About TrendAI

TrendAI, the global AI security leader and enterprise business unit of Trend Micro, empowers organizations with full AI visibility, governance, and consolidated security that inspires confidence, drives innovation, and eliminates risk. Trusted by the largest enterprises and governments across 185 countries, TrendAI secures the entire organization, from identities, to infrastructure, to data. Global Fortune 500 companies rely on TrendAI to stop threats up to 115 days earlier, powered by world-leading threat and attack intelligence. Through deep ecosystem partnerships with market leaders like NVIDIA, Anthropic, AWS, Google, and Microsoft, TrendAI enables teams to securely move at the speed of AI. These alliances deliver results, as TrendAI became the first APJ-based AI security partner to surpass US $1 billion in AWS Marketplace sales.

With TrendAI, organizations can clearly see how AI is used across environments, identify emerging risks, and take action faster. CISOs can simplify their security stack while giving business leaders the confidence to innovate, securely. AI Fearlessly. trendaisecurity.com

The issuer is solely responsible for the content of this announcement.

– Published and distributed with permission of Media-Outreach.com.

The issuer is solely responsible for the content of this announcement.

– Published and distributed with permission of Media-Outreach.com.

Source: Edith Cowan University

29 September 2026

The effectiveness of humanitarian aid delivered by the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation (GHF) has been called into question by a new paper (https://academic.oup.com/jcsl/advance-article/doi/10.1093/jcsl/krag019/8832340), which noted that not only was the distribution of aid being offered inhumane, but could well be violating international law.

Images that have surfaced online since 2025 of hungry civilians forced to walk for miles to humanitarian aid stations amid mass displacement, ongoing conflict and devastating loss, is a haunting example of a failed and inhumane aid delivery model.

Authored by Associate Professor Shannon Bosch (https://www.ecu.edu.au/schools/business-and-law/faculty/profiles/associate-professor/associate-professor-shannon-bosch), the paper has shone a spotlight on the failed humanitarian relief outsourced to private security contractors in Gaza.

The Associate Professor from Edith Cowan University’s (ECU) School of Business and Law said the GHF’s concentration of aid distribution through four large, heavily secured aid sites breached international law.

The radically different model for delivering food to Palestinians trapped in Gaza occurred over six months in 2025.

“My research into the GHF model shows why the delivery of humanitarian aid matters. Humanitarian assistance in occupied territory must comply with rules designed not merely to get food into civilian hands, but to protect the people receiving it,” Associate Professor Bosch said.

“The protection of civilians must be at the heart of delivering humanitarian aid.”

Where and how aid is delivered matters

Before the GHF began operating, humanitarian assistance had been distributed through more than 400 UN-coordinated sites across Gaza. The GHF replaced this network with four large distribution sites.

Safe Reach Solutions provided security logistics, while UG Solutions secured distribution sites and interacted directly with Palestinians.

Civilians south of Wadi Gaza could reach the aid distribution sites only using routes that took them through heavily armed Israeli military units and bases, while people in northern Gaza faced long journeys.

“Distribution was also unpredictable. At times, civilians received only minutes’ notice that a site was opening, and sites could remain open for very short periods.”

Associate Professor Bosch argues that the GHF is a model for how humanitarian aid should not be delivered.

“When uniformed and heavily armoured private security personnel are employed to handle the delivery of humanitarian aid – the international law warning bell should be ringing,” she said.

“We often see humanitarian workers with a military-like convoy to protect and guard them in occupied territory against criminal elements trying to hijack aid, but private security contractors are not trained to actually be the ones delivering aid.”

International law requirements

International humanitarian law and international human rights law places extensive obligations on an occupying power towards the civilian population.

Associate Professor Bosch said the GHF model is legally problematic. There are limits to the ways an occupying power can regulate humanitarian operations for legitimate security reasons.

“Calling something ‘humanitarian aid’ doesn’t make it so,” she said.

“Humanitarian relief must remain impartial and needs-based. Civilians must be treated humanely and without discrimination. Relief operations must also be sufficiently independent of political and military objectives to retain their humanitarian character.

“What the GHF model shows is that the delivery of humanitarian aid can be weaponised as a tool of control. It can be used to violate human rights and force people to relocate. How aid is distributed and who is doing it matters.”

Humanitarian aid should reduce civilian vulnerability

The GHF aid distribution points became sites of crowding, stampedes and shootings. Vulnerable civilians attempting to access aid included women, children, older people and people with disabilities. Thousands of Palestinians were reported killed or injured around GHF distribution sites and aid routes.

Associate Professor Bosch’s research argues that activities such as coercive crowd control, intelligence gathering, security screening and the use of force in civilian settings risks crossing the line between protecting humanitarian operations and performing military or government functions.

“A humanitarian system should reduce civilian vulnerability, not repeatedly expose hungry civilians to danger in order to obtain food,” Associate Professor Bosch said.

Under the Fourth Geneva Convention, an occupying power remains responsible for the treatment of protected civilians by those acting under its authority or control.

“As governments increasingly rely on private contractors to outsource functions once carried out by states or established humanitarian organisations, they ought to be reminded that this does not negate their legal responsibility to uphold international law.”

Humanitarian Aid, Private Security and the International Law Obligations on the Occupying Power: A Commentary on the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation (https://academic.oup.com/jcsl/advance-article/doi/10.1093/jcsl/krag019/8832340) is published in the Journal of Conflict & Security Law.

MIL OSI

Source: Federated Farmers

Federated Farmers says it’s outrageous that another Otago council is thinking about trucking its treated human effluent from town out onto farmland.

As part of a meeting tomorrow, Central Otago District Council (CODC) will vote whether to send thousands of cubic metres of sludge from Alexandra and Cromwell to the small community of Lauder.

“It’s absolutely staggering that the council is even discussing this after the recent outcry over Wānaka trucking its treated excrement to a Lauder farm,” Feds Otago president Anna Gillespie says.

“People all over the country – not just farmers down here – have been so angry to hear about Otago Regional Council granting consent to do that.

“We’re calling on CODC to either remove this item from their agenda or vote it down tomorrow.”

CODC staff have recommended that the solution to Cromwell’s growing mountain of accumulated sludge waste is to spread it on farmland in the Manuherekia catchment.

Gillespie says that’s a kick in the guts for farmers there who’ve long been bagged by councils and the government for alleged poor water quality.

“I’m surprised the environmental groups are being so quiet on this. It’s a sensitive catchment and landowners have worked extremely hard to lift standards and protect groundwater and waterways.

“Central government invested more than $4 million in Jobs for Nature funding to boost that work through the Thomson’s catchment project and Waiora Manuherekia.

“Now it seems urban areas from all over the province reckon it’s fine to transfer a by-product of what they flush to this same sensitive catchment under some sort of ‘out of sight, out of mind’ delusion.

“Our call for Local Government Minister Simon Watts to intervene is now even more pressing.”

News broke several weeks ago that a consent had been granted for up to 2000 cubic metres of sewage sludge from Wānaka and Albert Town to be spread across 178 hectares of a former sheep and beef farm in Lauder.

A further 3600 cubic metres of waste from grease traps, mud tanks/sumps and winery wastewater can also be spread on the property.

The consent was granted non-notified, meaning there was no public hearing, as the effects were judged to be ‘no more than minor’.

Gillespie acknowledges strict monitoring conditions are attached to the consent but says there’s deep scepticism among rural residents about modelling showing the Lauder farm can handle the sludge.

“Experienced local farmers know what a farm like this – with porous gravelly soils and low rainfall – can realistically produce by way of crops to soak up effluent nutrients.

“There is a serious mismatch between those estimations and what the consent allows.”

The same consent that allows Queenstown Lakes District Council to contract SJ Allen Ltd to transport and dump Wānaka’s sludge at Lauder allows Central Otago District Council to do the same.

Sludge – the remains of micro-organisms that have disgested human wastewater – has been stored in geobags at the Cromwell treatment plant.

The geobags act as sieves, allowing the sludge to dry out, so the material is not so heavy and expensive to transport.

But the council is running out of room to store the geobags and another 20,000 cubic metres of sludge from the bottom of the wastewater settlement ponds also needs to be moved “as a matter of urgency”, a council report says.

If it isn’t, the plant could be in breach of its own consent, and more expensive treatment requirements may be triggered.

Sludge from the Alexandra treatment plant also needs to be dealt with.

The report to Wednesday’s meeting says the council could save about $600,000 if the sludge is taken to Lauder, rather than transporting it to a landfill in Winton, a disposal method used in the past.

“We all understand the desire to save ratepayers’ money, but this shouldn’t be at the expense of water quality in a sensitive catchment upstream of public water intakes,” Gillespie says.

“Federated Farmers, and many rural residents, want the Lauder farm consent to be re-investigated.

“Spreading treated effluent on land and in forests is not new, but the characteristics of the site selected makes it highly unsuitable.

“We’re calling on Central Otago District councillors to kick this short-sighted plan to touch.”

MIL OSI

The issuer is solely responsible for the content of this announcement.

– Published and distributed with permission of Media-Outreach.com.

The issuer is solely responsible for the content of this announcement.

– Published and distributed with permission of Media-Outreach.com.

Source: Hayley Brooks and Jeff Brooks

• ‘The A to Z of Money’ was co-written by father daughter duo Hayley Brooks and the late Jeff Brooks
• The book won Bronze in the People’s Choice – Product 2025 category at the 2025 AusMumpreneur Awards.
• Research commissioned by the Ecstra Foundation found that 57 per cent of parents said their child was not learning about money concepts at school

With Australian parents and teachers overwhelmingly calling for greater financial education in schools, father-and-daughter authors Hayley Brooks and the late Jeff Brooks wanted to help children get a head start with their award-winning book, The A-Z of Money.

Designed as a simple and engaging introduction to finance for young children, The A-Z of Money takes readers through the fundamentals of money and entrepreneurship in an accessible format aimed at what its creators call the next generation of “tiny entrepreneurs”.

Illustrated by Trent Lambert, the book addresses increasing concern about how well Australian children are being prepared to manage money.

Research commissioned by the Ecstra Foundation and conducted by YouGov in March 2025 surveyed 2,123 Australian teachers, parents and students. It found 98 per cent of teachers and 97 per cent of parents agreed financial education should be taught in schools. Yet 57 per cent of parents said their child was either not learning about money concepts at school, or they did not know whether they were.

The same research found 95 per cent of teachers, 98 per cent of parents and 93 per cent of students believe learning about money and finance is important.

Almost three-quarters of teachers and more than two-thirds of parents also said financial education had become even more important over the previous 12 months amid cost-of-living pressures, inflation and economic uncertainty, increasingly complex financial systems, digital transactions, and the influence of social media.

The father-daughter team recognised a gap in children’s financial education and wanted to create a resource that could introduce financial concepts early, long before children ever have to make decisions about spending, saving, and managing money.

Hayley brought a different generational perspective to the project. Her career in real estate and experience building her own property portfolio reinforced the value of understanding money and investing from an early age.

Says Hayley, “Financial literacy is one of those life skills that can have an enormous impact on a person’s future, yet too many people don’t start learning about money until they’re already having to make important financial decisions.”

“We wanted to help change that by making conversations about money simple, engaging and accessible for children from an early age.”

Published by Little Steps Publishing, the 56-page children’s book is aimed at children aged three and over and uses an A-to-Z format to introduce the basics of finance.

The A-Z of Money is available on Amazon Australia.

MIL OSI

The issuer is solely responsible for the content of this announcement.

– Published and distributed with permission of Media-Outreach.com.

Source: Federated Farmers

Federated Farmers is welcoming Labour’s commitment to review the Sharemilking Agreements Act and is calling on the other major parties to do the same.

Labour Party agriculture spokesperson Jo Luxton announced at the NZ Guild of Agricultural Journalists and Communicators’ ag policy debate last night that a Labour Government would “review and fix” the Act.

“It is something the sector has been asking for. We’ve listened and we will deliver,” Luxton said.

Federated Farmers sharefarmer chair Sam Ebbett says Labour’s commitment is a positive step towards bringing the legislation into line with modern dairy farming.

“We’ve been calling for this review of the Sharemilking Agreements Act because the legislation has failed to keep pace with the way dairy farming operates today.

“Contract milking is now a major part of the dairy progression pathway, but contract milkers sit outside the Act because they’re paid a negotiated rate rather than a share of returns.

“So, even though contract milkers perform essentially the same role as variable-order sharemilkers, they can have quite different protections under the law because of how they’re paid.

“We don’t think that’s a good enough outcome – and a review of the law is urgently needed.”

There were 1,367 dairy herds operated by contract milkers in the 2024/25 season, representing 13.2% of all herds.

Unlike variable-order sharemilkers, contract milkers aren’t guaranteed the minimum terms and dispute-resolution process provided by the Act and Sharemilking Agreements Order 2011.

Instead, they rely on their individual agreements and general contract law, even where there’s a significant imbalance in bargaining power.

Ebbett says that is increasingly out of step with the role contract milking plays in helping young farmers establish themselves in the industry.

“The Sharemilking Agreements Act was designed to provide a statutory floor for sharemilkers, but the industry has changed hugely since then.

“Contract milking has become a really important first step into self-employment for a lot of young farmers, and we need a framework that gives them confidence in those arrangements.”

Federated Farmers sharefarm owner chair Brendan Attrill says the issue also matters for farm owners, particularly those using sharemilking and contract milking as part of succession and business planning.

“Sharemilking and contract milking are critical entry points into dairy farm ownership and succession pathways,” Attrill says.

“They allow the next generation to build capability and capital while providing established farmers with a practical way to transition out of the business.”

Attrill says the Sharemilking Agreements Act also predates modern arrangements such as hybrid contracts, processor incentives and environmental payments.

“We’ve got a dairy industry operating in a very different commercial environment from what this legislation was originally designed for back in the 1930s, especially with the increase in contract milking since the 2010s.

“We need the legislation to reflect how farming businesses actually operate today, while keeping the flexibility that makes these different progression pathways work so well.”

Federated Farmers wants a review to consider whether the framework can provide appropriate and consistent minimum protections for comparable dairy operating arrangements, without converting operators into employees.

It also wants coverage to reflect the nature of the work rather than simply how an operator is paid, greater clarity around new revenue and incentive payments, and clearer, more accessible and proportionate dispute-resolution mechanisms.

Federated Farmers has written to the major political parties asking them to commit to reviewing the Sharemilking Agreements Act 1937 and Sharemilking Agreements Order 2011.

“It’s great to have Labour on board – but now we’re calling on the other major parties to make the same commitment,” Ebbett says.

“This shouldn’t be a partisan issue. There is a clear case for updating legislation that was written in the 1930s to reflect how the dairy sector actually operates today.”

“It’s time to bring the law into the 21st century.”

MIL OSI

MIL OSI

Source: Fonterra Co-operative Group Ltd

24 September 2026

• Total cash returns to shareholders1: $19.6 billion
• FY26 total cash dividends, fully imputed: 73 cents per share, up from 57 cents
• 2025/26 final Farmgate Milk Price: $9.69 per kgMS
• 2025/26 final Organic Milk Price: $14.13 per kgMS
• Total Group:
• Operating profit: $3.4 billion, up 97.6% on prior year, including a $1.2 billion Mainland divestment benefit
• Profit after tax: $2.6 billion, up 142%
• Underlying business2:
• Operating profit: $1.8 billion, up 23.6% on prior year
• Earnings of 71 cents per share, up 17 cents
• Return on capital: 14.2%, up from 11.7%
• FY27 forecast underlying earnings range: 65-85 cents per share
• 2026/27 forecast Farmgate Milk Price: $9.50 per kgMS, with a range of $8.50 – $10.50 per kgMS
• 2026/27 forecast Organic Milk Price: $14.30 per kgMS, with a range of $13.30 – $15.30 per kgMS

Fonterra Co-operative Group Ltd has today reported its FY26 annual results, delivering $27 billion in revenue and nearly $20 billion in cash returns to New Zealand farmer owners and unit holders.

The final Farmgate Milk Price for the 2025/26 season was $9.69 per kgMS. The Co-op also declared a final fully imputed dividend of 33 cents per share, bringing fully imputed total dividends for the year to 73 cents per share. This includes the 24 cent interim dividend and 16 cent special Mainland dividend paid in April.

Fonterra Chairman Peter McBride says the Co-operative has continued building momentum and delivered at the top end of its performance expectations.

“Consistency is important to farmers and our shareholders. We’re proud of the collective effort that’s delivered another strong result, at the top end of our earnings guidance. The team hasn’t missed a beat despite the Mainland divestment process and the significant change that followed. Richard’s transition into the CEO role has been seamless and it’s exciting to see the energy his team is putting into building off this strong position.”

Fonterra CEO Richard Allen says the Co-operative’s disciplined approach to strategic execution has once again generated strong results.

“FY26 was a year of delivery. Our teams collected, processed and shipped near record volumes of milk, allocated products for the highest possible returns, and reliably delivered them to our customers right around the world.

“Despite some challenging conditions, including weather events and geopolitical volatility, we leveraged our full supply chain network and logistics partnerships to keep milk moving, achieving record shipping volumes and materially improving our delivery performance,” says Mr Allen.

Performance

Total Group reported operating profit was $3.4 billion, up from $1.7 billion last year, including the Mainland divestment benefit of $1.2 billion. Reported profit after tax was $2.6 billion.

“One year ago, we set a target for earnings to return to FY25 levels within three years if the Consumer and associated businesses were divested,” says Mr Allen.

“I’m pleased to share that our team’s focused execution of strategy in FY26 has got us to that target already, with underlying operating profit for our continuing business of $1.8 billion and profit after tax of $1.2 billion, equivalent to 71 cents per share.”

The Co-operative’s return on capital was 14.2%, above our target range of 10-12% and showing the value of our focused business-to-business (B2B) strategy.

“Our Ingredients business delivered $1,293 million in operating profit, supported by strong global protein demand, favourable pricing and product mix decisions. In Foodservice, we achieved $547 million in operating profit, which was driven largely by volume and pricing growth across all product categories and markets,” says Mr Allen.

Strategy

Mr Allen says Fonterra’s strategy to create value for farmers through disciplined capital choices, operational efficiencies, innovation and a customer focus is delivering results, and will continue to guide its new era as a B2B Co-op.

“Our foundations are in our New Zealand milk supply, and as we move forward as a B2B Co-op, we’ll stay focused on making our farmer offering as competitive as possible. This includes helping farmers with practical tools and services to make compliance easier and targeted support for the next generation of Co-op farm owners.

“This year, we also confirmed the planned expansion of our organic milk business into the South Island and are continuing with our recruitment drive for more organic farmers across the country to meet growing demand, off the back of a record organic milk price of $14.13 per kgMS.

“Our New Zealand milk is complemented by our high value, off-shore whey protein sourcing, which in FY26 continued to deliver outstanding returns to the portfolio.

“Our priorities in FY26 were to complete the Mainland Group sale, unlock new manufacturing capacity, and continue with our Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) software roll-out. I’m pleased to report that we have executed on all of these this year.

“Following approval from our farmer shareholders, we completed the sale of Mainland Group in March and have been working to ensure a smooth separation of the two businesses.

“We progressed our capital investment programme and invested $1 billion in essential sustainability and growth projects.

“And finally, our ERP system replacement is on track and on budget, with five sites now live and two more planned for later this year.

“These priorities will continue into 2027 as we maintain our focus on investing for growth, operational efficiency and digital transformation.

“This year, we also continued with our sustainability efforts and made progress on a programme of long-term energy resilience projects across multiple sites to improve energy security, reduce gas usage and support our emissions targets and future processing growth.

“Today, we are announcing the Co-op will invest an incremental $1 billion over the next three years in the South Island to accelerate and expand our protein manufacturing network and improve our environmental performance, including our impact on water and emissions.

“These projects position the Co-op to respond to changes in how people want to consume dairy, with a growing focus on sustainably produced, protein-rich and nutrient-dense foods. They are critical to our future value growth and improve our optionality, increase our capacity and, as a result, strengthen returns for farmers and shareholders over the long term.

“Using the capital retained from the Mainland Group divestment, alongside our strong cashflow, this additional investment will help us move more milk from whole milk powder and commodities into high-value products, strengthen partnerships with existing customers, and pursue new opportunities as demand for advanced proteins continues to grow.

“Once operational in 2029, the investment is expected to create around 50 – 60 permanent roles, as well as supporting local businesses involved across the construction projects.”

Over the next three years, Fonterra expects total capital investment to be approximately $1.3-1.6 billion per annum.

Outlook

“Looking ahead, we’re planning for another season of strong milk supply. However, we are also well prepared for an El Niño weather pattern should this eventuate,” says Mr Allen.

The Co-operative is forecasting milk collections for the 2026/27 season to be just above 1.6 billion kgMS, and a Farmgate Milk Price of $9.50 per kgMS with a range of $8.50 – $10.50 per kgMS. The 2026/27 Organic Milk Price forecast is $14.30 per kgMS within a range of $13.30 – $15.30 per kgMS.

Having reached the target for earnings to return to FY25 levels, Fonterra will no longer report on that target and will revert to its prior practice of forecasting earnings for the relevant financial year.

Accordingly, the Co-operative’s forecast earnings range for FY27 is 65-85 cents per share. This improving outlook reflects continued delivery from our B2B businesses, as they continue to grow high-value demand across our markets. Geopolitical volatility remains and with only two months complete, previous seasons tell us that things can always change.

“This year, we’ve delivered a strong set of results, executed on our priorities and positioned the Co-op for a new phase of value growth as a global B2B dairy ingredients provider,” says Mr Allen.

“The sale of Mainland Group was a significant step forward. Now, as we head into an increasingly changing world, our farmers’ quality, grass-fed milk, combined with our flexible assets, reliable supply chain and deep customer and market presence will help us deliver growth into the long-term.

“We’re building on our strong foundations, focused on making Fonterra’s products the world’s most sought-after source of nutrition and fostering an enduring Co-op for generations.”

Notes to editor: 1 Total cash payments to shareholders includes milk payments over the 2025/26 season for Fonterra farmers, ordinary and special cash dividends declared and the Mainland capital return during FY26. 2 Underlying performance is Fonterra’s continuing operations represented as if the Mainland transaction had occurred for the full period to provide a comparative of Fonterra’s continuing operations and align with the Pro forma historical financial information disclosed in the Notice of Special Meeting 2025 (29 September 2025).

About Fonterra As a global B2B dairy provider, we go to market through our global Ingredients brand NZMP <https://www.nzmp.com/global/en.html> and global Foodservice brand Anchor Food Professionals <https://www.anchorfoodprofessionals.com/global/en.html>. We provide high-quality products, valued for our dairy innovation and science expertise and New Zealand provenance, to customers in more than 100 countries around the world.

MIL OSI

Source: Federated Farmers

Federated Farmers is welcoming changes that will further enhance New Zealand’s strong international reputation for high animal welfare standards in the dairy sector.

“New Zealanders can be very proud of our animal welfare standards that already go further than most other countries,” Federated Farmers dairy chair Karl Dean says.

“Kiwi dairy farmers are great at what we do. We produce high quality, sustainable and safe dairy products with some of the highest animal welfare standards in the world.

“The revised Code of Welfare: Dairy Cattle, released earlier today, shows we’re not resting on our laurels. We’re constantly striving to lift the bar and do better.”

The work of the National Animal Welfare Advisory Committee and the wider sector in shaping these improvements speaks to the commitment to caring well for our livestock.

“We need to have a proactive attitude and continue building on that strong international reputation and brand,” Dean says.

“Dairy is so important for our rural communities and New Zealand’s economy. We’re the largest export earner and support more than 50,000 farm and processing jobs.”

Key changes in the revised code include:

• A new minimum standard related to the feeding, rearing, and weaning of calves. Calves must have access to milk or milk replacer at least twice-a-day in the first 2 weeks of their life.
• Dairy cattle with a body condition score of 3 or below will only be able to be transported off-farm with veterinary approval.
• Minimum standards relating to the tethering of dairy cattle will be strengthened, and new regulations on tethering will be developed following public consultation.

The revised code comes into effect from 19 April next year.

“I’m confident our dairy farmers are invested in making any changes to their farm practice to meet the new standards,” Dean concluded.

MIL OSI

Source: Greenpeace

Greenpeace says Environment Canterbury (ECan) has thrown rural households ‘under the tractor’, after the regional council voted to ‘resolve’ the nitrate emergency it declared just one year ago.

Greenpeace Programme Director Niamh O’Flynn says, “Resolving the emergency makes it sound like it’s sorted, but a few discussions from the council has not magically cleaned up the nitrate pollution that is wrecking our rivers and poisoning the water in people’s kitchen taps.”

“Tens of thousands more cows have been consented for Canterbury, which is only going to exacerbate the existing crisis. ECan has essentially written off the problem, let polluters go for gold, and left households to stump up the costs associated with trying to access safe drinking water for their families.”

“In ten years time, when rural people in Canterbury are looking for who was responsible for allowing the dairy industry to poison their water, they should look at the records of this council meeting, and the politicians who have aided and abetted the dairy industry in its pollution.”

Greenpeace says this move to minimise the nitrate emergency, at the behest of industry lobby groups like Federated Farmers and Dairy NZ, is spineless.

O’Flynn says, “ECan has a bare minimum responsibility to keep telling the truth about the situation in Canterbury. There is a nitrate emergency. It hasn’t gone away – if anything, it’s gotten worse. And the only thing that the regional council has put in place to deal with this is a Drinking Water Action Plan which does not address the source of the pollution, and puts the onus back on households.”

ECan’s Drinking Water Action Plan prioritises education and evidence gathering, but does not provide solutions to stopping pollution from getting into groundwater in the first place.

“The evidence of the problem is clear,” says O’Flynn. “Prioritising ‘evidence gathering’ instead of calling time on the issue and addressing the source of the problem, is not only kicking the can down the road, but condemning more Cantabrians to increased risk of bowel cancer, pre-term birth, and the anxiety about their drinking water for years to come.”

“ECan has a responsibility to protect source water and stop it from getting polluted in the first place. But if its not willing to maintain its declaration of a nitrate emergency, then it is safe to assume they will not be taking action to make sure it doesn’t get worse.”

Greenpeace says that while ECan has a responsibility to protect drinking water at the source and advocate for its constituents, central Government is ultimately responsible for the failure to protect rural people’s health.

“The source of the nitrate emergency is the intensive dairy industry – an industry that successive Governments have let off the hook for decades. Fonterra and the other dairy corporations are poisoning rural drinking water and they’ve managed to avoid any kind of accountability for it.”

“Ultimately, the solution is clear. We need fewer cows, a ban on synthetic nitrogen fertiliser use, and a transition away from intensive dairying, towards ecological practices that don’t poison our drinking water and pollute our lakes and rivers.”

MIL OSI

Source: Federated Farmers

By Richard Dawkins, Federated Farmers water storage spokesperson

New Zealand doesn’t have a shortage of water storage ideas – what we lack is a system for turning the best of those ideas into reality.

Across the country, there are water storage and infrastructure projects at every stage of development, from Northland to Central Otago.

Some are already operating, some are well advanced, and others are little more than concepts.

That’s encouraging, but the problem is every community still seems to have to reinvent the wheel.

They assemble their own team, find funding, commission studies, work through consenting and somehow maintain enough local enthusiasm to keep a project alive for years.

When a project is finally finished, much of that knowledge and experience simply walks out the door.

We should be much better at this by now because water storage isn’t a new challenge – we’ve been talking about it for decades.

Many of the projects being discussed today have long histories, and the barriers are familiar: finance, consenting and finding people with enough time and determination to keep pushing them forward.

I think we can learn a lot from the approach taken across the ditch in Tasmania.

Rather than expecting every community to start from scratch, Tasmania has a dedicated entity with the people and expertise to assess projects, work alongside local communities and move viable schemes through development.

If a project isn’t going to stack up, they establish that early and move on.

If it does stack up, they use the same engineering, commercial and project development capability to turn it into something that’s ready for investment.

Then the lessons learned are carried into the next project.

It makes perfect sense, and IrrigationNZ has been looking closely at that model and advocating for a similar, more coordinated approach here.

I’m not saying New Zealand needs to copy Tasmania line for line, but there’s plenty we could learn from the model.

There’s also plenty of evidence here at home showing why storage is worth getting right.

Take Opuha Dam in South Canterbury, where farming benefits from the water, but irrigation is only part of the story.

Releases from the dam have historically prioritised environmental river flows, followed by domestic and stock water, then irrigation and electricity generation. The lake has also become an important recreational asset.

It’s a useful reminder that water storage is about so much more than just putting more water on farmland.

Done well, water storage can support environmental flows, drinking water, recreation, groundwater recharge, productive land use and climate resilience.

It helps both rural and urban communities manage longer dry periods and more variable rainfall.

Reliable water also changes the decisions people are prepared to make.

If farmers and growers know water will be available when they need it, they can invest with more confidence, use water more efficiently and consider different crops or higher-value land uses.

That investment doesn’t stop at the farm gate; it flows into processing, jobs, service businesses and stronger regional economies.

The Central Plains irrigation scheme is a good example. Federated Farmers’ 2026 election platform points to the scheme as contributing around $400 million to Canterbury’s GDP in 2025 and supporting more than 2,200 full-time jobs.

None of this means every proposed dam should be built, or that taxpayers should be writing blank cheques.

Water users should pay for the private benefits they receive, and projects still need to stack up commercially and environmentally.

But there’s a clear role here for government in helping worthwhile projects through the difficult early stages and removing unnecessary barriers before good projects are killed by process.

That’s why Federated Farmers is asking the next government to provide seed funding for new water storage projects.

We also want faster approvals, resource management reform that properly enables community storage and managed aquifer recharge, and a national standard that makes sensible on-farm water storage much easier to build.

Fast-track consenting is already helping address the consenting challenge for some major projects, but consenting is only one part of the job.

Someone still needs to identify the opportunities, test the engineering and economics, build local support, find the funding and turn a concept into something investors can actually back.

This is where a more coordinated approach like Tasmania’s could make a real difference.

We already have the projects, the expertise, and the successful examples showing what water storage can deliver.

Now we need to build a system that turns our best water storage opportunities into reality.

Captions

Richard Dawkins beside dam on his farm.jpg – Richard Dawkins beside one of two dams on his farm in Marlborough’s Waihopai Valley. This dam holds 85,000 cubic metres and was built in 2020; the other one, built in 2016, holds 47,000 cubic metres. Together, the dams store 132,000 cubic metres of water for irrigating 135ha of grapes.

MIL OSI

Source: Federated Farmers

Federated Farmers says new legislation to replace the Resource Management Act will cut red tape, unlock investment and help grow our export-led economy.

The Planning Bill and Natural Environment Bill passed their third reading in Parliament yesterday.

Federated Farmers RMA reform spokesperson Mark Hooper says the new legislation is a huge milestone not just for farmers but for New Zealand more broadly.

“We’ve been pushing hard for RMA reform because the status quo has simply not been good enough.

“The RMA has been around for more than 30 years, increasingly making it harder and more expensive for productive Kiwis to get on with doing things to grow our economy.

“Farmers have spent far too much time and money navigating a system that’s been unnecessarily complex, expensive and uncertain for even the most basic everyday activities, like building a new shed or water storage.

“Meanwhile, councils and communities have also been left dealing with endless layers of bureaucratic planning rules and processes.

“This marks the end of that era and the beginning of an opportunity to do things differently.”

Federated Farmers has repeatedly called for the Government to get RMA reform across the line before the November election.

“We’ve been clear that getting this legislation passed before the election was important, and the Government has delivered on that,” Hooper says.

“Now we have a clean slate and the chance to build a planning system that’s simpler, more predictable and focused on getting good outcomes rather than generating more needless red tape.

“These two new laws mark a fundamental shift in the way New Zealand manages its natural resources.

“Finally, we can restore some commonsense to the whole system and make it easier to farmers – and all New Zealanders – to get things done.”

Hooper says a better resource management system is important for New Zealand’s ability to grow and invest.

“Farmers need to be able to make long-term decisions about their businesses without constantly wondering what the next planning rule, consent requirement or council process is going to mean for them.

“That matters when you’re deciding whether to invest in new infrastructure, improve environmental outcomes, expand production, develop irrigation or make other long-term investments in your farm.

“More broadly, New Zealand needs to build houses, infrastructure and businesses, generate energy and grow our productive economy.

“A planning system that adds unnecessary delays, cost and uncertainty makes all of that so much harder than it needs to be.”

Hooper says passing the legislation is a major step in the right direction, but now the focus should turn to making sure the new system works as intended on the ground.

“We’ll be watching that closely and continuing to advocate for a system that delivers certainty for farmers while achieving the environmental outcomes New Zealand needs.

“There’s a way to go before the system is up and running, but there are things the Government could do to speed up the benefits of these reforms.

“For example, they could pick up Federated Farmers’ request for 10 new national standards to make basic farming activities permitted activities.”

MIL OSI

NANNING, CHINA – Media OutReach Newswire – 21 September 2026 – During the 23rd China-ASEAN Expo and the China-ASEAN Business and Investment Summit, China Southern Power Grid showcased a range of innovations designed to support energy cooperation between China and ASEAN. These included the DaWatt – Lao Language Large Language Model (LLM) for the Energy and Power Sector V2.0 and the Flexible Grayscale Intelligent Monitoring & Analysis Platform for power system cybersecurity, highlighting expanding opportunities for cooperation in digitalization, intelligent technologies and green energy.

The Lao-language LLM has been deployed at Electricité du Laos Transmission Company Limited (EDL-T), where it can automatically analyze thousands of inspection images within a short period of time. After its algorithms were optimized for Laos’ mountainous and rainforest terrain, the model completed intelligent inspection analysis for four transmission lines, processing 26,000 drone inspection images and identifying more than 3,600 equipment defects.

Liu Ying, general manager of the Digitalization Department at Guangxi Power Grid Co., Ltd., said the company has been building multilingual professional corpora for the power sector, covering ASEAN countries including Laos, Vietnam and Malaysia. Drawing on the capabilities of the DaWatt foundation model, the company is developing energy and power models tailored to ASEAN languages and real-world power industry applications.

Talent development is another focus of the cooperation. The China-ASEAN Institute of Energy, jointly established by Guangxi Power Grid Co., Ltd. and Guangxi University, is exploring an industry-university training model with a strong emphasis on practical experience. So far, two cohorts totaling 53 students from ASEAN countries have enrolled.

Cooperation is also evolving from one-way training toward joint innovation. Guangxi Power Grid Co., Ltd. and the Royal Academy of Cambodia have jointly established a laboratory for artificial intelligence and safety equipment, while the company has also launched peer-to-peer exchanges with Electricité du Laos on improving power supply reliability.

To address language barriers in cross-border technical exchanges, Guangxi Power Grid Co., Ltd. has developed an AI-powered translation platform backed by a specialized database containing terminology for more than 1,800 types of power equipment. The platform supports accurate translation between Chinese and English, Chinese and Lao, and Chinese and Vietnamese.

At a recent training program for Chinese and overseas engineers, the system supported one-click generation of bilingual course materials and real-time speech translation, helping participants navigate highly specialized power-sector terminology.

To support regular international exchanges, Guangxi Power Grid Co., Ltd. has also established an international talent pool covering management, technical and skilled personnel. It has developed 24 hours of courses on international affairs as well as 20 short-form video courses.

“This year, we will also explore joint postgraduate programs with universities in ASEAN countries,” said Sun Xiaohua, deputy director of the Human Resources Department at Guangxi Power Grid Co., Ltd.

Looking ahead, Guangxi Power Grid Co., Ltd. plans to further advance a development model featuring “R&D in Beijing, Shanghai and Guangdong, integration in Guangxi, and application in ASEAN.” The company will continue expanding its multilingual power-sector corpora and explore a “Token Goes Global” model for power-sector AI, with computing resources and models based in Guangxi while knowledge services are delivered overseas. The effort is aimed at creating new forms of China-ASEAN energy cooperation and supporting the green development of the China-ASEAN Free Trade Area 3.0.

Hashtag: #GuangxiPowerGridCo.,Ltd. #ChinaSouthernPowerGrid #ChinaASEAN #EnergyCooperation

The issuer is solely responsible for the content of this announcement.

– Published and distributed with permission of Media-Outreach.com.

Source: Fonterra Co-operative Group Ltd

21 September 2026

Fonterra Co-operative Group Ltd has today revised its forecast Farmgate Milk Price midpoint for the 2026/27 season and narrowed its forecast range, reflecting recent improvements in global dairy commodity prices while retaining a prudent approach to the season ahead.

The new forecast midpoint has lifted from $9.25 per kgMS to $9.50 per kgMS, with the forecast range lifted and narrowed from $8.00 – $10.50 per kgMS to $8.50 – $10.50 per kgMS.

CEO Richard Allen says the increase in the forecast milk price midpoint is supported by recent improvements in global commodity prices.

“Since our last update in July, Global Dairy Trade auction results for key commodity products, particularly whole milk powder and skim milk powder, have improved. Globally, we continue to see strength in demand.

“This improving outlook reflects continued delivery from our focused execution across our B2B businesses. Geopolitical volatility remains and, with only two months complete, previous seasons tell us that things can always change,” says Mr Allen.

About Fonterra

As a global B2B dairy provider, we go to market through our global Ingredients brand NZMP and global Foodservice brand Anchor Food Professionals. We provide high-quality products, valued for our dairy innovation and science expertise and New Zealand provenance, to customers in more than 100 countries around the world.

MIL OSI

MIL OSI

MIL OSI

Source: Social Empowerment Education Program (SEEP)

17 September 2026

The Social Empowerment Education Program (SEEP) is calling for early and sustained public awareness on Fiji’s proposed national referendum, saying the recent low turnout at the Parliamentary consultation in Labasa provides an important lesson on the need to give communities sufficient time and information to participate.

Fewer than 10 members of the public attended the consultation on the Electoral (Amendment) Bill 2026 held on 15 September at Khatriya Hall, Naodamu, Labasa. SEEP was the only organisation that made a submission.

SEEP Research and Policy Officer Metuisela Gauna made the submission, accompanied by SEEP Deputy Director Josefa Ravea.

SEEP believes the low turnout should not automatically be interpreted as a lack of public interest. Instead, it raises questions about whether communities were given enough notice, information and opportunity to prepare and participate.

The consultation also took place on the same day as the National Agriculture Show at Subrail Park, which attracts people from across the North.

SEEP Executive Director Chantelle Khan said the Labasa experience should be taken as a lesson as Fiji moves towards a proposed national referendum.

“People need enough time to understand, think, discuss and ask questions before they are asked to participate in an important national process,” Ms Khan said.

According to media sources, the Government has proposed holding a referendum between November and mid-December 2026, with the proposed new Constitution to take effect by 24 December 2026, subject to the required processes.

SEEP acknowledges the progress being made on the constitutional review but is concerned about the short timeframe available to prepare the public for a referendum, a process Fiji has never held before.

“The concern is that we should not wait until one week or one day before the referendum to start explaining to people what the process is and how it will work,” Ms Khan said.

SEEP is therefore calling for public awareness on the proposed referendum to begin now, using radio, television, social media, print media and community meetings.

The organisation believes the public should have sufficient time to understand the referendum process, the proposed constitutional changes and how they will participate.

“Labasa has shown us that public participation cannot be assumed. We need to make sure people are informed and given a genuine opportunity to participate,” Ms Khan added.

SEEP encourages Government, Parliament and relevant authorities to begin engaging communities on the referendum process as early as possible.

MIL OSI

Source: New Zealand Labour Party

Let’s be honest about what’s going on.

Prices keep going up. Wages don’t keep up. And a small number of big, powerful companies are cashing in.

You feel it every week. At the supermarket checkout. On your power bill. At the petrol pump.

A handful of companies control many of the things you can’t do without. They know you have nowhere else to go – and they can use that power to charge you more than they should.

It’s called price gouging. It’s unacceptable. And Labour is going to make it illegal.

When people are working hard but still struggling to afford groceries, it can feel like the whole system is stacked against them.

We’re going to change the rules.

We’ll give the Commerce Commission real power to investigate the most powerful companies, take them to court, and make them pay back every dollar they overcharged you.

For the first time, the law will draw a clear line between high prices and unfair, excessive prices.

And this isn’t only about families at the checkout. Growers, producers and small suppliers are squeezed by the same corporate giants. We’ll make sure groups representing them can take complaints directly to the Commerce Commission too.

Let’s be clear about who this targets. Not your local dairy. Not your local café. Not the tradie down the road. Small businesses are doing it tough too.

This law will crack down on the big end of town – the powerful players in groceries, power, fuel, telecommunications, banking and insurance.

National said they’d fix the cost of living. Instead, it got worse. We can’t afford another three years of Christopher Luxon.

Last year, one in three New Zealand households couldn’t afford enough food. That’s not bad luck. It’s the result of political choices – choices we can make differently.

If a company uses its power to rip you off, we will stop them. As Prime Minister, I’ll personally oversee this to make sure it happens fast.

Labour will take on the big companies. We’ll take the profit out of price gouging. And we’ll put hardworking people first – because that’s who this country is for.

MIL OSI

Source: Greenpeace Aotearoa

National, ACT and NZ First have taken over $1 million in political donations from agribusiness-linked donors since 2022, new Greenpeace analysis reveals.

The finding is part of Greenpeace’s 2026 election scorecard, which exposes a stark divide between the parties over the future of New Zealand’s rivers, oceans, climate and conservation land.

Greenpeace says the figures should “set alarm bells ringing”, following revelations about Fonterra’s secret lobbying of the Government over the Smith climate case, and recent reports that major agriculture lobby groups privately lobbied Ministers for changes to new environmental laws – many of which were subsequently adopted.

Greenpeace campaigner Gen Toop says: “Our scorecard shows voters have fundamentally different choices for nature this election. Some parties are promising to restore environmental protections and tackle pollution, while others want more mining, fossil fuels and ocean exploitation.”

National, ACT and New Zealand First received the lowest possible grade each scoring an F, while Labour scored a C, The Opportunities Party a B, and the Greens and Te Pāti Māori received an A.

The scorecard looks at some of the biggest environmental decisions facing the next Government. It also puts political donations from major industries alongside the parties’ policy positions.

“We included donations data because people deserve to know which companies and wealthy individuals are funding the political parties vying for power this November”, says Toop.

“If you follow the money, a disturbing pattern emerges. The parties taking money from agribusiness, fishing, mining and fossil fuel interests are the parties promising policies that benefit those industries at the expense of our environment.”

The analysis shows since 2022, National, ACT and NZ First have collectively received $1,143,659 from agribusiness interests, $345,980 from mining interests and $314,261 from oil and gas companies. National and NZ First collectively received $172,812 from commercial fishing interests.

ACT alone received $771,761 from agribusiness-linked donors. ACT MP Simon Court is also the Ministerial Under-Secretary overseeing RMA reforms that environmental groups warn will gut protections against agricultural pollution, while ex-president of Federated Farmers, ACT MP Andrew Hoggard, is Associate Minister of Agriculture.

“Big industries may have deep pockets to pour into political donations, but ultimately voters decide who gets to govern”, says Toop.

“This election, voters have the power to choose whether our rivers, oceans, climate and wild places are protected, or whether the industries profiting from their destruction continue to get their way.”

Notes to editor

Full details on the scoring methodology and breakdown of political parties’ responses can be viewed here. Political donations analysis can be seen here.

Political parties were sent questions about their environmental policies and positions broken down by category – conservation land, oceans, freshwater, climate, and environmental law and democracy.

MIL OSI

The issuer is solely responsible for the content of this announcement.

– Published and distributed with permission of Media-Outreach.com.

Source: Federated Farmers

Profitability is the highest it’s been in a decade, but farmers are worried about whether the good times will hold.

Federated Farmers’ latest Confidence Survey shows 72% of farmers are making a profit, with fewer than one in 20 making a loss.

“That’s an incredibly positive result and the highest since we started asking about profitability back in 2016,” Federated Farmers president Colin Hurst says.

“High interest rates, low commodity prices and sky-high input costs were making it really hard for farmers to earn a living just a few years ago.

“Dairy, sheep and beef farmers are now getting strong returns again, meaning farming has been one of the main bright spots in an otherwise sluggish New Zealand economy.”

The July survey of 634 farms found farmers are feeling confident about wider economic conditions right now.

However, confidence about the next 12 months moved sharply in the opposite direction.

Nearly 30% of farmers expect conditions to worsen, compared with only 12% expecting improvement.

“Most of that concern about the year ahead is coming from dairy farmers, with 39% expecting a downturn versus 18% of meat and wool farmers,” Hurst says.

“Nearly 8% ticked ‘don’t know’, suggesting genuine uncertainty rather than settled pessimism.”

When asked to name their top concerns, the reasons for declining forward confidence are clear, Hurst says.

“Farmers who answered our survey describe a sector that’s currently well paid at the farmgate – arable farms a notable exception.

“But even though returns are good, they’re feeling squeezed by high costs, over-regulated, and politically anxious.”

Farmers’ top three concerns are rising input costs/on-farm inflation (33%), the election and domestic politics (30%) and regulation, compliance and red tape (23%).

“In farmers’ written comments, we can see a recurring theme that fuel, fertiliser, freight, insurance and other costs are ratcheting up faster than returns.

“They have limited ability to pass those costs on, so that means profit margins could be eroded.”

Worries about commodity prices and weather, such as a potential El Niño-driven drought, are well back at 12% and 11% respectively.

Despite net pessimism about the year ahead, more than half of the survey respondents plan to increase on-farm spending, and many expect to lift production.

Two in five farms expect to reduce debt against one in nine expecting they’ll have to borrow more.

“Set against rising profitability, it appears our sector is investing and repairing balance sheets while the cash flow is there,” Hurst says.

Unfortunately, while for dairy and meat and wool farmers many of the indicators are holding or positive, that’s not the case for arable farmers.

The arable sector is the only group that expects to have to increase debt rather than pay it down, and the only group negative on current profitability at net -2.6%.

“It’s incredibly concerning that only one in five arable farmers report making a profit, and nearly one in four report a loss,” Hurst says.

“The current conditions lifting the pastoral sector are not reaching our cropping farmers and that’s bad news for all of us.

“Arable farmers supply the platform of seeds, grains and feed required to run the nation’s multi-billion dollar livestock industry.”

Hurst says for political parties wondering what farmers want most from the Government, the clearest single instruction is to finish what has been started.

“The Government has done a good job of slashing red tape and trying to get Wellington out of farming.

“Even so, nearly a third of farmers say cutting regulation and compliance costs is their top priority for the Government.

“What we need is for the Resource Management Act reform to be completed, alongside simplifying consents and audits, and reducing council powers.

“Our election platform lays out a five-point plan to double farm productivity, cut costs and improve the environment, and we encourage all parties to take it on board.”

Other key findings from the July survey:

• Current profitability has risen at every survey January and July survey since a July 2024 trough. In the 2026 July survey, fewer than one in 20 farms report making a loss, compared with roughly one in three at the depth of the 2022-2024 downturn.
• Dairy farmers report strong current profitability, at a net +74.5, with 77% making a profit. Yet they are by far the most pessimistic about the year ahead: 39% expect economic conditions to worsen and 40% expect their own profitability to decline, against 18% and 14% among meat & wool farmers.
• Asked whether pressures such as economic conditions, weather, or government policy and regulation are affecting their mental health and wellbeing, just under one-third said yes, with a further 8% unsure. When first asked in January 2023, at the depth of the downturn, the figure was just over 70%.

MIL OSI

The issuer is solely responsible for the content of this announcement.

– Published and distributed with permission of Media-Outreach.com.