexibility in our capital markets strategy by establishing a framework for potential future capital-raising opportunities to further strengthen our liquidity position,” concluded Kargieman.

    “We are also excited to disclose our intended domestication to the U.S. in December, which is expected to be completed by the end of the month,” commented Rick Dunn, Satellogic CFO. We believe the domestication will continue to lower our barriers to entry in the U.S. and allied markets and improve transparency for investors and customers.”

    “In terms of financial results, we ended 2024 with $22.5 million of cash on hand and continued to reduce our cash used in operations by $13.7 million, or 27.6%, compared to the year ended December 31, 2023. Our revenue increased 28% to $12.9 million, while our cost of sales, excluding depreciation expense, remained flat year-over-year. As a percentage of revenue, our cost of sales were 39% for the year ended December 31, 2024, a substantial improvement compared to 50% in the prior year.”

    “While our improving revenue performance and strategic progress are encouraging and confidence-building, we’ve continued the work started in 2023 to realign and streamline our business to better position us to capitalize on near-term growth opportunities. Specifically, we further reduced our workforce by 104 full time equivalents in the second quarter of 2024, incurring approximately $2.0 million in cumulative severance-related charges that have been paid out in 2024, and also identified additional operating cost reductions. The cumulative impact of these workforce reductions and operating expense savings is expected to result in approximately $9.6 million of annual savings. As a result of our previously announced successful Mark V deployment, the Company now has capacity to meet current customer needs and we expect to moderate our constellation growth initiatives going forward to pace with expected customer growth.”

    “We expect that our revenue for 2025 will largely be dependent on closing opportunities within our Space Systems line of business, which we anticipate will contribute considerable per unit cash flow and strong gross margin. As we look to 2025 and beyond, management continues to focus on near-term growth opportunities and moving the Company forward on a path to profitability,” concluded Dunn.

    Financial Results for the Year Ended December 31, 2024

    • Revenue for the year ended December 31, 2024, increased by $2.8 million, or 28%, to $12.9 million, as compared to revenue of $10.1 million for the year ended December 31, 2023. The increase was driven primarily by a $5 million increase in imagery ordered by new and existing Asset Monitoring customers, partially offset by a $2.2 million decrease in revenue generated from the Space Systems business line. Revenue for the year ended December 31, 2024 included $9.5 million attributable to our Asset Monitoring line of business, $1.8 million attributable to our Space Systems line of business, and $1.6 million attributable to our CaaS line of business compared to $4.5 million, $3.9 million and $1.6 million, respectively, in the prior year.
    • Cost of Sales, excluding depreciation expense, for the year ended December 31, 2024, remained flat at $5.0 million, as compared to $5.1 million for the year ended December 31, 2023. However, as a percentage of revenue, our cost of sales were 39% for the year ended December 31, 2024, as compared to 50% for the year ended December 31, 2023.
    • Selling, General and Administrative expenses for the year ended December 31, 2024, decreased by $2.0 million, or 6%, to $33.0 million, as compared to $35.0 million for the year ended December 31, 2023. This decrease was primarily driven by a decrease in salaries, wages, stock-based compensation and other benefits as a result of the Company’s workforce reductions in 2024 and other expense reductions resulting from continued cash control measures during 2024. Additionally, the decrease was driven by lower expense for estimated credit losses on accounts receivable and lower insurance costs due to rate improvements on certain policies. These decreases were partially offset by a $4.0 million increase in professional fees consisting mainly of the accrued, nonrecurring advisory fee pursuant to the subscription agreement entered into with Liberty in connection with going public in 2022 and professional fees related to the secured convertible notes.
    • Engineering expenses for the year ended June 30, 2024, decreased $7.8 million, or 35%, to $14.4 million for the year ended December 31, 2024 from $22.2 million for the year ended December 31, 2023. The decrease was driven primarily by a decrease in salaries, wages, and other benefits and stock-based compensation as a result of the Company’s workforce reductions in 2024 and other expense reductions resulting from continued cash control measures during 2024, in addition to fees resulting from the termination of our high-throughput plant lease in the Netherlands.
    • Net loss for the year ended December 31, 2024, increased by $55.2 million to $116.3 million, as compared to a net loss of $61.0 million for the year ended December 31, 2023. The increase was primarily driven by an increase in the change in fair value of financial instruments ($60.0 million) and other expenses ($3.2 million) offset by increases in revenue and decreases in operating costs.
    • Non-GAAP Adjusted EBITDA loss for the year ended December 31, 2024, improved by $10.4 million to $33.7 million, from an Adjusted EBITDA loss of $44.1 million for the year ended December 31, 2023, primarily due to year-over-year increases in revenue and decreases in operating expenses.
    • Cash was $22.5 million at December 31, 2024, compared to $23.5 million at December 31, 2023.
    • Net cash used in operating activities was $35.9 million for the year ended December 31, 2024, compared to $49.6 million for the year ended December 31, 2023. This decline in net cash used by operations was primarily due to workforce reduction and overall cost control initiatives.

    Use of Non-GAAP Financial Measures

    We monitor a number of financial performance and liquidity measures on a regular basis in order to track the progress of our business. Included in these financial performance and liquidity measures are the non-GAAP measures, Non-GAAP EBITDA and Non-GAAP Adjusted EBITDA. We believe these measures provide analysts, investors and management with helpful information regarding the underlying operating performance of our business, as they remove the impact of items that we believe are not reflective of our underlying operating performance. The non-GAAP measures are used by us to evaluate our core operating performance and liquidity on a comparable basis and to make strategic decisions. The non-GAAP measures also facilitate company-to-company operating performance comparisons by backing out potential differences caused by variations such as capital structures, taxation, capital expenditures and non-cash items (i.e., depreciation, embedded derivatives, debt extinguishment and stock-based compensation) which may vary for different companies for reasons unrelated to operating performance. However, different companies may define these terms differently and accordingly comparisons might not be accurate. Non-GAAP EBITDA and Non-GAAP Adjusted EBITDA are not intended to be a substitute for any GAAP financial measure. For the definitions of Non-GAAP EBITDA and Non-GAAP Adjusted EBITDA and reconciliations to the most directly comparable GAAP measure, net loss, see below.

    We define Non-GAAP EBITDA as net loss excluding interest, income taxes, depreciation and amortization. We did not incur amortization expense during the years ended December 31, 2024 and 2023.

    We define Non-GAAP Adjusted EBITDA as Non-GAAP EBITDA further adjusted for professional fees related to the secured convertible notes, other income (expense), net, changes in the fair value of financial instruments and stock-based compensation. Other income, net consists mainly of differences related to foreign exchange gains and losses as well as gains and losses on disposal of property and equipment.

    The following table presents a reconciliation of Non-GAAP EBITDA and Non-GAAP Adjusted EBITDA to its net loss for the periods indicated.

      Years Ended December 31,
    (in thousands of U.S. dollars) 2024   2023
    Net loss available to stockholders $ (116,272 )   $ (61,018 )
    Interest expense   71       51  
    Income tax expense   2,858       9,082  
    Depreciation expense   12,655       17,256  
    Non-GAAP EBITDA $ (100,688 )   $ (34,629 )
    Professional fees related to Secured Convertible Notes   2,444       —  
    Other expense (income), net   2,107       (9,271 )
    Change in fair value of financial instruments   60,071       (6,474 )
    Stock-based compensation   2,335       6,299  
    Non-GAAP Adjusted EBITDA $ (33,731 )   $ (44,075 )
                   

    About Satellogic

    Founded in 2010 by Emiliano Kargieman and Gerardo Richarte, Satellogic (NASDAQ: SATL) is the first vertically integrated geospatial company, driving real outcomes with planetary-scale insights. Satellogic is creating and continuously enhancing the first scalable, fully automated EO platform with the ability to remap the entire planet at both high-frequency and high-resolution, providing accessible and affordable solutions for customers.

    Satellogic’s mission is to democratize access to geospatial data through its information platform of high-resolution images to help solve the world’s most pressing problems including climate change, energy supply, and food security. Using its patented Earth imaging technology, Satellogic unlocks the power of EO to deliver high-quality, planetary insights at the lowest cost in the industry.

    With more than a decade of experience in space, Satellogic has proven technology and a strong track record of delivering satellites to orbit and high-resolution data to customers at the right price point.

    To learn more, please visit: http://www.satellogic.com

    Forward-Looking Statements

    This press release contains “forward-looking statements” within the meaning of the U.S. federal securities laws. The words “anticipate”, “believe”, “continue”, “could”, “estimate”, “expect”, “intends”, “may”, “might”, “plan”, “possible”, “potential”, “predict”, “project”, “should”, “would” and similar expressions may identify forward-looking statements, but the absence of these words does not mean that a statement is not forward-looking. These forward-looking statements are based on Satellogic’s current expectations and beliefs concerning future developments and their potential effects on Satellogic and include statements concerning Satellogic’s strategic realignment as a U.S. company, and the visibility and high growth opportunities it will provide in connection therewith. Forward-looking statements are predictions, projections and other statements about future events that are based on current expectations and assumptions and, as a result, are subject to risks and uncertainties. These statements are based on various assumptions, whether or not identified in this press release. These forward-looking statements are provided for illustrative purposes only and are not intended to serve, and must not be relied on by an investor as, a guarantee, an assurance, a prediction or a definitive statement of fact or probability. Actual events and circumstances are difficult or impossible to predict and will differ from assumptions. Many actual events and circumstances are beyond the control of Satellogic. Many factors could cause actual future events to differ materially from the forward-looking statements in this press release, including but not limited to: (i) our ability to generate revenue as expected, (ii) our ability to effectively market and sell our EO services and to convert contracted revenues and our pipeline of potential contracts into actual revenues, (iii) risks related to the secured convertible notes, (iv) the potential loss of one or more of our largest customers, (v) the considerable time and expense related to our sales efforts and the length and unpredictability of our sales cycle, (vi) risks and uncertainties associated with defense-related contracts, (vii) risk related to our pricing structure, (viii) our ability to scale production of our satellites as planned, (ix) unforeseen risks, challenges and uncertainties related to our expansion into new business lines, (x) our dependence on third parties to transport and launch our satellites into space, (xi) our reliance on third-party vendors and manufacturers to build and provide certain satellite components, products, or services, (xii) our dependence on ground station and cloud-based computing infrastructure operated by third pirates for value-added services, and any errors, disruption, performance problems, or failure in their or our operational infrastructure, (xiii) risk related to certain minimum service requirements in our customer contracts, (xiv) market acceptance of our EO services and our dependence upon our ability to keep pace with the latest technological advances, (xv) competition for EO services, (xvi) challenges with international operations or unexpected changes to the regulatory environment in certain markets, (xvii) unknown defects or errors in our products, (xviii) risk related to the capital-intensive nature of our business and our ability to raise adequate capital to finance our business strategies, (xix) substantial doubt about our ability to continue as a going concern, (xx) uncertainties beyond our control related to the production, launch, commissioning, and/or operation of our satellites and related ground systems, software and analytic technologies, (xxi) the failure of the market for EO services to achieve the growth potential we expect, (xxii) risks related to our satellites and related equipment becoming impaired, (xxiii) risks related to the failure of our satellites to operate as intended, (xxiv) production and launch delays, launch failures, and damage or destruction to our satellites during launch and (xxv) the impact of natural disasters, unusual or prolonged unfavorable weather conditions, epidemic outbreaks, terrorist acts and geopolitical events (including the ongoing conflicts between Russia and Ukraine, in the Gaza Strip and the Red Sea region) on our business and satellite launch schedules. The foregoing list of factors is not exhaustive. You should carefully consider the foregoing factors and the other risks and uncertainties described in the “Risk Factors” section of Satellogic’s Annual Report on Form 20-F and other documents filed or to be filed by Satellogic from time to time with the Securities and Exchange Commission. These filings identify and address other important risks and uncertainties that could cause actual events and results to differ materially from those contained in the forward-looking statements. Forward-looking statements speak only as of the date they are made. Readers are cautioned not to put undue reliance on forward-looking statements, and Satellogic assumes no obligation and does not intend to update or revise these forward-looking statements, whether as a result of new information, future events, or otherwise. Satellogic can give no assurance that it will achieve its expectations.

    Contacts

    Investor Relations:

    Ryan Driver, VP of Strategy & Corporate Development
    ryan.driver@satellogic.com

    Media Relations:

    Satellogic
    pr@satellogic.com

    SATELLOGIC INC.
    CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS AND COMPREHENSIVE LOSS
    UNAUDITED
     
      Year Ended December 31,
    (in thousands of U.S. dollars, except share and per share amounts) 2024   2023
    Revenue $ 12,870     $ 10,074  
    Costs and expenses      
    Cost of sales, exclusive of depreciation shown separately below   5,024       5,056  
    Selling, general and administrative   32,992       34,968  
    Engineering   14,405       22,197  
    Depreciation expense   12,655       17,256  
    Total costs and expenses   65,076       79,477  
    Operating loss   (52,206 )     (69,403 )
    Other (expense) income, net      
    Interest income, net   970       1,722  
    Change in fair value of financial instruments   (60,071 )     6,474  
    Other (expense) income, net   (2,107 )     9,271  
    Total other (expense) income, net   (61,208 )     17,467  
    Loss before income tax   (113,414 )     (51,936 )
    Income tax expense   (2,858 )     (9,082 )
    Net loss available to stockholders $ (116,272 )   $ (61,018 )
    Other comprehensive loss      
    Foreign currency translation gain (loss), net of tax   (538 )     279  
    Comprehensive loss $ (116,810 )   $ (60,739 )
           
    Basic net loss per share for the period attributable to holders of Common Stock $ (1.28 )   $ (0.68 )
    Basic weighted-average Common Stock outstanding   91,164,286       89,539,910  
    Diluted net loss per share for the period attributable to holders of Common Stock $ (1.28 )   $ (0.68 )
    Diluted weighted-average Common Stock outstanding   91,164,286       89,539,910  
                   
    SATELLOGIC INC.
    CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS
    UNAUDITED
     
      December 31,
    (in thousands of U.S. dollars, except per share amounts)  2024     2023 
    ASSETS      
    Current assets      
    Cash and cash equivalents $         22,493     $         23,476  
    Accounts receivable, net of allowance of $148 and $126, respectively                          1,464       901  
    Prepaid expenses and other current assets                           3,907                               2,173  
    Total current assets                         27,864                             26,550  
    Property and equipment, net                         27,228                             41,130  
    Operating lease right-of-use assets   877       3,195  
    Other non-current assets                           5,722                               5,507  
    Total assets $         61,691     $         76,382  
    LIABILITIES AND STOCKHOLDERS’ (DEFICIT) EQUITY      
    Current liabilities      
    Accounts payable $         3,754     $         7,935  
    Warrant liabilities                         11,511                               2,795  
    Earnout liabilities                           1,501       419  
    Operating lease liabilities   363       2,143  
    Contract liabilities                           5,871                               3,728  
    Accrued expenses and other liabilities                         11,621                               4,372  
    Total current liabilities                         34,621                             21,392  
    Secured Convertible Notes at fair value   79,070       —  
    Operating lease liabilities   516       1,789  
    Contract liabilities   —       1,000  
    Other non-current liabilities   516       526  
    Total liabilities                       114,723                             24,707  
    Commitments and contingencies      
    Stockholders’ (deficit) equity      
    Preferred stock, $0.0001 par value, 5,000,000 shares authorized, 0 shares issued and outstanding as of December 31, 2024 and December 31, 2023                                 —                                     —  
    Class A Common Stock, $0.0001 par value, 385,000,000 shares authorized, 83,000,501 shares issued and 82,432,678 shares outstanding as of December 31, 2024 and 77,289,166 shares issued and 76,721,343 shares outstanding as of December 31, 2023                                 —                                     —  
    Class B Common Stock, $0.0001 par value, 15,000,000 shares authorized, 13,582,642 shares issued and outstanding as of December 31, 2024 and December 31, 2023                                 —                                     —  
    Treasury stock, at cost, 567,823 shares as of December 31, 2024 and 567,823 shares as of December 31, 2023                         (8,603 )                           (8,603 )
    Additional paid-in capital                       356,247                           344,144  
    Accumulated other comprehensive loss   (571 )     (33 )
    Accumulated deficit   (400,105 )     (283,833 )
    Total stockholders’ (deficit) equity                       (53,032 )                           51,675  
    Total liabilities and stockholders’ (deficit) equity $         61,691     $         76,382  
                   
    SATELLOGIC INC.
    CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
    UNAUDITED
     
      Year Ended December 31,
    (in thousands of U.S. dollars) 2024   2023
    Cash flows from operating activities:      
    Net loss $ (116,272 )   $ (61,018 )
    Adjustments to reconcile net loss to net cash used in operating activities:      
    Depreciation expense   12,655       17,256  
    Debt issuance costs   2,397       —  
    Operating lease expense   1,515       2,751  
    Stock-based compensation   2,335       6,299  
    Change in fair value of financial instruments   60,071       (6,474 )
    Foreign exchange differences   (2,936 )     (10,933 )
    Loss on disposal of property and equipment   4,377       —  
    Expense for estimated credit losses on accounts receivable, net of recoveries   22       1,126  
    Non-cash change in contract liabilities   (1,323 )     1,188  
    Other, net   234       666  
    Changes in operating assets and liabilities:      
    Accounts receivable   (1,126 )     (385 )
    Prepaid expenses and other current assets   (1,666 )     2,114  
    Accounts payable   (2,356 )     1,533  
    Contract liabilities   2,532       598  
    Accrued expenses and other liabilities   7,200       (2,059 )
    Operating lease liabilities   (2,024 )     (2,233 )
    Cash paid for interest on Secured Convertible Notes   (1,525 )     —  
    Net cash used in operating activities   (35,890 )     (49,571 )
    Cash flows from investing activities:      
    Purchases of property and equipment   (5,038 )     (14,885 )
    Other   6       450  
    Net cash used in investing activities   (5,032 )     (14,435 )
    Cash flows from financing activities:      
    Proceeds from Secured Convertible Notes   30,000       —  
    Payments of debt issuance costs   (2,397 )     —  
    Tax withholding payments for vested equity-based compensation awards   (660 )     (458 )
    Proceeds from exercise of Public Warrants   1       —  
    Proceeds from PIPE Investment, net of transaction costs   9,600       —  
    Proceeds from exercise of stock options   911       375  
    Net cash provided by (used in) financing activities   37,455       (83 )
    Net (decrease) increase in cash, cash equivalents and restricted cash   (3,467 )     (64,089 )
    Effect of foreign exchange rate changes   2,546       10,900  
    Cash, cash equivalents and restricted cash – beginning of period   24,603       77,792  
    Cash, cash equivalents and restricted cash – end of period $ 23,682     $ 24,603  

    The MIL Network –

    March 25, 2025
  • MIL-OSI New Zealand: INVESTOR SUMMIT SPEECH

    Source: New Zealand Government

    Ka nui te mihi kia kotou, kia ora, and good morning everyone. 
    To those of you visiting us from overseas, can I extend a very special welcome to each and every one of you. 
    Welcome to New Zealand, welcome to the best country on planet Earth, and welcome to our stunning Auckland waterfront. 
    And to all those Kiwis I see in the room today, thank you for being here and showcasing some of the extraordinary businesses and talent that exists in our business community. 
    And it was a real pleasure to meet many of you informally last night, and my Ministers and I are really looking forward to spending much more time with you over the next two days. 
    I meant it before when I said this is the best country on planet Earth. 
    Because what makes New Zealand so very special and unique is our Kiwi Spirit which is exemplified in the qualities, character, and attitude of New Zealanders.  
    For us, it‘s about resilience and determination, ingenuity and innovation, adventure and exploration, creativity and practical problem-solving, humility and mateship, fairness, and a deep care for our land and community. 
    It’s no surprise that growing up in New Zealand, our heroes are Kiwi trailblazers and pioneers, people who have dared to push boundaries, challenge the status quo, and leave a lasting mark on the world.
    From our early Māori explorers navigating vast oceans guided by the stars, to modern-day adventurers like Sir Edmund Hillary conquering Everest.   
    To Ernest Rutherford, the father of nuclear physics, who split the atom and revolutionised our understanding of science. To Rocket Lab’s Peter Beck and his groundbreaking developments in rocket technology launching satellites into space. 
    And Kate Shepperd, who secured New Zealand women the right to vote – the very first country in the world to do so. 
    And our phenomenal athletes who show the world what determination and talent can achieve. Or the stunning world of The Lord of the Rings created by one of our most creative storytellers – Peter Jackson.
    We may be a small country, but time and again, we have proven that size is no barrier to greatness. From the peaks of Everest to the frontlines of social progress, from scientific breakthroughs to arts and sporting legends, Kiwis have led the way.
    And we’re living in an age when New Zealand has never been closer to the action – right in the middle of the booming Indo-Pacific with direct connections to Asia and North America. 
    With the weight of global economic activity shifting from the Atlantic to the Pacific and digital connections breaking down barriers, New Zealand has never been closer to the world.  
    But for all our spirit and hard work, we also know New Zealand can’t do it alone. 
    We’re a small country of around five million people like Ireland, Singapore, and Denmark. 
    Just as those countries have prospered by tapping into larger markets, building stronger international connections, and fostering trade and investment, New Zealand needs to do the same. 
    If we want our country to thrive, we need to work even harder to compete on the world stage – and, in particular, to unlock the commercial partnerships that will supercharge the next generation of growth in the New Zealand economy. 
    That means the Government will work more with Industry to deliver much of the infrastructure and projects that will be showcased over the next two days. 
    Many of your organisations will have extensive experience delivering outstanding world-class infrastructure to national and regional governments worldwide.
    I want New Zealand to seize every opportunity to partner with the private sector and deliver a fresh generation of infrastructure investment to unleash economic growth.  
    But it’s not just infrastructure. 
    I want to develop closer ties between outstanding New Zealanders and their companies based here, with investors and organisations based offshore.  
    I also want to unlock more partnerships between indigenous Iwi Māori organisations and commercial investors, whether they are based in Auckland or Abu Dhabi, Dunedin or Denver.  
    I want start-ups based in Christchurch and Hamilton fighting for seed capital in San Francisco and London – winning their share of global influence and success. 
    Breaking perceptions about the New Zealand economy is critical to that. 
    Yes, we have globally competitive dairy, film, and tourist industries, but our space industry is also operating at the cutting edge, ranking fourth in the world for launches behind the US, China, and Russia. 
    Over the next two days, you will hear more about our plan to unleash growth and ensure New Zealand reaches its full potential. 
    We want you to join us on that journey, and we will have several opportunities on display. 
    That will include the opportunity to deliver infrastructure in partnership with the Crown – both in the form of immediate opportunities and the pipeline of projects going forward. 
    It will include working with Iwi Māori organisations to grow their businesses as they make a multigenerational investment in their people. 
    It will include opportunities in a range of specific sectors where we believe New Zealand has a unique role to play and where we expect the Government to focus its efforts on growth. 
    In the very short term, we have made good economic progress in our first year in Government, although there’s still a long way to go. 
    New Zealand is now in the early stages of a cyclical economic recovery, with growth beginning to pick up and unemployment expected to peak around its current rate. 
    Inflation has fallen and now sits comfortably anchored within the Reserve Bank’s target band at 2.2%. 
    Annual tourism expenditure was up 23% last year, and services and manufacturing activity have returned to growth after extended periods of contraction. 
    Business confidence is at around its highest level in a decade. As confidence has risen, retail trade has picked up, and growth is expected to rise, hitting 3% in 2026. 
    So, there’s now cause for optimism in the New Zealand economy that the recovery is underway and better days lie ahead. 
    For policymakers here in New Zealand, that poses an opportunity – not just to watch the economic recovery, but to shape it. 
    Step-changing economic productivity, lifting incomes, creating jobs, and unleashing the investment New Zealand needs to become much more prosperous.  
    Which brings us to today. 
    I know the only way we will raise incomes, lift New Zealanders’ standard of living, and fund the quality public services we rely on is by unlocking more investment, more innovation, and more entrepreneurship.
    Having broken inflation last year, our collective focus has now turned to shaping the economic recovery – ensuring we take every possible step to lift New Zealand’s economic performance. 
    That renewed energy and effort forms the backdrop of this Summit. 
    My Government is working around the clock to make New Zealand an outstanding place to do business. 
    But before I highlight some of those reforms and my economic priorities as Prime Minister, I want to make a more fundamental point about New Zealand as an investment destination. 
    New Zealand has been and will continue to be a poster child for social and political stability in a more volatile and challenging world. 
    That reputation is long-standing, but in challenging times, it has come into sharper focus. 
    We stand up for our values and live by them, too. That means respecting civil liberties, private property and private life, and the democratic and social institutions that underpin them. 
    We consistently advocate for a rules-based international order that allows small countries like New Zealand to thrive. Free trade isn’t just an idea in New Zealand; it’s the bedrock of our prosperity. 
    For farmers and growers living in rural New Zealand, it has allowed a modern economic miracle: the opportunity to not just collectively operate one of the most efficient agricultural sectors in the world but to live in some of the most stunning parts of the world while they do it. 
    Finally, we might disagree sometimes – but we’re not disagreeable. Over the next two days, you will hear from various political leaders.
    You will hear from senior Ministers representing each of the three political parties in our Coalition Government, as well as Barbara Edmonds, the Labour Party’s Opposition Finance Spokesperson.  
    It’s pretty normal in New Zealand for political parties to disagree with each other – often loudly, and sometimes even with my own Coalition colleagues. 
    But I believe the broad political representation that is here demonstrates that most New Zealanders share the same motivations – higher incomes and more financial freedom, quality public services, and a long-standing belief that our best days lie ahead of us. 
    When you look at all the tension, volatility, and strife in the world today, I think that makes us pretty special, and a very attractive destination for anyone looking to take shelter from the global storm. 
    Political stability, however, is not an excuse for a lack of ambition. 
    You should be under no illusions about my commitment to the Government’s growth agenda and the reforms we are pushing through to unleash investment in the New Zealand economy. 
    Last month, Minister for Economic Growth Nicola Willis published our Government’s Going for Growth Agenda – we have copies for you here – which outlines a range of actions we are taking to get the New Zealand economy moving and realising its vast potential. 
    Each of those actions fits into one of five pillars we have identified as critical to lifting economic growth and improving New Zealanders’ standard of living:

    Developing talent,
    Encouraging innovation, science, and technology,
    Introducing competitive business settings,
    Promoting global trade and investment,
    And delivering infrastructure for growth. 

    Across each of those pillars, we have Ministers from across the Government working day and night to drive through reform – in transport,  tourism, aquaculture, construction, advanced aviation, mining, energy, agriculture, and horticulture. 
    Over the next two days, you will hear much more about our work programme in those areas that will play a critical role in the next phase of New Zealand’s growth story – with more information on a series of specific investable propositions available in the private sector. 
    Among that reform programme are some significant changes designed to achieve a profound step change in the New Zealand economy that I would like to touch on today. 
    For a start, we are clearing away decades of broken planning law – brick by brick. 
    We have introduced the Fast Track regime, which streamlines the consenting process for projects that are regionally and nationally significant. 
    In short, instead of seeking different permissions under different laws, under Fast Track, it’s all done in one place, with a faster process and fewer hurdles to getting underway. 
    That regime is now up and running, and I know a number of projects have already submitted applications since it became operational last month. 
    In short, if you want to build a wind farm, a highway, a quarry, hundreds of new homes, or any other regionally or nationally significant projects, we are busting down the doors to make it happen faster and cheaper. 
    149 projects have already been listed in legislation, but nothing prevents new projects from applying for referral into the scheme. 
    And it doesn’t stop with Fast Track. 
    Further planning reforms are also on the way, including a total replacement of the Resource Management Act. 
    We are also eliminating the barriers to more significant investment in energy and generation to unleash abundant, affordable energy. 
    The impact of unaffordable and unreliable energy on economic growth has been brought into the spotlight in recent years following the Russian invasion of Ukraine. 
    Industries in Europe that had historically relied on access to low-cost natural gas came under tremendous strain, putting pressure on growth and household incomes. 
    In New Zealand, we are lucky that 85% of electricity generation is already renewable, thanks to decades of investment in hydro, wind, solar, and geothermal.  
    But we can’t risk falling short in the years to come. So, as a Government, we are tearing down the barriers to fresh energy investment. That means introducing more permissive rules for renewables.
    But it also means ending restrictions on offshore oil and gas exploration – and providing certainty for market participants by confidently saying that gas has to be part of New Zealand’s energy mix going forward.  
    At the same time, we are making it easier to invest in New Zealand from offshore.  
    That started last year, with fresh directives to our Overseas Investment Office, which slashed processing times and made applications more predictable. 
    Today, an application for offshore investment is approved within 18 days on average, compared to 28 days prior to those changes.
    And two weeks ago, we announced upcoming changes to legislation designed to further improve the timeliness and reliability of our overseas investment regime. 
    We also announced just last month that, from April 1 this year, individuals who invest at least $5 million in New Zealand will be eligible for an Active Investor Visa, with a pathway to residency after three years. 
    I know that for many of you from offshore in this room, that will be positive news. But as a New Zealander, I have to say it’s an even bigger deal for the sharp, ambitious Kiwis here and all around the country, who are hungry for capital and hungry to grow. 
    We know the impact foreign investment has on local businesses. It’s not just the capital investment; it’s the skills, connections, and linkages into new markets. 
    That translates into higher wages, more jobs, more money in Kiwi wallets, and more resilient businesses that make an even greater contribution in the community. 
    We need more of it, especially for a small country hungry to grow like New Zealand, which is why I have invited many of you here today. 
    I believe New Zealand’s best days are ahead of us—and we can make them happen if we get serious about partnering with commercial expertise to solve some of our biggest economic challenges and seize on the huge economic opportunities ahead of us. 
    Helping to end New Zealand’s infrastructure deficit through private sector partnership.
    Fattening out our capital markets and opening up new sectors for growth.
    Strengthening our connections to the world, enhancing technology, lifting productivity, and opening new markets for our products and services. 
    Over the next two days, you will hear from a range of leaders—cabinet Ministers, business leaders, and Iwi Māori leaders—who I know are committed to responding to our challenges and opportunities. 
    There will also be plenty of time across both days for closer interactions and to discuss the opportunities and challenges that you are confronting in your own businesses. 
    While you’re here, please also enjoy our hospitality and culture. We’re not just here to do business—we’re here to build relationships and make the case for New Zealand as an outstanding country to invest in, to visit, and to establish roots in. 
    So once again, and on behalf of the New Zealand Government and the New Zealand people, welcome to this year’s Summit. 
    I’m excited to get stuck in – and I can’t wait to hear more from you over the next two days about your approach to business and the difference you could make for growth, investment, jobs, and opportunity for us here in New Zealand. 
    Thank you. 

    MIL OSI New Zealand News –

    March 25, 2025
  • MIL-OSI Europe: REPORT on the proposal for a decision of the European Parliament and of the Council on providing macro-financial assistance to the Arab Republic of Egypt – A10-0037/2025

    Source: European Parliament

    DRAFT EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT LEGISLATIVE RESOLUTION

    on the proposal for a decision of the European Parliament and of the Council on providing macro-financial assistance to the Arab Republic of Egypt

    (COM(2024)0461 – C10‑0009/2024 – 2024/0071(COD))

    (Ordinary legislative procedure: first reading)

    The European Parliament,

    – having regard to the Commission proposal to Parliament and the Council (COM(2024)0461),

    – having regard to Article 294(2) and Article 212 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, pursuant to which the Commission submitted the proposal to Parliament (C10‑0009/2024),

    – having regard to Article 294(3) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

    – having regard to the budgetary assessment by the Committee on Budgets,

    – having regard to Rule 60 of its Rules of Procedure,

    – having regard to the opinion of the Committee on Foreign Affairs,

    – having regard to the report of the Committee on International Trade (A10-0037/2025),

    1. Adopts its position at first reading hereinafter set out;

    2. Calls on the Commission to refer the matter to Parliament again if it replaces, substantially amends or intends to substantially amend its proposal;

    3. Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council, the Commission and the national parliaments.

     

     

    Amendment  1

    Proposal for a decision

    Recital 1 a (new)

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

     

    (1a) This Decision has implications for the Union budget. Accordingly, the European Parliament’s Committee on Budgets adopted a budgetary assessment, which forms an integral part of Parliament’s mandate for negotiations.

    Amendment  2

    Proposal for a decision

    Recital 2 a (new)

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

     

    (2a) On 17 March 2024, Egypt and the European Union jointly decided to upgrade their relations to a strategic and comprehensive partnership, based on the values of equity and mutual respect and trust in order to strengthen their common stability, peace and prosperity.

    Amendment  3

     

    Proposal for a decision

    Recital 3

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    (3) In line with the Partnership Priorities, the EU and Egypt are committed to ensuring accountability, the rule of law, the full respect of human rights, fundamental freedoms, promoting democracy, gender equality and equal opportunities as constitutional rights of all their citizens. These commitments contribute to the advancement of the partnership and to Egypt’s sustainable development and stability. The increased and constructive engagement between the EU and Egypt in the last period has opened the path to more meaningful dialogue on human rights related issues. The subcommittee on Political Matters, Human Rights and Democracy, International and Regional issues of December 2022 and the Association Committee of May 2023 provided the institutional platforms to exchange on an array of human rights issues, which the EU would like to continue and build on. The improvement of the human rights situation in Egypt will have a positive impact on EU-Egypt relations.

    (3) In line with the Partnership Priorities, the EU and Egypt are committed to ensuring accountability, the rule of law, the full respect of human rights, fundamental freedoms, promoting democracy, gender equality and equal opportunities as constitutional rights of all their citizens. These commitments contribute to the advancement of the partnership and to Egypt’s sustainable development, good governance and socio-economic stability. The increased and constructive engagement between the EU and Egypt in the last period has opened the path to more meaningful dialogue on human rights related issues. The subcommittee on Political Matters, Human Rights and Democracy, International and Regional issues of December 2022 and the Association Committee of May 2023 provided the institutional platforms to exchange on an array of human rights issues, which the EU would like to continue and build on. The steady improvement of the human rights situation and women’s rights and fundamental freedoms due to an active, coherent and proactive policy in that area in Egypt will have a positive impact on EU-Egypt relations.

    Amendment  4

    Proposal for a decision

    Recital 3 a (new)

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

     

    (3a) Egypt’s economic and financial situation has been marked by several macroeconomic adjustment programmes implemented under the aegis of the IMF in exchange for credit facilities (USD 12 billion from 2016 to 2019 and USD 3 billion in 2022, rising to USD 8 billion in March 2024);

    Amendment  5

     

    Proposal for a decision

    Recital 5

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    (5) The EU recognises Egypt’s key role for regional security and stability. Terrorism, organised crime and conflicts are common threats against our security and the social fabric of nations across both sides of the Mediterranean. Therefore, the EU and Egypt have a common interest in strengthening cooperation highlighted in the Partnership Priorities, in full compliance with international law, including human rights and international humanitarian law.

    (5) The EU recognises Egypt’s key role for regional security and stability. Terrorism, organised crime, such as human trafficking, irregular migration, and conflicts, are common threats against our security and the social fabric of nations across both sides of the Mediterranean. Similarly, energy is also one of the most pressing challenges facing countries on both sides of the Mediterranean. The Energy Cooperation between the Union and Egypt in the Eastern Mediterranean could not only offer a source of economic prosperity for the region but also strengthen energy security for the Union by diversifying energy supplies and encouraging regional collaboration. In that respect, the East Mediterranean Gas Forum serves as a platform of positive regional cooperation. Therefore, the EU and Egypt have a common interest in strengthening cooperation highlighted in the Partnership Priorities, in full compliance with international law, including the International Law of the Sea, human rights and international humanitarian law.

    Amendment  6

     

    Proposal for a decision

    Recital 6

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    (6) Recalling the geo-political challenges, such as the consequences of Hamas terrorist attacks across Israel on 7 October 2023 as well as the conflict in Sudan, and the strategic importance of Egypt as the largest country in the region and a pillar of stability for the whole Middle East, the Union is embarking on concluding a Strategic and Comprehensive partnership with Egypt as outlined in the Joint Declaration.

    (6) Recalling the global and regional geo-political challenges, such as the humanitarian crisis in Gaza, resulting from the aftermath of the Hamas terrorist attacks across Israel on 7 October 2023, the escalating tensions in the Horn of Africa and the safety of navigation in the Red Sea and the Suez Canal, as well as migratory pressure from the conflict in Sudan, uncertainties in Syria, the instability in Libya, Egypt’s responsibilities as a host to large numbers of refugees and migrants and the strategic importance of Egypt as the largest country in the region and a pillar of stability for the whole Middle East, the Union has embarked on a Strategic and Comprehensive partnership with Egypt as outlined in the Joint Declaration.

    Amendment  7

     

    Proposal for a decision

    Recital 7

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    (7) The objective of the Strategic and Comprehensive Partnership with Egypt is to elevate the EU-Egypt political relations to a strategic partnership and enable Egypt to fulfil its key role of providing stability in the region. The partnership aims to contribute to support Egypt’s macroeconomic resilience and enable the implementation of ambitious socio-economic reforms in a manner that complements and reinforces the reform process foreseen under the IMF programme for Egypt. As outlined in the Joint Declaration, the partnership will address a wide set of policy measures clustered across six pillars of intervention, namely: political relations; economic stability; investment and trade; migration; security and law enforcement cooperation; demography and human capital.

    (7) The objective of the Strategic and Comprehensive Partnership with Egypt is to elevate the EU-Egypt political relations to a strategic partnership and enable Egypt to fulfil its key role of providing stability in the region, the Middle East and North Africa. The partnership aims to contribute to support Egypt’s macroeconomic resilience and enable the implementation of ambitious socio-economic reforms in a manner that complements and reinforces the reform process foreseen under the IMF programme for Egypt. As outlined in the Joint Declaration, the partnership will address a wide set of policy measures clustered across six pillars of intervention, namely: political relations; economic stability; investment and trade; irregular migration and mobility in respect of human rights; security and law enforcement cooperation; demography and human capital. Such Strategic and Comprehensive Partnership should be developed in line with initiatives at Union and Member State level such as the Global Gateway and the Mattei Plan for Africa.

    Amendment  8

     

    Proposal for a decision

    Recital 8

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    (8) Underpinning the partnership will be a financial package of EUR 7.4 billion consisting of short- and longer-term support for the necessary macro-fiscal and socio-economic reform agenda, as well as increased amounts available to support investments in Egypt and targeted support for the implementation of the different strategic priorities. Part of the support package is the EU MFA package of up to EUR 5 billion in loans, composed of two MFA operations, one short-term for up to EUR 1 billion and a regular, more medium-term one for up to EUR 4 billion, financial instruments, such as guarantees and blending instruments, aimed at mobilising public and private investments with the objective of generating substantial new investments. This will be complemented by programmes to support specific priorities under the Strategic and Comprehensive Partnership through individual projects and technical assistance implemented under the Neighbourhood, Development and International Cooperation Instrument2 .

    (8) Underpinning the partnership is a financial package of EUR 7.4 billion consisting of short- and longer-term support for the necessary macro-fiscal and socio-economic reform agenda, as well as increased amounts available to support investments in Egypt and targeted support for the implementation of the different strategic priorities, particularly in terms of irregular migration and renewable energy. Part of the support package is the EU MFA package of up to EUR 5 billion in concessional loans, composed of two MFA operations, one short-term for up to EUR 1 billion and a regular, more medium-term one for up to EUR 4 billion, financial instruments, such as guarantees and blending instruments, aimed at mobilising public and private investments that benefit the majority of Egyptians with the objective of generating substantial new investments. This will be complemented by programmes to support specific priorities under the Strategic and Comprehensive Partnership through individual projects and technical assistance implemented under the Neighbourhood, Development and International Cooperation Instrument2.

    __________________

    __________________

    2 Established by Regulation (EU) 2021/947 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 9 June 2021 establishing the Neighbourhood, Development and International Cooperation Instrument – Global Europe, amending and repealing Decision No 466/2014/EU and repealing Regulation (EU) 2017/1601 and Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 480/2009 (OJ L 209, 14.6.2021, p. 1)

    2 Established by Regulation (EU) 2021/947 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 9 June 2021 establishing the Neighbourhood, Development and International Cooperation Instrument – Global Europe, amending and repealing Decision No 466/2014/EU and repealing Regulation (EU) 2017/1601 and Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 480/2009 (OJ L 209, 14.6.2021, p. 1)

    Amendment  9

     

    Proposal for a decision

    Recital 9

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    (9) Egypt’s macro-fiscal situation has faced significant challenges and deteriorated substantially over recent months, as external pressures have intensified and public debt has increased further, with substantial downside risks to the economic outlook persisting. The repercussions of Russia’s war on Ukraine and of Hamas terrorist attacks against Israel have led to protracted capital outflows and lower foreign currency receipts, notably due to sharply falling income from tourism and Suez Canal proceeds. This is particularly challenging amid Egypt’s difficult fiscal situation, which is characterised by constant fiscal deficits and high and growing debt to GDP ratios.

    (9) Egypt’s macro-fiscal situation has faced significant challenges and deteriorated substantially over recent months, as external pressures have intensified and public debt has increased further, with substantial downside risks to the economic outlook persisting. The repercussions of Russia’s war on Ukraine and the geopolitical tensions and conflicts in the Middle East have led to protracted capital outflows and lower foreign currency receipts, notably due to sharply falling income from tourism, Suez Canal proceeds and gas production and loss of confidence among foreign investors. This is particularly challenging amid Egypt’s difficult fiscal situation, which is characterised by constant fiscal deficits and high and growing debt to GDP ratios. Despite that difficult external context, in 2024 Egypt was able to implement reforms, such as the unification of exchange rates and making progress in tightening monetary policy, to help preserve macroeconomic stability.

    Amendment  10

    Proposal for a decision

    Recital 12

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    (12) Egypt re-engaged with the IMF in early 2024 and reached a staff-level agreement on 6 March 2024 on a revamped Extended Fund Facility programme scaled up to USD 8 billion. The new programme is expected to be adopted by IMF Executive Board decision in March 2024 and aims to address the areas of 1) credible exchange rate flexibility, 2) sustainable tightening of monetary policy, 3) fiscal consolidation to preserve debt sustainability, 4) a new framework to rein in infrastructure spending, 5) providing adequate levels of social spending to protect vulnerable groups, and 6) implementation of the State Ownership Policy and reforms to level the playing field. Together with the staff level agreement’s signature, Egypt also enacted a flexibilisation of the exchange rate, and raised the central bank’s key policy rate by a sizeable 600 basis points, in line with the IMF programme’s priorities.

    (12) Egypt re-engaged with the IMF in early 2024 and reached a staff-level agreement on 6 March 2024 on a revamped Extended Fund Facility programme scaled up to USD 8 billion. Negotiations at expert level on the fourth revision of Egypt’s economic reform programme were concluded in December 2024. The new programme aims to address the areas of 1) credible exchange rate flexibility, 2) sustainable tightening of monetary policy, 3) fiscal consolidation to preserve debt sustainability, 4) a new framework to rein in infrastructure spending, 5) providing adequate levels of social spending to protect vulnerable groups from the cost of living and energy price rises, and 6) implementation of the State Ownership Policy and reforms to level the playing field by promoting the development of the private sector in the economy. Together with the staff level agreement’s signature, Egypt also enacted a flexibilisation of the exchange rate, and raised the central bank’s key policy rate by a sizeable 600 basis points, in line with the IMF programme’s priorities.

    Amendment  11

    Proposal for a decision

    Recital 16

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    (16) Given that there is still a significant residual external financing gap in Egypt’s balance of payments over and above the resources provided by the IMF and other multilateral institutions, the Union macro-financial assistance to be provided to Egypt is, under the current exceptional circumstances, considered to be an appropriate response to Egypt’s request for support to the economic stabilisation, in conjunction with the IMF programme. The Union’s macro-financial assistance package, including the MFA of up to EUR 4 billion under this proposal, would support the economic stabilisation and the structural reform agenda of Egypt, supplementing resources made available under the IMF’s financial arrangement.

    (16) Given that there is still a significant residual external financing gap in Egypt’s balance of payments over and above the resources provided by the IMF and other multilateral institutions and regional partners, the Union macro-financial assistance to be provided to Egypt is, under the current exceptional circumstances, considered to be an appropriate response to Egypt’s request for support to the economic stabilisation, in conjunction with the IMF programme. The Union’s macro-financial assistance package, including the MFA of up to EUR 4 billion under this proposal, would support the economic stabilisation and the structural reform agenda of Egypt, supplementing resources made available under the IMF’s financial arrangement.

    Amendment  12

     

    Proposal for a decision

    Recital 19

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    (19) The Commission should ensure that the Union’s macro-financial assistance is legally and substantially in line with the key principles, objectives and measures taken within the different areas of external action and with other relevant Union policies.

    (19) The Commission should ensure that the Union’s macro-financial assistance is legally and substantially in line with the key principles, objectives and measures taken within the different areas of external action and with other relevant Union policies, including those relating to democracy, human rights and rule of law, in line with Article 2 of the EU-Egypt Association Agreement.

    Amendment  13

     

    Proposal for a decision

    Recital 22

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    (22) A pre-condition for granting the Union’s macro-financial assistance to Egypt should be that the country continues to make concrete and credible steps towards respecting effective democratic mechanisms – including a multi-party parliamentary system – and the rule of law, and guarantees respect for human rights. In addition, the specific objectives of the Union’s macro-financial assistance should strengthen the efficiency, transparency and accountability of the public finance management systems, the governance and supervision of the financial sector in Egypt and promote structural reforms aimed at supporting sustainable and inclusive growth, decent employment creation and fiscal consolidation. The fulfillment of the pre-condition and the achievement of the specific objectives should be regularly monitored by the Commission services and the European External Action Service.

    (22) Macro-financial assistance should remain an economic instrument. However, a pre-condition for granting the Union’s macro-financial assistance to Egypt should be that the country continues to make concrete, credible and tangible steps towards respecting and strengthening effective democratic mechanisms – including a multi-party parliamentary system – and the rule of law, and guaranteeing respect for human rights. In addition, the specific objectives of the Union’s macro-financial assistance should strengthen the efficiency, transparency and accountability of the public finance management systems, the governance and supervision of the financial sector in Egypt and promote structural reforms aimed at supporting sustainable and inclusive growth, decent employment creation and fiscal consolidation. The fulfillment of the pre-condition and the achievement of the specific objectives should be regularly monitored by the Commission services and the European External Action Service.

    Amendment  14

    Proposal for a decision

    Recital 23

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    (23) In order to ensure that the Union’s financial interests linked to the Union’s macro-financial assistance are protected efficiently, Egypt should take appropriate measures relating to the prevention of, and fight against, fraud, corruption and any other irregularities linked to the assistance. In addition, a loan agreement to be concluded between the Commission and the Egyptian authorities should contain provisions authorising European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF) to carry out investigations, including on-the-spot checks and inspections, in accordance with the provisions and procedures laid down in Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 883/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council3 and Council Regulation (Euratom, EC) No 2185/964 , the Commission and the Court of Auditors to carry out audits and the European Public Prosecutor’s Office to exercise its competences with regard to the provision of the Union’s macro-financial assistance during and after its availability period.

    (23) It is essential to underline that Egypt has to meet the necessary economic pre-condition for eligibility. Egypt has demonstrated its solvency and financial stability, which have been verified by the Commission. However, in order to ensure that the Union’s financial interests linked to the Union’s macro-financial assistance are protected efficiently. Egypt should take appropriate measures relating to the prevention of, and fight against, fraud, corruption and any other irregularities linked to the assistance. In addition, a loan agreement to be concluded between the Commission and the Egyptian authorities should contain provisions authorising European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF) to carry out investigations, including on-the-spot checks and inspections, in accordance with the provisions and procedures laid down in Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 883/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council3 and Council Regulation (Euratom, EC) No 2185/964 , the Commission and the Court of Auditors to carry out audits and the European Public Prosecutor’s Office to exercise its competences with regard to the provision of the Union’s macro-financial assistance during and after its availability period.

    __________________

    __________________

    3 Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 883/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 September 2013 concerning investigations conducted by the European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF) and repealing Regulation (EC) No 1073/1999 of the European Parliament and of the Council and Council Regulation (Euratom) No 1074/1999 (OJ L 248, 18.9.2013, p. 1).

    3 Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 883/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 September 2013 concerning investigations conducted by the European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF) and repealing Regulation (EC) No 1073/1999 of the European Parliament and of the Council and Council Regulation (Euratom) No 1074/1999 (OJ L 248, 18.9.2013, p. 1).

    4 Council Regulation (Euratom, EC) No 2185/96 of 11 November 1996 concerning on-the-spot checks and inspections carried out by the Commission in order to protect the European Communities’ financial interests against fraud and other irregularities (OJ L 292, 15.11.1996, p. 2).

    4 Council Regulation (Euratom, EC) No 2185/96 of 11 November 1996 concerning on-the-spot checks and inspections carried out by the Commission in order to protect the European Communities’ financial interests against fraud and other irregularities (OJ L 292, 15.11.1996, p. 2).

    Amendment  15

     

    Proposal for a decision

    Recital 26

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    (26) The Union’s macro-financial assistance should be managed by the Commission. In order to ensure that the European Parliament and the Council are able to follow the implementation of this Decision, the Commission should regularly inform them of developments relating to the assistance and provide them with relevant documents.

    (26) The Union’s macro-financial assistance should be managed by the Commission. In order to ensure that the European Parliament and the Council are able to follow the implementation of this Decision, the Commission should regularly inform them with an annual report of developments relating to the assistance and on respect for effective democratic mechanisms, as per the pre-conditions referred to in this Decision, and provide them with relevant documents.

    Amendment  16

     

    Proposal for a decision

    Recital 28

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    (28) The Union’s macro-financial assistance should be subject to economic policy conditions, to be laid down in a Memorandum of Understanding. In order to ensure uniform conditions of implementation and for reasons of efficiency, the Commission should be empowered to negotiate such conditions with the Egyptian authorities under the supervision of the committee of representatives of the Member States in accordance with Regulation (EU) No 182/2011. Under that Regulation, the advisory procedure should, as a general rule, apply in all cases other than as provided for in that Regulation. Considering the potentially important impact of assistance of more than EUR 90 million, it is appropriate that the examination procedure be used for operations above that threshold. Considering the amount of the Union’s macro-financial assistance to Egypt, the examination procedure should apply to the adoption of the Memorandum of Understanding, and to any reduction, suspension or cancellation of the assistance.

    (28) The Union’s macro-financial assistance should be subject to sustainable economic policy reforms, to be laid down in a Memorandum of Understanding. In order to ensure uniform conditions of implementation and for reasons of efficiency, the Commission should be empowered to negotiate such conditions with the Egyptian authorities under the supervision of the committee of representatives of the Member States in accordance with Regulation (EU) No 182/2011. Under that Regulation, the advisory procedure should, as a general rule, apply in all cases other than as provided for in that Regulation. Considering the potentially important impact of assistance of more than EUR 90 million, it is appropriate that the examination procedure be used for operations above that threshold. Considering the amount of the Union’s macro-financial assistance to Egypt, the examination procedure should apply to the adoption of the Memorandum of Understanding, and to any reduction, suspension or cancellation of the assistance.

    Amendment  17

     

    Proposal for a decision

    Article 1 – paragraph 1

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    1. The Union shall make macro-financial assistance of a maximum amount of up to EUR 4 billion available to Egypt (“the Union’s macro-financial assistance”), with a view to supporting Egypt’s economic stabilisation and a substantive reform agenda. The release of the Union’s macro-financial assistance is subject to the approval of the Union budget for the relevant year by the European Parliament and the Council. The assistance shall contribute to covering Egypt’s balance of payments needs as identified in the IMF programme.

    1. The Union shall make macro-financial assistance in the form of concessional loans of a maximum amount of up to EUR 4 billion available to Egypt (“the Union’s macro-financial assistance”), with a view to supporting Egypt’s socio-economic stabilisation and a substantive structural reform agenda, as well as its responsibility to mitigate the effects of irregular migration and managing migratory flows. The release of the Union’s macro-financial assistance is subject to the approval of the Union budget for the relevant year by the European Parliament and the Council. The assistance shall contribute to covering Egypt’s balance of payments needs as identified in the IMF programme.

    Amendment  18

    Proposal for a decision

    Article 1 – paragraph 3 a (new)

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

     

    3a. Macro-financial assistance may, as far as possible, contribute to the Union’s growth and economic resilience.

    Amendment  19

     

    Proposal for a decision

    Article 2 – paragraph 1

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    1. A pre-condition for granting the Union’s macro-financial assistance shall be that Egypt continues to make concrete and credible steps towards respecting effective democratic mechanisms – including a multi-party parliamentary system – and the rule of law, and guarantees respect for human rights.

    1. A pre-condition for granting the Union’s macro-financial assistance shall be that Egypt continues to make concrete and credible steps towards respecting and strengthening effective democratic mechanisms – including a multi-party parliamentary system – and the rule of law, and continues to make efforts in order to guarantee respect for human rights.

    Amendment  20

     

    Proposal for a decision

    Article 2 – paragraph 2

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    2. The Commission services and the European External Action Service shall monitor the fulfilment of this pre-condition throughout the life-cycle of the Union’s macro-financial assistance.

    2. The Commission services and the European External Action Service shall monitor the fulfilment of this pre-condition throughout the life-cycle of the Union’s macro-financial assistance and report, regularly and in writing, to the European Parliament and the Council on the fulfilment of the economic policy and financial conditions set out in the Memorandum of Understanding.

    Amendment  21

    Proposal for a decision

    Article 3 – paragraph 1

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    1. The Commission, in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 7(2), shall agree with the Egyptian authorities on clearly defined economic policy and financial conditions, focusing on structural reforms and sound public finances, to which the Union’s macro-financial assistance is to be subject, to be laid down in a Memorandum of Understanding (“the Memorandum of Understanding”) which shall include a timeframe for the achievement of those reforms. The economic policy and financial conditions set out in the Memorandum of Understanding shall be consistent with the agreements or understandings referred to in Article 1(3), including the macroeconomic adjustment and structural reform programmes implemented by Egypt with the support of the IMF.

    1. The Commission, in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 7(2), shall agree with the Egyptian authorities on clearly defined economic policy and financial conditions, focusing on structural reforms, such as the new criminal procedure reform, and sound public finances, to which the Union’s macro-financial assistance is to be subject, to be laid down in a Memorandum of Understanding (“the Memorandum of Understanding”) which shall include a timeframe for the achievement of those reforms. The economic policy and financial conditions set out in the Memorandum of Understanding shall be consistent with the agreements or understandings referred to in Article 1(3), including the macroeconomic adjustment and structural reform programmes implemented by Egypt with the support of the IMF.

    Amendment  22

     

    Proposal for a decision

    Article 3 – paragraph 2

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    2. The conditions referred to in paragraph 1 shall aim, in particular, at enhancing the efficiency, transparency and accountability of the public finance management systems in Egypt, including for the use of the Union’s macro-financial assistance. Progress in mutual market opening, the development of rules-based and fair trade, and other priorities in the context of the Union’s external policy shall also be duly taken into account when designing the policy measures. Progress in attaining those objectives shall be regularly monitored by the Commission.

    2. The economic policy and financial conditions referred to in paragraph 1 shall aim, in particular, at enhancing the efficiency, transparency and accountability of the public finance management systems in Egypt, including for the use of the Union’s macro-financial assistance. Progress in mutual market opening, including for SMEs, the development of rules-based and fair trade, sustainable development, good governance and other priorities in the context of the Union’s external policy shall also be duly taken into account when designing the policy measures. Progress in attaining those objectives shall be regularly monitored by the Commission.

    Amendment  23

    Proposal for a decision

    Article 4 – paragraph 4

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    4. Where the conditions in paragraph 3 are not met, the Commission shall temporarily suspend or cancel the disbursement of the Union’s macro-financial assistance. In such cases, it shall inform the European Parliament and the Council of the reasons for that suspension or cancellation.

    4. Where the conditions in paragraph 3 are not met, the Commission shall temporarily suspend or cancel the disbursement of the Union’s macro-financial assistance. In such cases, it shall inform the European Parliament and the Council without delay of the reasons for that suspension or cancellation.

    Amendment  24

    Proposal for a decision

    Article 5 – paragraph 1

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    (1) In order to finance the support under the macro-financial assistance in the form of loans, the Commission shall be empowered, on behalf of the Union, to borrow the necessary funds on the capital markets or from financial institutions in accordance with Article 220a of Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2018/1046.

    1. In order to finance the support under the macro-financial assistance in the form of loans, the Commission shall be empowered, on behalf of the Union, to borrow the necessary funds on the capital markets or from financial institutions in accordance with Article 223 of Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2024/2509.

     

    Amendment  25

    Proposal for a decision

    Article 5 – paragraph 2

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    (2) The Commission shall enter into a loan agreement with Egypt in respect of the amount referred to in Article 1. The detailed terms of the support under the MFA in the form of loans shall be laid down in a loan agreement in accordance with Article 220 of the Financial Regulation, to be concluded between the Commission and the Egyptian authorities. The loan agreement shall lay down the availability period and the detailed terms of the support under the macro-financial assistance in the form of loans, including in relation to the internal control systems. The loans shall be granted at terms that allow Egypt to repay the loan over a long period, including a possible grace period. The maximum duration of the loans shall be 35 years. The Commission shall inform the European Parliament and the Council of developments in the operations referred to in paragraph 3.

    2. The Commission shall enter into a loan agreement with Egypt in respect of the amount referred to in Article 1. The detailed terms of the support under the MFA in the form of loans shall be laid down in a loan agreement in accordance with Article 223 of the Financial Regulation, to be concluded between the Commission and the Egyptian authorities. The loan agreement shall lay down the availability period and the detailed terms of the support under the macro-financial assistance in the form of loans, including in relation to the internal control systems. Egypt shall reimburse the loan, which shall be granted at terms that allow its repayment over a long period, including, after a formal notification to the European Parliament and the Council, a possible grace period. The maximum duration of the loans shall be 35 years. The Commission shall inform the European Parliament and the Council of developments in the operations referred to in paragraph 3.

    Amendment  26

    Proposal for a decision

    Article 6 – paragraph 1

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    1. The Union’s macro-financial assistance shall be implemented in accordance with Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 2018/1046 of the European Parliament and of the Council7.

    1. The Union’s macro-financial assistance shall be implemented in accordance with Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 2024/2509 of the European Parliament and of the Council7.

    _________________

    _________________

    7 Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 2018/1046 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 July 2018 on the financial rules applicable to the general budget of the Union and repealing Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 966/2012 (OJ L 193, 30.07.2018, p. 1).

    7 Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2024/2509 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 September 2024 on the financial rules applicable to the general budget of the Union (OJ L, 2024/2509, 26.9.2024, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2024/2509/oj).

    Amendment  27

    Proposal for a decision

    Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point b

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    (b) assess the economic situation and prospects of Egypt, as well as progress made in implementing the policy measures referred to in Article 3(1);

    (b) assess the economic situation and prospects of Egypt, as well as progress made in implementing the policy measures referred to in Article 2 and Article 3(1);

    Amendment  28

    Proposal for a decision

    Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point c

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    (c) indicate the connection between the economic policy reform measures laid down in the Memorandum of Understanding, Egypt’s on-going economic and fiscal performance and the Commission’s decisions to release the instalments of the Union’s macro-financial assistance.

    (c) indicate the connection between Egypt’s economic policy reforms under the Memorandum of Understanding, its fiscal performance, and the release of Union macro-financial assistance, while outlining steps taken towards democratic mechanisms, the rule of law and human rights.

     

     

    EXPLANATORY STATEMENT

    Political dialogue between Egypt and the EU was suspended after the revolution in 2011, and remained frozen through 2015. However, following Sisi’s election as president in May 2014, a rapprochement between Europe and Egypt gradually began to take place. The stability of the country became defining characteristics of European policy towards the Egypt. In 2024 the European Union (‘EU’) and Egypt have agreed to deepen their relationship and develop a strategic and comprehensive partnership for shared prosperity, stability and security, based on joint interest and mutual trust and building on the already existing positive agenda in EU-Egypt relations. The Strategic and Comprehensive Partnership covers specific areas of cooperation outlined in the Joint Declaration, clustered across six pillars of intervention, namely: political relations; economic stability; investment and trade; migration; security and law enforcement cooperation; demography and human capital.

    The partnership is based on a financial package consisting of short- and longer-term support for the necessary macro-fiscal and socio-economic reform agenda, as well as increased amounts available to support investments in Egypt and targeted support for the implementation of the different strategic priorities.

    Given Egypt’s critical economic and financial situation and Egypt’s role as an important stabilising factor amid geopolitical tensions in an increasingly volatile region, the Commission proposed on 15 March 2024 to support Egypt with macro-financial assistance (‘MFA’) of up to EUR 5 billion in loans as part of the EUR 7.4 billion financial package, divided into a short-term MFA operation of up to EUR 1 billion to be disbursed in one instalment, and a regular MFA operation of up to EUR 4 billion to be disbursed in three instalments.

    The short-term MFA was agreed without involvement of the European Parliament for urgency reasons. The rapporteur highlights that this can only be an exception and European Parliament should not be bypassed in the future.

    The amount of the proposed two new MFA operations corresponds to 56.7% of the estimated residual financing gap for the period FY24/25-FY26/27. This is consistent with standard practices on burden-sharing for MFA operations (for a country with an Association Agreement, the upper limit would be 60% according to the Council conclusions of 8 October 2002), taking into account the assistance pledged to Egypt by other bilateral and multilateral donors.

    The rapporteur would like to point out that the EU’s cooperation with Egypt does not begin with this MFA which is just a piece of the puzzle and in fact consequence of a longstanding cooperation with Egypt on human rights and security highlighted by the Association Agreement/Euro-Mediterranean Agreement (2004), the EU’s new Agenda for the Mediterranean (2021), the Partnership Priorities (2022) and the Joint Declaration launching a new Strategic and Comprehensive partnership (2024). Moreover, Egypt is a strategic, economic, military and geopolitical partner of the EU and the EU is the leading investor in Egypt.

    Given the instability in the region, Egypt remains a stable partner that engages in constructive dialogue with its partners. The EU need allies like that in the Middle East, and we need to emphasise their importance.

    But Egypt is also hit by a series of external shocks.

    A migratory shock first and foremost, with almost 10 million migrants and 800 000 registered refugees. Egypt is also committed to providing access to education for children, access to health services, help in finding housing and help in finding employment, with the support of NGOs. These commitments, if they are to be carried out properly, come at a cost.

    A geopolitical shock with the uncertainty of developments in Israel / Palestine and Syria.

    An economic shock, because Egypt, like many other countries, is seeing the cost of debt repayment and civil service salaries rise, thus limiting investment capacity.

    This MFA is based on strict pre-conditions requiring Egypt to continue to make concrete and credible steps towards democratic mechanism, rule of law and human rights. The rapporteur believes that those pre-conditions embedded in the long-term cooperation with Egypt will lead to reforms and long-term improvements in the country.

    Moreover, it is important to underline that Egypt already made big improvements in several areas.

    Firstly, on human rights, with a major plan launched in 2021 underlining the country’s commitment to this path. Some may feel that things are not moving fast enough, but it is hard to deny that the country is on the right track.

    Then there is the question of the place of women in society, which is very often a thermometer of democracy in a country. Wearing the veil is not compulsory. Women have access to public jobs and elected office (27% of women elected to the House, 13% to the Senate). Although Egyptian society is seen as patriarchal, the position of women has changed considerably in recent years.

    This is a financial instrument designed to support our partner in the face of the challenges it faces, but also to help it pursue change. The European Parliament will be closely monitoring progress and the rapporteur is asking the Commission to keep the European Parliament duly informed at all stages of the process. After all, the MFA is a loan and the grants are subject to reimbursement.

    To conclude the rapporteur would like to highlight that the MFA is an emergency instrument that has to be granted as soon as possible. The rapporteur is convinced that the MFA will be an effective incentive for – political and financial reforms in the country that will ensure a sustainable partnership between the EU and Egypt.

     

     

    ANNEX: ENTITIES OR PERSONS FROM WHOM THE RAPPORTEUR HAS RECEIVED INPUT

    Pursuant to Article 8 of Annex I to the Rules of Procedure, the rapporteur declares that she received input from the following entities or persons in the preparation of the report, prior to the adoption thereof in committee:

    Entity and/or person

    European Commission – DG ECFIN

    European Commission – DG NEAR

    EEAS

    Embassy of Egypt

    Members of the Egyptian Parliament

    Amnesty International

    Human Rights Watch

    The list above is drawn up under the exclusive responsibility of the rapporteur.

    Where natural persons are identified in the list by their name, by their function or by both, the rapporteur declares that she has submitted to the concerned natural persons the European Parliament’s Data Protection Notice No 484 (https://www.europarl.europa.eu/data-protect/index.do), which sets out the conditions applicable to the processing of their personal data and the rights linked to that processing.

     

     

    MINORITY POSITION

    Pursuant to Rule 56(4) of the Rules of Procedure

    Vicent Marzà Ibáñez (Greens/EFA)

    On behalf of the Greens/EFA group, I would like to express our opposition to the fact that the European Commission has treated Egypt differently from other countries that receive Macro-Financial Assistance (MFA) from the EU.

    Following an agreement between the Council and Parliament, all MFAs should, as a pre-condition, respect human rights, democracy, and the rule of law. However, the Commission chose not to adhere to this policy when EC President Ursula von der Leyen announced a package of €7.4 billion in support for Egypt in March 2024, including €5 billion in Macro-Financial Assistance in the form of loans.

    We support providing Egypt with macro-financial assistance as a means to improve the living conditions of the Egyptian people, to reduce poverty and inequalities as well as to promote human rights. Our group has previously supported providing macro-financial assistance to alleviate financial burdens for countries in difficulty, while also promoting democratic values and human rights worldwide. However, the Commission must respect the agreements made by Parliament and the Council and act in line with the principles enshrined in the EU Treaties regarding external action.

     

     

    BUDGETARY ASSESSMENT OF THE COMMITTEE ON BUDGETS (29.1.2025)

    for the Committee on International Trade

    on the proposal for a decision of the European Parliament and of the Council on providing macro-financial assistance to the Arab Republic of Egypt

    (COM(2024)0461 – C10‑0009/2024 – 2024/0071(COD))

    Rapporteur for budgetary assessment: Matjaž Nemec

     

    The Committee on Budgets has carried out a budgetary assessment of the proposal under Rule 58 of the Rules of Procedure and has reached the following conclusions:

    – having regard to Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2024/2509 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 September 2024 on the financial rules applicable to the general budget of the Union[1] (Financial Regulation),

    – having regard to Council Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2020/2093 of 17 December 2020 laying down the multiannual financial framework for the years 2021 to 2027[2],

    – having regard to the Interinstitutional Agreement of 16 December 2020 between the European Parliament, the Council of the European Union and the European Commission (IIA) on budgetary discipline, on cooperation in budgetary matters and on sound financial management, as well as on new own resources, including a roadmap towards the introduction of new own resources[3],

    A. whereas Egypt continues to face sizeable and unmet financing needs, with an external financing gap estimated by the International Monetary Fund (IMF) programme at around USD 17.7 billion for 2024-2027, requiring substantial international support to maintain economic stability and implement crucial reforms;

    B. whereas recently, Egypt’s macro-fiscal situation has deteriorated noticeably, with intensified external pressures and increased debt, reflecting both domestic challenges and external shocks, including the repercussions of Russia’s war against Ukraine and regional instability;

    C. whereas the destructive and ongoing conflict in Gaza and the attacks in the Red Sea have severely impacted Egypt’s key sources of foreign currency earnings, particularly tourism revenues and Suez Canal proceeds, while persistent capital outflows and lower services exports have further strained the country’s external position; whereas Egypt’s socio-economic situation, including poverty rates and the Human Development Index, are also expected to be negatively impacted[4];

    D. whereas the severe deterioration of external accounts and the strategic importance of regional stability conditionally justify this comprehensive support package, while stressing the need for the EU to work towards a lasting long-term peace solution in the Middle East, which will help alleviate the reasons behind Egypt’s financial struggles;

    E. whereas Egypt’s public debt burden had increased substantially to 95.9 % of GDP at the end of the 2022/2023 fiscal year, up from 88.5 % the previous fiscal year, reaching its highest level since 2017 and raising concerns about long-term debt sustainability;

    F. whereas Egypt’s real GDP growth declined to 2.4 % in the 2023/2024 fiscal year due to inflation and external pressures, with food price inflation remaining a strain, especially on vulnerable households;

    G. whereas all major rating agencies have downgraded Egypt’s sovereign credit ratings to below-investment grade following the outbreak of the conflict in Gaza, reflecting increased regional risks and deteriorating humanitarian and economic conditions; whereas this has further complicated the country’s access to international financial markets;

    H. whereas the proposed macro-financial assistance (MFA) of up to EUR 4 billion would help Egypt address its external financing needs while supporting the implementation of structural reforms aimed at improving the macroeconomic situation, strengthening economic governance and transparency, and enhancing conditions for sustainable and inclusive growth;

    I. whereas on 12 April 2024, the Council adopted Decision (EU) 2024/1144 providing EUR 1 billion in short-term macro-financial assistance to the Arab Republic of Egypt[5], pursuant to the urgency procedure provided under Article 213 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), bypassing Parliament entirely; whereas the Commission adopted a decision on 20 December 2024 to release this single instalment to Egypt;

    J. whereas the IMF has confirmed Egypt’s implementation of key reforms that have contributed to preserving macroeconomic stability despite the challenging environment;

    K. whereas the short-term macro-financial assistance was subject to conditions set out in the Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) agreed on and signed by the Commission and the Egyptian authorities on 29 June 2024, including the implementation of economic reforms, concrete and credible steps towards respecting democratic principles, and an on-track IMF programme; whereas the Commission and the European External Action Service undertook a review mission to Cairo in October 2024 and subsequently evaluated the Egyptian authorities’ written compliance reporting, with an overall positive assessment of Egypt’s progress in fulfilling these conditions;

    L. whereas Parliament, as one arm of the EU’s budgetary authority, was not involved in the negotiation and drafting of the MoU, which sets out the structural reform measures associated with the proposed MFA operation, including aspects of timing and sequencing for the disbursement of the initial assistance of EUR 1 billion;

    M. whereas the MoU to be concluded with the Egyptian authorities for the remainder of the MFA is an essential part of the assistance itself; whereas Parliament’s lack of involvement in this process severely hinders its budgetary scrutiny; whereas it is necessary to find an appropriate way to involve Parliament when such memorandums with non-EU countries are negotiated by the Commission;

    N. whereas the MoU should crucially provide the Commission with a mechanism to monitor progress as regards the implementation of structural reforms, notably the specific conditions for disbursement of the assistance;

    1. Recalls that while MFA is meant to be an exceptional crisis response instrument and should not serve as a substitute for structural development aid, its increasing use to address structural economic challenges in partner countries risks diluting its emergency nature;

    2. Highlights the importance of MFA in urgently addressing the situation in Egypt, taking into account Egypt’s critical economic and financial situation and its role as an important stabilising actor in an increasingly volatile region;

    3. Regrets the fact that the first proposal of this package bypassed the co-decision rights of Parliament and undermined its democratic oversight role by using Article 213 TFEU instead of Article 212 TFEU; insists that this should not set a precedent and that Parliament’s rights and role should be respected in future proposals; emphasises that MFA is an instrument requiring proper parliamentary and budgetary scrutiny;

    4. Notes that the Commission proposal of EUR 4 billion in MFA requires EUR 360 million in provisioning under the External Action Guarantee from the Neighbourhood, Development and International Cooperation Instrument – Global Europe, which represents a significant allocation of limited resources;

    5. Recalls its previous concerns about the effectiveness of MFA in driving sustainable reforms; acknowledges, however, that linking this assistance to the broader strategic partnership framework can, when properly implemented, provide stronger leverage for implementing the agreed reform agenda; recalls that the partnership priorities cover three broad areas, namely sustainable modern economy and social development, partnering in foreign policy, and enhancing stability;

    6. Takes note of Egypt’s overall compliance with reform implementation under the previous MFA; reiterates its calls for transparent and timely reporting of assistance implementation; calls for adequate monitoring mechanisms with clear benchmarks and outcomes to be established in the MoU, and for regular reporting to the budgetary authority on developments related to the assistance, given the unprecedented size of this MFA package;

    7. Notes that while the MFA loan structure spreads repayments over a longer period, this creates extended contingent liabilities for the EU budget that require careful monitoring over multiple financial frameworks;

    8. Emphasises that the MFA constitutes a general budgetary support instrument for the benefit of Egypt and that the EU has no control over how the funds are actually spent; nevertheless encourages the Egyptian authorities and counterparties to disclose information on spending at the Commission’s request;

    9. Recalls that Article 6 of the Financial Regulation establishes the obligation for the Commission to ensure compliance with the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU and to respect the values enshrined in Article 2 of the Treaty on European Union when implementing the EU budget; stresses that such a budgetary principle constitutes a core legal requirement for any form of EU financial assistance; underscores, therefore, the fact that the proposal lacks sufficient safeguards and clear benchmarks to measure progress towards compliance, particularly regarding respect for human dignity, freedom, democracy, equality, the rule of law and human rights, including the rights of persons belonging to minorities and freedom of belief, in order to protect the EU’s financial interests and ensure the MFA’s implementation in accordance with the Regulation;

    10. Recalls that a pre-condition for granting MFA involves respecting effective democratic mechanisms, including a multiparty parliamentary system and the rule of law, and guaranteeing respect for human rights; highlights that, in this case, Egypt should continue to make concrete and credible steps towards respecting these criteria; emphasises the need to ensure their robust implementation;

    11. Emphasises that strict adherence to democratic principles, the rule of law and fundamental freedoms should remain non-negotiable prerequisites for accessing EU financial support; calls on the Commission to withhold disbursements in the absence of credible progress on these fronts; notes that the Commission’s decision to disburse the short-term macro-financial assistance reflects Egypt’s progress in implementing reforms and the EU’s commitment to supporting Egypt’s economic stabilisation and reform agenda under the strategic and comprehensive partnership, while noting that human rights challenges in Egypt remain significant; stresses, in this respect, the importance of Egypt’s stability and its crucial role in the region, particularly in the current geopolitical context;

    12. Regrets Parliament’s lack of involvement in and scrutiny of the MoU concluded between the Commission and the Egyptian authorities, which, among other things, includes important budgetary provisions that fall within the remit of Parliament, will determine clearly defined economic policy and financial conditions, focusing on structural reforms and sound public finances, and will include a time frame for achieving those reforms, which are linked to loan disbursement;

    13. Concludes that the proposal for a decision of the European Parliament and of the Council on providing macro-financial assistance to the Arab Republic of Egypt is compatible with the elements referred to in Rule 58(3) of the Rules of Procedure.

     

    As part of its budgetary assessment, the Committee on Budgets also submits the following amendments to the proposal:

     

    Amendment  1

    Proposal for a decision

    Recital 1 a (new)

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

     

    (1a) This Decision has implications for the Union budget. Accordingly, the European Parliament’s Committee on Budgets adopted a budgetary assessment, which forms an integral part of Parliament’s mandate for negotiations.

     

    Amendment  38

    Proposal for a decision

    Article 5 – paragraph 1

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    (1) In order to finance the support under the macro-financial assistance in the form of loans, the Commission shall be empowered, on behalf of the Union, to borrow the necessary funds on the capital markets or from financial institutions in accordance with Article 220a of Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2018/1046.

    (1) In order to finance the support under the macro-financial assistance in the form of loans, the Commission shall be empowered, on behalf of the Union, to borrow the necessary funds on the capital markets or from financial institutions in accordance with Article 223 of Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2024/2509.

     

    Amendment  39

    Proposal for a decision

    Article 5 – paragraph 2

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    (2) The Commission shall enter into a loan agreement with Egypt in respect of the amount referred to in Article 1. The detailed terms of the support under the MFA in the form of loans shall be laid down in a loan agreement in accordance with Article 220 of the Financial Regulation, to be concluded between the Commission and the Egyptian authorities. The loan agreement shall lay down the availability period and the detailed terms of the support under the macro-financial assistance in the form of loans, including in relation to the internal control systems. The loans shall be granted at terms that allow Egypt to repay the loan over a long period, including a possible grace period. The maximum duration of the loans shall be 35 years. The Commission shall inform the European Parliament and the Council of developments in the operations referred to in paragraph 3.

    (2) The Commission shall enter into a loan agreement with Egypt in respect of the amount referred to in Article 1. The detailed terms of the support under the MFA in the form of loans shall be laid down in a loan agreement in accordance with Article 223 of the Financial Regulation, to be concluded between the Commission and the Egyptian authorities. The loan agreement shall lay down the availability period and the detailed terms of the support under the macro-financial assistance in the form of loans, including in relation to the internal control systems. The loans shall be granted at terms that allow Egypt to repay the loan over a long period, including a possible grace period. The maximum duration of the loans shall be 35 years. The Commission shall inform the European Parliament and the Council of developments in the operations referred to in paragraph 3.

     

    Amendment  40

    Proposal for a decision

    Article 6 – paragraph 1

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    (1) The Union’s macro-financial assistance shall be implemented in accordance with Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 2018/1046 of the European Parliament and of the Council7.

    (1) The Union’s macro-financial assistance shall be implemented in accordance with Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 2024/2509 of the European Parliament and of the Council7.

    _________________

    _________________

    7 Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 2018/1046 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 July 2018 on the financial rules applicable to the general budget of the Union and repealing Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 966/2012 (OJ L 193, 30.07.2018, p. 1).

    7 Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2024/2509 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 September 2024 on the financial rules applicable to the general budget of the Union (recast) (OJ L, 2024/2509, 26.9.2024, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2024/2509/oj).

    Amendment  41

    Proposal for a decision

    Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point b

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    (b) assess the economic situation and prospects of Egypt, as well as progress made in implementing the policy measures referred to in Article 3(1);

    (b) assess the economic situation and prospects of Egypt, as well as progress made in implementing the policy measures referred to in Articles 2 and 3(1);

    ANNEX: ENTITIES OR PERSONS
    FROM WHOM THE RAPPORTEUR FOR BUDGETARY ASSESSMENT HAS RECEIVED INPUT

    Pursuant to Article 8 of Annex I to the Rules of Procedure, the rapporteur for budgetary assessment declares that he received input from the following entities or persons in the preparation of the budgetary assessment, prior to the adoption thereof in committee:

    Entity and/or person

    European Commission

    Ambassador of Egypt to the EU

    Head of delegation of the European Union to Egypt

    The Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Arab Republic of Egypt

    The list is drawn up under the exclusive responsibility of the rapporteur for budgetary assessment.

    Where natural persons are identified in the list by their name, by their function or by both, the rapporteur for budgetary assessment declares that he has submitted to the natural persons concerned the European Parliament’s Data Protection Notice No 484 (https://www.europarl.europa.eu/data-protect/index.do), which sets out the conditions applicable to the processing of their personal data and the rights linked to that processing.

     

    PROCEDURE – COMMITTEE ASKED FOR BUDGETARY ASSESSMENT

    Title

    Macro-financial assistance to the Arab Republic of Egypt

    References

    COM(2024)0461 – C10-0009/2024 – 2024/0071(COD)

    Committee(s) responsible

    INTA

     

     

     

     Date announced in plenary

    BUDG

    13.11.2024

    Rapporteur for budgetary assessment

     Date appointed

    Matjaž Nemec

    24.10.2024

    Discussed in committee

    16.1.2025

     

     

     

    Date adopted

    29.1.2025

     

     

     

    Result of final vote

    +:

    –:

    0:

    32

    5

    1

    Members present for the final vote

    Georgios Aftias, Rasmus Andresen, Isabel Benjumea Benjumea, Tobiasz Bocheński, Olivier Chastel, Tamás Deutsch, Angéline Furet, Jens Geier, Thomas Geisel, Jean-Marc Germain, Sandra Gómez López, Monika Hohlmeier, Alexander Jungbluth, Janusz Lewandowski, Giuseppe Lupo, Siegfried Mureşan, Matjaž Nemec, Danuše Nerudová, João Oliveira, Ruggero Razza, Karlo Ressler, Julien Sanchez, Hélder Sousa Silva, Joachim Streit, Carla Tavares, Nils Ušakovs, Lucia Yar, Auke Zijlstra

    Substitutes present for the final vote

    Damian Boeselager, Michalis Hadjipantela, Moritz Körner, Tiago Moreira de Sá, Rasmus Nordqvist, Michele Picaro, Jacek Protas, Beata Szydło

    Members under Rule 216(7) present for the final vote

    Thierry Mariani, Aodhán Ó Ríordáin

     

    FINAL VOTE BY ROLL CALL
    IN COMMITTEE ASKED FOR BUDGETARY ASSESSMENT

    32

    +

    ECR

    Tobiasz Bocheński, Michele Picaro, Ruggero Razza, Beata Szydło

    NI

    Thomas Geisel

    PPE

    Georgios Aftias, Isabel Benjumea Benjumea, Michalis Hadjipantela, Monika Hohlmeier, Janusz Lewandowski, Siegfried Mureşan, Danuše Nerudová, Jacek Protas, Karlo Ressler, Hélder Sousa Silva

    PfE

    Tamás Deutsch, Angéline Furet, Thierry Mariani, Tiago Moreira de Sá, Julien Sanchez

    Renew

    Olivier Chastel, Moritz Körner, Joachim Streit, Lucia Yar

    S&D

    Jens Geier, Jean-Marc Germain, Sandra Gómez López, Giuseppe Lupo, Matjaž Nemec, Aodhán Ó Ríordáin, Carla Tavares, Nils Ušakovs

     

    5

    –

    PfE

    Auke Zijlstra

    The Left

    João Oliveira

    Verts/ALE

    Rasmus Andresen, Damian Boeselager, Rasmus Nordqvist

     

    1

    0

    ESN

    Alexander Jungbluth

     

    Key to symbols:

    + : in favour

    – : against

    0 : abstention

     

     

     

     

    OPINION OF THE COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS (30.1.2025)

    for the Committee on International Trade

    on the proposal for a decision of the European Parliament and of the Council on providing macro-financial assistance to the Arab Republic of Egypt

    (COM(2024)0461 – C10‑0009/2024 – 2024/0071(COD))

    Rapporteur for opinion: Tineke Strik

     

    SHORT JUSTIFICATION

    As enshrined in the Treaties, the EU is required to uphold and promote the principles of human rights, democracy and the rule of law in its external action. While acknowledging the importance of the EU-Egypt strategic partnership and the need for MFA-support to Egypt in light of the economic impact of, among others, the current geopolitical situation, this opinion aims to integrate human rights, democracy and the rule of law as core parts of the MFA and to strengthen provisions related to parliamentary scrutiny and transparency. The Rapporteur is pleased that the Foreign Affairs Committee (AFET) confirmed that these founding principles of the EU should form the basis of EU-Egypt relations, and concrete improvement from Egypt in this regard is a precondition for the disbursement of the MFA. Moreover, the vote confirmed that the AFET Committee is convinced that Commission services and the European External Action Service have the responsibility to integrate this approach into the Memorandum of Understanding to be negotiated with Egypt, and report on progress on the specific conditions to the European Parliament and Council. Payment of each instalment should be subject to concrete improvements on human rights, democracy and the rule of law. The Rapporteur has full trust that the competences of the AFET Committee will be integrated into the report of the Committee on International Trade, and will engage with the respective Rapporteur to that end.

    AMENDMENTS

    The Committee on Foreign Affairs submits the following to the Committee on International Trade, as the committee responsible:

    Amendment  1

     

    Proposal for a decision

    Recital 3

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    (3) In line with the Partnership Priorities, the EU and Egypt are committed to ensuring accountability, the rule of law, the full respect of human rights, fundamental freedoms, promoting democracy, gender equality and equal opportunities as constitutional rights of all their citizens. These commitments contribute to the advancement of the partnership and to Egypt’s sustainable development and stability. The increased and constructive engagement between the EU and Egypt in the last period has opened the path to more meaningful dialogue on human rights related issues. The subcommittee on Political Matters, Human Rights and Democracy, International and Regional issues of December 2022 and the Association Committee of May 2023 provided the institutional platforms to exchange on an array of human rights issues, which the EU would like to continue and build on. The improvement of the human rights situation in Egypt will have a positive impact on EU-Egypt relations.

    (3) In line with the Partnership Priorities, the EU and Egypt are committed to ensuring accountability, the rule of law, the full respect of human rights, fundamental freedoms, promoting democracy, gender equality and equal opportunities as constitutional rights of all their citizens. These commitments contribute to the advancement of the partnership and to Egypt’s sustainable social and economic development and stability. The increased and constructive engagement between the EU and Egypt in the last period has opened the path to more meaningful dialogue on human rights related issues. The subcommittee on Political Matters, Human Rights and Democracy, International and Regional issues of December 2022 and the Association Committee of May 2023 provided the institutional platforms to exchange on an array of human rights issues, which the EU would like to continue and build on. A future improvement of the human rights situation in Egypt, such as improving the rights to freedom of expression, association and peaceful assembly, introducing a moratorium on death penalty, combating torture and enforced disappearances, and improving the conditions of prisons, will have a positive impact on EU-Egypt relations.

    Amendment  2

     

    Proposal for a decision

    Recital 5

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    (5) The EU recognises Egypt’s key role for regional security and stability. Terrorism, organised crime and conflicts are common threats against our security and the social fabric of nations across both sides of the Mediterranean. Therefore, the EU and Egypt have a common interest in strengthening cooperation highlighted in the Partnership Priorities, in full compliance with international law, including human rights and international humanitarian law.

    (5) The EU recognises Egypt’s key role for regional security and stability, and has a strong interest in preventing short-term economic instability in that country that could have broader consequences as well as benefit geopolitical rivals. Terrorism, organised crime, disinformation, conflicts and persecution of religious and ethnic minorities are common threats against our security and the social fabric of nations across both sides of the Mediterranean. Therefore, the EU and Egypt have a common interest in strengthening cooperation highlighted in the Partnership Priorities, in full compliance with international law, including human rights and international humanitarian law, as well as in promoting joint interests and addressing common challenges.

    Amendment  3

     

    Proposal for a decision

    Recital 6

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    (6) Recalling the geo-political challenges, such as the consequences of Hamas terrorist attacks across Israel on 7 October 2023 as well as the conflict in Sudan, and the strategic importance of Egypt as the largest country in the region and a pillar of stability for the whole Middle East, the Union is embarking on concluding a Strategic and Comprehensive partnership with Egypt as outlined in the Joint Declaration.

    (6) Recalling the geo-political challenges, such as the broader consequences of the situation in the Middle East following the Hamas terrorist attacks of 7 October 2023, as well as the armed conflict in Sudan and instability in Syria, and the strategic importance of Egypt as the largest country in the region and a pillar of stability and security for the whole Middle East, the Union is embarking on concluding a Strategic and Comprehensive partnership with Egypt as outlined in the Joint Declaration.

    Amendment  4

     

    Proposal for a decision

    Recital 9

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    (9) Egypt’s macro-fiscal situation has faced significant challenges and deteriorated substantially over recent months, as external pressures have intensified and public debt has increased further, with substantial downside risks to the economic outlook persisting. The repercussions of Russia’s war on Ukraine and of Hamas terrorist attacks against Israel have led to protracted capital outflows and lower foreign currency receipts, notably due to sharply falling income from tourism and Suez Canal proceeds. This is particularly challenging amid Egypt’s difficult fiscal situation, which is characterised by constant fiscal deficits and high and growing debt to GDP ratios.

    (9) Egypt’s macro-fiscal situation has faced significant challenges and deteriorated substantially over recent months, as external pressures have intensified and public debt has increased further, with substantial downside risks to the economic outlook persisting. The repercussions of Russia’s war on Ukraine and of the situation in the Middle East have led to protracted capital outflows and lower foreign currency receipts, notably due to sharply falling income from tourism and Suez Canal proceeds. This is particularly challenging amid Egypt’s difficult fiscal situation, which is characterised by constant fiscal deficits and high and growing debt to GDP ratios. Moreover, instability and uncertainty in Syria would further exacerbate the already existing macro-financial issues for Egypt.

    Amendment  5

     

    Proposal for a decision

    Recital 19

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    (19) The Commission should ensure that the Union’s macro-financial assistance is legally and substantially in line with the key principles, objectives and measures taken within the different areas of external action and with other relevant Union policies.

    (19) As enshrined in Article 212 TFEU, the Commission should ensure that the Union’s macro-financial assistance is legally and substantially in line with the key principles, objectives and measures taken within the different areas of external action, and in particular with Article 2 of the EU-Egypt Association Agreement of 2004 concerning the respect of democratic principles and fundamental human rights and with other relevant Union policies.

    Amendment  6

     

    Proposal for a decision

    Recital 22

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    (22) A pre-condition for granting the Union’s macro-financial assistance to Egypt should be that the country continues to make concrete and credible steps towards respecting effective democratic mechanisms – including a multi-party parliamentary system – and the rule of law, and guarantees respect for human rights. In addition, the specific objectives of the Union’s macro-financial assistance should strengthen the efficiency, transparency and accountability of the public finance management systems, the governance and supervision of the financial sector in Egypt and promote structural reforms aimed at supporting sustainable and inclusive growth, decent employment creation and fiscal consolidation. The fulfillment of the pre-condition and the achievement of the specific objectives should be regularly monitored by the Commission services and the European External Action Service.

    (22) A pre-condition for granting the Union’s macro-financial assistance to Egypt should be that the country takes concrete and credible steps towards respecting and enhancing effective democratic mechanisms – including a multi-party parliamentary system – and the rule of law, and guarantees respect for human rights, In addition, the specific objectives of the Union’s macro-financial assistance should strengthen the efficiency, transparency and accountability of the public finance management systems, the governance and supervision of the financial sector in Egypt and promote structural reforms aimed at supporting sustainable and inclusive growth, decent employment creation and fiscal consolidation. The fulfillment of the pre-condition and the achievement of the specific objectives should be regularly monitored by the Commission services and the European External Action Service.

    Amendment  7

     

    Proposal for a decision

    Recital 26

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    (26) The Union’s macro-financial assistance should be managed by the Commission. In order to ensure that the European Parliament and the Council are able to follow the implementation of this Decision, the Commission should regularly inform them of developments relating to the assistance and provide them with relevant documents.

    (26) The Union’s macro-financial assistance should be managed by the Commission. In order to ensure that the European Parliament and the Council are able to follow the implementation of this Decision, the Commission should regularly inform them with an annual report of developments relating to the assistance and on the respect of effective democratic mechanisms, as per the pre-conditions referred to in this Decision and, provide them with relevant documents.

    Amendment  8

     

    Proposal for a decision

    Recital 28

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    (28) The Union’s macro-financial assistance should be subject to economic policy conditions, to be laid down in a Memorandum of Understanding. In order to ensure uniform conditions of implementation and for reasons of efficiency, the Commission should be empowered to negotiate such conditions with the Egyptian authorities under the supervision of the committee of representatives of the Member States in accordance with Regulation (EU) No 182/2011. Under that Regulation, the advisory procedure should, as a general rule, apply in all cases other than as provided for in that Regulation. Considering the potentially important impact of assistance of more than EUR 90 million, it is appropriate that the examination procedure be used for operations above that threshold. Considering the amount of the Union’s macro-financial assistance to Egypt, the examination procedure should apply to the adoption of the Memorandum of Understanding, and to any reduction, suspension or cancellation of the assistance.

    (28) The Union’s macro-financial assistance should be subject to economic policy and democracy, rule of law and human rights conditions, to be laid down in a Memorandum of Understanding. In order to ensure uniform conditions of implementation and for reasons of efficiency, the Commission should be empowered to negotiate such conditions with the Egyptian authorities under the supervision of the committee of representatives of the Member States in accordance with Regulation (EU) No 182/2011. Under that Regulation, the advisory procedure should, as a general rule, apply in all cases other than as provided for in that Regulation. Considering the potentially important impact of assistance of more than EUR 90 million, it is appropriate that the examination procedure be used for operations above that threshold. Considering the amount of the Union’s macro-financial assistance to Egypt, the examination procedure should apply to the adoption of the Memorandum of Understanding, and to any reduction, suspension or cancellation of the assistance.

    Amendment  9

     

    Proposal for a decision

    Article 1 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    The release of the Union’s macro-financial assistance shall be managed by the Commission in a manner consistent with the agreements or understandings reached between the IMF and Egypt, and with the key principles and objectives of economic reforms set out in the EU-Egypt Association Agreement.

    The release of the Union’s macro-financial assistance shall be managed by the Commission in a manner consistent with the agreements or understandings reached between the IMF and Egypt, and with the key principles and objectives set out in the EU-Egypt Association Agreement.

    Amendment  10

     

    Proposal for a decision

    Article 1 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    The Commission shall regularly inform the European Parliament and the Council of developments regarding the Union’s macro-financial assistance, including disbursements thereof, and shall provide those institutions with the relevant documents in due time.

    The Commission shall regularly inform the European Parliament and the Council of developments regarding the Union’s macro-financial assistance, including disbursements thereof, as well as on the progress made relating to economic and democratic reforms in Egypt, and shall provide those institutions with the relevant documents, including third-party independent assessments, in due time.

    Amendment  11

     

    Proposal for a decision

    Article 1 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2 a (new)

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

     

    The transparent management of funds allocated under this macro-financial assistance is essential in order to ensure that resources are used wisely, in accordance with the set objectives. The Union shall ensure that effective and independent control and audit mechanisms are put in place to prevent any misappropriation.

    Amendment  12

     

    Proposal for a decision

    Article 2 – paragraph 1

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    1. A pre-condition for granting the Union’s macro-financial assistance shall be that Egypt continues to make concrete and credible steps towards respecting effective democratic mechanisms – including a multi-party parliamentary system – and the rule of law, and guarantees respect for human rights.

    1. A pre-condition for granting the Union’s macro-financial assistance shall be that Egypt takes concrete and credible steps towards respecting effective democratic mechanisms – including a multi-party parliamentary system – and the rule of law, and made a quantitative and substantial improvement in the respect for human rights, since the signing in June 2024 of the Memorandum of Understanding linked to the EUR 1 billion macro-financial assistance package, and that it continues to make concrete and credible improvements in those areas throughout the period covered by this Decision.

    Amendment  13

     

    Proposal for a decision

    Article 2 – paragraph 2

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    2. The Commission services and the European External Action Service shall monitor the fulfilment of this pre-condition throughout the life-cycle of the Union’s macro-financial assistance.

    2. The Commission services and the European External Action Service shall monitor the fulfilment of this pre-condition throughout the life-cycle of the Union’s macro-financial assistance in a transparent process in which civil society and international entities such as UN organisations are able to contribute, and report, regularly and in writing, to the European Parliament on the conditions referred to in Article 2 (1).

    Amendment  14

     

    Proposal for a decision

    Article 3 – paragraph 1

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    1. The Commission, in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 7(2), shall agree with the Egyptian authorities on clearly defined economic policy and financial conditions, focusing on structural reforms and sound public finances, to which the Union’s macro-financial assistance is to be subject, to be laid down in a Memorandum of Understanding (“the Memorandum of Understanding”) which shall include a timeframe for the achievement of those reforms. The economic policy and financial conditions set out in the Memorandum of Understanding shall be consistent with the agreements or understandings referred to in Article 1(3), including the macroeconomic adjustment and structural reform programmes implemented by Egypt with the support of the IMF.

    1. The Commission, in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 7(2), shall agree with the Egyptian authorities on clearly defined economic policy and financial conditions, focusing on structural reforms and sound public finances, as well as on democracy, rule of law and human rights conditions, to which the Union’s macro-financial assistance and the release of each separate instalment is to be subject, to be laid down in a Memorandum of Understanding (“the Memorandum of Understanding”) which shall include a timeframe for the achievement of those reforms. The economic policy and financial conditions set out in the Memorandum of Understanding shall be consistent with the agreements or understandings referred to in Article 1(3), including the macroeconomic adjustment and structural reform programmes implemented by Egypt with the support of the IMF.

    Amendment  15

     

    Proposal for a decision

    Article 3 – paragraph 2

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    2. The conditions referred to in paragraph 1 shall aim, in particular, at enhancing the efficiency, transparency and accountability of the public finance management systems in Egypt, including for the use of the Union’s macro-financial assistance. Progress in mutual market opening, the development of rules-based and fair trade, and other priorities in the context of the Union’s external policy shall also be duly taken into account when designing the policy measures. Progress in attaining those objectives shall be regularly monitored by the Commission.

    2. The conditions referred to in paragraph 1 shall aim, in particular, at introducing reforms towards respecting effective democratic mechanisms – including a multi-party parliamentary system – and the rule of law, and ensuring respect for human rights, enhancing the efficiency, transparency and accountability of the public finance management systems in Egypt, including for the use of the Union’s macro-financial assistance. Progress in mutual market opening, poverty reduction, good governance, the fight against corruption, the development of rules-based and fair trade, and other priorities in the context of the Union’s external policy, including those relating to democracy, rule of law and human rights, shall also be duly taken into account when designing the policy measures. Progress in attaining those objectives shall be regularly monitored by the Commission.

    Amendment  16

     

    Proposal for a decision

    Article 4 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 – point c

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    (c) the satisfactory implementation of the economic policy conditions and financial conditions agreed in the Memorandum of Understanding.

    (c) the satisfactory implementation of the economic policy conditions, financial conditions, and democracy, rule of law and human rights conditions, agreed in the Memorandum of Understanding.

    Amendment  17

     

    Proposal for a decision

    Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point c a (new)

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

     

    (ca) outline the concrete and credible steps Egypt has taken towards respecting effective democratic mechanisms, including a multi-party parliamentary system, and the rule of law, and towards ensuring respect for human rights.

    ANNEX: ENTITIES OR PERSONS
    FROM WHOM THE RAPPORTEUR HAS RECEIVED INPUT

    Pursuant to Article 8 of Annex I to the Rules of Procedure, the rapporteur for the opinion received input from the following entities or persons in the preparation of the opinion:

    Entity and/or person

     

    European Commission – DG ECFIN

    EEAS

    Various Egyptian authorities on multiple occassion

    Amnesty International

    Euromed Rights

    CIHRS

    Egyptian Front for Human Rights

    Committee to Protect Journalists

    Various Members of the Egyptian Parliament

    UNHCR

    Save the Children

    Frontex

    Various diplomats of EU Member States in Caïro

    Various local civil society organisations in Egypt

    Third country diplomat in Egypt

    The list above is drawn up under the exclusive responsibility of the rapporteur for the opinion.

    Where natural persons are identified in the list by their name, by their function or by both, the rapporteur for the opinion declares that she has submitted to the concerned natural persons the European Parliament’s Data Protection Notice No 484 (https://www.europarl.europa.eu/data-protect/index.do), which sets out the conditions applicable to the processing of their personal data and the rights linked to that processing.

    PROCEDURE – COMMITTEE ASKED FOR OPINION

    Title

    Macro-financial assistance to the Arab Republic of Egypt

    References

    COM(2024)0461 – C10-0009/2024 – 2024/0071(COD)

    Committee(s) responsible

    INTA

     

     

     

    Opinion by

     Date announced in plenary

    AFET

    13.11.2024

    Rapporteur for the opinion

     Date appointed

    Tineke Strik

    14.10.2024

    Discussed in committee

    3.12.2024

     

     

     

    Date adopted

    30.1.2025

     

     

     

    Result of final vote

    +:

    –:

    0:

    59

    6

    7

    Members present for the final vote

    Mika Aaltola, Lucia Annunziata, Petras Auštrevičius, Jordan Bardella, Dan Barna, Wouter Beke, Robert Biedroń, Ioan-Rareş Bogdan, Marc Botenga, Grzegorz Braun, Sebastião Bugalho, Danilo Della Valle, Özlem Demirel, Elio Di Rupo, Michael Gahler, Geadis Geadi, Giorgos Georgiou, Raphaël Glucksmann, Bernard Guetta, Rima Hassan, Rasa Juknevičienė, Sandra Kalniete, Łukasz Kohut, Rihards Kols, Andrey Kovatchev, Vilis Krištopans, Nathalie Loiseau, Claudiu Manda, David McAllister, Sven Mikser, Francisco José Millán Mon, Arkadiusz Mularczyk, Leoluca Orlando, Kostas Papadakis, Tonino Picula, Thijs Reuten, Nacho Sánchez Amor, Andreas Schieder, Alexander Sell, Villy Søvndal, Davor Ivo Stier, Sebastiaan Stöteler, Stanislav Stoyanov, Marie-Agnes Strack-Zimmermann, Michał Szczerba, António Tânger Corrêa, Marta Temido, Cristian Terheş, Riho Terras, Hermann Tertsch, Pierre-Romain Thionnet, Sebastian Tynkkynen, Reinier Van Lanschot, Roberto Vannacci, Hilde Vautmans, Harald Vilimsky, Željana Zovko

    Substitutes present for the final vote

    Jaume Asens Llodrà, Malik Azmani, Engin Eroglu, Sandra Gómez López, Evin Incir, András László, Ana Catarina Mendes, Hans Neuhoff, Nicolás Pascual de la Parte, Chloé Ridel, Tineke Strik, Şerban Dimitrie Sturdza, Ingeborg Ter Laak, Matej Tonin, Ivaylo Valchev, Isabel Wiseler-Lima

    Members under Rule 216(7) present for the final vote

    Catarina Vieira

     

     

    FINAL VOTE BY ROLL CALL IN COMMITTEE ASKED FOR OPINION

    59

    +

    ECR

    Geadis Geadi, Rihards Kols, Arkadiusz Mularczyk, Şerban Dimitrie Sturdza, Cristian Terheş, Ivaylo Valchev

    PPE

    Mika Aaltola, Wouter Beke, Ioan-Rareş Bogdan, Sebastião Bugalho, Michael Gahler, Rasa Juknevičienė, Sandra Kalniete, Łukasz Kohut, Andrey Kovatchev, David McAllister, Francisco José Millán Mon, Nicolás Pascual de la Parte, Davor Ivo Stier, Michał Szczerba, Ingeborg Ter Laak, Riho Terras, Matej Tonin, Isabel Wiseler-Lima, Željana Zovko

    PfE

    András László, António Tânger Corrêa, Hermann Tertsch, Roberto Vannacci

    Renew

    Petras Auštrevičius, Malik Azmani, Dan Barna, Engin Eroglu, Bernard Guetta, Nathalie Loiseau, Marie-Agnes Strack-Zimmermann, Hilde Vautmans

    S&D

    Lucia Annunziata, Robert Biedroń, Elio Di Rupo, Raphaël Glucksmann, Sandra Gómez López, Evin Incir, Claudiu Manda, Ana Catarina Mendes, Sven Mikser, Tonino Picula, Thijs Reuten, Nacho Sánchez Amor, Andreas Schieder, Marta Temido

    The Left

    Özlem Demirel, Rima Hassan

    Verts/ALE

    Jaume Asens Llodrà, Leoluca Orlando, Villy Søvndal, Tineke Strik, Reinier Van Lanschot, Catarina Vieira

     

    6

    –

    NI

    Grzegorz Braun, Kostas Papadakis

    PfE

    Jordan Bardella, Sebastiaan Stöteler, Pierre-Romain Thionnet, Harald Vilimsky

     

    7

    0

    ECR

    Sebastian Tynkkynen

    ESN

    Hans Neuhoff, Alexander Sell, Stanislav Stoyanov

    The Left

    Marc Botenga, Danilo Della Valle, Giorgos Georgiou

     

    Key to symbols:

    + : in favour

    – : against

    0 : abstention

     

     

     

     

     

    PROCEDURE – COMMITTEE RESPONSIBLE

    Title

    Macro-financial assistance to the Arab Republic of Egypt

    References

    COM(2024)0461 – C10-0009/2024 – 2024/0071(COD)

    Date submitted to Parliament

    15.3.2024

     

     

     

    Committee(s) responsible

    INTA

     

     

     

    Committees asked for opinions

     Date announced in plenary

    AFET

    13.11.2024

     

     

     

    Rapporteurs

     Date appointed

    Céline Imart

    30.9.2024

     

     

     

    Discussed in committee

    14.10.2024

    30.1.2025

     

     

    Date adopted

    20.3.2025

     

     

     

     

    BUDG

    29.1.2025

     

     

     

    Result of final vote

    +:

    –:

    0:

    28

    7

    5

    Members present for the final vote

    Christophe Bay, Brando Benifei, Anna Bryłka, Udo Bullmann, Benoit Cassart, Markéta Gregorová, Bart Groothuis, Céline Imart, Karin Karlsbro, Bernd Lange, Ilia Lazarov, Thierry Mariani, Javier Moreno Sánchez, Ştefan Muşoiu, Daniele Polato, Majdouline Sbai, Lukas Sieper, Dominik Tarczyński, Francesco Torselli, Kathleen Van Brempt, Jörgen Warborn, Iuliu Winkler, Bogdan Andrzej Zdrojewski, Juan Ignacio Zoido Álvarez

    Substitutes present for the final vote

    Mika Aaltola, Nicolas Bay, Markus Buchheit, João Cotrim De Figueiredo, Danilo Della Valle, Borja Giménez Larraz, Vicent Marzà Ibáñez, Marina Mesure, Martin Schirdewan, Kris Van Dijck

    Members under Rule 216(7) present for the final vote

    Hildegard Bentele, Mélanie Disdier, Niels Geuking, Chloé Ridel, Romana Tomc, Matthieu Valet

    Date tabled

    24.3.2025

     

    FINAL VOTE BY ROLL CALL BY THE COMMITTEE RESPONSIBLE

    28

    +

    ECR

    Nicolas Bay, Daniele Polato, Dominik Tarczyński, Francesco Torselli, Kris Van Dijck

    ESN

    Markus Buchheit

    NI

    Lukas Sieper

    PPE

    Mika Aaltola, Hildegard Bentele, Niels Geuking, Borja Giménez Larraz, Céline Imart, Ilia Lazarov, Romana Tomc, Jörgen Warborn, Iuliu Winkler, Bogdan Andrzej Zdrojewski, Juan Ignacio Zoido Álvarez

    PfE

    Christophe Bay, Anna Bryłka, Mélanie Disdier, Thierry Mariani, Matthieu Valet

    Renew

    Benoit Cassart, João Cotrim De Figueiredo, Bart Groothuis, Karin Karlsbro

    S&D

    Javier Moreno Sánchez

     

    7

    –

    S&D

    Udo Bullmann

    The Left

    Danilo Della Valle, Marina Mesure, Martin Schirdewan

    Verts/ALE

    Markéta Gregorová, Vicent Marzà Ibáñez, Majdouline Sbai

     

    5

    0

    S&D

    Brando Benifei, Bernd Lange, Ştefan Muşoiu, Chloé Ridel, Kathleen Van Brempt

     

    Key to symbols:

    + : in favour

    – : against

    0 : abstention

     

     

    MIL OSI Europe News –

    March 25, 2025
  • MIL-OSI Europe: REPORT on the proposal for a decision of the European Parliament and of the Council on providing macro-financial assistance to the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan – A10-0038/2025

    Source: European Parliament

    DRAFT EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT LEGISLATIVE RESOLUTION

    on the proposal for a decision of the European Parliament and of the Council on providing macro-financial assistance to the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan

    (COM(2024)0159 – C9‑0146/2024 – 2024/0086(COD))

    (Ordinary legislative procedure: first reading)

    The European Parliament,

    – having regard to the Commission proposal to Parliament and the Council (COM(2024)0159),

    – having regard to Article 294(2) and Article 212 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, pursuant to which the Commission submitted the proposal to Parliament (C9‑0146/2024),

    – having regard to Article 294(3) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

    – having regard to Rule 60 of its Rules of Procedure,

    – having regard to the budgetary assessment by the Committee on Budgets,

    – having regard to the opinion of the Committee on Foreign Affairs,

    – having regard to the report of the Committee on International Trade (A10-0038/2025),

    1. Adopts its position at first reading, taking over the Commission proposal;

    2. Calls on the Commission to refer the matter to Parliament again if it replaces, substantially amends or intends to substantially amend its proposal;

    3. Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council, the Commission and the national parliaments.

     

     

    EXPLANATORY STATEMENT

    In an increasingly challenging global economic context, Jordan faces persistent structural challenges compounded by significant external shocks. While the country has maintained moderate growth of around 2% in recent years, this level remains insufficient to address fundamental economic needs: reducing high unemployment (22.9% in 2022) and alleviating a substantial public debt burden (88.7% of GDP in 2023).

    These domestic challenges are further exacerbated by heightened regional tensions, including the war between Israel and Gaza and ongoing instability in Syria, which are disrupting trade, straining public resources and jeopardizing key sectors such as tourism. Therefore, Jordan is facing a series of unfavorable factors with economic, political, social and demographic consequences, and must receive appropriate and rapid support as a reliable and stable partner of the EU. Moreover, the migratory pressure is very high in the Kingdom with 1.3 million refugees from Syria out of total of 3.8 million of refugees. It means 1/3 of the Kingdom population are refugees.

    To support Jordan’s economic stability and cover the country’s residual financing needs over the operation’s availability period, the Commission proposes a macro-financial assistance (MFA) operation of up to €500 million in loans, despite the Jordan’s request for €700 million.

    This assistance is designed to address pressing economic challenges, including high public debt, a structurally elevated budget deficit (5.1% of GDP in 2023), and a persistent external deficits (average of around 6.5% of GDP over the last five years). It also aims to mitigate the fiscal constraints exacerbated by recent crises, such as the COVID-19 pandemic and regional instability.

    The political and economic conditions necessary for granting the proposed MFA are fulfilled, as confirmed by the Commission’s evaluation of Jordan’s current situation. The loan will be provided under the External Action Guarantee with a provisioning at a rate of 9%, which will be programmed under the NDICI-GE, for a total amount of EUR 45 million. To ensure risk coverage, the EU will provision 9% of the total amount, or €45 million, under the External Action Guarantee.

    The MFA will have a validity period of two and a half years following the entry into force of the Memorandum of Understanding (MoU). The disbursement of funds will occur in three tranches, contingent upon the full and timely implementation of the agreed-upon economic policies outlined in the MoU. These policies include ambitious reforms in key areas such as public governance, fiscal management, and anti-corruption efforts, ensuring that the assistance supports Jordan’s long-term economic resilience.

    This assistance complements the ongoing IMF program approved in January 2024, which provides $1.2 billion over four years, and aligns with support from other international partners, including substantial U.S. grants. It also builds on Jordan’s track record with macro-financial assistance, being the fourth MFA operation since 2014, totaling €1.08 billion to date. These successive programs underscore the EU’s ongoing commitment to strengthening Jordan’s institutional capacity and promoting economic stability.

    By addressing Jordan’s immediate financing needs and supporting reforms in key areas, the MFA reinforces the country’s economic resilience while contributing to regional stability. Subordinated to clear economic policy conditions, this assistance ensures accountability and progress. The full and timely implementation of these policies will remain a prerequisite for the disbursement of each tranche, ensuring that Jordan continues to meet its reform commitments.

    Jordan is a key partner in the region, able to engage in dialogue with the various geopolitical players in the Middle East. It is important to give Jordan due consideration and not to take its support for granted. It is therefore important to build a global and strategic partnership with Jordan, alongside and in addition to this MFA, in order to quickly lay the foundations for tomorrow’s collaboration.

     

     

    ANNEX: ENTITIES OR PERSONS FROM WHOM THE RAPPORTEUR HAS RECEIVED INPUT

    Pursuant to Article 8 of Annex I to the Rules of Procedure, the rapporteur declares that she received input from the following entities or persons in the preparation of the report, prior to the adoption thereof in committee:

    Entity and/or person

    European Commission – DG ECFIN

    European Commission – DG NEAR

    EEAS

    Embassy of the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan

    The list above is drawn up under the exclusive responsibility of the rapporteur.

    Where natural persons are identified in the list by their name, by their function or by both, the rapporteur declares that she has submitted to the concerned natural persons the European Parliament’s Data Protection Notice No 484 (https://www.europarl.europa.eu/data-protect/index.do), which sets out the conditions applicable to the processing of their personal data and the rights linked to that processing.

     

    BUDGETARY ASSESSMENT OF THE COMMITTEE ON BUDGETS (4.2.2025)

    for the Committee on International Trade

    on the proposal for a decision of the European Parliament and of the Council on providing macro-financial assistance to the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan

    (COM(2024)0159 – C9‑0146/2024 – 2024/0086(COD))

    Rapporteur for budgetary assessment: Johan Van Overtveldt 

    The Committee on Budgets has carried out a budgetary assessment of the proposal under Rule 58 of the Rules of Procedure and has reached the following conclusions:

    A. whereas Jordan continues to face significant external financing needs and economic challenges, with a current account deficit of 7.1 % of gross domestic product (GDP) in the first half of 2023, driven by persistent deficits in trade in goods; whereas Jordan’s public debt burden remains high at 88.7 % of GDP in 2023, raising concerns about long-term fiscal sustainability;

    B. whereas Jordan’s narrow revenue base, with domestic tax revenue at only 16 % of GDP, raises concerns about long-term fiscal sustainability and capacity to service external debts;

    C. whereas the policy measures associated with macro-financial assistance (MFA) cover selected provisions related to the Association Agreement and the EU-Jordan Partnership Priorities 2021-2027;

    D. whereas significant structural challenges hinder economic growth, with deficiencies in the business environment, access to finance, labour market flexibility and public administration; whereas unemployment remains high, especially among women, youth and university graduates, with women’s labour force participation at just 14 % in 2023, among the lowest globally; whereas the EU-Jordan Partnership Priorities 2021-2027 aim to address these issues by fostering decent work, innovation, skills development and comprehensive social protection systems;

    E. whereas the EU-Jordan Partnership Priorities 2021-2027 highlight cooperation in inter-religious and intercultural dialogue and the protection of cultural heritage as drivers of peace and sustainable development; whereas these efforts can include safeguarding historical manuscripts and archives, contributing to inclusive dialogue and mutual understanding;

    F. whereas Jordan’s economy has suffered significantly from protracted conflicts and crises in the region, notably in neighbouring Syria, and most recently in Israel/Gaza and the Red Sea; whereas these pose further risks to Jordan’s economic outlook, particularly affecting tourism and trade, with disruptions to exports and vessel traffic;

    G. whereas the severe deterioration of external accounts and Jordan’s strategic importance for regional stability justify this support package;

    H. whereas the conflicts in Gaza and the wider region have been exacerbating socioeconomic challenges in Jordan given its geographical position;

    1. Notes that the Commission proposal of EUR 500 million in MFA requires EUR 45 million in provisioning under the External Action Guarantee from the Neighbourhood, Development and International Cooperation Instrument – Global Europe; points out that the evolving financial and economic realities in Jordan might require a revision of the proposed amount of MFA, consequently having an effect on provisioning;

    2. Notes that the assistance will be disbursed in three instalments between 2024 and 2027, with release strictly linked to the progress of the implementation of both the International Monetary Fund programme and additional policy measures;

    3. Recalls that this represents the fourth MFA operation for Jordan since 2014, bringing total MFA support to EUR 1.58 billion, demonstrating the EU’s sustained commitment to supporting Jordan’s economic stability;

    4. Acknowledges that the loan structure includes a grace period and spreads repayments over a long period, creating extended contingent liabilities for the EU budget that require monitoring over multiple financial frameworks;

    5. Acknowledges that the International Monetary Fund assessed Jordan’s public debt level as sustainable in its report of January 2024, while noting that debt sustainability risks remain significant;

    6. Recalls that previous MFA operations for Jordan have demonstrated positive track records in terms of repayment;

    7. Emphasises that the MFA underpins Jordan’s continued commitment to values shared with the Union, including democracy, rule of law, good governance and respect for human rights; highlights that these commitments are key to ensuring effective reforms and long-term stability; stresses that a precondition for granting the Union’s macro-financial assistance is that Jordan respects effective democratic mechanisms – including a multi-party parliamentary system – and guarantees respect for human rights;

    8. Stresses the importance of the regular verification of Jordan’s compliance with the preconditions, ongoing conditionality and objectives to protect the EU’s financial interests and ensure the implementation of the MFA in accordance with the regulation;

    9. Calls for proper monitoring and regular reporting to Parliament and the Council on developments relating to the assistance as well as the continuous monitoring of conditions and objectives;

    10. Recalls that while MFA is meant to be an exceptional crisis response instrument, its increasing use to address structural economic challenges in partner countries risks diluting its emergency nature;

    11. Concludes that the proposal for a decision on providing macro-financial assistance to Jordan is compatible with the EU’s budgetary framework and financial rules.

     

     

    ANNEX: ENTITIES OR PERSONS
    FROM WHOM THE RAPPORTEUR FOR BUDGETARY ASSESSMENT HAS RECEIVED INPUT

    The Chair in his capacity as rapporteur for budgetary assessment declares under his exclusive responsibility that he did not receive input from any entity or person to be mentioned in this Annex pursuant to Article 8 of Annex I to the Rules of Procedure.

     

    PROCEDURE – COMMITTEE ASKED FOR BUDGETARY ASSESSMENT

    Title

    Macro-financial assistance to the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan

    References

    COM(2024)0159 – C9-0146/2024 – 2024/0086(COD)

    Committee(s) responsible

    INTA

     

     

     

     Date announced in plenary

    BUDG

    25.4.2024

    Rapporteur for budgetary assessment

     Date appointed

    Johan Van Overtveldt

    5.12.2024

    Discussed in committee

    16.1.2025

     

     

     

    Date adopted

    29.1.2025

     

     

     

    Result of final vote

    +:

    –:

    0:

    35

    2

    1

    Members present for the final vote

    Georgios Aftias, Rasmus Andresen, Isabel Benjumea Benjumea, Tobiasz Bocheński, Olivier Chastel, Tamás Deutsch, Angéline Furet, Jens Geier, Thomas Geisel, Jean-Marc Germain, Sandra Gómez López, Monika Hohlmeier, Alexander Jungbluth, Janusz Lewandowski, Giuseppe Lupo, Siegfried Mureşan, Matjaž Nemec, Danuše Nerudová, João Oliveira, Ruggero Razza, Karlo Ressler, Julien Sanchez, Hélder Sousa Silva, Joachim Streit, Carla Tavares, Nils Ušakovs, Lucia Yar, Auke Zijlstra

    Substitutes present for the final vote

    Damian Boeselager, Michalis Hadjipantela, Moritz Körner, Tiago Moreira de Sá, Rasmus Nordqvist, Michele Picaro, Jacek Protas, Beata Szydło

    Members under Rule 216(7) present for the final vote

    Thierry Mariani, Aodhán Ó Ríordáin

     

     

     

    FINAL VOTE BY ROLL CALL
    IN COMMITTEE ASKED FOR BUDGETARY ASSESSMENT

    35

    +

    ECR

    Tobiasz Bocheński, Michele Picaro, Ruggero Razza, Beata Szydło

    NI

    Thomas Geisel

    PPE

    Georgios Aftias, Isabel Benjumea Benjumea, Michalis Hadjipantela, Monika Hohlmeier, Janusz Lewandowski, Siegfried Mureşan, Danuše Nerudová, Jacek Protas, Karlo Ressler, Hélder Sousa Silva

    PfE

    Tamás Deutsch, Angéline Furet, Thierry Mariani, Tiago Moreira de Sá, Julien Sanchez

    Renew

    Olivier Chastel, Moritz Körner, Joachim Streit, Lucia Yar

    S&D

    Jens Geier, Jean-Marc Germain, Sandra Gómez López, Giuseppe Lupo, Matjaž Nemec, Aodhán Ó Ríordáin, Carla Tavares, Nils Ušakovs

    Verts/ALE

    Rasmus Andresen, Damian Boeselager, Rasmus Nordqvist

     

    2

    –

    PfE

    Auke Zijlstra

    The Left

    João Oliveira

     

    1

    0

    ESN

    Alexander Jungbluth

     

    Key to symbols:

    + : in favour

    – : against

    0 : abstention

    OPINION OF THE COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS (31.1.2025)

    for the Committee on International Trade

    on the proposal for a decision of the European Parliament and of the Council on providing macro-financial assistance to the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan

    (COM(2024)0159 – C9‑0146/2024 – 2024/0086(COD))

    Rapporteur for opinion: Malik Azmani

     

     

    AMENDMENTS

    The Committee on Foreign Affairs submits the following to the Committee on International Trade, as the committee responsible:

    Amendment  1

    Proposal for a decision

    Recital 2

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    (2) Since 2011, Jordan has embarked on a number of political reforms to strengthen parliamentary democracy and the rule of law. A Constitutional Court and an Independent Electoral Commission have been set up and a number of major laws, including the Electoral Act and the Political Parties Act as well as laws on decentralisation and municipalities, have been passed by the Jordanian Parliament. Legislative improvements as regards the independence of the judiciary and women’s rights have been adopted.

    (2) Since 2021, Jordan has embarked on a number of political reforms to strengthen parliamentary democracy and the rule of law. A Constitutional Court and an Independent Electoral Commission have been set up and a number of major laws, including the Electoral Act and the Political Parties Act as well as laws on decentralisation and municipalities, have been passed by the Jordanian Parliament. Legislative improvements as regards the independence of the judiciary and women’s rights have been adopted. The European Election Observation Mission in Jordan took note of the inclusive and well-organised parliamentary elections that took place on 10 September 2024 in the context of the political modernisation initiated by the King in 2021. It is crucial that the Union continues to support peace in Jordan and does everything within its power to preserve the unique Jordanian model of ethnic and religious representation in order to ensure legitimate representation of those groups.

    Amendment  2

     

    Proposal for a decision

    Recital 3

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    (3) The Jordanian economy has suffered significantly from protracted conflicts in the region, notably in neighbouring Syria, and most recently in Israel/Gaza and the Red Sea. Since the start of the war in Syria, the Jordanian economy has been impacted by a large inflow of Syrian refugees, which has increased pressure on its fiscal position, public services and infrastructure. In addition to regional instability, the macroeconomic and fiscal challenges related to the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020/2021, commodity price developments following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in 2022, high exposure to trade fluctuations and the increase of borrowing costs for emerging markets globally continued to weigh on the Jordanian economy. As a result, Jordan experienced an economic contraction in 2020, followed by a slow economic recovery, as unemployment increased significantly in 2020 and remained high, and new fiscal and external financing needs emerged.

    (3) The Jordanian economy has suffered significantly from protracted conflicts in the region, notably in neighbouring Syria, and most recently in Israel/Gaza and the Red Sea. Since the start of the war in Syria, the Jordanian economy has been impacted by a large inflow of Syrian refugees, which has increased pressure on its fiscal position, public services and infrastructure. The current uncertainty in Syria further exacerbates the already highly detrimental instability for Jordan. Jordan hosts around 1,3 million refugees, making it one of the countries with the highest number of refugee populations per capita. In addition to regional instability, the macroeconomic and fiscal challenges related to the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020/2021, commodity price developments following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in 2022, high exposure to trade fluctuations and the increase of borrowing costs for emerging markets globally continued to weigh on the Jordanian economy. As a result, Jordan experienced an economic contraction in 2020, followed by a slow economic recovery, as unemployment increased significantly in 2020 and remained high, and new fiscal and external financing needs emerged. Moreover, significant structural issues hinder economic growth, particularly in the area of private sector development. Challenges such as an unfavourable business environment and inflexibility in the labour market remain unresolved.

    Amendment  3

     

    Proposal for a decision

    Recital 4 a (new)

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

     

    (4a) The Union recognises Jordan’s pivotal role in promoting regional stability and mediating conflicts, particularly amidst heightened tensions. The proposed macro-financial assistance aims to support Jordan in maintaining its positive role in the region. In that context, and in recognition of Jordan being one of the Union’s strongest regional partners, it is imperative for the Commission and the European External Action Service (EEAS) to further deepen and strengthen the EU-Jordan partnership, thereby advancing cooperation.

    Amendment  4

     

    Proposal for a decision

    Recital 21

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    (21) A pre-condition for granting the Union’s macro-financial assistance should be that Jordan respects effective democratic mechanisms – including a multi-party parliamentary system – and the rule of law, and guarantees respect for human rights. In addition, the specific objectives of the Union’s macro-financial assistance should strengthen the efficiency, transparency and accountability of the public finance management systems in Jordan and promote structural reforms aimed at supporting sustainable and inclusive growth, employment creation and fiscal consolidation. Both the fulfilment of the pre-conditions and the achievement of those objectives should be regularly monitored by the Commission and the EEAS.

    (21) A pre-condition for granting the Union’s macro-financial assistance should be that Jordan respects effective democratic mechanisms – including a multi-party parliamentary system – and the rule of law, and guarantees respect for human rights. In addition, the specific objectives of the Union’s macro-financial assistance should strengthen the efficiency, transparency and accountability of the public finance management systems in Jordan and promote structural reforms aimed at supporting sustainable and inclusive growth, employment creation, and fiscal consolidation and policies. Both the fulfilment of the pre-conditions and the achievement of those objectives should be regularly monitored by the Commission and the EEAS, which should subsequently be reported to the European Parliament. The Union should encourage Jordan’s efforts toward economic diversification and sustainability, particularly in sectors such as renewable energy, technology  and digital services, in order to reduce its reliance on tourism and chemical exports and to enhance long-term resilience.

    Amendment  5

     

    Proposal for a decision

    Recital 27

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    (27) The Union’s macro-financial assistance should be subject to economic policy conditions, to be laid down in a Memorandum of Understanding. In order to ensure uniform conditions of implementation and for reasons of efficiency, the Commission should be empowered to negotiate such conditions with the Jordanian authorities under the supervision of the committee of representatives of the Member States in accordance with Regulation (EU) No 182/2011. Under that Regulation, the advisory procedure should, as a general rule, apply in all cases other than as provided for in that Regulation. Considering the potentially important impact of assistance of more than EUR 90 million, it is appropriate that the examination procedure be used for operations above that threshold. Considering the amount of the Union’s macro-financial assistance to Jordan, the examination procedure should apply to the adoption of the Memorandum of Understanding, and to any reduction, suspension or cancellation of the assistance.

    (27) The Union’s macro-financial assistance should be subject to clear and measurable economic, as well as democracy, rule of law and human rights policy conditions, to be laid down in a Memorandum of Understanding. In order to ensure uniform conditions of implementation and for reasons of efficiency, the Commission should be empowered to negotiate such conditions with the Jordanian authorities under the supervision of the committee of representatives of the Member States in accordance with Regulation (EU) No 182/2011. Under that Regulation, the advisory procedure should, as a general rule, apply in all cases other than as provided for in that Regulation. Considering the potentially important impact of assistance of more than EUR 90 million, it is appropriate that the examination procedure be used for operations above that threshold. Considering the amount of the Union’s macro-financial assistance to Jordan, the examination procedure should apply to the adoption of the Memorandum of Understanding, including clear and measurable benchmarks to evaluate the implementation of each instalment, and to any reduction, suspension or cancellation of the assistance.

    Amendment  6

     

    Proposal for a decision

    Article 2 – paragraph 2

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    2. The Commission and the European External Action Service shall monitor the fulfilment of this pre-condition throughout the life cycle of the Union’s macro-financial assistance..

    2. The Commission and the European External Action Service shall monitor the fulfilment of this pre-condition throughout the life cycle of the Union’s macro-financial assistance in a transparent process in which independent third parties are able to contribute meaningfully. The Commission and the EEAS shall also report, both regularly and in writing, to the European Parliament and to the Council on the fulfilment of the pre-condition referred to in paragraph 1.

    Amendment  7

     

    Proposal for a decision

    Article 3 – paragraph 2

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    2. The conditions referred to in paragraph 1 shall aim, in particular, at enhancing the efficiency, transparency and accountability of the public finance management systems in Jordan, including for the use of the Union’s macro-financial assistance. Progress in mutual market opening, the development of rules-based and fair trade, and other priorities in the context of the Union’s external policy shall also be duly taken into account when designing the policy measures. Progress in attaining those objectives shall be regularly monitored by the Commission.

    2. The conditions referred to in paragraph 1 shall aim, in particular, at enhancing the efficiency, transparency and accountability of the public finance management systems in Jordan, including for the use of the Union’s macro-financial assistance. This shall include the publication of regular and detailed reports by the Jordanian government on the use of funds, specifying allocations for key sectors such as healthcare, education, and infrastructure, ensuring public access to such information. Progress in public services, mutual market opening, the development of rules-based and fair trade, and other priorities in the context of the Union’s external policy, including those related to democracy, rule of law and human rights, shall also be duly taken into account when designing the policy measures. Progress in attaining those objectives shall be regularly monitored by the Commission and the EEAS, and shall be communicated to the European Parliament.

    Amendment  8

    Proposal for a decision

    Article 4 – paragraph 4

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    4. Where the conditions referred to in the first subparagraph of paragraph 3 are not met, the Commission shall temporarily suspend or cancel the disbursement of the Union’s macro-financial assistance. In such cases, it shall inform the European Parliament and the Council of the reasons for the suspension or cancellation.

    4. Where the conditions referred to in the first subparagraph of paragraph 3 are not met, the Commission shall temporarily suspend or cancel the disbursement of the Union’s macro-financial assistance. In such cases, it shall inform the European Parliament and the Council of the reasons for the suspension or cancellation and of the subsequent steps.

     

     

    ANNEX: ENTITIES OR PERSONS
    FROM WHOM THE RAPPORTEUR FOR THE OPINION HAS RECEIVED INPUT

    Pursuant to Article 8 of Annex I to the Rules of Procedure, the rapporteur for the opinion received input from the following entities or persons in the preparation of the opinion:

    Entity and/or person

     

    European Commission – DG ECFIN

    The Court of Auditors

    The Ambassador of Jordan to the EU

    Member of the Royal committee to Modernize the Political System in Jordan

    The list above is drawn up under the exclusive responsibility of the rapporteur for the opinion.

    Where natural persons are identified in the list by their name, by their function or by both, the rapporteur for the opinion declares that he has submitted to the concerned natural persons the European Parliament’s Data Protection Notice No 484 (https://www.europarl.europa.eu/data-protect/index.do), which sets out the conditions applicable to the processing of their personal data and the rights linked to that processing.

     

    PROCEDURE – COMMITTEE ASKED FOR OPINION

    Title

    Macro-financial assistance to the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan

    References

    COM(2024)0159 – C9-0146/2024 – 2024/0086(COD)

    Committee(s) responsible

    INTA

     

     

     

    Opinion by

     Date announced in plenary

    AFET

    25.4.2024

    Rapporteur for the opinion

     Date appointed

    Malik Azmani

    14.10.2024

    Date adopted

    30.1.2025

     

     

     

    Result of final vote

    +:

    –:

    0:

    54

    11

    6

    Members present for the final vote

    Mika Aaltola, Lucia Annunziata, Petras Auštrevičius, Jordan Bardella, Dan Barna, Wouter Beke, Robert Biedroń, Ioan-Rareş Bogdan, Marc Botenga, Grzegorz Braun, Sebastião Bugalho, Danilo Della Valle, Özlem Demirel, Elio Di Rupo, Michael Gahler, Geadis Geadi, Giorgos Georgiou, Raphaël Glucksmann, Bernard Guetta, Rima Hassan, Rasa Juknevičienė, Sandra Kalniete, Łukasz Kohut, Rihards Kols, Andrey Kovatchev, Vilis Krištopans, Nathalie Loiseau, Claudiu Manda, David McAllister, Sven Mikser, Francisco José Millán Mon, Arkadiusz Mularczyk, Leoluca Orlando, Kostas Papadakis, Tonino Picula, Nacho Sánchez Amor, Andreas Schieder, Alexander Sell, Villy Søvndal, Davor Ivo Stier, Sebastiaan Stöteler, Stanislav Stoyanov, Marie-Agnes Strack-Zimmermann, Michał Szczerba, António Tânger Corrêa, Marta Temido, Cristian Terheş, Riho Terras, Hermann Tertsch, Pierre-Romain Thionnet, Sebastian Tynkkynen, Reinier Van Lanschot, Roberto Vannacci, Hilde Vautmans, Harald Vilimsky, Željana Zovko

    Substitutes present for the final vote

    Malik Azmani, Engin Eroglu, Sandra Gómez López, Evin Incir, András László, Ana Catarina Mendes, Hans Neuhoff, Nicolás Pascual de la Parte, Tineke Strik, Ingeborg Ter Laak, Matej Tonin, Ivaylo Valchev, Isabel Wiseler-Lima, Milan Zver

    Members under Rule 216(7) present for the final vote

    Catarina Vieira

     

    FINAL VOTE BY ROLL CALL IN COMMITTEE ASKED FOR OPINION

    54

    +

    ECR

    Geadis Geadi, Rihards Kols, Arkadiusz Mularczyk, Cristian Terheş, Ivaylo Valchev

    PPE

    Mika Aaltola, Wouter Beke, Ioan-Rareş Bogdan, Sebastião Bugalho, Michael Gahler, Rasa Juknevičienė, Sandra Kalniete, Łukasz Kohut, Andrey Kovatchev, David McAllister, Francisco José Millán Mon, Nicolás Pascual de la Parte, Davor Ivo Stier, Michał Szczerba, Ingeborg Ter Laak, Riho Terras, Matej Tonin, Isabel Wiseler-Lima, Željana Zovko, Milan Zver

    PfE

    András László

    Renew

    Petras Auštrevičius, Malik Azmani, Dan Barna, Engin Eroglu, Bernard Guetta, Nathalie Loiseau, Marie-Agnes Strack-Zimmermann, Hilde Vautmans

    S&D

    Lucia Annunziata, Robert Biedroń, Elio Di Rupo, Raphaël Glucksmann, Sandra Gómez López, Evin Incir, Claudiu Manda, Ana Catarina Mendes, Sven Mikser, Tonino Picula, Nacho Sánchez Amor, Andreas Schieder, Marta Temido

    The Left

    Özlem Demirel, Rima Hassan

    Verts/ALE

    Leoluca Orlando, Villy Søvndal, Tineke Strik, Reinier Van Lanschot, Catarina Vieira

     

    11

    –

    ECR

    Sebastian Tynkkynen

    NI

    Grzegorz Braun, Kostas Papadakis

    PfE

    Jordan Bardella, Vilis Krištopans, Sebastiaan Stöteler, António Tânger Corrêa, Hermann Tertsch, Pierre-Romain Thionnet, Roberto Vannacci, Harald Vilimsky

     

    6

    0

    ESN

    Hans Neuhoff, Alexander Sell, Stanislav Stoyanov

    The Left

    Marc Botenga, Danilo Della Valle, Giorgos Georgiou

     

    Key to symbols:

    + : in favour

    – : against

    0 : abstention

     

     

     

     

    PROCEDURE – COMMITTEE RESPONSIBLE

    Title

    Macro-financial assistance to the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan

    References

    COM(2024)0159 – C9-0146/2024 – 2024/0086(COD)

    Date submitted to Parliament

    8.4.2024

     

     

     

    Committee(s) responsible

    INTA

     

     

     

    Committees asked for opinions

     Date announced in plenary

    AFET

    25.4.2024

     

     

     

    Rapporteurs

     Date appointed

    Céline Imart

    30.9.2024

     

     

     

    Discussed in committee

    14.10.2024

    30.1.2025

     

     

    Date adopted

    20.3.2025

     

     

     

     

    BUDG

    29.1.2025

     

     

     

    Result of final vote

    +:

    –:

    0:

    35

    2

    3

    Members present for the final vote

    Christophe Bay, Brando Benifei, Anna Bryłka, Udo Bullmann, Benoit Cassart, Markéta Gregorová, Bart Groothuis, Céline Imart, Karin Karlsbro, Bernd Lange, Ilia Lazarov, Thierry Mariani, Javier Moreno Sánchez, Ştefan Muşoiu, Daniele Polato, Majdouline Sbai, Lukas Sieper, Dominik Tarczyński, Francesco Torselli, Kathleen Van Brempt, Jörgen Warborn, Iuliu Winkler, Bogdan Andrzej Zdrojewski, Juan Ignacio Zoido Álvarez

    Substitutes present for the final vote

    Mika Aaltola, Nicolas Bay, Markus Buchheit, João Cotrim De Figueiredo, Danilo Della Valle, Borja Giménez Larraz, Vicent Marzà Ibáñez, Marina Mesure, Martin Schirdewan, Kris Van Dijck

    Members under Rule 216(7) present for the final vote

    Hildegard Bentele, Mélanie Disdier, Niels Geuking, Chloé Ridel, Romana Tomc, Matthieu Valet

    Date tabled

    24.3.2025

     

    FINAL VOTE BY ROLL CALL BY THE COMMITTEE RESPONSIBLE

    35

    +

    ECR

    Daniele Polato, Dominik Tarczyński, Francesco Torselli, Kris Van Dijck

    NI

    Lukas Sieper

    PPE

    Mika Aaltola, Hildegard Bentele, Niels Geuking, Borja Giménez Larraz, Céline Imart, Ilia Lazarov, Romana Tomc, Jörgen Warborn, Iuliu Winkler, Bogdan Andrzej Zdrojewski, Juan Ignacio Zoido Álvarez

    PfE

    Christophe Bay, Anna Bryłka, Mélanie Disdier, Thierry Mariani, Matthieu Valet

    Renew

    Benoit Cassart, João Cotrim De Figueiredo, Bart Groothuis, Karin Karlsbro

    S&D

    Brando Benifei, Udo Bullmann, Bernd Lange, Javier Moreno Sánchez, Ştefan Muşoiu, Chloé Ridel, Kathleen Van Brempt

    Verts/ALE

    Markéta Gregorová, Vicent Marzà Ibáñez, Majdouline Sbai

     

    2

    –

    ECR

    Nicolas Bay

    ESN

    Markus Buchheit

     

    3

    0

    The Left

    Danilo Della Valle, Marina Mesure, Martin Schirdewan

     

    Key to symbols:

    + : in favour

    – : against

    0 : abstention

     

     

    MIL OSI Europe News –

    March 25, 2025
  • MIL-OSI Global: Heeding the lessons of COVID-19 in the face of avian influenza

    Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Matthew S Miller, Executive Director, Global Nexus and M.G. DeGroote Institute for Infectious Disease Research, McMaster University

    If the H5N1 avian flu virus learns to spread efficiently from person to person, it could pose an imminent threat to humanity. (CDC and NIAID), CC BY

    Infectious disease outbreaks have a bad habit of piling on at the worst possible times.

    The 1918 flu pandemic, also known as the Spanish flu, caught the world by surprise just as the First World War was coming to an end. It was responsible for killing three to five per cent of the world’s population (50-100 million people, equivalent to about 400 million today).

    Now, as we reflect on five years since the declaration of the COVID-19 pandemic and face economic uncertainty imposed by the United States administration — as well as lingering conflicts in places such as the Middle East and Ukraine — it’s the steady march of avian influenza, or “bird flu,” that poses an imminent threat to humanity.

    Walter Reed hospital flu ward in Washington, D.C. during the flu epidemic of 1918-19, which killed three to five per cent of the world’s population.
    (Shutterstock)

    Bird flu has been causing a flurry of human infections, especially in U.S. cattle workers. If the virus learns to spread effectively from human to human, it could change the course of history. Even though our weary world already feels maxed out, we have to make room to avert yet another crisis.




    Read more:
    Bird flu in cattle: What are the concerns surrounding the newly emerging bovine H5N1 influenza virus?


    The good news is that we know how to minimize risk and mobilize resources quickly, before the virus starts moving from human-to-human.

    Heading off a bird flu pandemic

    Knowing what to do and actually doing it, though, are very different, as we saw all too well five years ago when COVID-19 shut down much of the world, killing more than seven million people worldwide. And it’s not through with us yet.

    The question is whether we will act in time to head off a bird flu pandemic. The Spanish Flu was the first of five influenza pandemics since the end of the First World War.

    A sixth is inevitable without co-ordinated global action. Otherwise, the only questions are when it will it come and how bad it will be.




    Read more:
    Combatting the measles threat means examining the reasons for declining vaccination rates


    Infectious diseases constitute a permanent threat to society, especially as vaccine hesitancy and misinformation grow. Fighting pandemics needs to be a full-time, ongoing priority for governments everywhere.

    After the arrival of COVID-19, there were some impressive investments in infrastructure and science to support pandemic preparedness, but many were essentially one-time projects.

    Canada needs to establish permanent capacity to prevent and respond to health emergencies. Government agencies specifically dedicated to supporting the development of medical countermeasures for pathogens that pose a pandemic risk, like the recently established Health Emergencies Readiness Canada (HERC), are a step in the right direction.

    However, we must also re-prioritize investments in the fundamental research that is the birthplace of new medical and non-medical solutions to pandemic preparedness — where we currently lag far behind essentially all of our G7 counterparts. This has never been more important than in the current global political context.

    The cost of acting to prevent or limit a pandemic is infinitesimal compared to the price of letting one happen, whether one measures the toll in human lives, or in dollars.

    The world needs to adopt a collective mentality that we are “all in” on prevention if we want to maximize our chances of avoiding the next pandemic. We cannot sit on our hands and hope we get lucky. That strategy has failed us in the past and will doom us in the future.

    H5N1 avian flu

    Today, as we stand on the brink of an avian influenza pandemic that could be significantly worse than COVID-19, too much of the world seems unaware, unprepared or largely disengaged.

    Globally, more than 900 humans are known to have been infected by H5N1 avian influenza so far. The death rate associated with these human infections is a staggering one in two, placing it on par with threats such as Ebola.

    Death rates resulting from human infections of the most prevalent currently circulating H5N1 virus in the U.S. (clade 2.3.4.4b) have been much lower — though the very narrow demographic characteristics of the individuals that have been infected leaves many questions regarding the true danger that this virus poses to the population at-large.
    Avian influenza has become more prevalent than ever in our environment. Having adapted to spread efficiently among cattle and other mammals, the virus will follow its biological imperative to adapt and survive.

    No responsible country can ignore the possibility that person-to-person spread could start anywhere and quickly wash over the planet.




    Read more:
    An ounce of prevention: Now is the time to take action on H5N1 avian flu, because the stakes are enormous


    Certainly, Canada is treating the issue seriously, as I know from my work with the Public Health Agency of Canada, the National Advisory Committee on Immunization, the Ontario Immunization Advisory Committee and other bodies.

    But the effort to stop or at least slow avian influenza needs to include all countries and to engage everyday people, especially those who work directly with birds, cattle and other wild and domestic animals.

    Targeted interventions

    The best tactics to stave off a pandemic, at least at this point, are relatively unintrusive, targeted interventions. It’s critical that farm workers, veterinarians and others who work with animals follow careful protocols such as wearing masks and goggles, sanitizing equipment and continuing to cull poultry flocks where exposure is identified.

    We also need to educate hunters about protective measures to lower their risk of exposure.

    Most mitigation measures are entirely non-medical — though offering vaccines to those at high risk of exposure, as Finland has done, would be prudent. It’s much easier to target vaccination programs to high-risk groups than to organize a global vaccine campaign after a pandemic has begun.

    We need to encourage these groups to take every possible action to protect themselves — and therefore the world — and to provide financial supports that enable them to comply without cost.

    If avian flu becomes established among humans, which could happen rapidly and with very little warning, COVID-19 has shown that only a swift, decisive and truly global approach can fend off disaster.

    A significant lesson from COVID-19 is that we have to support pandemic prevention and response efforts for people in every corner of the world, however remote they may be, and that we must reach vulnerable populations within wealthy countries, such as elderly, frail and marginalized people, and those affected by poverty. These are the people always impacted most by infectious diseases.

    A selective distribution of resources among the planet’s wealthiest populations will not provide the protection the world needs and will only enlarge and extend the reach of a new pandemic.

    We must remember what it was like to close down schools, workplaces and public gatherings and to have hospitals overflowing with patients as clinicians risked their lives to care for them.

    We could have saved so many people and so much money by taking the threat more seriously from the outset, including providing better public education about evidence-based measures such as masking and vaccines.

    It’s past time we made pandemic prevention and response a permanent priority, no matter what else is happening in the world.

    Matthew S Miller is co-founder and Chief Scientific Officer of AeroImmune Inc. He has received compensation from Seqirus, Sanofi, GSK, Roche, Grifols, and Aramis Biotechnologies for participating on advisory boards and for supporting educational activities. He has received research funding from the Canadian Institutes of Health Research, the Canadian Foundation for Innovation, the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada, the Canada Research Chairs Program, the Federal Economic Development Agency for Southern Ontario, Ontario Centre of Innovation, Bay Area Health Trust, Providence Therapeutics, JN Nova Pharma, Lactiga, and Zentek. He is a member of the National Advisory Committee on Immunization COVID-19 Working Group and H5N1 Influenza Working Group. He is also a member of the Ontario Immunization Advisory Committee and the Public Health Agency of Canada Expert Panel on Avian Influenza A(H5Nx).

    – ref. Heeding the lessons of COVID-19 in the face of avian influenza – https://theconversation.com/heeding-the-lessons-of-covid-19-in-the-face-of-avian-influenza-252161

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

    March 25, 2025
  • MIL-OSI Global: Five ways cannabis can contribute to a green future

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Julyan Levy, PhD Candidate, Social Sciences, Coventry University

    24K-Production/Shutterstock

    Cannabis legalisation could raise £1.5 billion for the UK economy, according to a recent report from the charity Transform. But aside from this plant’s economic benefits, cannabis also has many ecological advantages.

    My research into the potential role of cannabis in shaping a fairer and healthier world never fails to excite me. Cannabis flowers became legally allowed as a medicine in the UK in 2018, but its origins as a medicinal herb in Britain dates back to at least Anglo-Saxon times. Its popularity is evident in the many place names scattered across the country, from Hemel Hempstead in Hertfordshire to Littlehempston in Devon.

    Hemp is a colloquial term for the cannabis plant, Cannabis sativa. Hemp often refers to strains of cannabis that have had its main psychoactive chemical, tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), bred out of the female flowers.

    Due to the negative associations cannabis has picked up over the past 50 years of prohibition, hemp farmers have distanced themselves from using the term cannabis. In the UK, this association has resulted in strict conditions for growing hemp creating a barrier for farmers.

    In recent years, cannabidiol (CBD), the main non psychoactive chemical found in female cannabis flowers, has become popular as a wellness product. CBD is abundant in low-THC hemp flowers, so it’s easy for the lines between hemp and cannabis to become blurred.

    It’s all cannabis. This plant has some incredible environmental benefits, from improving soil health to storing carbon. Here are five ways that cannabis plants can contribute to a greener planet:

    1. Productive harvests

    Hemp stems have a woody core, known as shivs, that can be mixed with lime to make hempcrete, a carbon-neutral alternative to concrete. Concrete production is one of the major sources of global greenhouse gas emissions. Hempcrete could be used to build eco-friendly social housing across the UK.

    Hemp seeds are a nutritious food source, high in protein and omega-3. With the UK’s food system in crisis, hemp seeds and the oil they produce could be a more widespread sustainable homegrown food source if hemp could be grown on an industrial scale.

    But industrial monocultures of crops are harmful to biodiversity. One alternative is agroecology – working with nature to prioritise biodiversity through small-scale farming.

    Hemp is ideally suited to agroecology, but it’s not an easy crop to grow in the UK
    because licensing laws make it very difficult for hemp farmers to tap into a global market worth billions.

    Farmers at one community farm, Hempen in Oxfordshire, sowed their first hemp crop over an area of 30 acres. In 2019, Hempen were forced to destroy their CBD harvest as their licence wasn’t renewed.

    In California, THC strains are allowed. One farming community started producing its own CBD-based medicines on just one acre of land. Others use the plant in other interesting ways, from rehabilitating formally incarcerated people to off-grid market gardens.

    Hemp offers potential as a fast-growing crop that enriches soil health.
    MAR007/Shutterstock

    2. Healthy soils

    Soil is essential for growing 98.8% of our food. Yet, it is often contaminated with toxic chemicals from industrial processes or the legacies of war.

    A process known as phytoremediation cleans the soil of these toxic contaminants. Hemp’s deep roots have a high tolerance for absorbing dangerous heavy metals. It is also a great break crop – this is a way for farmers to rotate the types of crops they grow to keep the soil healthy.




    Read more:
    Hemp is more sustainable than timber – here’s how it could transform low-carbon construction


    3. Plastic alternatives

    Plastic is poisoning our bodies and our planet. Recent reports suggest that the human brain may contain enough microplastics to make a spoon.

    Bioplastics made from hemp are biodegradable, composting down into organic matter leaving no microplastics. Hemp bioplastics are already being used by a number of commercial companies from building cars to packaging.

    Bioplastics do not offer a complete solution, but with the right infrastructure they could help reduce the need to derive more plastics from fossil fuels.

    4. Carbon storage

    Trees and other plants remove carbon dioxide from the air through the process of photosynthesis. Hemp is great at this, storing twice as much carbon dioxide than trees.

    Hemp is easy to grow without synthetic chemical inputs. It requires virtually no pesticides and reaches maturity much more quickly than trees. Once it absorbs the carbon, it’s easily stored in hempcrete blocks that can be used in construction.

    5. Energy storage

    It’s very difficult to store excess energy from renewable sources for use at a later date when the sun might not be shining or the wind isn’t blowing. Big batteries are one solution but these require mining precious metals.

    Another solution are supercapacitors – mega-efficient energy storage solutions that can be as small as a coin. Graphene, a flat material stronger than steel, is an essential element in the production of supercapacitors but it’s expensive and energy-intensive to make.

    The whole stem biomass (unused plant waste) from cannabis could provide a low-cost way to make graphene. Research shows that supercapacitors using hemp-based graphene perform much more efficiently than current commercial models.

    Hemp has many other known uses, from textiles to paper. The UK could lead the way in hemp innovation. The previous UK government did announce some minor changes to hemp licensing. Now, further changes to legislation could help farmers to harness the potential of this wondercrop in the fight against climate change.


    Don’t have time to read about climate change as much as you’d like?

    Get a weekly roundup in your inbox instead. Every Wednesday, The Conversation’s environment editor writes Imagine, a short email that goes a little deeper into just one climate issue. Join the 40,000+ readers who’ve subscribed so far.


    Julyan Levy is affiliated with The Green Party of England and Wales.

    – ref. Five ways cannabis can contribute to a green future – https://theconversation.com/five-ways-cannabis-can-contribute-to-a-green-future-251523

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

    March 25, 2025
  • MIL-OSI United Kingdom: UK-French relationship strengthened as Defence Chiefs discuss Ukraine and European security with their French counterparts

    Source: United Kingdom – Executive Government & Departments

    Press release

    UK-French relationship strengthened as Defence Chiefs discuss Ukraine and European security with their French counterparts

    The UK and France have today continued top level defence engagements with a meeting of both nations Military Chiefs in London.

    UK Military Chiefs with their French counterparts stood in front of MOD Main Building

    • UK and France working hand-in-hand to secure a lasting peace In Ukraine.
    • Historic Anglo-French Lancaster House Agreement to be strengthened in 2025.
    • Chiefs will discuss efforts to step-up on European security.

    Leading international efforts to build a ‘Coalition of the Willing’ to support Ukraine’s future security, France and the UK have today continued top level defence engagements with a meeting of both nations Military Chiefs in London.

    The heads of the defence forces for both countries, alongside the heads of the Armies, Navies and Air Forces, will be discussing UK and French efforts to galvanise the European response to the situation in Ukraine as well as the growing defence partnership between the two countries.

    The third annual UK-France All Military Chiefs meeting comes at a pivotal time for European security and continues the acceleration of top level defence engagement around the Coalition of the Willing, where the UK and France have been leading discussions on how our military can support security guarantees for Ukraine’s future.

    Admiral Sir Tony Radakin, Chief of the Defence Staff, said:

    At this pivotal time for European security the third meeting of the British and French Chiefs of Staff should be seen as a sign of reassurance and commitment. Europe’s two leading nuclear powers are stepping up to forge a stronger and deeper partnership that has a vital foundational role to play in the security of the continent.

    Today’s deliberations will help shape the future of British and French military cooperation, and our shared efforts to support Ukraine with military aid now and after any peace deal.

    The combined convening power of Britain and France is immense. The political leadership of Prime Minister Starmer and President Macron is reflected in the military planning that is now underway between our respective staffs as we draw together a Coalition of the Willing from Europe and beyond.

    This meeting comes after a series of high-level engagements hosted in both Paris and London, with the Prime Minister travelling to Paris and hosting leaders in London and the Defence Secretary conducting simultaneous visits to France as well as joining an operational planning meeting last week alongside the Prime Minister at the UK’s Permanent Joint Headquarters (PJHQ).  

    The UK Is also set to host further joint planning meetings at PJHQ in Northwood this week, where intensive discussions will continue over several days.

    Joint Anglo-French efforts to build political alignment and collective agreement amongst Euro-Atlantic security actors is essential to ensure that any Ukraine deal is adequately defended. As the Prime Minister and Defence Secretary have both clearly stated, a lasting peace in Ukraine can only be achieved if we provide real and credible security assurances to deter Putin.

    The meetings will also provide an opportunity for dialogue ahead of UK-France Summit later in 2025. This summit will seek to enhance the 2010 Lancaster House Treaties on Security and Defence. These already provide the UK and France with a firm foundation of in-depth military cooperation, unmatched between European partners. The renewed treaties will be an ambitious refresh of our defence relationship and at this time of unprecedented challenge is vital to both of our security interests.  

    This work will aim to deliver the further integration of UK and French armed forces and include our shared Combined Joint Expeditionary Force (CJEF) concept, which has given the UK and France an unparalleled level of interoperability as allies.  

    Keeping the country safe is the Government’s first priority, and an integral part of its Plan for Change. The work of defence, is critical to the security and stability of the UK, supporting all of the Government’s five missions as a foundation of its plan.

    Share this page

    The following links open in a new tab

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

    Updates to this page

    Published 24 March 2025

    MIL OSI United Kingdom –

    March 25, 2025
  • MIL-OSI Europe: Briefing – EU energy partnerships: United States – 24-03-2025

    Source: European Parliament 2

    The energy system is a cornerstone of the United States (US) economy and competitiveness. The country’s energy mix in 2022 was well-diversified, consisting of two thirds natural gas and oil, with the rest almost equal proportions of coal, nuclear and renewables. By using its vast reserves in fossil fuels and applying new extraction technologies, the US has managed to increase its fossil fuel production significantly over the past 10 years and, since 2019, it has become a net energy exporter for the first time in decades. US fossil fuel exports have increased further since Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine, at a time when the EU has looked to close the gap created by its ending imports from Russia. The US is also the world’s largest producer of nuclear power, accounting for about 30 % of worldwide generation of nuclear electricity. During the Biden administration, the EU and the US were close allies and shared values on energy and the importance of energy transition. In this context, they cooperated through several channels and forums. At the same time, however, their initiatives (the Inflation Reduction Act in the US, the European Green Deal in the EU) showed that, while the goal (decarbonisation and generation of energy from renewable sources) remained the same, the visions and means to achieve them differed between the US and the EU. This created the conditions for both cooperation and rivalry. Since then, the new Trump administration has shown that it intends to conduct a more aggressive, fossil fuel-based energy policy. This could reduce cooperation and create tensions in energy relations between the partners, as was the case during President Trump’s previous term.

    MIL OSI Europe News –

    March 25, 2025
  • MIL-OSI Europe: Briefing – EU and Ukraine: Potential for stronger energy cooperation on the path to integration – 24-03-2025

    Source: European Parliament 2

    Ukraine is the second largest country on the European continent after Russia. Its oil, coal and gas reserves, as well as its geostrategic position, ensured its important role in energy trade, both during the Soviet Union and after its collapse. However, Russia’s initial invasion of Ukraine (since 2014), followed by a full-scale war of aggression against the country, have had severe human and economic impacts. In the energy area, for example, Russia’s strategy has been to weaponise (e.g. the occupation of Zaporizhzhia nuclear power station) or destroy (hydro and coal-fired power plants, as well as electricity grid substations) energy infrastructure. As a result, Ukraine’s electricity generation capacity has been severely limited. Moreover, its choice to be less dependent on Russian energy, and to apply for EU membership, means that, within a short time frame, it must rebuild its energy grid and orient it towards a future with less fossil fuels; all this while being in a war. Energy relations between the EU and Ukraine are multifaceted (e.g. the Energy Community; the memorandum of understanding on energy in 2005, updated in 2016; the association agreement signed in 2014). In future, they are due to be reframed under the institutional arrangements for the enlargement talks (after Ukraine was granted EU candidate status in 2022). Since the Russian invasion in 2022, to help Ukraine cope with the multiple challenges its energy grid has been facing, the EU has used several mechanisms and initiatives, such as successfully synchronising the Ukrainian grid with the Continental European Synchronous Area; the EU civil protection mechanism; the Ukraine Facility; the Ukraine Energy Support Fund; and the European Investment Bank. The outcome of the war is uncertain, and some see recent statements by the new United States administration as a significant setback for Ukraine. Others focus instead on the possibilities for further collaboration between Ukraine and the EU. They bring as examples the country’s vast gas reserves and infrastructure both to transport and to store natural gas, nuclear power or green hydrogen, provided that the country engages in the development of relevant infrastructure.

    MIL OSI Europe News –

    March 25, 2025
  • MIL-OSI Global: Giorgia Meloni’s government is still supporting Ukraine and backing NATO. Italy’s aerospace and defence sectors help explain why

    Source: The Conversation – France – By Jean-Pierre Darnis, Full professor at the University of Côte d’Azur, director of the master’s programme in “France-Italy Relations”. Associate fellow at the Foundation for Strategic Research (FRS, Paris) and adjunct professor at LUISS University (Rome), Université Côte d’Azur

    US President Donald Trump’s pivot toward Russia amid its war in Ukraine has collided with the stance of Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni’s government, which has always shown unwavering support for Kyiv as well as loyalty to Washington. When Trump came to power, Meloni wanted to appear connected to his administration, hoping to play the role of a bridge with Europe while France and Germany were in unfavourable political cycles. Trump’s pivot led to a revival of France’s role in Europe, while Germany emerged from its electoral period with its likely next chancellor, Friedrich Merz, calling for European defence’s “independence from the USA”.

    Meloni’s position is not only weakening within the European context, where France, Germany and the UK play leading roles, but also in Italian politics, as US policy has created rifts within the three-part governing coalition. Meloni’s party, Fratelli d’Italia, supports Ukraine and Europe, as does Forza Italia. But the leader of Lega, Matteo Salvini, has come to embody Trumpism in Italy, taking an openly pro-Russian position and opposing European rearmament. If a break with Lega were to occur, it could call into question the viability of the government, as it would no longer hold an absolute majority in parliament.

    Anti-French rhetoric

    For her part, Meloni always tends to push back against any “European-only” defence solution proposed by France. This position is a way for Italy to avoid facing the fact that NATO has weakened. It also reactivates an anti-French rhetoric that is a classic refrain among Italian nationalists. Salvini has recently accused French President Emmanuel Macron of being “crazy” and calling for Europe to prepare for nuclear war.

    However, Macron has not made any significant missteps toward Italy. Since the first informal emergency meeting in Paris after Trump’s policy shift toward Ukraine (a gathering that included the UK, Germany, Italy, Denmark, the Netherlands, Spain and Poland), the Italian government has always been involved. Moreover, Macron’s policy convergence with UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer has dulled criticisms, because Rome is traditionally close to London.

    Both Meloni’s government and the opposition have put forward complicated if not unrealistic proposals for the war in Ukraine, such as a UN peacekeeping mission after a ceasefire, and repeatedly reaffirmed their commitment to NATO. In terms of public opinion, a poll published in mid-February – two weeks before Trump scolded Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky during a White House visit – found that 69 percent of Italians “are favourable toward a common European army”.

    There is also a growing debate in Italy on nuclear deterrence. This issue had been taboo until now, with Italy benefitting from an arrangement in which US nuclear bombs are stored in bases on Italian soil. While Germany and Poland have expressed interest in an expansion of the French nuclear umbrella, Italian media and policymakers are also beginning to discuss it. The discussion may reflect doubts about US reliability within NATO, including Washington’s commitment to the alliance treaty’s Article 5, which holds that “an armed attack” on one member “shall be considered an attack against them all”.




    À lire aussi :
    French nuclear deterrence for Europe: how effective could it be against Russia?


    Defence ties to Europe

    There are also significant signals coming from Italian industry. While, in recent months, the Italian government appeared to want to use the telecommunications services of Starlink, the satellite network created by Elon Musk, for its defence needs, a contract no longer seems to be on the agenda. Musk’s fluctuating stance about the Starlink service provided to Kyiv, as well as the US decision that temporarily cut aid to Ukraine, introduced questions about reliability. This explains how, in just a few weeks, the French company Eutelsat, which owns the OneWeb constellation, has seen a resurgence of interest, as many countries assess its services as alternatives to Starlink. Following this turmoil, the Italian company Leonardo recently announced that it is planning to launch a constellation of 18 telecommunications satellites for defence purposes.

    These developments also tie into Italy’s industrial position in aerospace and defence, because Leonardo and Fincantieri, another large, publicly owned company, do not limit their markets to the Italian armed forces. As part of a European strategy, Leonardo concluded an agreement with the German company Rheinmetall in 2024 to jointly produce battle tanks, and recently announced an agreement with the Turkish company Baykar to produce drones. Leonardo is part-owner, along with French defence company Thales, of Telespazio and of Thales Alenia Space, and is also in discussions with Airbus to form a European satellite production group. In the missile sector, Leonardo’s participation in European joint venture MBDA allowed Italy and France to produce the SAMP/T anti-missile system, which could lead to further developments for the European missile-defence network. In shipbuilding, Fincantieri has expressed interest in merging its activities with the German group Thyssen Krupp Marine Systems. And in aircraft, Italy is participating in the Global Air Combat Programme, which includes the UK and Japan in the production of fighter jets. These examples show that Italian aerospace and defence development is intrinsically linked to European collaborations and export markets.

    Both in terms of industrial interests and politics, Italy is firmly anchored in the European camp. The positive stance that the Meloni government took toward Washington does not mean Rome is considering an alternative to EU affiliation. Italy is also facing continuous cyberattacks from Russian groups, which feeds a clear threat perception. The prime minister has stressed her differences with France and the UK during the recent European security summits, but while Italy may be reluctant to deploy peacekeeping troops in Ukraine, it cannot distance itself too much from the future defence architecture of Europe.

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

    – ref. Giorgia Meloni’s government is still supporting Ukraine and backing NATO. Italy’s aerospace and defence sectors help explain why – https://theconversation.com/giorgia-melonis-government-is-still-supporting-ukraine-and-backing-nato-italys-aerospace-and-defence-sectors-help-explain-why-252683

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

    March 25, 2025
  • MIL-OSI Global: Ukraine will need major rebuilding when war ends − here’s why the US isn’t likely to invest in its recovery with a new Marshall Plan

    Source: The Conversation – USA – By Frank A. Blazich Jr., Curator of Military History, National Museum of American History, Smithsonian Institution

    Europe after World War II? No, it’s the Ukrainian city of Bakhmut in 2023, after a year of Russian bombardment. AP Photo, File

    President Donald Trump wants Ukraine to repay the United States for helping to defend the country against Russia’s invasion.

    Since 2022, Congress has provided about US$174 billion to Ukraine and neighboring countries to assist its war effort. Trump inflated this figure to $350 billion in a March 2025 White House meeting with French President Emmanuel Macron. Separately, he has suggested Ukraine could reimburse the U.S. by giving America access to its minerals.

    Ukraine is rich in titanium, graphite, manganese and other rare earth metals used to produce electric vehicle batteries and other tech devices.

    Mining and refining these critical mineral resources would require major investment in infrastructure and economic development, including in parts of Ukraine severely damaged by fighting. Some analysts are calling for a return to the European Recovery Program, commonly known as the Marshall Plan.

    The Marshall Plan used $13.3 billion in U.S. funds – roughly $171 billion in today’s dollars – to rebuild war-torn Western Europe from 1948 to late 1951. It is often evoked as a solution for reconstruction following global crises. Yet as a military historian and curator, I find that the Marshall Plan is not well understood.

    For the U.S., the economic gains of the Marshall Plan did not come from European countries’ repaying loans or allowing the U.S. to extract their raw materials. Rather, the U.S. has benefited enormously from a half-century of goodwill, democratic stability and economic success in Europe.

    European nations turn inward

    After World War II ended in 1945, Western Europe faced a staggering burden of destruction and upheaval.

    Allied bombardment of major industrial areas and German cities such as Berlin, Hamburg and Cologne had created massive housing shortages. Meanwhile, fighting through agricultural areas and a critical manpower shortage had curtailed food production. What harvest there was could not get to hungry civilians because so many of Europe’s roads, bridges and ports had been destroyed.

    The United Kingdom, Italy, France, Germany and other European governments were buried in debt after so many years of war. They could not afford to rebuild on their own. Yet rather than cooperating on their mutual economic reconstruction, European nations looked inward, focusing primarily on their own political challenges.

    The continent was politically and militarily divided, too. Europe’s western half was influenced by the democratic, capitalistic forces led by the U.S. Eastern Europe was beholden to the communist, command-economy forces of the Soviet Union.

    In a 1946 speech at Westminster College in Fulton, Missouri, former British Prime Minister Winston Churchill articulated Europe’s growing postwar divide. Over the ruins of proud nations, he said, “an iron curtain” had “descended across the continent.”

    US looks abroad

    Unlike Europe, the U.S. emerged from World War II as the wealthiest nation in the world, with its territory intact and unharmed. Its steel and oil industries were booming. By 1947, the U.S. was the clear successor to Great Britain as the world’s superpower.

    But President Harry Truman feared the ambitions of the war’s other great victor – the Soviet Union. In March 1947, he announced a new doctrine to contain communist expansion southward across Europe by giving $400 million in military and economic aid to Greece and Turkey.

    Around the same time, U.S. Secretary of State George Marshall met with Soviet officials to plan Germany’s future. Following the Nazis’ surrender in May 1945, Germany had been divided into four occupied zones administered by U.S., British, French and Soviet forces.

    Each nation had its own goals for its section of Germany. The U.S. wanted to revitalize Germany politically and economically, believing that a moribund Germany would thwart the economic reconstruction of all of Europe.

    Marshall hoped that the Soviets would cooperate, but Soviet ruler Josef Stalin preferred extracting reparations from a prostrate Germany to investing in its recovery. A vibrant German economic engine, the Soviets felt, could just as easily rearm to attack the Russian countryside for the third time that century.

    The Truman administration chose to unilaterally rebuild the three western Allied sectors of Germany – and Western Europe.

    Marshall outlined his plan at a commencement address at Harvard University in June 1947. American action to restore global economic health, he said, would provide the foundation for political stability and peace in Europe. And an economically healthy Western Europe, in turn, would inhibit the spread of communism by plainly demonstrating the benefits of capitalism.

    “Our policy is not directed against any country,” Marshall said, “but against hunger, poverty, desperation and chaos.”

    Marshall’s plan

    Marshall invited all European nations to participate in drafting a plan to first address the immediate humanitarian aid of Europe’s people, then rebuild its infrastructure. The U.S. would pay for it all.

    For nearly bankrupt European nations, it was a lifeline.

    In September 1947, the new Committee for European Economic Co-operation, composed of 16 Western – but not Eastern – European nations, delivered its proposal to Washington.

    It would take a masterful legislative strategy for the Democratic Truman administration to persuade the Republican-led Congress to pass this $13 billion bill. It succeeded thanks to the dedicated effort of Republican Sen. Arthur Vandenberg, who convinced his isolationist colleagues that the Marshall Plan would halt the expansion of communism and benefit American economic growth.

    In April 1948, Truman signed the Economic Cooperation Act. By year’s end, over $2 billion had reached Europe, and its industrial production had finally surpassed prewar levels seen in 1939.

    NATO is born

    Along with economic stability, the Truman administration recognized that Europe needed military security to defend against communist encroachment by the Soviet Union.

    In July 1949, 12 European countries, the U.S. and Canada established the North Atlantic Treaty Organization. NATO committed each member country to the mutual defense of fellow NATO members.

    Since 1947, NATO has steadily expanded eastward to include Poland, Hungary, the Czech Republic and other former Soviet satellite states directly bordering Russia.

    Ukraine, which declared its independence from the Soviet Union in 1991, is not yet a NATO member. But it desperately wants to be.

    Ukraine applied for NATO membership in 2022 after Russia’s invasion. Its application is pending. Russian President Vladimir Putin has said any peace deal with Ukraine must bar NATO membership.

    Would a Marshall Plan work for Ukraine?

    Modern-day Ukraine mirrors the Western European countries of the Marshall Plan era in meaningful ways.

    It suffers from the physical devastation of war, with its major cities heavily damaged. The threat of military attack from hostile neighbors remains urgent. And it has a functional, democratic government that would – in peacetime – be capable of receiving and distributing aid to develop the nation’s economic growth and stability.

    U.S. global leadership, however, has changed dramatically since 1948.

    Outright American taxpayer financing of Ukraine’s reconstruction seems impossible. Any plan to reconstruct the country after war will likely require public funding from multiple nations and substantial private investment. That private investment could well include mineral extraction and refinement ventures.

    Ultimately, Ukraine’s recovery will most likely involve Ukraine and neighboring nations reaching agreement to restore its economic and military security. The European Union, which Ukraine also seeks to join, has the bureaucratic and economic resources necessary to reconstruct Ukraine, restore peace and ease tensions on the continent.

    Any future Marshall Plan for Ukraine will probably be European.

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

    – ref. Ukraine will need major rebuilding when war ends − here’s why the US isn’t likely to invest in its recovery with a new Marshall Plan – https://theconversation.com/ukraine-will-need-major-rebuilding-when-war-ends-heres-why-the-us-isnt-likely-to-invest-in-its-recovery-with-a-new-marshall-plan-251872

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

    March 25, 2025
  • MIL-OSI United Nations: UNECE Executive Secretary in Rome to strengthen cooperation with Italian Government and UN agencies

    Source: United Nations Economic Commission for Europe

    UNECE Executive Secretary Tatiana Molcean was in Rome on 18-19 March to meet with high-level officials of the Government of Italy and discuss efforts to strengthen development cooperation across multiple areas, as well as to exchange with principals of the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) and World Food Programme (WFP).  

    In discussions with Federico Eichberg, Chef de Cabinet at the Ministry of Enterprise and Made in Italy, Ms. Molcean focused on cooperation on corporate sustainability reporting, due diligence and digital product passports. She stressed the importance of UNECE’s tools for traceability along value chains, which were piloted with blockchain and other innovative technologies with brands, retailers and manufacturers of the Italian garment and footwear industry. Discussions also addressed gender equality and the promotion of women entrepreneurship and leadership, in particular knowledge sharing and best practices. 

    The Executive Secretary also met with Edoardo Rixi, Deputy Minister of Transport and Infrastructure, to discuss Italy’s longstanding contribution to UNECE’s work on transport, in particular on road safety, through the Global Forum for Road Traffic Safety (WP.1), chaired by Luciana Iorio, on vehicle regulations, through the World Forum for Harmonization of Vehicle Regulations (WP.29), as well as on the transport of dangerous goods and the carriage of goods by rail. She also encouraged Italy to join the Advisory Board of the UN Road Safety Fund hosted by UNECE.   

    Meeting with Davide La Cecilia, Special Envoy for the Reconstruction of Ukraine and Coordinator of the Ukraine Recovery and Resilience Task Force, as well as with Marco Rusconi, Director of the Italian Agency for Development Cooperation (AICS), and Carlo Batori, Deputy Director General for Development Cooperation, the Executive Secretary discussed preparations for the Ukraine Recovery Conference 2025 in Rome (10-11 July).  

    She appreciated Italy’s continued leadership and expected support to UNECE-led UN4UkrainianCities project, which plays a key role in rebuilding Ukraine’s urban centers, in particular Kharkiv and Mykolaiv, with a focus on sustainability, resilience, and inclusivity.   

    The Executive Secretary also visited the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) to meet with Director General Qu Dongyu. UNECE and FAO have had a longstanding cooperation since 1947 on forests. Discussions also touched upon UNECE’s contribution to food systems sustainability through its agricultural quality standards, trade facilitation, ESG traceability and circularity. Cooperation with FAO also includes the promotion of the water-food-energy-ecosystems nexus approach to water resource management. 

    In discussions with Carl Skau, Deputy Executive Director of the World Food Programme (WFP), Ms. Molcean underlined the strategic alignment of UNECE’s expertise in sustainable development, trade facilitation and logistics, and particularly agricultural standards, with WFP’s mission in food security and humanitarian aid.  

    MIL OSI United Nations News –

    March 25, 2025
  • MIL-OSI China: US, Russia start fresh talks in Saudi Arabia

    Source: China State Council Information Office

    This photo taken on March 24, 2025 shows the hotel where U.S. and Russian delegations begin a new round of talks in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. [Photo/Xinhua]

    U.S. and Russian delegations began a new round of talks in Saudi Arabia on Monday, eyeing a Ukraine settlement and Black Sea ceasefire deal before securing a broader agreement.

    The talks follow a meeting between the United States and Ukraine in Saudi Arabia on Sunday. Last week, Trump held phone talks with Russian President Vladimir Putin and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky on Tuesday and Wednesday, respectively.

    The U.S. delegation is led by Andrew Peek, a senior director at the White House National Security Council, and Michael Anton, a senior official from the State Department, according to local media Al Arabiya News.

    Russia is represented by Grigory Karasin, chair of the Federation Council’s Foreign Affairs Committee and a former diplomat, along with Sergei Beseda, an adviser to the director of the Federal Security Service, it said.

    MIL OSI China News –

    March 25, 2025
  • MIL-OSI China: US, Ukraine conclude ‘productive’ talks in Riyadh

    Source: China State Council Information Office 3

    Ukrainian Defense Minister Rustem Umerov announced Sunday that the talks between U.S. and Ukrainian delegations have concluded in Saudi Arabia’s capital Riyadh, saying the discussion was “productive and focused,” with “key points including energy” addressed.

    In a post on social media platform X, Umerov, who led the Ukrainian delegation, emphasized that Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky’s goal is “to secure a just and lasting peace” for Ukraine and Europe at large, claiming, “We are working to make that goal a reality.”

    The Ukrainian and U.S. teams met earlier in the day in Riyadh.

    According to the Ukrinform news agency, the Ukrainian delegation also included State Secretary of the Ukrainian Foreign Ministry Oleksandr Karasevych, deputy heads of the President’s Office, Pavlo Palisa and Ihor Zhovkva, as well as Deputy Energy Minister Mykola Kolisnyk.

    The talks came almost two weeks after a previous meeting between the two sides in the Saudi port city of Jeddah saw Ukraine okay a U.S.-proposed 30-day ceasefire plan in exchange for Washington lifting its pause on military aid to and intelligence sharing with Ukraine.

    Notably, the meeting precedes the talks between U.S. and Russian delegations scheduled for Monday. Media reported late Sunday that the Russian delegation has arrived in Riyadh. The delegation includes Grigory Karasin, chairman of the committee on international affairs in Russia’s upper house, and Sergey Beseda, adviser to the head of Russia’s Federal Security Service, Russian presidential aide Yuri Ushakov said earlier.

    MIL OSI China News –

    March 24, 2025
  • MIL-OSI New Zealand: AI INFRINGEMENT ALERT – NZ Authors books scraped in LibGEN dataset

    Source: New Zealand Society of Authors Te Puni Kaituhi o Aotearoa (PEN NZ)

    NZ Authors books scraped in LibGEN dataset – NZSA condemns authors intellectual property theft
     
    March 24, 2025 – Over the weekend, The Atlantic published a search tool that allows authors around the world to check if their works have been used in LibGen, an illegal pirate site Artificial Intelligence (AI) companies copied for their AI systems.

    This is a similar tool to the one that journalist Alex Reisner made available for the Books3 AI training dataset last year, but this new list has more than 7.5 million books copied by Meta, Open AI and other AI companies for their AI systems. It is not clear whether Meta Downloaded and used every book in LibGen.

    Thousands of books by NZ writers are included in this latest theft of intellectual property by Big Tech. NZ authors average incomes from their writing is circa $16k per year (Horizon Writers Survey, 2021) and our writers should not be the ones deprived of lost revenue in the development of this new technology. Big Tech can afford to pay licence fees to legally use the content they need to train their AI language models.

    Meta and other AI companies know exactly what they are doing

    AI companies need books for their quality writing, style, expression, long-form narration and content and use this to train their AI models. It appears those companies would rather steal that content than ask and pay for the use of it, as they do all other necessary components, costs and compliance required to run their businesses, such as electricity, wages, government health and safety requirements, and programming.

    Pirate Sites Are Illegal Sources of Books for AI Training 

    Author societies around the world are collaborating with each other, publishers and governments to combat major piracy websites that cost authors millions in lost sales and licence fees.

    In the US, collective action took down Z-Library and its 250 mirror sites and successfully sued Kiss Library, and assisted publishers in actions against LibGen, resulting in blocked domains In the US and multi-million-dollar fines. These sites remain challenging to permanently eliminate as they operate from Russia or Ukraine, and quickly migrate to new domains when blocked. New Zealand currently does not have legislation that allows site blocking to protect intellectual property and our creative industries.
     
    Around the globe Copyright Law is being reviewed and updated to tackle AI development and intellectual property rights. In NZ, The Ministry for Business, Innovation and Employment (MBIE) is the Ministry responsible for the Copyright Act review. MBIE is planning to progress formal consultation in 2025 with the creative industries and the public on Copyright legislation including AI.This is demonstrably urgent.

    NZSA is collating a list of all NZ books from NZSA members and other writers affected by this latest instance of mass piracy.

    The New Zealand Society of Authors Te Puni Kaituhi o Aotearoa (PEN NZ) strongly condemns the appropriation of New Zealand Aotearoa authors intellectual property. This unauthorised use is intellectual property theft by Big Tech that infringes existing legislation. The imbalance of power between individual authors defending their property rights versus Big Tech money and might is alarming. The unsanctioned use of work is legally indefensible, and amoral. For the creative industries of Aotearoa to thrive we need robust copyright law, protections and enforcement mechanisms, and appropriate penalties for infringement.

    Article for reference:

    How the Emerging Market for AI Training Data is Eroding Big Tech’s ‘Fair Use’ US Law Copyright Defense: https://authors.us5.list-manage.com/track/click?u=905a5275ec5c023659502ec21&id=badb3ee21e&e=466373ae7c
    CLNZ/NZSA position statement on AI HERE: https://authors.us5.list-manage.com/track/click?u=905a5275ec5c023659502ec21&id=bbcb427614&e=466373ae7c

    About NZSA
    The NZSA represents over 1,800 writers in New Zealand. We offer support through advocacy and representation, professional development, information and guidance on publishing and the literary arts, administer prizes and awards and contract/business advice. We work to protect authors incomes and offer memberships for writers at all stages of their careers, including students. Our many assessment and mentorship programmes supported by Creative New Zealand. NZSA is affiliated to International PEN, a voice that upholds freedom of speech and protests against writers falsely silenced and imprisoned around the world. NZSA collaborates across the book sector with other organisations to make NZ books and NZ writers more visible. The NZSA is a not for profit incorporated society and a registered charity in Aotearoa.
    www.authors.org.nz

    MIL OSI New Zealand News –

    March 24, 2025
  • MIL-OSI China: Trump’s ‘transactional foreign policy’ hits deadlock

    Source: China State Council Information Office

    In the two months since taking office, U.S. President Donald Trump’s administration has been aggressively pursuing its foreign policy agenda under the belief that everything is subject to “deals,” triggering wide backlash in international society.

    The essence of Trump’s foreign policy is “purely transactional,” said an article on the U.S. website The National Interest.

    “All I know, is… deals”

    “My whole life is deals. That’s all I know, is deals,” said Trump following his meeting with French President Emmanuel Macron about a month ago.

    When it comes to the means to facilitate these deals, as Kevin Hassett, director of the White House National Economic Council, put it, “We could do that with carrots, and we can do that with sticks.”

    On the issue of the Ukraine crisis, to facilitate negotiations between the parties, the Trump administration threatened that Russia would face U.S. sanctions if it refused to participate in talks, and that Ukraine would lose U.S. aid if it declined to negotiate.

    The United States has also coveted Ukraine’s resources, initially demanding rare earth elements, followed by oil, natural gas and other mineral resources.

    Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky strongly opposed these demands at first. His fiery clash with Trump at the White House on Feb. 28 shocked the world, prompting the United States to suspend military aid to Ukraine and cut off intelligence-sharing.

    When they spoke by phone on Wednesday, Trump even suggested to Zelensky that the United States could help run, and possibly own, Ukraine’s Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant, according to a statement by the U.S. presidential administration.

    On the Palestinian question, Trump demanded that Hamas release detained Israeli hostages, threatening that “or it is OVER for you” on March 5 in a post on Truth Social.

    Trump also proposed to “clean out” Gaza in late January and used the suspension of aid as leverage to pressure Egypt and Jordan to accept Palestinians.

    To address the issues of illegal immigration and fentanyl within the United States, the Trump administration wielded the “tariff stick” against Mexico and Canada. According to the Trump administration’s logic, these two major problems were caused by Canada and Mexico, and if they are not resolved, tariffs will be imposed.

    Trump also set his sights on Greenland, an autonomous territory of Denmark.

    He said that the United States would take control of Greenland “one way or the other,” refusing to rule out economic or military coercion. Trump said he would consider imposing tariffs on Denmark “at a very high level” if it resisted his offer to acquire the territory.

    Referring to Trump’s book where he talks about his experiences as a hotel developer, Sina Toossi, a fellow at the U.S. think tank Center for International Policy, told AFP: “He approaches diplomacy the way he approached real estate in ‘The Art of the Deal:’ — escalate tensions, maximize threats, push the situation to the brink of disaster and then, at the last minute, strike a deal.”

    “Transactional foreign policy” reaches impasse

    “My proudest legacy will be that of a peacemaker and unifier,” Trump declared in his inaugural address on Jan. 20. But how effective is his “transactional foreign policy?”

    After Trump’s phone calls with Russian President Vladimir Putin and Zelensky on Tuesday and Wednesday respectively, U.S. media believe that Russia has in effect rejected the U.S.-proposed 30-day ceasefire plan for Russia and Ukraine.

    The Washington Post reported that the call between the U.S. and Russian leaders highlighted differences more than agreement.

    Meanwhile, Ukraine is also dissatisfied with the proposal to halt attacks on each other’s energy infrastructure within 30 days, hoping to extend the ceasefire to include other civilian infrastructure.

    Zelensky said that Ukraine has no intention of transferring the Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant, which the Trump administration is interested in.

    As with Ukraine, Trump has pledged to bring “peace” to the Middle East, but his failure to facilitate “deals” through coercion and pressure has led to the rekindling of the flames of war in Gaza and Yemen.

    After “full coordination with the United States,” the Israeli military resumed large-scale airstrikes on the Gaza Strip on Tuesday, signaling the collapse of the Gaza ceasefire agreement.

    Additionally, the U.S. military began large-scale military operations against Yemen’s Houthi group on March 15. In retaliation, the Houthis claimed to have attacked U.S. aircraft carriers multiple times.

    After the Trump administration launched its “tariff war,” many countries implemented countermeasures. On March 12, the Canadian government announced a 25-percent retaliatory tariff on 29.8 billion Canadian dollars’ (20.7 billion U.S. dollars’) worth of U.S. goods.

    On the same day, the European Commission declared that the European Union (EU) would impose retaliatory tariffs on 26 billion euros’ (28.3 billion U.S. dollars’) worth of U.S. goods starting in April, targeting items such as beef, poultry, whiskey and motorcycles.

    Trump’s tariffs “are an act of self-harm,” The Economist said in a recent article.

    Trump’s remarks about Greenland have also increased anti-American sentiment on the island. To protest Trump’s remarks about acquiring the territory, an anti-American rally was held on March 15 in Nuuk, the capital of Greenland, with thousands of demonstrators marching to the U.S. Consulate there.

    Danish and EU officials also voiced their support for Greenland. “I believe that Greenland will remain part of the Danish Commonwealth for quite some time,” Danish Foreign Minister Lars Lokke Rasmussen said recently.

    “To all the people of Greenland and of Denmark as a whole, I want to be very clear that Europe will always stand for sovereignty and territorial integrity,” European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen said Tuesday.

    The Japanese daily Yomiuri Shimbun commented Thursday: “Another major offensive has begun in the Middle East, and Russia declined to endorse a full ceasefire in Ukraine. U.S. President Donald Trump’s diplomacy based on deals has apparently stalled.”

    A more dangerous world

    Analysts believe that the root cause of the impasse in “transactional foreign policy” lies in Trump’s sole focus on U.S. interests. He disregards the demands and needs of others, especially those of conflicting parties, and makes no effort to address the underlying issues.

    “For Trump, foreign policy isn’t about carefully negotiated peace deals. It’s about performance, leverage and crafting a narrative that sells,” Toossi said.

    Trump’s ability to create bargaining chips out of thin air and force concessions through coercion and inducement rely on the United States’ military and economic strength, analysts said.

    The essence of his “transactional foreign policy” is nothing more than coercion diplomacy rooted in power, serving the narrow self-interests of the United States. Rather than solving problems at their root, it ignores the concerns of relevant parties and pressures them to accept U.S. terms.

    “Team Trump claims that its dealmaking will bring peace and that, after 80 years of being taken for a ride, America will turn its superpower status into profit,” said The Economist in an article.

    “Instead it will make the world more dangerous, and America weaker and poorer,” it added. 

    MIL OSI China News –

    March 24, 2025
  • MIL-OSI China: Russia-Ukraine ceasefire negotiations still in early stages

    Source: China State Council Information Office

    This photo taken on March 18, 2025 shows an exterior view of the Kremlin in Moscow, Russia. [Photo/Xinhua]

    Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said on Sunday that achieving a ceasefire in the Russia-Ukraine conflict remains a complex challenge requiring substantial efforts, emphasizing that negotiations are still in their early stages.

    “I want to remind you that President (Vladimir) Putin certainly supports the idea of a ceasefire … This is a very complex matter and a lot of work remains to be done. We are only at the beginning of this path,” Peskov told local media.

    He underscored that Western nations are unlikely to swiftly lift sanctions against Russia, urging the country to pursue development under the current constraints.

    Despite geopolitical tensions, Peskov said that Moscow and Washington should not allow disagreements to derail mutually beneficial cooperation.

    “We can disagree on something, but it does not mean that we should let it obstruct pragmatic cooperation,” he added.

    U.S. President Donald Trump has recently talked with his Russian and Ukrainian counterparts respectively to negotiate a ceasefire. 

    MIL OSI China News –

    March 24, 2025
  • MIL-OSI China: US, Ukraine conclude ‘productive’ talks in Riyadh: Ukrainian DM

    Source: China State Council Information Office

    Ukrainian Defense Minister Rustem Umerov announced Sunday that the talks between U.S. and Ukrainian delegations have concluded in Saudi Arabia’s capital Riyadh, saying the discussion was “productive and focused,” with “key points including energy” addressed.

    In a post on social media platform X, Umerov, who led the Ukrainian delegation, emphasized that Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky’s goal is “to secure a just and lasting peace” for Ukraine and Europe at large, claiming, “We are working to make that goal a reality.”

    The Ukrainian and U.S. teams met earlier in the day in Riyadh.

    According to the Ukrinform news agency, the Ukrainian delegation also included State Secretary of the Ukrainian Foreign Ministry Oleksandr Karasevych, deputy heads of the President’s Office, Pavlo Palisa and Ihor Zhovkva, as well as Deputy Energy Minister Mykola Kolisnyk.

    The talks came almost two weeks after a previous meeting between the two sides in the Saudi port city of Jeddah saw Ukraine okay a U.S.-proposed 30-day ceasefire plan in exchange for Washington lifting its pause on military aid to and intelligence sharing with Ukraine.

    Notably, the meeting precedes the talks between U.S. and Russian delegations scheduled for Monday. Media reported late Sunday that the Russian delegation has arrived in Riyadh. The delegation includes Grigory Karasin, chairman of the committee on international affairs in Russia’s upper house, and Sergey Beseda, adviser to the head of Russia’s Federal Security Service, Russian presidential aide Yuri Ushakov said earlier.

    MIL OSI China News –

    March 24, 2025
  • MIL-Evening Report: Labor gains big lead in a Morgan poll, but drops back in YouGov

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Adrian Beaumont, Election Analyst (Psephologist) at The Conversation; and Honorary Associate, School of Mathematics and Statistics, The University of Melbourne

    A national Morgan poll, conducted March 10–16 from a sample of 2,097, gave Labor a 54.5–45.5 lead by headline respondent preferences, a three-point gain for Labor since the March 3–9 Morgan poll. This is Labor’s largest lead in a Morgan poll since August 2023.

    Primary votes were 34% Coalition (down three), 32.5% Labor (up 2.5), 13.5% Greens (steady), 5% One Nation (steady), 10.5% independents (steady) and 4.5% others (up 0.5). By 2022 election flows, Labor led by 54.5–45.5, a 2.5-point gain for Labor.

    By 50.5–35, respondents thought the country was going in the wrong direction (51.5–33 previously). However, Morgan’s consumer confidence index slid 3.1 points to 83.8, its lowest this year.

    Voters were blaming Donald Trump for the stock market falls, and this was hurting the Coalition. The stock market had a better week last week, but Trump is likely to impose more tariffs on April 2.

    Morgan is a volatile poll that reacts more to news events than other polls. This poll was taken in the week Trump imposed his steel and aluminium tariffs on Australia. It’s likely that this poll is a pro-Labor outlier, with other polls not giving Labor big leads. Here is the poll graph.

    The ABC’s Patricia Karvelas wrote on March 17 that a Talbot Mills poll, conducted March 6–12 from a sample of 1,051, asked about Trump’s ratings with Australians for his performance as US president.

    Trump was down six points since February to net -14 approval (51% disapprove, 37% approve). There was a six-point increase in strongly disapprove to 40%, with strongly approve down one to 15%. By 65–22, respondents disapproved of the US imposing tariffs on Australia.

    Coalition gains in YouGov poll for a 50–50 tie

    A national YouGov poll, conducted March 14–19 from a sample of 1,500, had a 50–50 tie, a one-point gain for the Coalition since the March 7–13 YouGov poll.

    Primary votes were 37% Coalition (up one), 31% Labor (steady), 13% Greens (down 0.5), 7% One Nation (down 0.5), 1% Trumpet of Patriots (steady), 8% independents (down one) and 3% others (up one). YouGov is using weaker preference flows for Labor than occurred in 2022, and this poll would give Labor about a 51.5–48.5 lead by 2022 flows.

    Albanese’s net approval was down three points to -9, with 50% dissatisfied and 41% satisfied. Dutton’s net approval was up one point to -5. Albanese led Dutton as better PM by 45–40 (45–39 previously).

    Essential poll tied at 47–47 but Albanese’s ratings jump

    A national Essential poll, conducted March 12–16 from a larger than normal sample of 2,256, had a 47–47 tie including undecided by respondent preferences (48–47 to the Coalition in early March).

    Primary votes were 35% Coalition (steady), 29% Labor (steady), 12% Greens (down one), 8% One Nation (steady), 1% Trumpet of Patriots (steady compared with UAP), 9% for all Others (down one) and 6% undecided (up one). By 2022 preference flows, this poll would give Labor about a 50.5–49.5 lead, a 0.5-point gain for the Coalition.

    Albanese’s net approval jumped nine points to +1, with 46% approving and 45% disapproving. This is Albanese’s first positive net approval in Essential since October 2023. Dutton’s net approval dropped two points to -5, his worst since January 2024.

    By 48–35, respondents thought Australia was on the wrong track (49–34 previously).

    On climate change, 54% (down five since October 2021) said “climate change is happening and is caused by human activity”, while 35% (up five) thought “we are just witnessing a normal fluctuation in the earth’s climate”. This is the lowest lead for human activity in Essential’s graph which goes back to 2016.

    On addressing climate change, 35% (up two since November) thought Australia is not doing enough, 34% (down three) doing enough and 19% (steady) doing too much.

    By 39–30, voters opposed the Coalition’s policy of removing working from home provisions for public service workers. By 39–33, voters opposed Australia sending troops to Ukraine.

    By 53–33, voters thought Trump’s presidency would have a negative impact on the US economy, by 62–24 negative for the global economy and by 61–20 negative for the Australian economy.

    Labor gains lead in a Redbridge poll

    A national Redbridge poll, conducted March 3–11 from a sample of 2,007, gave Labor a 51–49 lead, a 2.5-point gain for Labor since the previous Redbridge poll in early February. Primary votes were 37% Coalition (down three), 32% Labor (up one), 12% Greens (up one) and 19% for all Others (up one).

    By 51–29, respondents thought things were headed in the wrong direction (49–32 in November 2024).

    There has been more criticism of AUKUS from the left since Trump’s election, but by 51–19 respondents said AUKUS makes Australia safer (49–19 in July 2024). There was pro-AUKUS movement on other questions.

    Polls in Greens target seats

    The Poll Bludger reported last Tuesday on polls of seats either held by the Greens or plausible targets for them. These polls were taken by Insightfully for the right-wing Advance, and first reported by the News Corp tabloids. Sample sizes were 600 per seat with no fieldwork dates provided. Seat polls are unreliable.

    The Greens hold three Queensland federal seats (Griffith, Ryan and Brisbane), and one Victorian seat (Melbourne). On the primary votes provided, the Greens would retain Griffith, Ryan would be line-ball between the Greens and Liberal National Party. Brisbane would be gained by Labor.

    In Victoria, the Greens would hold Melbourne and gain Macnamara from Labor, while Labor would retain Wills against a Greens challenge.

    Unemployment steady despite jobs fall

    The Australian Bureau of Statistics reported last Thursday that the unemployment rate was 4.1% in February, unchanged from January. This was despite a 52,800 decrease in jobs that didn’t affect unemployment owing to a lower participation rate.

    The employment population ratio (the percentage of eligible Australians that are employed) was down 0.3% since a record high in January to 64.1%.

    WA election final lower house seats

    At the March 8 Western Australian election, Labor won 46 of the 59 lower house seats (down seven from the record landslide in 2021), the Liberals seven (up five) and the Nationals six (up two). Comparing this election with 2017, which was a big win for Labor, Labor is up five seats, the Liberals down six and the Nationals up one.

    In 2017, Labor won 69.5% of lower house seats, in 2021 90% and in 2025 78%. If the WA lower house had as many seats as the federal House of Representatives (150), Labor would have won over 100 seats in all three elections.

    In the upper house, 75.7% of enrolled voters has been counted, compared with 82.7% in the lower house. On current figures, Labor is likely to win 16 of the 37 seats, the Liberals ten, the Greens four, the Nationals two, and One Nation, Legalise Cannabis and Australian Christians one each.

    Two seats are unclear, with an independent group (0.47 quotas) and Animal Justice (0.45) just ahead of One Nation’s second candidate (0.40). As the count has progressed, the Liberals have dropped and the Greens have risen. ABC election analyst Antony Green said the inclusion of below the line votes could put Labor’s 16th seat in doubt, with the Greens possibly winning five seats.

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

    – ref. Labor gains big lead in a Morgan poll, but drops back in YouGov – https://theconversation.com/labor-gains-big-lead-in-a-morgan-poll-but-drops-back-in-yougov-252380

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

    March 24, 2025
  • MIL-OSI United Kingdom: Taking on Trump & Farage – and fixing church roofs

    Source: Liberal Democrats UK

    We meet at a time of great peril. For our continent, and for our country.

    Because Donald Trump is not only betraying Ukraine. It’s not only their sovereignty he’s selling out. It’s our security. The security of Europe and the security of our United Kingdom.

    And that is unforgivable.

    Putin might be able to fool Donald Trump into thinking that his ambitions do not extend beyond parts of Ukraine, but we know better. Just look at what he’s already doing in Georgia, in Moldova, in Romania – undermining their democracies and seeking to extend his grip further into Europe.

    Our brave Ukrainian allies are on the frontline. Fighting not just for their homes. Not just for their freedom. But for the freedom and security of people across Europe, including ours here in the UK. Their fight is our fight.

    So to our Ukrainian friends, on behalf of all Liberal Democrats, let me say once again – We thank you. We salute you. We stand with you. Today. Tomorrow. Always.

    And of course, that solidarity must go beyond mere words. That’s why I am proud that the United Kingdom has been Ukraine’s staunchest ally right from the start. Why I am so proud of the tens of thousands of British families who welcomed Ukrainians into their homes. Showing the incredible warmth and generosity of the British people. Why I am proud of all the military assistance we have given to the Ukrainian armed forces – the tanks and training, missiles and drones to repel Putin’s war machine. And it’s why I was proud that the Prime Minister brought Europe and Canada together here in Britain to chart a way forward, the day after those appalling scenes of Trump and Vance ambushing President Zelenskyy in the Oval Office.

    And Trump’s so-called “special envoy” might dismiss British leadership as pointless posturing, but we know what it really is… Britain, leading in Europe again, as we have done at the greatest moments in our nation’s history. And friends, it was good to see that again after such a long time, wasn’t it?

    But now we must step up our efforts and do more. Much more. For the defence of Ukraine, for the defence of Europe, and for our own national defence too.

    So we Liberal Democrats have led calls for far more support for Ukraine – funded by the tens of billions of pounds of Russian assets frozen in the UK, and the hundreds of billions of pounds frozen across the G7. We backed proposals for a new European Rearmament Bank, to finance a massive expansion of defence manufacturing here at home and across the continent. We pressed the Government to raise defence spending to 2.5% of GDP – and now we are continuing to push for cross-party talks to get it to 3%.

    Because the threat we face is existential.

    To our east, a murderous dictator hellbent on building a new Russian empire – and committing atrocities on European soil in pursuit of it. And to our west, for the first time in my life, a President of the United States willing not merely to turn a blind eye to Putin’s aggression – but actually to praise it. A President who has repeatedly demonstrated that he is not a reliable ally to Ukraine, to Britain, to Europe, or to anyone else.

    So the fundamental questions we now face are these:

    How do we deal with Putin?

    And how do we deal with Trump?

    Well, let me tell you how not to deal with them. Just like any bully, you don’t deal with them by curling up in a ball and hoping they’ll leave you alone. You don’t turn a blind eye as they attack your friends, praying that maybe they’ll stop there. You have to stand up. Stand tough. Stand together with our friends. Make clear that an attack on one is an attack on all.

    And that – for the vast majority of people in our country – is our instinctive response. Brits can’t stand a bully.

    What Trump and Putin are doing offends our fundamental British values of decency, fair play, respect for national sovereignty and the rule of law. Almost everyone I speak to – in every part of our country – feels that way. But there is one man who thinks differently.

    One lone holdout. Someone who simply doesn’t seem to get it. A man who splits his time between GB News, Mar-a-Lago… and weirdly selling nappies on social media, apparently. A man who can even, legend has it, occasionally be spotted in the House of Commons and – if you wait long enough – in the town of Clacton-on-Sea. Nigel Farage.

    Unlike you and me, Nigel Farage thinks Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin are great. Not in a “look, we have to be pragmatic and work with them” kind of way. More in a teenager with a celebrity crush kind of way.

    Don’t forget, when Farage was asked which world leader he most admired, his answer was Vladimir Putin. Yes, really. Now, to be fair, that was before Donald Trump became President – so I guess Putin might have slipped to number two by now. 

    A tyrant responsible for the brutal suppression of Russia’s own people, and countless atrocities in Ukraine. Who has murdered thousands of innocent civilians. And abducted 20,000 children from their homes. Snatched them away from their families.

    That, apparently, is the sort of man who wins Nigel Farage’s admiration.

    How despicable. How completely out-of-touch with British values. With human values. How unpatriotic. How deeply un-British. And this from a man who thinks he can be our Prime Minister. Not on our watch.

    With war on our continent, an unpredictable President in the White House, and an increasingly volatile world… This is no time for a nationalist.

    We need real British patriotism instead. At home and abroad, our country has big problems to solve. And let’s be absolutely clear: Nigel Farage is not the least bit interested in solving them.

    If Farage had his way, he would turn our great country into little more than a Donald Trump tribute act. He has said it himself: he sees Trump as his inspiration. He wants to do to Britain what Trump is doing to America: All the division. The nasty culture-war nonsense. The economic self-harm of tariffs. Cruelty for the sake of being cruel. Siding with criminals and undermining the rule of law. And of course, limiting your access to healthcare. And making you pay more for it.

    Farage doesn’t like to talk about it much these days, but he has been very clear throughout his long political career that he doesn’t believe in the fundamental NHS principle of universal healthcare free at the point of use. He’s called for an American-style insurance-based model. He says he’s “open to anything” when it comes to the future of the NHS – including privatisation. Just like his idol Donald would want.

    And apart from that, isn’t it striking that Farage has nothing to say about the challenges facing our NHS? Nothing to say about how to make sure people can actually see a doctor or a dentist when they need one. Nothing to say about ambulance delays or crumbling hospitals. Nothing to say about fixing social care, so that our loved ones get the care they need and carers get the support they deserve. And I mean literally – nothing to say. 

    Farage has never uttered the word “care” once in Parliament. Because the truth is: Nigel Farage doesn’t care.

    He hasn’t mentioned the “NHS” once either – or GPs, hospitals, ambulances, dentists. Imagine that. A political party whose leader has nothing at all to say on one of the biggest issues on people’s lips, and the biggest challenges we face. Our country has big problems to solve. And Nigel Farage is not the least bit interested in solving them.

    But friends, that’s not the worst of it, is it? What worries us most about Farage and Reform is the deeply destructive, divisive brand of politics they deploy.

    The weaponisation of difference. The demonisation of diversity. The scapegoating of “the other”. The superficial, simplistic, snake-oil solutions they peddle. We know where it all will lead, if we don’t stop it.

    We know what happens when cynical, opportunistic politicians seize on the struggles and the anxieties of ordinary people – Anxieties about the cost of living. About cultural and technological change. About sovereignty and security. When they exploit those struggles and anxieties for their own selfish ends – When they point the finger of blame at those who differ from you because of their religion or their nationality or the colour of their skin – When they teach that those people threaten your job or your family or your way of life – When they manipulate new forms of media to spread lies, sow fear and stir hatred – When they use those tools to convince you that their cause alone is righteous and all who stand against them are evil… We know where that ends.

    We have seen it before across history – too many times. It is the populist playbook, and its pages are very well-worn. It is ugly. It is powerful. And it is incredibly destructive. Not only to the groups they target – the vulnerable, the minorities – but ultimately to us all. To our whole society. To the very idea of liberal democracy that our United Kingdom embodies.

    And if this sounds alarmist or over-the-top, remember this: It always starts that way.

    With a reasonable, even beguiling face. With an appeal to “common sense” and “plain speaking”. But if allowed to take root, it grows and mutates with such speed and ferocity, till it fills every crack in the foundations of our country… Until those cracks become chasms.

    And what is broken can never be mended. So we know where it leads. We know what is at stake. Not just an election. Not just a set of policies. But the very future of liberal democracy itself.

    That is what’s under threat. And friends – Liberal Democrats – it falls to us to save it.

    Because with the Conservatives desperately chasing Reform’s tail – And Labour sounding more and more like them every day – We Liberal Democrats are the only ones with the courage and the conviction to stand up and offer something different. Offer a positive alternative. Something better… Hope.

    And here’s the good news – Because I know it can feel like the tides of history are against us right now. I know that when you look at Trump in America, Le Pen in France, the AfD in Germany, Reform here in the UK – When the headlines are so often so bleak – It can be tempting to give in to despair.

    Well the good news is this: What we can offer people is even more powerful than all their lies. All their false promises. The easy answers of the populist right. Even more powerful, and even more popular. Real hope.

    Hope based not on empty rhetoric or magical thinking – But on hard work and concrete action that people can see making a difference to their lives and to their communities.

    That’s what good old-fashioned Liberal Democrat community politics has always been all about. Winning people’s trust by getting things done. Showing them what liberal democracy can do for them – not by talking about it, but by rolling up our sleeves and actually doing it. Putting our policies into practice and our ideals into action.

    I don’t know if you heard what Kemi Badenoch said about us recently. Did you hear this?

    She said – and I quote: “A typical Liberal Democrat will be somebody who is good at fixing their church roof. And people in the community like them.”

    Good at fixing the church roof. People in the community like them.

    I think she meant it as an insult! But I’ll happily wear it as a badge of honour.

    Because she’s right. Liberal Democrats fix things.

    And isn’t it telling, that attitude from the Leader of the Conservative Party? 

    Not that she doesn’t like us – I’m not surprised about that. She’s got good reason not to like the Liberal Democrats… After all, we did take 60 seats off them last July! I’ll say that again, Conference… We took 60 seats off the Conservatives! So you can hardly blame them for being a bit upset!

    But what I’m talking about is the sneering attitude of the Leader of the Conservatives. The sneering attitude that says fixing church roofs is somehow beneath her. Even beneath politics altogether. That what happens in our communities is trivial and insignificant compared to debating the true meaning of conservatism on Twitter.

    And it goes far beyond Kemi Badenoch and church roofs. It’s the whole Conservative Party – whether in Westminster or in town halls and county halls across the country. They have abandoned our communities.

    The Conservatives left schools and hospitals to crumble. Left whole areas without enough GPs or dentists. Left water companies to pump filthy sewage into our rivers and seas. And they have left decent, traditional Conservatives without a political home.

    Their out-of-touch, disdainful thinking is why the Conservative Party is in the mess it is today. Treating the day-to-day things that matter in people’s lives not just with indifference, but outright contempt.

    It’s why so many lifelong Conservative voters have turned to the Liberal Democrats. It’s why people rightly kicked them out of government last July – And why we must kick them out of our councils in May too.

    But that Conservative disdain and neglect is also what has opened the door to Reform. And that’s why it’s so important that we Liberal Democrats are rooted in our communities, getting things done.

    Fixing the church roof – and much more besides. Showing people that politics can work for them. That who they vote for can make a difference. That their voice matters. 

    That is how you defeat the populists. How you drain away the cynicism that feeds them. How you win back people’s trust and restore their hope.

    It’s not easy, our way of doing politics.

    Liberal Democrat MPs certainly have to spend a lot more time in our constituencies than Nigel Farage spends in Clacton – although I admit that’s a low bar.

    That’s why no one ever joins the Liberal Democrats as a shortcut to high office. And if that’s why any of you are here today, I’m sorry to have to let you down like this.

    We join because we want to make a difference to our communities and our country. Even though we know it’s hard work. 

    And we join – we all joined – because of a genuine belief in the core Liberal values that have made our country great: Freedom and equality. Community and internationalism. A commitment to human rights, to the environment, and to democracy. And those values are exactly what this moment in history demands.

    At a time when people are facing so many daily challenges on so many different fronts – The cost of living crisis. An economy that is still barely growing. Public services that just aren’t working the way they should. Opportunity that feels further and further out of reach for too many young people.

    These are challenges that can really test our values. When people feel so economically insecure. When times are so tough. Historically these are the times that liberalism has struggled, that progress has stumbled. But these are the times when our liberal values are needed more than ever.

    To build the fair, free and open society we all believe in. So that people can get on in life – with real power to make their own choices and pursue their own dreams.

    Because we understand that if you free people – If you empower them to make their voices heard and hold the powerful properly to account – Then you unleash the best in people and create a better society and a stronger economy as a result.

    So that everyone gets a fair deal. Every child gets the best possible start in life, and everyone sees their hard work and aspiration properly rewarded. Everyone gets the care they need when they need it, and a helping hand if they fall on tough times.

    And friends, how critical are our Liberal, internationalist values right now?

    Not just on Ukraine and defending Europe from Putin – critical though that is. But on so many big, global challenges – from the rise of China to the threat of climate change to the risks of artificial intelligence.

    These are challenges that no nation can afford to ignore. And challenges that no nation can tackle alone. Pulling up the drawbridge simply isn’t an option. Like I said, this is no time for a nationalist.

    What we need is a movement of proud internationalists – People who believe that our country and our people thrive when we are open and outward-looking. Who know that the UK can be an incredible force for good when it stands tall on the world stage. And stands up for what is right. Who recognise that the concerns of one nation inevitably become the concerns of all nations. A movement of proud internationalists. And Liberal Democrats, that is who we are.

    The only party that has consistently opposed the Conservatives’ damaging Brexit deal from the start. The only party arguing for a new deal with the EU, with a Customs Union at its heart – putting us on a path back to the Single Market. The only party still championing international aid, after first the Conservatives and now Labour shamefully cut it.

    And friends, we’re the only party in British politics speaking up in defiance of Donald Trump. The only ones willing to state the obvious truth: that he is no leader of the free world. I mean, this is a man who stands on the White House drive, flogging Teslas for Elon Musk like a particularly bad used car salesman. It’s hardly “Ask not what your country can do for you”, is it?

    And more despicably, this is a man who halted shipments of food, medicine and other essential aid supplies to people around the world who desperately need them. Locking whole shipping containers in port for their contents to rot. So much for Ronald Reagan’s “shining city on a hill”.

    And remember – this is the man Nigel Farage calls his “inspiration”. We’re the only ones willing to say that Trump cannot be relied upon to play by the rules, or stick to agreements. That his presidency is a threat to peace and prosperity in the UK, across Europe, and around the world. And that we must deal with him as he is. Bullying. Narcissistic. Unpredictable. We must deal with Trump from a position of strength, not weakness.

    Like on trade. If there’s one thing we know, it’s that Donald Trump loves tariffs. He says it’s “the most beautiful word in the dictionary”…

    Which, when you think about it, really is a very Donald Trump way of deciding your economic policy, isn’t it?

    Now, as Liberals, we profoundly disagree. After all, it was the Victorian Liberals who overturned centuries of protectionism and ushered in a new era of free trade and prosperity. We can already see the damage Trump’s tariffs are doing to the US economy, with forecasters saying he may plunge it into recession. And we fear the damage his trade war could do to the world economy, impacting jobs and living standards here in the UK too.

    So the question, again, is how do we deal with him?

    And the answer, we say again, is from a position of strength. Regrettably, that’s not Labour’s strategy. They say: “Let’s be nice to him and hope he won’t hurt us”.

    Now Labour’s even talking about scrapping Britain’s tax on social media giants. Changing the UK’s tax policy to appease Donald Trump – and Elon Musk. Well appeasement never works with bullies, and it doesn’t work with Trump – as his tariffs on British steel already show.

    And let me say this to Elon Musk, who I know is my biggest fan… We will make out-of-control social media giants like you pay more – so we can defend our children and young people from the harm you’re causing them.

    But it’s not just Labour bending the knee to this White House. It’s the Conservatives too. They’d have us go to Mar-a-Lago, begging bowl outstretched, pleading for a trade deal on whatever terms Trump will give us. The Conservatives would sell out British farmers to President Trump, just as they sold them out in their damaging trade deals with Australia and New Zealand. And then they’d let Trump’s billionaire mates carve up the NHS between them. 

    Another Elon Musk rebrand, this time to NH-X.

    More and more appeasement – in the futile hope it would protect us from more Trump tariffs in future. But we know it wouldn’t. Of course it wouldn’t.

    Just look at how he’s treated Canada – a steadfast ally who fought fascism alongside the US and the UK. He has hit them with outrageous tariffs, breaking the trade deal between their two countries. Because he doesn’t like the deal, so he doesn’t think he has to stick to it.

    Last month he asked “who would ever sign a thing like this”. The answer, of course, is you did Donald. Only five years ago. His signature means nothing.

    So no, a bad Trump deal won’t protect us from tariffs. And playing nice, being weak, is no way to deal with him either. So let’s stand up to Trump. Let’s stand side by side with the EU and with our Commonwealth ally Canada. I urge the Prime Minister to bring those leaders together here in the UK to agree a coordinated response to Trump’s trade war – just like he’s rightly done on Putin’s murderous war. As others have done, we should hit back with tariffs of our own – starting with those Teslas Trump is so desperate to sell. 

    And Conference, let’s put ourselves in the strongest possible position by rebuilding our trade with Europe – Strengthening British businesses and showing Trump we have other options.

    So you see, when it comes to dealing with Trump – as with the other looming threats in the world right now – it is our liberal belief in internationalism that offers the solution. Conference, with Trump in the White House and Farage leading a Trump tribute act here in the UK – Our role in British politics has never been more essential. Our precious liberal values are the only antidote to their destructive nationalism. Our trademark community politics is the only way to defeat their cynical populism.

    The threat they pose is grave. The challenge before us is great. This is a battle of competing values. A battle of competing visions. A battle for the future.

    We didn’t choose this fight. But friends, I know you are up for it. I know together we can win it.

    For the future of our democracy. For the good of our communities. For the love of our country. Let’s go to battle.

    MIL OSI United Kingdom –

    March 24, 2025
←Previous Page
1 … 96 97 98 99 100 … 174
Next Page→
NewzIntel.com

NewzIntel.com

MIL Open Source Intelligence

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

Twenty Twenty-Five

Designed with WordPress