Lawyers acting for the terrorist who massacred 51 worshippers at two Christchurch mosques say their client suffered a “complete destruction of his identity” because of his prison conditions, leading to an irrational decision to plead guilty.

Australian Brenton Tarrant wants the Court of Appeal to overturn his convictions and sentence for the March 2019 shootings at Al Noor Mosque and Linwood Islamic Centre.

After initially pleading not guilty in June 2019 to 51 counts of murder, 40 of attempted murder and one of committing terrorism, he changed his pleas in March 2020.

The terrorist was sentenced to life imprisonment without parole in August 2020.

The 35-year-old now claims he pleaded guilty only because he was irrational as a result of the solitary nature of his prison conditions, which were torturous and inhumane.

One of the terrorist’s lawyers, who can only be identified as counsel A, quoted Nelson Mandela in laying out their argument to Justices Christine French, Susan Thomas and David Collins.

“No one truly knows a nation until he’s been inside its jails. A nation should not be judged on how it treats its highest citizens but how it treats its lowest ones,” the lawyer said.

The lawyer argued there were minimum conditions that all prisoners were entitled to, regardless of the crime they were accused of, and the terrorist’s rights had been breached.

“Those conditions apply to everyone. They apply to everyone, even Mr Tarrant, who has been described as the most reviled person in New Zealand. He is entitled to the rule of law and to be treated in accordance with the same standards that attach to all prisoners in New Zealand,” the lawyer said.

“Even in this most terrible of cases there are minimum expectations – minimum – which we say were ignored in this unprecedented case. These principles and standards include the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act, as well as international agreements as to how prisoners are to be held and treated.

“It is submitted that we must hold fast to those ideals that form this nation and not be pulled away by the undoubtedly strong and no doubt justified emotions that attach in this particular case. We must hold fast, especially in the most difficult of cases and circumstances which this case undoubtedly is. It is these most difficult of cases which test and strain at the rule of law the most.”

Counsel A claimed that the terrorist had lost all ability to defend himself in court as a result of his prison conditions, including total isolation aside from transactional contact with corrections staff, constant surveillance and limited activity.

“His guilty pleas were not entered voluntarily. They were entered as a direct result of the oppressive conditions in which he was held,” the lawyer said.

“It is said that these oppressive conditions impacted upon his mental health to such a severe extent that it prevented him from being able to participate in court process properly.

“It is Mr Tarrant’s evidence that due to his isolation and the associated conditions, he suffered a complete destruction of his identity. He describes this as nervous exhaustion or a nervous breakdown.”

The court has heard the terrorist initially raised the possibility of pleading guilty on 31 July 2019 – which came as a surprise to one of his then-lawyers – but four days’ later he again changed his mind and maintained his not guilty stance.

On Tuesday his former lawyers Shane Tait and Jonathan Hudson told the court from that point they were clear the terrorist always intended to plead guilty but he wanted to control the timing of his plea.

The terrorist claimed his mental state had declined to such an extent he felt forced into pleading guilty and he feared embarrassing himself at trial.

“It is his evidence that he had lost his sense of who he was and the capacity, the resilience if you like, to be able to run an effective defence by himself,” counsel A told the court on Thursday morning.

“There was also the point made that he believed if he did plead guilty that he might be able to ameliorate or improve those prison conditions under which he was being held.”

On Wednesday the court heard from other lawyers who had previously acted for the terrorist and described his conditions as unsatisfactory.

A psychologist said the terrorist’s prison conditions were not positive but were not as harsh as some prisons globally and did not amount to torture.

The terrorist was housed in the prisoners of extreme risk unit (PERU) at Auckland Prison.

He was cut off from meaningful interaction with other people, including fellow prisoners.

Another lawyer acting for the terrorist, who can only be identified as counsel B, said the conditions her client was held under before pleading guilty were unprecedented in modern New Zealand history.

“Make no mistake, Mr Tarrant’s circumstances are like no other. They are far more extreme, in our submission, than any other prisoner in the PERU or any other prisoner in New Zealand history,” counsel B told the court.

The terrorist, in his own subjective assessment, was not acting rationally at the time of pleading guilty but had only become aware of that with the benefit of hindsight, counsel B said.

The terrorist’s lawyers will continue their submissions on Thursday afternoon.

Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero, a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.

– Published by EveningReport.nz and AsiaPacificReport.nz, see: MIL OSI in partnership with Radio New Zealand

An inquest into the death of a special forces trooper during a training exercise in south Auckland hopes to find out what went wrong.

Lance Corporal Nicholas Kahotea fell to his death in May of 2019 while training to dismount from a Blackhawk helicopter onto the edge of a building.

Kahotea was leading his SAS regiment through what should have been a routine training exercise.

The men were excited to perform their first bump landing, a helicopter manoeuvre meant to get soldiers onto the roof of a building as quickly as possible.

It was part of a joint exercise with the United States military, using its top-of-the-line Blackhawk helicopters to train for counter-terrorism operations.

One of Kahotea’s fellow soldiers, whose identity is suppressed and can only be referred to as call sign 63, said the team was enthusiastic.

“I’m not sure whose decision it was but we were told the next [exercise]’s going to be a bump landing. And we were pretty excited about it,” he said.

“When we got told we were going to do a bump landing at nighttime it didn’t matter to us, we do training at night all the time. We were excited to get another skill under our belt.”

A bump landing involves setting just one wheel on the edge of a building and hovering steady while the troops step off.

Call sign 63 was first off the helicopter.

“I could see the dispatcher giving me the signal to go … I looked down and confirmed it was safe for me to drop,” he continued.

“I simply managed to step onto the roof, no worries.

“As the first man off the helicopter my job is to ensure the area at the front is clear and protect the people still on the helicopter. The threat to me and my team is out to my front. In this training exercise my main threat was the stairs off the roof, so that’s where I was looking.”

Two more soldiers dropped from the helicopter, and the exercise continued as call sign 63 moved to the stairs.

“When I got to the stairs I felt a tap on my shoulder, this indicated to me we were ready to proceed,” he said.

“I can’t recall if the next thing I heard was over the radio or if it was one of the guys behind me. It was saying man down, man down. No duff. One of your men is down on the other side of the building. No duff means it’s a serious situation.”

CCTV footage of the exercise shows the helicopter sway, as the gap between it and the roof inches wider.

That gap was the distance between life and death.

Kahotea fell several metres, sustaining catastrophic injuries. He later died in hospital.

This week, almost seven years later, a coronial inquest will recount the tragic event in detail and make recommendations to avoid similar accidents in the future.

Kahotea’s partner, Dr Sophie Walker, criticised the Defence Force’s approach to the exercise.

“A bump insertion is not a static or benign manoeuvre,” she said.

“This is a dynamic and inherently unstable balance. From a physics perspective, the Black Hawk’s mass means very small changes in altitude create very large force transfers that promote tail movement.”

She hoped the inquest would lead to answers and accountability.

“Our hope is that the findings of this inquest will ensure no other family will encounter the consequences of systemic risk assessment failure,” she said through tears.

“Loss is not something that just happened in May of 2019 … It is something that I wake up to every day. It is having to accept over and over that this is my life.”

Defence Force lawyer Sally McKechnie admitted it did not fully appreciate the risks of the manoeuvre at the time.

She said the NZDF had thoroughly investigated its processes since Kahotea’s death and had made improvements.

The inquest will continue through to Friday.

Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero, a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.

– Published by EveningReport.nz and AsiaPacificReport.nz, see: MIL OSI in partnership with Radio New Zealand

The white supremacist who massacred 51 people in the Christchurch terror attack attempted to engage a leading human rights lawyer to act as his “mouthpiece”.

Australian Brenton Tarrant wants the Court of Appeal to overturn his convictions and sentence for the March 2019 shootings at Christchurch’s Al Noor Mosque and Linwood Islamic Centre.

The 35-year-old now claims he pleaded guilty only because he was irrational due to the solitary nature of his prison conditions.

On Wednesday afternoon, the court heard from Dr Tony Ellis, who represented the terrorist for about six months in 2021, and Ron Mansfield KC, who represented him for just over a year from late 2021.

Ellis told the court he was primarily engaged by Tarrant to obtain a copy of the Royal Commission of Inquiry’s report into the terror attack.

He obtained a copy of the report and sent it to the prison, however, it did not reach the terrorist.

Ellis said the terrorist had also raised the possibility of launching an appeal. But the lawyer was not willing to act for him.

“If I was going to act for him on appeal he wanted me to do precisely as ordered and basically act as his mouthpiece,” he said.

“I told him I wasn’t prepared to act in those circumstances.”

Ellis had spoken to the terrorist a dozen times on the phone and the conversations were often lengthy.

“Many clients who have been detained in solitary confinement, they want to have a chat with somebody because its psychologically harmful to be left in solitary confinement and you need human interaction,” he told the court.

Mansfield had primarily been engaged to assist the terrorist in preparing for the coronial inquiry into the deaths of the 51 people murdered on 15 March 2019.

He then assisted the terrorist with taking steps towards seeking judicial review of his prison conditions.

Mansfield found the terrorist’s prison conditions to be unsatisfactory.

The terrorist had also raised the possibility of appealing his convictions and sentence, Mansfield said.

However, the terrorist had discussed the possibility of representing himself.

The terrorist dispensed with Mansfield’s services in April 2023 after becoming frustrated at the time it took for his legal matters to progress.

The Court of Appeal will hear legal arguments on Thursday and Friday.

Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero, a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.

– Published by EveningReport.nz and AsiaPacificReport.nz, see: MIL OSI in partnership with Radio New Zealand

A forensic psychologist has called into question a report prepared for the white supremacist who massacred 51 worshippers at two Christchurch mosques.

Australian Brenton Tarrant is serving life imprisonment without parole for the March 2019 shootings at Christchurch’s Al Noor Mosque and Linwood Islamic Centre.

The 35-year-old now claims he pleaded guilty only because he was irrational due to the solitary nature of his prison conditions.

He is seeking to overturn his convictions and sentence at the Court of Appeal.

On Monday, a psychologist, whose name is suppressed and is only known as Witness B, told the court the prison conditions affected the terrorist’s mental health.

The psychologist said the conditions were onerous and would have affected anyone’s mental health.

On Wednesday, forensic psychologist Professor James Ogloff, Dean of Health Sciences at Swinburne University in Melbourne, questioned the conclusions of that psychologist.

The terrorist was not subjected to deprivation or torture in prison, Ogloff told the court.

Ogloff said he believed when the terrorist spoke with Witness B he might have been consciously exaggerating the distress he claimed to be under at the time he pleaded guilty.

The terrorist’s argument for setting aside his guilty pleas was he claimed he was incapable of making a rational decision at the time because of the torturous and inhumane prison conditions.

A psychologist and a psychiatrist assessed the terrorist before his sentencing in August 2020. Both concluded he was fit to plea at that time.

Ogloff said he had no reason to call into question those assessments.

However, Witness B’s report appeared to reach the opposite conclusion and Witness B based much of his thinking on speaking to the terrorist several years after the time in question, Ogloff said.

When giving evidence on Monday, Witness B had tried to minimise his disagreement with the earlier assessments and appeared to back down from many of his report’s points, Ogloff said.

The terrorist was housed in the prisoners of extreme risk unit in Auckland Prison.

He was cut off from meaningful interaction with other people, including fellow prisoners.

Ogloff said he was not claiming the prison conditions were positive, but nor were they so harsh that severe mental deterioration was inevitable.

On Tuesday, the court heard from the two lawyers who represented the terrorist from late March 2019 until July 2020.

The pair presented an image of a man who was concerned with the attention he received in the outside world, who wanted to control the aspects of his legal proceedings he could, and who was often dismissive of his lawyer’s advice.

The terrorist had indicated to his lawyers he wanted to plead guilty in late July 2019 before again changing his mind several days later.

He finally pleaded guilty in March 2020 but the process was rushed.

However, both lawyers told the court the terrorist had indicated he would always plead guilty but he wanted to control when that happened.

Neither had any concerns about his fitness to provide instruction or to plea.

The court will hear evidence from the final witnesses on Wednesday afternoon before legal arguments on Thursday and Friday.

If the terrorist is successful, his guilty pleas will be overturned and he will stand trial in the High Court.

If he is unsuccessful, an appeal of his sentence will be heard, likely later this year.

Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero, a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.

– Published by EveningReport.nz and AsiaPacificReport.nz, see: MIL OSI in partnership with Radio New Zealand

One of the survivors of the Christchurch terror attack says the terrorist is just seeking attention with his Court of Appeal bid.

White supremacist Brenton Tarrant is serving a life sentence without parole for the mass shootings in March 2019 and has gone to the Court of Appeal to overturn his convictions and sentence.

Temel Atacocugu, who was shot during the massacre at Al Noor Mosque, said he believed this was all for the terrorist’s entertainment and so he could get the public’s attention again.

“He doesn’t want to be forgotten, but he lost that chance. He is forgotten already. I don’t think it will make any difference to his conditions in jail after all this court case is finished,” Atacocugu said.

Atacocugu was shot nine times in the attack and said it was still challenging for him physically and mentally.

He has been watching the court hearing via livestream in Christchurch and said it was difficult to see the terrorist’s face on screen.

“When I saw his face on the screen, flashbacks started bombarding my mind, and remembering that day. And my body reacted and was aching and my disabled arm on my left side. So it’s not easy for us to be still dealing with this court case,” he said.

The terrorist should stop with the self-pity and face what he had done like a man, Atacocugu said.

Federation of Islamic Associations chair Abdur Razzaq said the latest court appearance by the Australian terrorist followed a well-known pattern used by convicted right-wing terrorists globally to exploit legal systems in order to regain publicity, amplify their ideology and inspire online supporters.

The white supremacist was following an almost identical trajectory to the man responsible for the 2011 Norway attacks that killed 77 people, he said.

“After initially confessing guilt, the Oslo terrorist systematically exploited the Norwegian and European legal systems through repeated court actions following his 2012 conviction, including cases in 2016, 2017, and again in 2024, largely focused on alleged prison conditions. This is quite similar to the Australian 15 March terrorist who is now exploiting the NZ legal system claiming he pleaded guilty under duress by torture,” Abdur Razzaq said.

The terrorist was using the New Zealand legal system not to seek genuine redress but to re-enter the public arena, garner repeated media reporting and ensure continued visibility, he said.

The legal challenges brought societal costs to the March 15 families, who were already suffering from PTSD and large financial costs, Abdur Razzaq said.

“Unfortunately, as a society, we must confront an uncomfortable reality.”

Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero, a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.

– Published by EveningReport.nz and AsiaPacificReport.nz, see: MIL OSI in partnership with Radio New Zealand

The Australian white supremacist who massacred 51 worshippers at two Christchurch mosques was pleased to be charged with committing terrorism, the Court of Appeal has heard.

Convicted murderer and terrorist Brenton Tarrant made the admission to one of his lawyers after being advised of the charge in May 2019.

The 35-year-old wants to vacate his guilty pleas for the 15 March 2019 terror attacks at Al Noor Mosque and Linwood Islamic Centre and stand trial instead.

In March 2020, the gunman pleaded guilty at the High Court to 51 counts of murder, 40 of attempted murder and one of committing a terrorist act.

He was jailed for life without parole in August 2020.

The terrorist’s former lawyers Jonathan Hudson and Shane Tait, who represented him from late March 2019 until July 2020, gave evidence at a Court of Appeal hearing in Wellington on Tuesday morning.

Lawyers representing the terrorist at the Court of Appeal have name suppression.

During an exchange with a lawyer known only as counsel B, Hudson said the terrorist gave surprising responses to being advised of a 51st charge of murder and a charge of terrorism being laid against him.

Hudson’s affidavit described an “extremely unusual response” to the final murder charge.

“It wasn’t the response I had expected,” Hudson told the court, although he did not elaborate.

Hudson also detailed the gunman’s response to being advised of the terrorism charge in late May 2019.

“He was pleased,” he said.

“He wanted to be described as a terrorist.”

Hudson told the court the terrorist expressed a willingness to immediately plead guilty to the charge of terrorism, while at the same time maintaining a desire to plead not guilty to the murder and attempted murder charges.

The terrorist pleaded not guilty to all charges in June 2019 and contacted Hudson on 31 July 2019 when he expressed a desire to plead guilty.

Hudson said the terrorist’s change of heart came as a surprise.

Two days later Hudson met the terrorist in prison and read a letter outlining the pleas and the case against him.

There was no change in the terrorist’s demeanour, Hudson said.

Four days later the terrorist had another change of heart shortly before he was due to formally enter his pleas in court.

Hudson received the news via a phone call from the terrorist.

“We only had 20 minutes before the scheduled teleconference with the judge,” Hudson told the court.

“I went to visit him at the prison afterwards to confirm his instructions.”

Guilty plea

Asked by counsel B if he found the terrorist’s changing mind to be “illogical or irrational”, Hudson said he attributed it to “the seriousness of the punishment he faced if he went through with the guilty plea”.

Hudson had made the terrorist aware he faced life imprisonment without parole regardless of whether he pleaded guilty or not.

Tait and Hudson told the court the terrorist always intended to plead guilty.

“He was consistent that he was going to plead guilty but he was inconsistent as to when he would plead guilty,” Hudson said.

Tait said he advised the terrorist he had no defence in law, the evidence against him was overwhelming and he accepted that advice and intended to plead guilty.

He said the terrorist had raised wanting to claim he was defending New Zealand from overpopulation from migrant communities.

“I made it clear that defence was not available to him,” Tait said.

Tait advised the terrorist that there was a possible defence to the terrorism charge because no-one had been convicted of the offence at the time.

“To be clear Mr Tarrant never wanted to defend the terrorism charge. It was something he wanted to be convicted of,” he said.

Tait and Hudson continued preparing for trial on the basis it might proceed.

As part of their preparation, Tait advised the terrorist to seek a change in venue for trial.

That application was quite advanced before the terrorist abandoned it, although Tait was not surprised.

“It was just another attempt for him to try to control the proceedings,” he told the court.

“I wasn’t surprised. I wasn’t happy but I envisaged he may attempt to do something like that.

“His explanation is he didn’t want to be seen to be running away from the trauma he had caused the community.”

Tarrant’s extreme ideology seemed to be “more important to him than any idea of fair trial rights”, Tait said.

The court heard the terrorist had regularly ignored the advice of his lawyers, including in his desire to give a statement to the Royal Commission of Inquiry into the attack.

The terrorist gave evidence to the court on Monday, in his first public remarks since the 2019 mass shooting.

During his evidence he claimed he always intended on dismissing his lawyers, going to trial and representing himself.

He felt “forced” to plead guilty in March 2020 because of his deteriorating mental state and his fear he would make a fool of himself at trial.

His argument for vacating his guilty pleas amounted to the terrorist claiming he was incapable of making a rational decision at the time because of the solitary nature of confinement.

Hudson and Tait disputed the terrorist’s claim he had raised dismissing them.

Tait said the terrorist had only ever discussed representing himself at sentencing.

Tait recalled regularly pressing the terrorist for an arguable defence to take to trial and the terrorist made clear he was going to plead guilty, it was just a matter of when.

“Brenton what am I going to tell a jury?,” Tait recalled asking the terrorist.

“Don’t worry, it won’t get to that,” he said the terrorist would respond.

The terrorist, who is housed in the specialist prisoners of extreme risk unit at Auckland Prison, told the court on Monday any remorse he had expressed before his August 2020 sentencing was because of his isolation and poor mental state.

“I did express some remorse. I would now say that was induced by the prison conditions, I was irrational,” the terrorist told the court.

“It was actually real but it was induced by the prison conditions inducing the irrationality.”

The hearing is set down for five days.

Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero, a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.

– Published by EveningReport.nz and AsiaPacificReport.nz, see: MIL OSI in partnership with Radio New Zealand

The Court of Appeal will hear from the lawyers who would have represented Brenton Tarrant if he went to trial.

The 35-year-old white supremacist is seeking to overturn his guilty pleas for the March 2019 massacres at Christchurch’s Al Noor Mosque and Linwood Islamic Centre.

He now claims he only pleaded guilty as he was irrational due to the solitary nature of his prison conditions.

The court heard the terrorist told his then-lawyers that he always intended to plead guilty.

But the terrorist disputed that, telling the court he planned on representing himself at trial and running his own defence.

Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero, a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.

– Published by EveningReport.nz and AsiaPacificReport.nz, see: MIL OSI in partnership with Radio New Zealand

$3.6bn GPU Financing Secured for Microsoft Contract¹

Targeted 140k GPU Expansion on Track to Deliver $3.4bn ARR by End of CY26²

New 1.6GW Data Center Campus in Oklahoma

NEW YORK, Feb. 05, 2026 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — IREN Limited (NASDAQ: IREN) (“IREN” or “the Company”) today reported its financial results for the three months ended December 31, 2025.

Highlights

• $3.6bn GPU financing secured for Microsoft contract¹
  • Interest rate of
  • Together with Microsoft prepayment ($1.9bn) covers 95% of GPU-related capex
• Targeted 140k GPU expansion on track to deliver $3.4bn ARR by end of CY26²
  • Horizon 1-4 construction progressing to schedule
  • British Columbia AI Cloud expansion ongoing, with ~$0.4bn ARR now under contract for Prince George and remaining contract negotiations supporting >$0.5bn ARR³
• New 1.6GW data center campus in Oklahoma
  • Increases secured grid-connected power to >4.5GW
  • Grid-studies complete, with power scheduled to ramp from 2028
  • Large scale site (2,000 acres) with low latency network connectivity

Financing

• IREN continues to strengthen its capital structure and fund growth through diversified sources:
  • Cash and cash equivalents were $2.8bn as of January 31, 2026⁴
  • >$9.2bn funding secured financial year to date across customer prepayments, convertible notes, GPU leasing and GPU financing
• Ongoing financing workstreams include:
  • GPU financing
  • Data center financing
  • Select corporate level initiatives

Q2 FY26 Financial Results

• Results reflected continued progress in the transition from Bitcoin mining to AI Cloud, with capacity increasingly allocated to higher-value AI workloads and AI Cloud revenues accelerating as deployments ramped:
  • Total revenue decreased to $184.7m (vs. Q1 FY26 $240.3m)
  • Net income (loss) of $(155.4)m (vs. Q1 FY26 $384.6m)
  • Adj. EBITDA decreased to $75.3m (vs. Q1 FY26 $91.7m)⁵
  • EBITDA of $(243.9)m (vs. Q1 FY26 $662.7m)⁵
• Net income (loss) and EBITDA were impacted by significant non-cash and non-recurring items, primarily:
  • Unrealized losses related to prepaid forwards and capped calls associated with convertible notes (vs. significant unrealized gains on such positions in Q1 FY26), together with a one-time debt conversion inducement expense, totaling $(219.2)m
  • Mining hardware impairments of $(31.8)m related to the ongoing ASIC-to-GPU transition across British Columbia
  • Stock-based compensation expense of $(58.2)m, including $(22.3)m of accelerated amortization on performance-based restricted stock units and stock options, driven by materially higher share prices exceeding defined performance thresholds
  • Partially offset by an income tax benefit primarily on the release of previously recognized deferred tax liabilities relating to the unrealized gain on financial instruments of $182.5m

Management Commentary

“Last quarter marked meaningful progress across capacity expansion, customer engagement, and capital formation, reflecting IREN’s progress as a scaled AI Cloud platform,” said Daniel Roberts, Co-Founder and Co-CEO of IREN.

“We are seeing the strongest demand environment to date, and importantly, that demand is being met by a proven execution capability. Over several years, we have consistently delivered data center capacity on time and at scale, and that delivery track record continues to resonate with customers who value reliability alongside performance.

“With more than 4.5GW of secured power, we are able to advance a broad set of opportunities in our pipeline and support the next phase of growth. Our $3.4bn ARR target represents an early stage of monetization relative to the size of our secured power portfolio, highlighting the scale of the platform we are building.”

Q2 FY26 Results Webcast & Conference Call

IREN will host its Q2 FY26 results webcast and conference call at the following time:

The webcast will be recorded, and the replay will be accessible shortly after the event at https://iren.com/investor/events-and-presentations

About IREN

IREN is a leading AI Cloud Service Provider, delivering large-scale GPU clusters for AI training and inference. IREN’s vertically integrated platform is underpinned by its expansive portfolio of grid-connected land and data centers in renewable-rich regions across the U.S. and Canada.

Contacts

Investors
ir@iren.com

Media
media@iren.com

Assumptions and Notes

1. GPU financing and applicable interest rate is subject to agreed pricing parameters, level of base interest rates, execution of definitive long form documentation and customary conditions precedent.
2. ARR of $3.4bn represents expected $1.94bn average annual revenue under Microsoft contract plus estimated $1.5bn ARR from ~63k GPU deployment at British Columbia sites, based on internal company assumptions regarding GPU models, utilization and pricing. It is not fully contracted, there can be no assurance that it will be achieved, and actual revenue may differ materially. Assumes on time delivery and commissioning of GPUs.
3. ARR under contract of $0.4bn at Prince George is calculated as GPU/hour pricing for contracted GPUs as of February 5, 2026 multiplied by 8,760 hours per year and includes annualized revenue for storage and ancillaries. ARR under contract includes amounts that are not yet revenue-generating until the relevant GPUs are delivered, commissioned, and in service. There can be no assurance that contracted GPUs will result in such hours or pricing, and actual revenue may vary materially.
4. Reflects USD equivalent, unaudited preliminary cash and cash equivalents as of January 31, 2026.
5. EBITDA and Adjusted EBITDA are non-GAAP financial measures. Refer to page 12 for a reconciliation to the nearest comparable GAAP financial measure.

Forward-Looking Statements

This press release includes “forward-looking statements” within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended (“Securities Act”), and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (“Exchange Act”), that involve substantial risks and uncertainties. Forward-looking statements include information concerning possible or assumed future results of operations, including descriptions of our business plan and strategies and trends we expect to affect our business. These statements often include words such as “anticipate,” “expect,” “suggest,” “plan,” “believe,” “intend,” “estimate,” “target,” “project,” “should,” “potential,” “could,” “would,” “may,” “will,” “forecast,” and other similar expressions Forward-looking statements may also be made, verbally or in writing, by members of our Board or management team. Such statements are subject to the same limitations, uncertainties, assumptions and disclaimers set out in this press release.

We base these forward-looking statements or projections on our current expectations, plans and assumptions that we have made in light of our experience in the industry, as well as our perceptions of historical trends, current conditions, expected future developments and other factors we believe are appropriate under the circumstances and at such time. The forward-looking statements are subject to and involve risks, uncertainties and assumptions and you should not place undue reliance on these forward-looking statements. Although we believe that these forward-looking statements are based on reasonable assumptions at the time they are made, you should be aware that many factors could affect our actual financial results or results of operations, and could cause actual results to differ materially from those expressed in the forward-looking statements. Factors that may materially affect such forward-looking statements include, but are not limited to: Bitcoin price and foreign currency exchange rate fluctuations; our ability to obtain additional capital on commercially reasonable terms and in a timely manner to meet our capital needs and facilitate our expansion plans; the terms of any future financing or any refinancing, restructuring or modification to the terms of any existing or future financing, which could require us to comply with onerous covenants, restrictions or guarantees, and our ability to service our debt obligations; our ability to successfully execute on our growth strategies and operating plans, including our ability to continue to develop our existing data center sites, design and deploy direct-to-chip liquid cooling systems, and diversify and expand into the market for high-performance computing (“HPC”) solutions (including the market for AI Cloud Services and potential colocation services such as powered shell, build-to-suit and turnkey data centers (collectively “HPC and AI services”)); our limited experience with respect to new markets we have entered or may seek to enter, including the market for HPC and AI services; our ability to remain competitive in dynamic and rapidly evolving industries; expectations with respect to the ongoing profitability, viability, operability, security, popularity and public perceptions of the Bitcoin network; expectations with respect to the useful life and obsolescence of hardware (including GPUs, hardware for Bitcoin mining and any current or future HPC and AI services we offer); delays, increases in costs or reductions in the supply of equipment used in our operations including as a result of tariffs and duties, and certain equipment (including GPUs, hardware for Bitcoin mining and any other hardware for any current or future HPC and AI services we offer) being in high demand due to global supply chain constraints, and our ability to secure additional hardware (including GPUs, hardware for Bitcoin mining and any other hardware for any current or future HPC and AI services we offer), on commercially reasonable terms or at all; expectations with respect to the profitability, viability, operability, security, popularity and public perceptions of any current and future HPC and AI services we offer; our ability to secure and retain customers on commercially reasonable terms or at all, particularly as it relates to our strategy to expand into markets for HPC and AI services; our ability to establish and maintain a customer base for our HPC and AI services business and customer concentration; our ability to manage counterparty risk (including credit risk) associated with any current or future customers, including customers of our HPC and AI services and other counterparties; the risk that any current or future customers, including customers of our HPC and AI services or other counterparties, may terminate, default on or underperform their contractual obligations; our ability to perform under, and observe our obligations pursuant to, contractual obligations with counterparties, including customers of our HPC and AI services; changing political and geopolitical conditions, including changing international trade policies and the implementation of wide-ranging, reciprocal and retaliatory tariffs, surtaxes and other similar import or export duties, or trade restrictions; Bitcoin global hashrate fluctuations; our ability to secure renewable energy, renewable energy certificates, power capacity, timely grid connections, facilities and sites on commercially reasonable terms or at all; delays and costs associated with, or failure to obtain or complete, permitting approvals, grid connections and other development activities customary for greenfield or brownfield infrastructure projects, including as a result of the Electric Reliability Council of Texas’s (“ERCOT”) announced amendments to the approval process for large load interconnection requests; our reliance on power, network and utilities providers, third party mining pools, exchanges, banks, insurance providers and our ability to maintain relationships with such parties; expectations regarding availability and pricing of electricity; our participation and ability to successfully participate in demand response products and services and other load management programs run, operated or offered by electricity network operators, regulators or electricity market operators; the availability, reliability and/or cost of electricity supply, hardware and electrical and data center infrastructure, including with respect to any electricity outages and any laws and regulations that may restrict the electricity supply available to us; any variance between the actual operating performance of our miner hardware achieved compared to the nameplate performance including hashrate; electricity market risks relating to changes in laws, regulations and requirements of market operators, network operators and/or regulatory bodies, including with respect to interconnection of facilities of large electrical loads to the ERCOT grid (for example, via a process that may batch multiple large load interconnection requests), grid stability, voltage ride-through, frequency ride-through and curtailment obligations; heightened complexity and additional constraints in energy markets including load ramp requirements by utilities or grid operators which may not align with our planned data center development and commissioning timelines; our ability to curtail our electricity consumption and/or monetize electricity depending on market conditions, including changes in Bitcoin mining economics and prevailing electricity prices; actions undertaken or inaction by electricity network and market operators, regulators, governments or communities in the regions in which we operate, including such actions that could result in the estimated power availability at secured sites being materially less than initially expected, available too late, delayed, conditioned upon technical or operational requirements or not available in each case whether at sustainable cost or at all; the availability, suitability, reliability and cost of internet connections at our facilities; our ability to operate in an evolving regulatory environment; our ability to successfully operate and maintain our property and infrastructure; reliability and performance of our infrastructure compared to expectations; malicious attacks on our property, infrastructure or IT systems; our ability to secure connection agreements to access power sources and permits or to maintain in good standing the operating and other permits, approvals and/or licenses required for our operations, construction activities and business which could be delayed by regulatory approval processes, may not be successful or may be cost prohibitive; our ability to obtain, maintain, protect and enforce our intellectual property rights and confidential information; any intellectual property infringement and product liability claims; whether the secular trends we expect to drive growth in our business materialize to the degree we expect them to, or at all; any pending or future acquisitions, dispositions, joint ventures or other strategic transactions, including our ability to consummate any such transactions on terms favorable to the Group or at all; the occurrence of any environmental, health and safety incidents at our sites, and any material costs relating to environmental, health and safety requirements or liabilities; damage to our property and infrastructure and the risk that any insurance we maintain may not fully cover all potential exposures; settlement and termination of proceedings relating to the default under certain equipment financing facilities, ongoing securities litigation, and any future litigation, claims and/or regulatory investigations, and the costs, expenses, use of resources, diversion of management time and efforts, liability and damages that may result therefrom; our failure to comply with any laws including the anti-corruption laws of the United States and various international jurisdictions; any failure of our compliance and risk management methods; any laws, regulations and ethical standards that may relate to our business, including those that relate to data centers, HPC and AI services, Bitcoin and the Bitcoin mining industry and those that relate to any other services we offer, including laws and regulations related to data privacy, cybersecurity and the storage, use or processing of information and consumer laws; our ability to attract, motivate and retain senior management and qualified employees; increased risks to our global operations including, but not limited to, political instability, acts of terrorism, theft and vandalism, cyberattacks and other cybersecurity incidents and unexpected regulatory and economic sanctions changes, among other things; climate change, severe weather conditions and natural and man-made disasters that may materially adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations; public health crises, including an outbreak of an infectious disease and any governmental or industry measures taken in response; damage to our brand and reputation; evolving stakeholder expectations and requirements relating to environmental, social or governance (“ESG”) issues or reporting, including actual or perceived failure to comply with such expectations and requirements; volatility with respect to the market price of our ordinary shares (“Ordinary shares”); that we do not currently pay any cash dividends on our Ordinary shares, and may not in the foreseeable future and, accordingly, your ability to achieve a return on your investment in our Ordinary shares will depend on appreciation, if any, in the price of our Ordinary shares; and other important factors discussed under “Part 1. Item 1.A. Risk Factors” in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended June 30, 2025 and “Part II. Item 1A. Risk Factors” in our Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2025, as such factors may be updated from time to time in our other filings with the SEC, accessible on the SEC’s website at www.sec.gov and the Investor Relations section of IREN’s website at https:// investors.iren.com.

The foregoing list of factors is not exhaustive and does not necessarily include all of the important factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from those expressed in any of our forward-looking statements.

These and other important factors could cause actual results to differ materially by the forward-looking statements made in this press release. Any forward-looking statement that IREN makes in this press release speaks only as of the date of such statement. Except as required by law, IREN disclaims any obligation to update or revise, or to publicly announce any update or revision to, any of the forward-looking statements, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise.

Non-GAAP Financial Measures

This press release refers to certain measures that are not recognized under GAAP and do not have a standardized meaning prescribed by GAAP. IREN uses non-GAAP measures including “EBITDA” and “Adjusted EBITDA,” and “Adjusted EBITDA margin,” (each as defined below) as additional information to complement GAAP measures by providing further understanding of the Company’s operations from management’s perspective.

EBITDA is defined as net income (loss), excluding income tax (expense) benefit, finance expense, interest income and depreciation and amortization, which are important components of our net income (loss). Further, “Adjusted EBITDA” also excludes stock based compensation, foreign exchange gain (loss), impairment of assets, certain other non-recurring income, gain (loss) on disposal of property, plant and equipment, unrealized fair value gain (loss) on financial instruments, debt conversion inducement expense, gain (loss) on partial extinguishment of financial liabilities, increase (decrease) in fair value of assets held for sale and certain other expense items. “Adjusted EBITDA margin” is defined as Adjusted EBITDA divided by revenue.

Beginning in the fiscal year ended June 30, 2026, the Company has changed its definition of Adjusted EBITDA to exclude debt conversion inducement expense. This is a change from the presentation of Adjusted EBITDA in prior periods, and these adjustments did not have any impact on the calculation of Adjusted EBITDA in prior periods.

The reconciliations of these non-GAAP financial measures to the most directly comparable GAAP financial measures are shown in the Appendix hereto.

1) For further detail, see our unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements for the quarter ended December 31, 2025, included in our Form 10-Q filed with the SEC on February 5, 2026.

1)  For further detail, see our unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements for the quarter ended December 31, 2025, included in our Form 10-Q filed with the SEC on February 5, 2026.

1)  For further detail, see our unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements for the quarter ended December 31, 2025, included in our Form 10-Q filed with the SEC on February 5, 2026.

1)  Net Income Margin is calculated as Net Income divided by Total Revenue.
2)  Debt conversion inducement expense relating to the induced conversion of a portion of the 2030 Convertible Notes and 2029 Convertible Notes.
3)  Other expenses include a one-time liquidation payment incurred in August 2024 resulting from the transition to spot pricing at the Group’s site at Childress, the reversal of the unrealized loss recorded on fixed price contracted amounts outstanding at June 30, 2024, a litigation related settlement provision, loss on theft of mining hardware in transit, one-off professional fees incurred in relation to litigation matters, and transaction costs incurred on entering the capped call transactions in conjunction with the issuance of the convertible notes.
4)  Adjusted EBITDA Margin is calculated as Adjusted EBITDA divided by Total Revenue.

– Published by The MIL Network

Oklahoma energy asset acquisition, UAE digital asset mining MOU with Greenbelt Industries, and equity financing from Aegis Capital advance integrated energy and infrastructure strategy

IBG and BlockFuel continue to progress toward completion of previously announced merger, expected to close by end of Q1 2026 pending Nasdaq listing approval

SYDNEY, Jan. 20, 2026 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Innovation Beverage Group Ltd (“IBG” or “the Company”) (Nasdaq: IBG), an innovative developer, manufacturer, and marketer of a growing beverage portfolio of 60 formulations across 13 alcoholic and non-alcoholic brands, today provided a business update highlighting progress across several strategic initiatives tied to its proposed merger with BlockFuel Energy Inc. (“BlockFuel”). These developments include energy asset acquisitions, international digital infrastructure development, financing activity, and merger-related milestones.

“Today’s business update reflects continued momentum as we work toward completing our proposed combination with BlockFuel Energy,” said Sahil Beri, Chief Executive Officer of Innovation Beverage Group. “We believe the recent operational and strategic developments at BlockFuel underscore the opportunity to create a publicly traded platform with exposure to energy production and digital infrastructure. We remain focused on navigating the remaining regulatory and closing steps to finalize the transaction.”

“Over the past several months, we have made meaningful progress executing on our strategy across energy production, power infrastructure and digital asset development,” said Daniel Lanskey, Chief Executive Officer of BlockFuel Energy. “The completion of the Oklahoma asset acquisition and the signing of our joint venture MOU in the UAE reflect our focus on building a diversified, vertically integrated energy platform as we advance toward the completion of our proposed merger with Innovation Beverage Group.”

Acquisition of Oil and Gas Production Assets in Oklahoma
BlockFuel has completed the acquisition of oil and gas production assets located in the state of Oklahoma, marking a key step in the execution of its vertically integrated energy strategy. The acquired portfolio includes forty-six (46) previously producing horizontal oil and gas wells and eight (8) saltwater disposal wells with surface facilities. The wells are situated across approximately 30,000 acres, with BlockFuel Energy now owning the majority working interest (~86%) and net revenue interest (~70%) in the wells.

The aggregate purchase price was $12.5 million, comprised of cash paid at closing, seller-financed considerations payable under an amortized note bearing interest, and $3.7 million payable in shares of the Company’s common stock. The shares are to be issued on or before April 1, 2026, at a price equal to a 15% discount to the five-day volume-weighted average price prior to issuance.

Following the closing on December 24, 2025, BlockFuel assumed operational control of the oil field assets on December 26 and initiated the process of restoring production. Initial oil sales are underway, and assets generated from these sales are expected to play an important role in supporting BlockFuel’s energy-backed digital infrastructure initiatives while generating near-term operational activity.

An update on production and well status will be made at the end of February 2026.

Natural Gas Power Generation and Launch of Digital Asset Mining Initiative in Oklahoma
BlockFuel has started planning and initial deployment activities are underway to integrate on-site natural gas–fueled power generation with digital asset mining operations across BlockFuel’s Oklahoma asset base. As natural gas production is progressively brought back online, BlockFuel is evaluating the phased commissioning of approximately 6 megawatts of modular generation capacity at select well sites.

This infrastructure is designed to utilize associated natural gas at the wellhead – including stranded, flared, and saleable gas – to support the development of energy-backed digital infrastructure alongside ongoing oil and natural gas liquids production. BlockFuel believes this strategy has the potential to enhance revenue and improve asset-level economics by monetizing natural gas through on-site power generation, with the capacity to mine up to approximately 4.5 bitcoin per month.

Joint Venture MOU with Greenbelt Industries for UAE Digital Asset Mining Project
BlockFuel has entered a binding memorandum of understanding with Greenbelt Industries LLC, a UAE-based energy generation company with proprietary biofuel manufacturing technology and integrated core production plants, to develop and operate a digital asset mining facility in Sharjah, United Arab Emirates.

The parties intend to form a three-year project-specific joint venture combining Greenbelt’s regulatory licenses, infrastructure, and biofuel-based power generation systems with BlockFuel’s ASIC mining equipment and operational expertise. The project is designed to deliver scalable, energy-efficient and fully compliant digital asset mining operations in the Middle East.

Ownership of the joint venture will be split 50.75% to Greenbelt and 49.25% to BlockFuel, with shared governance through a six-member board of directors. Per the agreement, BlockFuel will be responsible for installation, commission and maintenance of all mining equipment and operations at the site, while Greenbelt will manage business administration and provide power supply and generation services.

Equity Financing Activity with Aegis Capital Corp.
BlockFuel has completed an equity financing led by Aegis Capital Corp., providing $2.0 million in working capital to support near-term operational and strategic initiatives. Proceeds are expected to be used primarily to advance BlockFuel’s energy operations and broader corporate objectives.

The Company notes that certain aspects of the financing are subject to customary disclosure considerations, and additional details will be provided as appropriate and in accordance with applicable securities regulations.

Update on Proposed Merger with BlockFuel Energy
IBG and BlockFuel continue to advance toward completion of their previously announced merger, which is expected to result in BlockFuel Energy becoming the operating business of the combined public company listed on the Nasdaq under the ticker symbol “FUEL”. The transaction is expected to close by the end of the first quarter of 2026.

The proposed transaction remains subject to customary closing conditions, including approval from Nasdaq on the listing application of the combined public company. Both companies continue to work collaboratively with advisors and regulators to complete the required processes and advance toward closing. Management believes the combination positions the Company to participate in the intersection of energy production, power generation, and digital infrastructure, while providing IBG shareholders with exposure to a diversified and scalable operating platform.

If you have a question or would like to schedule a meeting with IBG or BlockFuel management, please contact BlockFuel@KCSA.com.

About Innovation Beverage Group
Innovation Beverage Group is a developer, manufacturer, marketer, exporter, and retailer of a growing beverage portfolio of 60 formulations across 13 alcoholic and non-alcoholic brands for which it owns exclusive manufacturing rights. Focused on premium and super premium brands and market categories where it can disrupt age old brands, IBG’s brands include Australian Bitters, BITTERTALES, Drummerboy Spirits, Twisted Shaker, and more. IBG’s most successful brand to date is Australian Bitters, which is a well-established and favored bitters brand in Australia. Established in 2018, IBG’s headquarters, manufacturing and flavor innovation center are located in Sydney, Australia with a U.S. sales office located in California. For more information visit: https://www.innovationbev.com/

About BlockFuel Energy
BlockFuel Energy is involved in the acquisition, exploration and development of proven oil fields onshore in North America. By turning natural gas at the source, including stranded and flared gas, into a potent resource for the digital era, BlockFuel Energy intends to redefine the energy industry. BlockFuel Energy combines state-of-the-art power generation with oil and gas exploration to power bitcoin mining operations and high-performance data centers. Our vertically integrated concept allows us to use co-location and modular power generation techniques to optimize efficiency and investment returns. Our cutting-edge solutions for energy optimization and extraction will enable us to transform underdeveloped resources into high-margin, scalable, and sustainable revenue streams. For more information visit: https://blockfuelenergy.com/

Forward Looking Statement
This press release contains “forward-looking statements” and “forward-looking information.” These statements include, but are not limited to, statements about the final terms of the potential merger transaction, the structure of such transaction, benefits of the contemplated transaction between IBG and BlockFuel Energy, expected closing conditions and the parties’ ability to complete the transaction, should definitive documentation be reached as well as other statements that are not historical facts. This information and these statements, which can be identified by the fact that they do not relate strictly to historical or current facts, are made as of the date of this press release or as of the date of the effective date of information described in this press release, as applicable.

The forward-looking statements herein relate to predictions, expectations, beliefs, plans, projections, objectives, assumptions, or future events or performance (often, but not always, using words or phrases such as “expects,” “anticipates,” “plans,” “projects,” “estimates,” “envisages,” “assumes,” “intends,” “strategy,” “goals,” “objectives” or variations thereof or stating that certain action events or results “may,” “can,” “could,” “would,” “might,” or “will” be taken, occur or be achieved, or the negative of any of these terms and similar expressions) and include, without limitation, statements with respect to projected financial targets that the Company is looking to achieve.

All forward-looking statements are based on current beliefs as well as various assumptions made by and information currently available to the Company’s management team. By their very nature, forward-looking statements involve inherent risks and uncertainties, both general and specific, and risks exist that estimates, forecasts, projections, and other forward-looking statements will not be achieved or that assumptions do not reflect future experience. Such factors include, among others, (1) delays in finalizing definitive documentation for the contemplated transaction, (2) the risk that definitive documentation will reflect different terms than the non-binding terms described herein, (3) the risk of delays in consummating the contemplated transaction, including as a result of required regulatory and stockholder approvals, which may not be obtained on the expected timeline, or at all, (4) the risk of any event, change or other circumstance that could cause the parties to terminate the transaction prior to closing, (5) disruption to the parties’ businesses as a result of the announcement and pendency of the transaction, including potential distraction of management from current plans and operations of IBG or BlockFuel Energy and the ability of IBG and BlockFuel Energy to retain and hire key personnel, (6) reputational risk and the reaction of each company’s customers, suppliers, employees or other business partners to the transaction, (7) the possibility that the transaction may be more expensive to complete than anticipated, including as a result of unexpected factors or events, (8) the outcome of any legal or regulatory proceedings that may be instituted against IBG or BlockFuel Energy related to the transaction or merger agreement, should definitive documentation be executed, (9) the risks associated with third party contracts containing consent and/or other provisions that may be triggered by the contemplated transaction, (10) legislative, regulatory, political, market, economic and other conditions, developments and uncertainties affecting IBG’s or BlockFuel Energy’s businesses; (11) the evolving legal, regulatory and tax regimes under which IBG or BlockFuel Energy operate; (12) any restrictions during the pendency of the contemplated transaction that may impact the parties’ ability to pursue certain business opportunities or strategic transactions; and (13) unpredictability and severity of catastrophic events, including, but not limited to, extreme weather, natural disasters, acts of terrorism or outbreak of war or hostilities. We caution any person reviewing this press release not to place undue reliance on these forward-looking statements as several important factors could cause the actual outcomes to differ materially from the beliefs, plans, objectives, expectations, anticipations, estimates, assumptions, and intentions expressed in such forward-looking statements. These risk factors may be generally stated as the risk that the assumptions and estimates expressed above do not occur.

The Company does not undertake to update any forward-looking statement, whether written or oral, that may be made from time to time by Company or on behalf of the Company except as may be required by law.

Contact:
Innovation Beverage Group Limited
Sahil Beri
CEO
sahil@innovationbev.com 
www.innovationbev.com

BlockFuel Energy Inc.
Daniel Lanskey
President and CEO
dan.lanskey@blockfuelenergy.com 
www.blockfuelenergy.com

Investor Relations:
KCSA Strategic Communications
Phil Carlson, Managing Director
BlockFuel@KCSA.com

– Published by The MIL Network

RNZ revealed on Wednesday that from next month anyone who was born in Britain – or has citizenship there – will no longer be able to travel to the UK without a British passport.

The British High Commission said it did put out notifications last year to make people aware of the change.

Until now, dual citizens have been able to visit on a New Zealand passport, more recently with an ETA, an electronic online declaration costing about $37.

The British government said that was only ever meant to be a transitional measure.

Citizens of other countries said they too are affected by a similar global tightening of borders and passport rules.

Art historian Mark Stocker emigrated to New Zealand from Britain in the 1980s and still returns there for family, friends and work commitments.

Dual nationals will now have to pay more to visit – through passport fees – than for someone born in New Zealand or any other visa-waiver country, he said.

Stockton said the change has not been well signalled and “came like a bombshell”.

“This has certainly put me off visiting. And I just feel that it seems to be discriminatory because of the accident of [place of] birth. I don’t have any criminal, terrorist or other offences.

“I like to revisit Britain – without feeling passionately sentimental or nostalgic about it. I’ve got some family and plenty of friends there. I hope that they will have second thoughts and relax the rules.”

The news has left him with two options, he said: the ‘sheer kerfuffle’ of applying for a second passport – through an online form which needs photocopies of his NZ passport pages to be mailed to passport staff – or renouncing his citizenship.

“Putting all these barriers in my way when I’ve done no wrong seems to me to be unutterably weird and very retro, given that the technology is what it is. It seems absurd, almost obscene, to go through – to chop down the trees, to photocopy the 40 redundant pages, to pay people money. Does this combat terrorism? I would doubt it.

“Could the British government please return to their senses? Could they be compassionate and decent towards expatriate British who, they have no animosity whatsoever, only affection. If they want to put us off from returning to their country of origin, they couldn’t be doing the job better.

“It’s going to happen to people who were born in Britain and moved to New Zealand as babies or toddlers. That’s nuts.”

But it’s not only the UK that has been changing the rules.

A Canadian man living in Dunedin since the 1990s, Mark, said he went through the same shock when his entire family was travelling to Canada two years ago.

A travel agent had advised their New Zealand passports would be sufficient, but some years earlier Canada had also decided its dual citizens must travel on Canadian documents.

“This could have been us. We could have gone to the airport, and only then would we have been turned back, and we wouldn’t have had a clue. And I had all the documentation, everything photocopied. I wouldn’t have known. And if I hadn’t checked on my own, just because I was paranoid that something could go wrong, if I hadn’t checked on my own, we would have arrived at the airport and our son would have been told you can’t come. It would have been horrible.

“Of course, when you arrive at the airport, you’re not dealing with high-level immigration officers, you’re dealing with someone at the gate who knows what he’s or she’s been instructed to do, and they’re not in a position to wave you by.”

He was tearing his hair out when they found out about the new rule and that his son only had a New Zealand passport.

“So we had to, at the last minute, apply for an emergency waiver through the consulate here. And that was quite a process. We were told it was unlikely to arrive on time, if we were to be granted one at all. And it did fortunately arrive a few days before our flights were scheduled to leave. Otherwise, one of our sons would not have been able to travel with us because his Canadian passport had expired.”

Other concerns among people who had emigrated here were the rules around joint Irish citizenship, or for those who were born in the UK to New Zealand parents but who never got citizenship.

‘Whinging Poms’

Another dual national said it was not only those born in Britain who were affected. He was born in New Zealand but decided to get a UK passport by descent some years ago, and worried that he was worse off now as he cannot just buy an ETA on his Kiwi passport and fly.

Many compatriots accused Britain of revenue-gouging – or complained that Brits were whinging Poms. Others thought that it was comparable to what other countries were doing as they try to capture data check identities and ward off criminals, illegal immigrants and terrorists.

Meanwhile, for those travelling soon, anxiety levels are rising.

The message from the travel agents’ association is to always check and never assume.

Its chief executive, Julie White, said it’s a big change that may have benefited from more proactive advertising, and more time to adjust.

“There’s definitely activity – a little bit of panic and nervousness from our members, customers, because the concern is – will they be able to get a passport in time? Because the 25th of February is not that far away – six weeks away.”

Britain did signal it was coming, she said, just not how quickly.

“What has come as a surprise is the drop-dead date [of Feb 25]. While they did give some indication of it, perhaps there could have been a bit of a dial-up on proactive comms.”

The British High Commission said in a statement while the UK introduced an ETA requirement for non-British nationals, any British citizens visiting the UK ‘must enter on their UK passport, or if they do not have a British passport, on the passport of another country with a UK certificate of entitlement.’

It said British nationals cannot apply for an ETA but did not answer a question about why that was the case, why they need to travel on a British passport, or how long it takes to get a new passport at the moment.

“We have been posting about the requirements for dual nationals since 18 August 2025. There have articles on the UK government’s website, Gov.uk, since 29 May 2025,” said the spokeswoman. “We encourage British nationals who plan to visit the UK to apply for, or renew their passports, as soon as possible.”

Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero, a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.

– Published by EveningReport.nz and AsiaPacificReport.nz, see: MIL OSI in partnership with Radio New Zealand

Explainer – America has been in an uproar the past week over the actions of ICE agents – Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers – after the shooting death of a US citizen.

The death last week of 37-year-old Minneapolis woman Renee Nicole Good raised more questions about what exactly ICE agents are, and what they can do.

The shooting, captured on video, has fired up protests around America, strong defences of ICE agent actions by US President Donald Trump and others, and stirred concerns about accountability and the use of force. It’s also signalled increased conflicts between federal – the broader American government – and state and local authorities.

Here is what we know about ICE agents and the powers they have.

What are ICE agents? Are they police? Or are they soldiers?

They’re neither, exactly. They are part of the US Department of Homeland Security and are immigration enforcement agents. That means they’re federal law enforcement charged with investigating illegal immigration and removing violators.

Under Trump’s crackdown on illegal immigration, ICE has expanded significantly and carried out immigration enforcement activity in cities all around the country including Minneapolis, Portland, Chicago and Los Angeles.

“ICE is a paramilitary organisation with powers of arrest and detention under its own set of rules,” said Paul Buchanan, a New Zealand-based security and defence analyst.

Buchanan said there’s nothing quite like ICE in New Zealand law enforcement.

“NZ has no equivalent, nor do many other countries that have gendarmes and/or military police because ICE does not engage in usual police activities such as crime-fighting, traffic law enforcement, etc,” he said.

“Like the US Marshals, they act as uniformed bounty-hunters, minus the bounty and with immigrants rather than fugitives from justice as their prey.”

What’s their history?

ICE was formed after the September 2001 terrorist attacks in the US, as part of the Homeland Security Act of 2002. That act created the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), of which ICE is a subsidiary.

The initial focus of the DHS was preventing foreign terrorism, but it has changed quite a lot under Trump. Immigration enforcement isn’t new – former President Barack Obama was called the “deporter-in-chief” by some rights groups and more than 3 million were deported during his terms in office. But the raids and action seen across large American cities is an escalation.

“Its focus has shifted from counter-terrorism to a much more broad, some would say amorphous concept of immigration law enforcement,” Buchanan said.

Last year, Trump signed a budget bill that included a massive increase to an overall US$170 billion (NZ$305b) toward federal immigration enforcement agencies, of which $75b (NZ$130b) is going to ICE over the next four years.

The current Secretary of Homeland Security in charge of the department is Kristi Noem, the former governor of North Dakota.

ICE agents are not quite the same as Customs officials or the US Border Patrol, which is also part of the Department of Homeland Security, although they all can deal with issues at the border or with immigration.

Border Patrol generally works within 100 miles (160km) of the US border and they have broad powers to stop, question and search individuals and vehicles within that limit without warrants or probable cause. However, they must still satisfy the requirements of the Fourth Amendment to the US Constitution, which prohibits unreasonable searches and seizures.

What are ICE agents allowed to do?

The frequently viral images and video of masked, armed ICE agents taking people into custody around America have surprised many.

“When compared to local law enforcement and other federal security agencies like the FBI, Secret Service, Capitol Police, Military Police and US Marshals, they have extremely broad and discretionary coercive powers,” Buchanan said.

ICE agents do not need judicial warrants to make arrests, although they are not allowed to enter private homes without warrants. They have made arrests in public areas such as parking lots or apartment building lobbies.

“All aliens who violate US immigration law are subject to arrest and detention, regardless of their criminal histories,” ICE states on its website.

“Like all other law enforcement officers, ICE officers and agents can initiate consensual encounters and speak with people, briefly detain aliens when they have reasonable suspicion that the aliens are illegally present in the United States, and arrest people they believe are illegal aliens,” the site goes on to explain.

There have been lawsuits accusing ICE of racial profiling in their sweeps of American cities which have made their way to the US Supreme Court – which ruled in September those raids could continue.

In some cases ICE agents can even arrest US citizens if they interfere with their duties, but they aren’t supposed to place them in immigration detention – although this has reportedly happened in some cases anyway.

What about the use of force?

According to data assembled by The Trace, an independent journalism website that focuses on American gun violence, there have been 16 incidents where immigration agents opened fire since the beginning of Trump’s second term last January. Four people have been killed.

A DHS policy memo from 2023 – before Trump’s return to the White House – states that federal officers “may use deadly force only when necessary” when they have “a reasonable belief that the subject of such force poses an imminent threat of death or serious bodily injury” to themself or another person.

That policy memo also states employees should be trained in “de-escalation tactics and techniques.”

Notably in the case of Renee Good, that memo also says DHS officers and agents are “prohibited from discharging firearms at the operator of a moving vehicle … unless the use of deadly force against the operator is justified under the standards articulated elsewhere in this policy.”

The Trump administration says that force was justified in the case of Good, but protesters and many Minneapolis officials vehemently disagree.

ICE agents aren’t required to wear body cameras or provide badge numbers, Axios has reported.

What qualifications do you need to join ICE?

There’s no requirement to have law enforcement or military experience to be an ICE agent, although many of its employees do have some background in those areas.

According to ICE’s website, its deportation officers are only required to be a US citizen, have a driver’s license and be eligible to carry a firearm. You are not required to have a university degree. For some positions, even a high school diploma is not required.

Would-be ICE agents are required to take about eight weeks of training in topics such as firearms, immigration law and managing crises, for six days a week.

In 2018, the training at the Federal Law Enforcement Training Center in Georgia lasted 20 weeks, but DHS has since cut that back to eight weeks, the Washington Post reported, with DHS saying in a statement that it was “to cut redundancy and incorporate technology advancements.”

A press release in August announced ICE would waive age limits for new applicants “so even more patriots will qualify to join ICE in its mission to arrest murderers, pedophiles, gang members, rapists, and other criminal illegal aliens from America’s streets.” It also is offering up to US$50,000 (NZ$87,000) signing bonuses and enhanced benefits, with the agency at one point reporting more than 150,000 applications.

The agency has been on a major hiring spree since last year. It is reportedly aiming to spend US$100m over the next year on what it’s calling a “wartime recruitment” drive, including “people who have attended UFC fights, listened to patriotic podcasts, or shown an interest in guns and tactical gear,” the Washington Post reported.

The issue of their training and “rules of engagement” is critical, Buchanan said.

Why do they wear masks?

ICE agents are typically seen in public wearing face masks, which until recently has not been common among US police.

The US government allows this to prevent public doxxing “which can (and has) placed them and their families at risk,” the ICE website says.

The argument has been that ICE agents are being “outed” on social media, Buchanan said.

“DHS says that this is required because ICE agents face exposure and retaliation if their identities are revealed, which is something that the current administration is reiterating when justifying the murder of an unarmed US citizen by an ICE agent in Minneapolis…

“No other law enforcement agency in the US has this degree of non-transparency.”

Defending masking, DHS has claimed in media statements that there has been a “1300 percent increase in assaults, a 3200 percent increase in vehicular attacks against them and an 8000 percent increase in death threats” which it blamed on “radical rhetoric by sanctuary politicians.”

However, some analysis by American media contradicts that claim.

Buchanan said ICE agent masking stands out from other American agencies.

“Even the FBI and US Marshals have to announce who they are and why they are conducting operations (and have warrants in order to have legal authority to do so), and there are laws in place that make malicious revealing of a federal security agency employee a felony (say, by doxxing or other forms of social media “outing”).

“So the level of ICE opaqueness is extraordinary, especially in peacetime.”

States and the wider government are increasingly in conflict on the issue of masks. California passed a law banning law enforcement including ICE from wearing masks that took effect on January 1, although it’s being challenged by the Trump administration and will face court hearings.

Are ICE agents being held to the same standards other law enforcement officials are?

That’s the big question after the death of Renee Nicole Good.

Noem has said that as she drove away from ICE officers, Good “weaponised her car” in a “domestic terror attack”. But plentiful video was shot at the scene of the incident, which is still under investigation.

Democrats are pushing for a variety of measures to rein in ICE, but as Republicans control both houses of Congress and the White House, it’s uncertain if any will pass.

Buchanan said there are many questions about ICE’s actions and accountability.

“In my opinion ICE has too much discretionary authority and too loose controls over the use of force, including lethal force.

“Besides concerns that ICE is turning into Trump’s private militia under the guise of being a public security agency, the way in which ICE operates almost inevitably sets up a clash with local government and law enforcement.”

The FBI is leading the investigation into the Minnesota shooting and after an initial agreement for a joint federal-state probe, announced it would block state investigators from participating in it.

Typically, federal and local authorities work together on prominent cases.

The Good case has seen a flurry of activity from the Trump administration defending ICE actions and a flood of protests against it.

In a press conference, Vice President JD Vance blamed the “far left” for attacks on law enforcement and said the killing of Good was a “tragedy of her own making.”

But Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey had strong words after Good’s death last week: “I have a message for ICE: Get the f- out of Minneapolis. We do not want you here.”

Buchanan warned of the possibility of “mini civil wars” in places where the backlash against ICE is extreme, as local government and communities push back against some of the Trump administration agenda.

“When ICE shows up and starts raiding, detaining, injuring and now killing people in jurisdictions where the local communities and government do not want them there, that sets up a confrontations dynamic that is pernicious in the extreme.”

Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero, a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.

– Published by EveningReport.nz and AsiaPacificReport.nz, see: MIL OSI in partnership with Radio New Zealand

𝐀𝐧𝐭𝐢-𝐏𝐚𝐥𝐞𝐬𝐭𝐢𝐧𝐢𝐚𝐧 𝐫𝐚𝐜𝐢𝐬𝐦 is a form of racism that targets Palestinians as a people, denying their identity, history, rights, and humanity. It operates by portraying Palestinians as inherently violent, less deserving of protection, or as an obstacle to peace, rather than as a people living under occupation and dispossession.

MIL OSI

By Aaron Blake, CNN

Analysis – On 2 November, White House chief of staff Susie Wiles told Vanity Fair that land strikes in Venezuela would require the approval of Congress. She said that if Trump “were to authorise some activity on land, then it’s war, then [we’d need] Congress”.

Days later, Trump administration officials privately told members of Congress much the same thing – that they lacked the legal justification to support attacks against any land targets in Venezuela.

Just two months later, though, the Trump administration has done what it previously indicated it couldn’t.

It launched what Trump called a “large scale strike against Venezuela” and captured its president, Nicolás Maduro, to face charges. And it launched this regime change effort without the approval of Congress.

(Trump in November claimed he didn’t need congressional authorisation for land action, but it clearly wasn’t the consensus view in the administration.)

It appears the mission is, for now, limited to removing Maduro. But as Trump noted, it did involve striking inside the country – the same circumstance some in the administration previously indicated required authorization that it didn’t have. CNN reported back in early November that the administration was seeking a new legal opinion from the Justice Department for such strikes.

And Trump in a news conference Saturday spoke repeatedly about not just arresting Maduro, but also running Venezuela and taking over its oil – comments that could certainly be understood to suggest this was about more than arresting Maduro.

Legally dubious strikes inside another country – even ones narrowly tailored at removing a foreign leaders – are hardly unheard of in recent American history. But even in that context, this one is remarkable.

Shifting justifications

That’s because the Trump administration has taken remarkably little care to offer a consistent set of justifications or a legal framework for the attack. And it doesn’t even appear to have notified Congress ahead of time, which is generally the bare minimum in such circumstances.

A full explanation of the claimed justification has yet to be issued, but the early signs are characteristically confusing.

Republican Sen Mike Lee of Utah said shortly after the strikes that Secretary of State Marco Rubio told him the attack was needed to, in Lee’s words, “protect and defend those executing the arrest warrant” against Maduro.

“This action likely falls within the president’s inherent authority under Article II of the Constitution to protect US personnel from an actual or imminent attack,” said Lee, a frequent critic of unauthorized foreign military action.

Hours later, Vice President JD Vance echoed that line.

“And PSA for everyone saying this was ‘illegal’: Maduro has multiple indictments in the United States for narcoterrorism,” Vance said on X. “You don’t get to avoid justice for drug trafficking in the United States because you live in a palace in Caracas.”

At a later news conference, Rubio echoed the line that the military had been supporting “a law enforcement function”.

But there are many people living in other countries that are under indictment in the United States; it is not the US government’s usual course to launch strikes on foreign countries to bring them to justice.

The administration also hadn’t previously indicated that military force could be legally used for this reason.

Initially, Trump threatened land strikes inside Venezuela to target drug traffickers – this despite Venezuela being an apparently somewhat small player in the drug-trafficking game.

Later, the administration suggested strikes might be needed because Venezuela sent bad people into the United States.

And then, after initially downplaying the role of oil in the US pressure campaign against Venezuela and Maduro, Trump said he aimed to reclaim “the oil, land, and other assets that they previously stole from us”.

The signals were confusing enough that even the hawkish Sen. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina in mid-December indicated the administration lacked “clarity” in its messaging.

“I want clarity right here,” Graham said. “President Trump is saying his days are numbered. That seems to me that he’s gotta go. If it’s the goal of taking him out because he’s a threat to our country, then say it. And what happens next? Don’t you think most people want to know that?”

Despite the focus on the law enforcement operation on Saturday, Trump at the news conference said the United States would now participate in running Venezuela, at least temporarily. And he repeatedly spoke about its oil.

“We’re going to rebuild the oil infrastructure,” Trump said, adding at another point: “We’re going to run the country right.”

And even if the administration had offered a more consistent justification, that doesn’t mean it would be an appropriate one.

A controversial 1989 memo

The most recent major example of using the US military for regime change is, of course, the war in Iraq. That war was authorized by Congress in 2002. The broader war on terror was authorized by Congress in 2001, after the 9/11 attacks.

Since then, administrations have sought to justify several military actions in the Middle East using those authorisations – sometimes dubiously. But Venezuela is in an entirely different theater.

While many have compared the effort in Venezuela to Iraq, the better comparison – and one the administration apparently intends to make – is Panama in 1989.

Like in Venezuela, Panama’s leader at the time, Manuel Noriega, was under US indictment, including for drug-trafficking. And like in Venezuela, the operation was less a large-scale war than a narrowly tailored effort to remove the leader from power.

The Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel in 1980 had concluded that the FBI didn’t have the authority to apprehend and abduct a foreign national to face justice. But George HW Bush administration’s OLC quietly reversed that in the summer of 1989.

A memo written by William P. Barr, who would later become attorney general in that Bush administration and Trump’s first administration, said a president had “inherent constitutional authority” to order the FBI to take people into custody in foreign countries, even if it violated international law to do so.

That memo was soon used to justify the operation to remove Noriega. (As it happens, Noriega was captured the same day Maduro was: January 3,1990.)

But that memo remains controversial to this day. It’s also an extraordinarily broad grant of authority, potentially allowing US military force anywhere.

And the situation in Venezuela could differ in that it’s a larger country that could prove tougher to control with its leader in foreign custody. It also has significant oil wealth, meaning other countries could take an interest in what happens there next. (China has called the attack a “blatant use of force against a sovereign state.”)

In both the news conference and an interview with Fox News on Saturday morning, Trump invoked the possibility of further military option, reinforcing that this could be about more than just arresting Maduro.

That also means the questions about Trump’s legal authorities could again be tested – just as he’s already tested them with his legally dubious strikes on alleged drug boats and other actions in the region.

What’s clear is that Trump is seeking to yet again test the limits of his authority as president – and Americans’ tolerance for it. But this time he’s doing it on one of the biggest stages yet. And the story of his stretching of the law certainly isn’t over.

– CNN

– Published by EveningReport.nz and AsiaPacificReport.nz, see: MIL OSI in partnership with Radio New Zealand

Please attribute to Police Commissioner Richard Chambers:

I am very pleased to announce Superintendent Jeanette Park (Eastern District Commander), Superintendent Corrie Parnell (Wellington District Commander) and Superintendent Tim Anderson (Bay of Plenty District Commander) are provisionally appointed as Assistant Commissioners for NZ Police.

The appointments of new Deputy and Assistant Commissioners will ensure that from early 2026 we will have a refreshed leadership team and be well-placed to deliver on our core priorities.

Jeanette, Tim and Corrie all have significant operational experience and a strong understanding of the front-line, as well as the communities Police serve in. They will bring different perspectives and experience to the wider team.

They will begin in their new roles as Assistant Commissioners in early February.

This follows the confirmation yesterday of Deputy Commissioner Mike Pannett as the statutory Deputy Commissioner. I expect to appoint a second, non-statutory, Deputy Commissioner early in 2026.

Superintendent Jeanette Park has been District Commander of the Eastern District since 2020, overseeing major operations including Operation Kotare to disrupt organised crime and gang harm.

She led the local Police response to Cyclone Gabrielle. Under her leadership, Eastern District has improved public trust and confidence through crime prevention measures and addressing gang tensions and the disruption gangs cause to communities. She has a proven track record in engaging with different communities and a strong focus on the safety and training of frontline staff.

Prior to her role as District Commander, she was Area Commander in Hawke’s Bay.

She started her policing career in Papakura in South Auckland in 1991 and has worked in Southern, Bay of Plenty, Central, Counties-Manukau, and Eastern Districts in a range of roles from CIB and road policing to prevention manager.

In 2005 she was awarded the Bravery Star for her actions in a 2002 critical incident in which her colleague Detective Constable Duncan Taylor was shot and killed, and Jeanette was also shot and seriously wounded.

Superintendent Corrie Parnell was appointed Wellington District Commander in 2019, and recently has been acting Assistant Commissioner: Investigations, Serious and Organised Crime.

Corrie joined New Zealand Police in 1993 and has worked across a broad range of investigative groups, and in District Commander and prevention roles.

Corrie has extensive experience in cross-agency emergency management.

As District Commander, he led multi-agency responses to some of the largest public order operations in Police history, including the 2022 Parliament protests and the 2024 Hīkoi mō e Tiriti, facing high levels of public and political scrutiny.

He was also involved in cross-agency management for the Canterbury earthquakes, Kaikoura earthquake, Port Hills fires, Covid-19 response, and Cyclone Gabrielle.

He has represented NZ Police globally, working with the United Nations on model protocols for policing protests and as a speaker on crisis management.

He was Acting Assistant Commissioner: People Services in 2023, overseeing nationwide strategies for workforce wellbeing, performance management, recruitment and culture change.

During 2018 Corrie was seconded as the Acting National Manager: Safer People, leading a major transformation programme. That same year he received training in counter-terrorism investigations, which in March 2019 saw him as one of the leaders responsible for the initial response to the Christchurch terror attacks.

In 2019 Corrie graduated from the FBI National Academy in Quantico, completing their three-month leadership programme.

Between 2003 and 2009 Corrie led several successful major crime and homicide investigations, receiving both District Commander and Commissioner’s Commendations for outstanding commitment to criminal investigations.

Superintendent Tim Anderson has been Bay of Plenty District Commander since 2022.

Since joining Police in February 1994, Tim has held a range of roles across Auckland and Bay of Plenty, including leadership roles across major investigations and prosecutions.

He has had a focus on serious crime investigations, including adult sexual assault and child protection matters.

From 2015 to 2019 Tim served as Detective Superintendent in the National Crime Manager role, leading the National Criminal Investigation Group.

In 2019, Tim was lead Senior Investigating Officer based at PNHQ in the investigation into the Christchurch terror attacks. He was also appointed by the Commissioner to lead the NZ Police team response to the Royal Commission of Inquiry into the attacks. In 2022, he was awarded the Police Bronze Merit Award for his work on Operation Deans.

As a trained Personal Protection Officer, Tim has been part of operational security planning teams for major events both domestically and overseas. He led the NZ Police Team as lead security adviser to the Chef de Mission and NZ Olympic Committee for the Rio Olympic Games 2016.

Tim holds a Bachelor of Laws with Honours from Auckland University, majoring in international criminal law and employment law.

ENDS

Issued by Police Media Centre

MIL OSI

Warning: This story contains content some may find disturbing.

A Hastings-based man who planned a mass stabbing attack at his court hearing has been sentenced to jail.

The 22-year-old, who has interim name suppression, previously pleaded guilty at the Napier District Court to 13 charges of indecent communications, distributing objectionable material, and for threatening to commit a mass stabbing attack at his 17 December sentencing.

He was sentenced to five years and four months’ imprisonment.

It follows a joint investigation by the Department of Internal Affairs (DIA) and Police.

On 20 August 2024, a search of the offender’s home revealed two electronic devices with over 2300 items of sexual abuse and exploitation material, including images and videos of child sexual abuse, bestiality and necrophilia, as well as terrorist and violent extremism content.

Police said further investigation identified several of his victims, including a child under 16 who he had solicited sexually explicit images from.

On 28 September, the FBI alerted DIA that he planned to commit a mass stabbing attack on his court date.

Police then found two bladed weapons in his bedroom – including a bayonet which he said would be used in the attack – and a manifesto detailing how he had been radicalised at the age of 19.

They said the offender claimed he was active within several violent online groups targeting children, the LGBTQ+ community and other vulnerable groups, enticing them to share nude images and engage in self-harm, later using the material as leverage for extortion.

Detective Inspector James Keene of Eastern District Police said the sentencing was an example of international agencies working together effectively.

“Any threats of mass harm, such as in this case, are always of concern to Police, which is why we moved quickly to arrest this man, and sought to detain him in custody,” he said.

“This individual preyed on the innocence of children by distributing horrific child abuse and exploitation images online, including personally requesting explicit images from a teenager.”

As part of his sentence, the man would be registered as a child sex offender and the devices used during his offending destroyed.

Police urged parents to talk to their tamariki about their online activities, with advice available at KeepItRealOnline.govt.nz.

Where to get help:

• Need to Talk? Free call or text 1737 any time to speak to a trained counsellor, for any reason.
• Lifeline: 0800 543 354 or text HELP to 4357.
• Suicide Crisis Helpline: 0508 828 865 / 0508 TAUTOKO. This is a service for people who may be thinking about suicide, or those who are concerned about family or friends.
• Depression Helpline: 0800 111 757 or text 4202.
• Samaritans: 0800 726 666.
• Youthline: 0800 376 633 or text 234 or email talk@youthline.co.nz.
• What’s Up: 0800 WHATSUP / 0800 9428 787. This is free counselling for 5 to 19-year-olds.
• Asian Family Services: 0800 862 342 or text 832. Languages spoken: Mandarin, Cantonese, Korean, Vietnamese, Thai, Japanese, Hindi, Gujarati, Marathi, and English.
• Rural Support Trust Helpline: 0800 787 254.
• Healthline: 0800 611 116.
• Rainbow Youth: (09) 376 4155.
• OUTLine: 0800 688 5463.

Sexual Violence

If it is an emergency and you feel like you or someone else is at risk, call 111.

Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero, a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.

– Published by EveningReport.nz and AsiaPacificReport.nz, see: MIL OSI in partnership with Radio New Zealand

Warning: This story contains content some may find disturbing.

A Hastings-based man who planned a mass stabbing attack at his court hearing has been sentenced to jail.

The 22-year-old, who has interim name suppression, previously pleaded guilty at the Napier District Court to 13 charges of indecent communications, distributing objectionable material, and for threatening to commit a mass stabbing attack at his 17 December sentencing.

He was sentenced to five years and four months’ imprisonment.

It follows a joint investigation by the Department of Internal Affairs (DIA) and Police.

On 20 August 2024, a search of the offender’s home revealed two electronic devices with over 2300 items of sexual abuse and exploitation material, including images and videos of child sexual abuse, bestiality and necrophilia, as well as terrorist and violent extremism content.

Police said further investigation identified several of his victims, including a child under 16 who he had solicited sexually explicit images from.

On 28 September, the FBI alerted DIA that he planned to commit a mass stabbing attack on his court date.

Police then found two bladed weapons in his bedroom – including a bayonet which he said would be used in the attack – and a manifesto detailing how he had been radicalised at the age of 19.

They said the offender claimed he was active within several violent online groups targeting children, the LGBTQ+ community and other vulnerable groups, enticing them to share nude images and engage in self-harm, later using the material as leverage for extortion.

Detective Inspector James Keene of Eastern District Police said the sentencing was an example of international agencies working together effectively.

“Any threats of mass harm, such as in this case, are always of concern to Police, which is why we moved quickly to arrest this man, and sought to detain him in custody,” he said.

“This individual preyed on the innocence of children by distributing horrific child abuse and exploitation images online, including personally requesting explicit images from a teenager.”

As part of his sentence, the man would be registered as a child sex offender and the devices used during his offending destroyed.

Police urged parents to talk to their tamariki about their online activities, with advice available at KeepItRealOnline.govt.nz.

Where to get help:

• Need to Talk? Free call or text 1737 any time to speak to a trained counsellor, for any reason.
• Lifeline: 0800 543 354 or text HELP to 4357.
• Suicide Crisis Helpline: 0508 828 865 / 0508 TAUTOKO. This is a service for people who may be thinking about suicide, or those who are concerned about family or friends.
• Depression Helpline: 0800 111 757 or text 4202.
• Samaritans: 0800 726 666.
• Youthline: 0800 376 633 or text 234 or email talk@youthline.co.nz.
• What’s Up: 0800 WHATSUP / 0800 9428 787. This is free counselling for 5 to 19-year-olds.
• Asian Family Services: 0800 862 342 or text 832. Languages spoken: Mandarin, Cantonese, Korean, Vietnamese, Thai, Japanese, Hindi, Gujarati, Marathi, and English.
• Rural Support Trust Helpline: 0800 787 254.
• Healthline: 0800 611 116.
• Rainbow Youth: (09) 376 4155.
• OUTLine: 0800 688 5463.

Sexual Violence

If it is an emergency and you feel like you or someone else is at risk, call 111.

Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero, a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.

– Published by EveningReport.nz and AsiaPacificReport.nz, see: MIL OSI in partnership with Radio New Zealand

A 22-year-old man has been sentenced to five years and four months imprisonment for indecent communications, distributing objectionable material, and threatening to commit a mass stabbing attack, following a joint investigation by the Department of Internal Affairs and New Zealand Police.

The Hastings-based man was granted interim name suppression having previously pled guilty to 13 charges at the Napier District Court related to the indecent communications, objectionable material, and for threatening to commit a mass stabbing attack when appearing at his sentencing on 17 December 2025.

A search of the offender’s home on 20 August 2024 led to the seizure of two electronic devices which contained over 2300 sexual abuse and exploitation images, including images and videos of child sexual abuse, bestiality and necrophilia, as well as terrorist and violent extremism content. Further investigation identified several of his victims, including a child under the age of 16, who he had solicited sexually explicit images from.

On the 28 September 2024, the Department received an alert from the FBI that he planned to commit a mass stabbing attack on his court date. Two bladed weapons were subsequently found in his bedroom by Police including a bayonet which he said would be used in the attack. A manifesto was also found detailing how he had been radicalised at the age of 19.

The offender claims he was active within several violent online groups. These groups target children, the LGBTQ+ community and other vulnerable groups, enticing them to share nude images and engage in self-harm, later using the material as leverage for extortion.

Protecting vulnerable groups has been a keen focus for law enforcement, with the New Zealand Police releasing public warning notices urging parents and young people to be alert when online. 

Detective Inspector James Keene of Eastern District Police says this sentencing shows a commitment by New Zealand and overseas agencies to work effectively together to reduce this level of harmful activity.

“This individual preyed on the innocence of children by distributing horrific child abuse and exploitation images online, including personally requesting explicit images from a teenager.

“Any threats of mass harm, such as in this case, are always of concern to Police, which is why we moved quickly to arrest this man, and sought to detain him in custody.”

“This investigation demonstrates the dedication of our investigators and partner agencies in stopping offenders from committing serious acts of harm against innocent victims, both online and in the real world,” says Jared Mullen, General Manager, Digital Safety and Investigations.

As part of his sentence, the Judge ordered he be registered as a child sex offender and the devices used during his offending to be destroyed.

Help and support

We encourage parents and caregivers to talk to their tamariki about their online activities. Advice and support for parents and caregivers about how they can keep their children safe online can be found at KeepItRealOnline.govt.nz

In a non-emergency situation, you can provide a report to Police by calling 105 or filing an online report.

If you know abuse is happening right now or a child is at risk, call police immediately on 111.

If you are concerned about something you have seen or want to report objectionable content, please report it to the Digital Child Exploitation Team and the Digital Violent Extremism Team at DIA.

If you are the victim of a child abuse or sexual abuse crime, you can contact: https://www.kidshealth.org.nz/child-abuse-directory-information-and-support

Safe to Talk: 0800 044 334 Text 4334

If you are concerned about your own or someone else’s sexual behaviour, please reach out for support:

Safe Network: 09 377 9898

WellStop: 04 566 4745

STOP: 03 353 0257

Stand Strong, Walk Tall

ENDS

Issued by Police Media Centre

MIL OSI

An international firearm regulation expert says the shooting at Bondi is not a sign gun laws aren’t effective – rather, it’s a wake up call for Australia’s enforcement.

A father and son targeted a Jewish festival on Sunday evening, killing 15 people with legally-owned rifles.

NSW Police Commissioner Mal Lanyon said the elder, Sajid Akram, had been a licensed firearms holder for the past 10 years and legally owned six firearms. Six firearms were recovered from the scene.

Rebecca Peters is the former director of the International Action Network on Small Arms, and was the leader of the grassroots movement in Australia to change gun laws following the Port Arthur Massacre.

She told RNZ since that success almost 30 years ago, Australia’s standards had slipped.

“Complacency has been one of the results of the success of our gun laws initially,” she said. “We have had a reduction in gun violence, and so it hasn’t seemed so important, I guess, to the police and certainly to the parliaments.”

For example, it was a requirement for a gun owner to be a member of a gun club, and then clubs would assist with enforecement by notifying authorities of any no-shows, which might imply they’d been citing recreation dishonestly as a reason to get a gun. She questioned whether that was still rigorously followed.

“Over the years, we’ve found that all of the enforcement of the laws has become much more lax, especially on renewal.”

It’s been revealed the younger of the gunmen, Naveed Akram, 24, had long-standing links to Australia’s pro-Islamic State (IS) network, although he was not on any terrorism watchlists.

Still, Peters said those links should have been enough to prevent his father owning a firearm – let alone six.

Photographs of the attack indicate the weapons used were not semi-automatic. Peters said those were capable of causing much more harm, as they far reduced the time needed to reload, which meant more time firing bullets.

She said it still raised questions about the necessity of owning weapons capable of causing such harm for the purposes of recreation.

Data showed most Australians who owned guns lived in the cities and suburbs, she said. “Now, the average number of guns owned by a gun owner is four. And most Australians are really taken aback to think, ‘Why are people in the suburbs being considered to have legitimate reasons to have four guns?’”

She said the rules needed to be reassessed. “I think some kind of measures to limit the numbers, and to just really, really pay close attention to the question of has this person has really justified [their need to own a gun]?”

Even if that vastly increased the workload for police and other relevant authorities?

“I think ask anyone in Australia, do you think that’s fair to ask the police to really do a careful examination of who you’re arming with this product designed to destroy bodies, do we think extra paying attention and digging around is worth it? Absolutely.”

The Australian government agreed change was needed. Prime Minister Anthony Albanese convened an urgent meeting of national cabinet on Monday afternoon, where premiers and first ministers unanimously agreed to bolster rules around gun ownership.

On the table were options to hasten work on a national firearms register, new rules to limit the number of guns a person could own, and further restriction of legal weapon types.

Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero, a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.

– Published by EveningReport.nz and AsiaPacificReport.nz, see: MIL OSI in partnership with Radio New Zealand

New Zealand police expect officers to guard key locations for the Jewish community until at least the end of the week.

Police say the officers, who have been armed, will stay while they continue to assess the deadly attack at Bondi that killed 15 people.

“We’re maintaining our presence while we assess what’s happened in Australia, while we ensure that everything is in New Zealand as it should be,” Assistant Commissioner for National and International Security, Mike Pannett said.

“It’s probably just a reminder that our national terrorism level remains at low in New Zealand, so that indicates there’s no immediate threat to New Zealand, but absolutely important that we give reassurance to all our communities, and on this occasion, particularly our Jewish community.”

Local leaders have said they’ve stopped holding religious celebrations in public because it is too much of a security threat.

New Zealand police have been working with the Jewish Council to ensure everyone can celebrate the Hannukah festival safely.

They say they are in contact with security agencies here multiple times a day, and also in regular contact with police in Australia.

“We are mindful that we take nothing for granted and that we are far better to be prepared and having contingencies in place,” Pannett said.

When asked how long police would remain at key sites, he said it was being assessed on a daily basis.

He expected officers to remain posted until the end of the week, if not longer.

“We are also speaking with other parts of the community of New Zealand as well, including the Muslim community,” Pannett said.

“We’re ensuring that we give them that reassurance to let them know that we are there in the event of something happening.”

Pannett said police were looking at significant events, particularly for the Jewish community, happening over the week.

“And we are maintaining a presence at those events that present a risk, but also provide the reassurance opportunity,” he said.

There was no immediate threat or increased risk to New Zealand, Pannett said.

“We are simply proceeding with caution as we assess the situation and the information that comes in from our partner agencies in Australia.”

Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero, a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.

– Published by EveningReport.nz and AsiaPacificReport.nz, see: MIL OSI in partnership with Radio New Zealand

STATEMENT: 15 December 2025 – The Reserve Bank of New Zealand – Te Pūtea Matua has filed civil proceedings in the High Court against ASB Bank Limited for breaches of core requirements under the Anti-Money Laundering and Countering Financing of Terrorism (AML/CFT) Act 2009 from at least December 2019.

ASB’s non-compliance relates to its failures to:

• establish, implement, or maintain an AML/CFT programme that complied in all respects with the requirements of the AML/CFT Act;
• adequately conduct ongoing customer due diligence;
• report suspicious activities within the timeframe provided in the AML/CFT Act;
• conduct enhanced customer due diligence; and
• terminate business relationships as required by the AML/CFT Act.

Acting Assistant Governor of Financial Stability Angus McGregor says this action is an important reminder to industry that serious non-compliance with the AML/CFT Act is unacceptable.

“The AML/CFT Act has been in place for well over a decade now and the Reserve Bank expects banks to have the systems and resources in place to be fully compliant with these requirements” Mr McGregor says.

“Banks who do not comply increase risk for New Zealanders and our financial system. Non-compliance with account monitoring and reporting requirements denies New Zealand law enforcement and intelligence agencies access to crucial time-sensitive information that is needed to detect and deter criminal activity.”

ASB has co-operated with the Reserve Bank and has admitted liability for all seven causes of action.

The parties have agreed to jointly recommend to the Court that a penalty of $6.73m is appropriate in this case, though the final determination is for the Court.

The enforcement response promotes the AML/CFT Act’s purposes, which are to detect and deter money laundering and the financing of terrorism; maintain and enhance New Zealand’s international reputation; and contribute to public confidence in the financial system.

It is not alleged that ASB was involved in money laundering or the financing of terrorism. As this matter is now before the High Court, the Reserve Bank will not be making any further comment.

In determining its enforcement response, the Reserve Bank applied its Enforcement Principles and Criteria Guidelines, which are available on the Reserve Bank’s website. https://govt.us20.list-manage.com/track/click?u=bd316aa7ee4f5679c56377819&id=3881919c3f&e=f3c68946f8

MIL OSI

PSNA is renewing calls to the government for sanctions, as Israel breaches the ceasefire in Gaza, with killing and still preventing essential aid getting into Gaza.

Palestine Solidarity Network Aotearoa Co-chair John Minto points to Israeli claims that it is ‘enforcing’ the ceasefire.

“Israeli soldiers have violated the ceasefire more than 500 times since the US plan came into effect.  They have killed 356 Palestinians in the same period.”

“Most times, the Israelis claim they had to shoot Palestinians ‘acting suspiciously’ near the Israeli delineated ‘yellow line’ of continued Israeli occupation of Gaza,” Minto says.

“But other times, Israel has bombed areas and killed people well away from the Israeli positions.  It looks like business as usual, except at a temporarily lower level.”

“Amnesty International has said the world must not be fooled. Israel’s genocide is not over.  We know that the indirect death toll is a number of times the official 70,000 recorded fatalities.”

“There is the additional crisis now of winter floods destroying the tent cities in parts of Gaza.  Experts are saying the risk of disease is dire, made worse by Israel restricting aid supplies, when the ceasefire arrangement was for the supplies to fully resume.”

Minto says while attention has been on Gaza, the uncontrolled Israeli settler terrorism against Palestinians in the Occupied West Bank, should be of serious concern to our government.

“National has strongly condemned Israeli land grabs in the West Bank in the past.  And more recently banned two Israeli cabinet ministers from ever entering Aotearoa New Zealand.  Luxon’s government needs to live up to its stated position on West Bank violence.”

“Instead, New Zealand has just abstained on a vote in the United Nations, to declare Israeli occupation of the Syrian Golan Heights as illegal,” Minto says.

“This is a vote which comes up in the General Assembly every year.  We used to vote with the vast majority to tell Israel that it has no valid claims on Syrian territory.”

“Now, our government is showing every sign to Israel that with the unenforceable Gaza deal, New Zealand can now declare all Israeli occupation, wherever it is, as no longer of any concern and can be forgotten about.”

“So our government is relying on the distractions of the approaching holiday season to maintain its wall of silence on Israel’s genocide and land grabbing.” 

“The government’s ‘season of goodwill’ applies to the perpetrators of genocide, but not to its victims”

“Foreign Minister Winston Peters and Defence Minister Judith Collins don’t want media attention on Gaza, so they can avoid accountability for complicity with Israeli”

“New Zealanders want sanctions against Israel.  That terrifies Peters and Collins.”

“Our national protest to parliament and the US Embassy next Wednesday will put the focus back on sanctions and this worst atrocity of the 21^st century.”

John Minto

Co-Chair PSNA

MIL OSI

The white supremacist terrorist who murdered 51 people in the Christchurch terror attack is expected to give evidence in an attempt to overturn his conviction and life sentence.

Brenton Harrison Tarrant massacred 51 worshippers at Al Noor Mosque and Linwood Islamic Centre during Friday prayers on 15 March, 2019.

He initially denied all charges and planned to stand trial but the Australian-born terrorist entered surprise guilty pleas to 51 counts of murder, 40 of attempted murder and one of terrorism on 26 March, 2020.

He was jailed for life with no possibility of parole – the first time such a sentence was imposed – in August 2020 but he is now seeking to vacate his guilty plea and appeal his conviction and sentence.

The terrorist must first convince the Court of Appeal to hear his appeal.

The court will hear evidence on an extension of time for the terrorist to appeal his conviction and sentence in February next year.

It is likely the terrorist will give evidence during the hearing.

He is also expected to give evidence to the Coroners Court after the High Court cleared the way for him to be called as a witness despite objections from survivors and victims’ families.

The terrorist was previously interviewed by a Royal Commission of Inquiry into the terror attack.

Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero, a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.

– Published by EveningReport.nz and AsiaPacificReport.nz, see: MIL OSI in partnership with Radio New Zealand

– Published by EveningReport.nz and AsiaPacificReport.nz, see: MIL OSI in partnership with Radio New Zealand

An attack on a satellite can take modern life offline, affecting everything from basic communication to banking. But international law is lagging, and an expert warns we risk turning the final frontier into the next frontline.

The next battleground for global security may not be on Earth, but above it.

As satellites control everything from navigation and banking to weather forecasting and military operations, experts warn that space is now a target for terrorism – and say we aren’t prepared.

“It’s no longer a question whether space terrorism occurs, but how we, as an international community, respond when it does,” says Anna Marie Brennan, a law lecturer at Waikato University, who has been researching outer space law and governance for the past seven years.

“If we don’t have those clear rules, if we don’t have accountability mechanisms, corporate strategies between states and also between states and space companies, do we actually run the risk of turning the final frontier into the next battlefield?”

Satellites, she says, have already been caught in the crossfire of cyber attacks and espionage.

In March 2022, Network Battalion (NB65), a group affiliated with Anonymous, allegedly hacked the Russian civilian space agency Roscosmos in protest of the country’s invasion of Ukraine.

More recently, in September this year, the navigation system of a plane carrying Ursula von der Leyen was disrupted due to suspected Russian interference.

It’s alleged that the “GPS jamming” happened while the European Commission president was about to arrive in Bulgaria, forcing the pilot to use paper maps to land safely.

“We are seeing a number of incidents emerging where very quickly us experts are starting to realise that we need a legal framework to try and combat it,” Brennan says.

“It’s very much a problem that is on the rise worldwide … but our laws are not catching up at all, and there is a considerable vacuum. We are reaching the point now of no return.

“If we don’t adopt laws, if we don’t have some sort of mechanism at the international level to ensure accountability, to engage in monitoring, we could see quite a severe attack on space infrastructure.

“And, of course, this infrastructure is vital for everyday life on earth – from climate and environmental monitoring to giving us a heads-up if there is a bad weather front on the way to our business and finance communications, even to us monitoring and responding to disasters. We need satellites to do all these activities,” she says.

“If we don’t have that legal framework, if we don’t have those protections in place, what experts fear is a rise in terrorist activities against this infrastructure.”

Modern life interrupted

So, in a world increasingly dependent on space-based systems – “there are about 10,000 satellites in orbit around us and that number is growing year on year” – she tells The Detail that a single disruption could ground flights, cripple stock exchanges or cut off communications for millions.

Even some of the most basic conveniences of modern life would be interrupted.

“If you are somebody like me, who really needs the Sat-Nav in their car to try to get from A to B, if a key satellite to provide that service is knocked out, you’d really struggle.”

Brennan says there are “currently five outer space treaties at the international level, but these were crafted at a time when only a handful of states had access to orbit”.

“Countries like New Zealand have a very strong legal framework. If you want to launch anything … you have to have a license from the minister. But not all countries have that legal framework.

“So, experts over several years will be trying to explore how to support states to craft laws to address space terrorism, how do we prevent this from happening, firstly, and how do we hold those to account who engage in this type of activity and criminal behaviour.

“How do we define an act of terrorism in space, how do we establish protocols for instant reporting, and determining liability for attacks on commercial and civilian infrastructure?”

She says as humanity expands its footprint beyond the planet, so too does the threat. And without clear international rules, the final frontier could become the next front line.

Check out how to listen to and follow The Detail here.

You can also stay up-to-date by liking us on Facebook ph or following us on Twitter.

– Published by EveningReport.nz and AsiaPacificReport.nz, see: MIL OSI in partnership with Radio New Zealand

Secured $9.7bn AI Cloud Contract with Microsoft 

Targeting $3.4bn AI Cloud ARR by End of 2026, Expansion to 140k GPUs ¹

NEW YORK, Nov. 06, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — IREN Limited (NASDAQ: IREN) (“IREN” or “the Company”) today reported its financial results for the three months ended September 30, 2025.

Highlights

• Targeting $3.4bn in AI Cloud annualized run-rate revenue (ARR) by the end of 2026 (expansion to 140k GPUs)¹
• Secured $9.7bn contract with Microsoft:
  • Phased deployments at Childress through 2026
  • 5-year average term
  • 20% customer prepayment
  • $1.9bn expected ARR contribution²
• New multi-year contracts including Together AI, Fluidstack and Fireworks AI, supporting growth to target AI Cloud ARR of >$500m by end of Q1 2026³
  

Q1 FY26 Financial Results

• Total revenue increased to record $240.3m (+355% vs. Q1 FY25 $52.8m)
• Net income increased to record $384.6m* (vs. Q1 FY25 net loss $(51.7)m)
• Adj. EBITDA increased to $91.7m (+3,568% vs. Q1 FY25 $2.5m)⁴
• EBITDA increased to record $662.7m* (vs. Q1 FY25 $(18.8)m)⁴

* Includes unrealized gains, primarily on prepaid forwards and capped calls in connection with convertible notes

Project Update

British Columbia (160MW)

• Transition of data centers from ASICs to GPUs ongoing, targeting completion by end of 2026

Childress (750MW)

• Accelerating construction of Horizon 1-4 (200MW critical IT load) liquid-cooled data centers for Microsoft
• Significant enhancements to original Horizon design, including Tier 3-equivalent concurrent maintainability, 100MW superclusters for high-performance training, and flexible rack densities (130-200kW)
• Design work advancing for potential conversion of entire campus to liquid-cooled AI deployments

Sweetwater Hub (2GW)

• Sweetwater 1 (1,400MW) substation energization targeting April 2026
• Sweetwater 2 (600MW) substation energization targeting late 2027

Financing

IREN continues to strengthen its capital structure and fund growth through diversified sources:

• Cash and cash equivalents were $1.8bn as of October 31, 2025⁵
  • $1.0bn zero-coupon convertible notes issued on October 14, 2025
  • $200m incremental GPU financing secured, bringing total to $400m
• Near-term capex expected to be funded through combination of existing cash, operating cashflows, Microsoft prepayments and additional financing initiatives

Management Commentary

“IREN continues to execute with discipline, delivering record results this quarter and meaningful progress in our AI Cloud expansion,” said Daniel Roberts, Co-Founder and Co-CEO of IREN.

“We secured several new multi-year contracts, including a landmark partnership with Microsoft, which solidifies IREN’s position as a leading AI Cloud Service Provider and expands our reach into new hyperscale customer segments.

Looking ahead, our announced expansion to 140k GPUs represents only 16% of our 3GW grid-connected power portfolio, providing ample capacity to continue scaling IREN’s AI Cloud platform and drive long-term value creation.”

Q1 FY26 Results Webcast & Conference Call

IREN will host its Q1 FY26 results webcast and conference call at the following time:

The webcast will be recorded, and the replay will be accessible shortly after the event at https://iren.com/investor/events-and-presentations

About IREN

IREN is a leading AI Cloud Service Provider, delivering large-scale GPU clusters for AI training and inference. IREN’s vertically integrated platform is underpinned by its expansive portfolio of grid-connected land and data centers in renewable-rich regions across the U.S. and Canada.

Contacts

Investors
Mike Power
mike.power@iren.com

Media
Matt Epting
matt.epting@iren.com 

To keep updated on IREN’s news releases and SEC filings, please subscribe to email alerts at https://iren.com/investor/ir-resources/email-alerts.

Assumptions and Notes

1. Represents expected $1.94bn average annual revenue under Microsoft contract plus estimated $1.5bn ARR from ~63k GPU deployment at British Columbia sites, based on internal company assumptions regarding GPU models, utilization and pricing. It is not fully contracted, there can be no assurance that it will be achieved, and actual revenue may differ materially. Assumes on time delivery and commissioning of GPUs.
2. ARR represents expected average annual revenue under the contract, assuming on-time delivery and commissioning of GPUs.
3. Represents potential ARR from ~23k GPU deployment at British Columbia sites, based on internal company assumptions regarding GPU models, utilization and pricing. It is not fully contracted, there can be no assurance that it will be achieved, and actual revenue may differ materially. Assumes on time delivery and commissioning of GPUs.
4. EBITDA and Adjusted EBITDA are non-GAAP financial measures. Refer to page 10 for a reconciliation to the nearest comparable GAAP financial measure.
5. Reflects USD equivalent, unaudited preliminary cash and cash equivalents as of October 31, 2025.

Forward-Looking Statements

This press release includes “forward-looking statements” within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended (“Securities Act”), and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (“Exchange Act”), that involve substantial risks and uncertainties. Forward-looking statements include information concerning possible or assumed future results of operations, including descriptions of our business plan and strategies and trends we expect to affect our business. These statements often include words such as “anticipate,” “expect,” “suggest,” “plan,” “believe,” “intend,” “estimate,” “target,” “project,” “should,” “potential,” “could,” “would,” “may,” “will,” “forecast,” and other similar expressions. Forward-looking statements may also be made, verbally or in writing, by members of our Board or management team. Such statements are subject to the same limitations, uncertainties, assumptions and disclaimers set out in this press release.

We base these forward-looking statements or projections on our current expectations, plans and assumptions that we have made in light of our experience in the industry, as well as our perceptions of historical trends, current conditions, expected future developments and other factors we believe are appropriate under the circumstances and at such time. The forward-looking statements are subject to and involve risks, uncertainties and assumptions and you should not place undue reliance on these forward-looking statements. Although we believe that these forward-looking statements are based on reasonable assumptions at the time they are made, you should be aware that many factors could affect our actual financial results or results of operations, and could cause actual results to differ materially from those expressed in the forward-looking statements. Factors that may materially affect such forward-looking statements include, but are not limited to: Bitcoin price and foreign currency exchange rate fluctuations; our ability to obtain additional capital on commercially reasonable terms and in a timely manner to meet our capital needs and facilitate our expansion plans; the terms of any future financing or any refinancing, restructuring or modification to the terms of any future financing, which could require us to comply with onerous covenants or restrictions, and our ability to service our debt obligations, any of which could restrict our business operations and adversely impact our financial condition, cash flows and results of operations; our ability to successfully execute on our growth strategies and operating plans, including our ability to continue to develop our existing data center sites, design and deploy direct-to-chip liquid cooling systems, and diversify and expand into the market for high-performance computing (“HPC”) solutions (including the market for AI Cloud Services and potential colocation services such as powered shell, build-to-suit and turnkey data centers (“Colocation Services”) (collectively “HPC and AI services”)); our limited experience with respect to new markets we have entered or may seek to enter, including the market for HPC and AI services); our ability to remain competitive in dynamic and rapidly evolving industries; expectations with respect to the ongoing profitability, viability, operability, security, popularity and public perceptions of the Bitcoin network; expectations with respect to the useful life and obsolescence of hardware (including hardware for Bitcoin mining and any current or future HPC and AI services we offer); delays, increases in costs or reductions in the supply of equipment used in our operations including as a result of tariffs and duties, and certain equipment being in high demand due to global supply chain constraints; expectations with respect to the profitability, viability, operability, security, popularity and public perceptions of any current and future HPC and AI services we offer; our ability to secure and retain customers on commercially reasonable terms or at all, particularly as it relates to our strategy to expand into markets for HPC and AI services; our ability to establish and maintain a customer base for our HPC and AI services business and customer concentration; our ability to manage counterparty risk (including credit risk) associated with any current or future customers, including customers of our HPC and AI services and other counterparties; the risk that any current or future customers, including customers of our HPC and AI services or other counterparties, may terminate, default on or underperform their contractual obligations; changing political and geopolitical conditions, including changing international trade policies and the implementation of wide-ranging, reciprocal and retaliatory tariffs, surtaxes and other similar import or export duties, or trade restrictions; Bitcoin global hashrate fluctuations; our ability to secure renewable energy, renewable energy certificates, power capacity, facilities and sites on commercially reasonable terms or at all; delays associated with, or failure to obtain or complete, permitting approvals, grid connections and other development activities customary for greenfield or brownfield infrastructure projects; our reliance on power and utilities providers, third party mining pools, exchanges, banks, insurance providers and our ability to maintain relationships with such parties; expectations regarding availability and pricing of electricity; our participation and ability to successfully participate in demand response products and services and other load management programs run, operated or offered by electricity network operators, regulators or electricity market operators; the availability, reliability and/or cost of electricity supply, hardware and electrical and data center infrastructure, including with respect to any electricity outages and any laws and regulations that may restrict the electricity supply available to us; any variance between the actual operating performance of our miner hardware achieved compared to the nameplate performance including hashrate; electricity market risks relating to changes in regulations and requirements of market operators and regulatory bodies, including with respect to grid stability, interconnection and curtailment obligations; our ability to curtail our electricity consumption and/or monetize electricity depending on market conditions, including changes in Bitcoin mining economics and prevailing electricity prices; actions undertaken by electricity network and market operators, regulators, governments or communities in the regions in which we operate; the availability, suitability, reliability and cost of internet connections at our facilities; our ability to secure additional hardware, including hardware for Bitcoin mining and any current or future HPC and AI services we offer, on commercially reasonable terms or at all, and any delays or reductions in the supply of such hardware or increases in the cost of procuring such hardware; our ability to operate in an evolving regulatory environment; our ability to successfully operate and maintain our property and infrastructure; reliability and performance of our infrastructure compared to expectations; malicious attacks on our property, infrastructure or IT systems; our ability to maintain in good standing the operating and other permits and licenses required for our operations and business; our ability to obtain, maintain, protect and enforce our intellectual property rights and confidential information; any intellectual property infringement and product liability claims; whether the secular trends we expect to drive growth in our business materialize to the degree we expect them to, or at all; any pending or future acquisitions, dispositions, joint ventures or other strategic transactions; the occurrence of any environmental, health and safety incidents at our sites, and any material costs relating to environmental, health and safety requirements or liabilities; damage to our property and infrastructure and the risk that any insurance we maintain may not fully cover all potential exposures; ongoing proceedings relating to the default under certain equipment financing facilities, ongoing securities litigation, and any future litigation, claims and/or regulatory investigations, and the costs, expenses, use of resources, diversion of management time and efforts, liability and damages that may result therefrom]; our failure to comply with any laws including the anti-corruption laws of the United States and various international jurisdictions; any failure of our compliance and risk management methods; any laws, regulations and ethical standards that may relate to our business, including those that relate to Bitcoin and the Bitcoin mining industry and those that relate to any other services we offer, including laws and regulations related to data privacy, cybersecurity and the storage, use or processing of information and consumer laws; our ability to attract, motivate and retain senior management and qualified employees; increased risks to our global operations including, but not limited to, political instability, acts of terrorism, theft and vandalism, cyberattacks and other cybersecurity incidents and unexpected regulatory and economic sanctions changes, among other things; climate change, severe weather conditions and natural and man-made disasters that may materially adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations; public health crises, including an outbreak of an infectious disease and any governmental or industry measures taken in response; damage to our brand and reputation; evolving stakeholder expectations and requirements relating to environmental, social or governance (“ESG”) issues or reporting, including actual or perceived failure to comply with such expectations and requirements; the market price of our ordinary shares (“Ordinary shares”) may be highly volatile; that we do not currently pay any cash dividends on our Ordinary shares, and may not in the foreseeable future and, accordingly, your ability to achieve a return on your investment in our Ordinary shares will depend on appreciation, if any, in the price of our Ordinary shares; and other important factors discussed under the caption “Risk Factors” in IREN’s annual report on Form 10-K filed with the SEC on August 28, 2024 as such factors may be updated from time to time in its other filings with the SEC, accessible on the SEC’s website at www.sec.gov and the Investor Relations section of IREN’s website at https://investors.iren.com.

These and other important factors could cause actual results to differ materially by the forward-looking statements made in this press release. Any forward-looking statement that IREN makes in this press release speaks only as of the date of such statement. Except as required by law, IREN disclaims any obligation to update or revise, or to publicly announce any update or revision to, any of the forward-looking statements, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise.

Non-GAAP Financial Measures

This press release refers to certain measures that are not recognized under GAAP and do not have a standardized meaning prescribed by GAAP. IREN uses non-GAAP measures including “EBITDA” and “Adjusted EBITDA,” and “Adjusted EBITDA margin,” (each as defined below) as additional information to complement GAAP measures by providing further understanding of the Company’s operations from management’s perspective.

EBITDA is defined as net income (loss), excluding income tax (expense) benefit, finance expense, interest income and depreciation and amortization, which are important components of our net income (loss). Further, “Adjusted EBITDA” also excludes stock based compensation, foreign exchange gain (loss), impairment of assets, certain other non-recurring income, gain (loss) on disposal of property, plant and equipment, unrealized fair value gain (loss) on financial instruments, gain (loss) on partial extinguishment of financial liabilities, increase (decrease) in fair value of assets held for sale and certain other expense items. “Adjusted EBITDA margin” is defined as Adjusted EBITDA divided by revenue.

The reconciliations of these non-GAAP financial measures to the most directly comparable GAAP financial measures are shown in the Appendix hereto.

1) For further detail, see our unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements for the quarter ended September 30, 2025, included in our Form 10-Q filed with the SEC on November 6, 2025

1) For further detail, see our unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements for the quarter ended September 30, 2025, included in our Form 10-Q filed with the SEC on November 6, 2025

1) For further detail, see our unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements for the quarter ended September 30, 2025, included in our Form 10-Q filed with the SEC on November 6, 2025

1) Net Income Margin is calculated as Net Income divided by Total Revenue
2) Other one-off expense items for FY25 includes a one-time liquidation payment incurred in August 2024 resulting from the transition to spot pricing at the Group’s site at Childress, the reversal of the unrealized loss recorded on fixed price contracted amounts outstanding at June 30, 2024, a litigation related settlement provision, loss on mining hardware in transit, transaction costs incurred in December 2024 and June 2025 on entering the Capped Call Transactions in conjunction with the issuance of the 2030 Convertible Notes and 2029 Convertible Notes, one-off professional fees incurred in relation to litigation matters and the securities class action
3) Adjusted EBITDA Margin is calculated as Adjusted EBITDA divided by Total Revenue

– Published by The MIL Network