It shows that support for the Fianna Fail party is at 21% ahead of polling day, only slightly ahead of their coalition partners Fine Gael and the largest opposition party Sinn Fein, who were neck-and-neck at 20%. The Red C-Business Post poll showed support for Fianna Fail unchanged, while Fine Gael had a slide of two percentage points and Sinn Fein gained two. The near dead-locked poll results came on Wednesday as fears over future economic threats took centre stage in the final stretch of the campaign. Taoiseach Simon Harris said he is taking a “project truth” approach to calling out Sinn Fein’s spending pledges as election results on the other side of the Atlantic put Ireland’s economic model into sharp relief. Donald Trump’s presidential election victory in the US has brought heightened concern around what his proposals for corporation tax and tariffs could mean for Ireland. Mr Harris, leader of Fine Gael, has argued Ireland and other EU countries need to prepare for the possibility of trade shocks as he criticised the scale of Sinn Fein’s spending pledges as well as their saving plans. He said: “I think that is irresponsible, I think it is dangerous and I think it is reckless.” He accused Sinn Fein leader Mary Lou McDonald of not being able to say what her party was prepared to do in the event of an economic crash, adding that Fine Gael would borrow and stop putting money towards a rainy-day fund. Asked if the party was engaging in “project fear” to dissuade voters against Sinn Fein, Mr Harris said: “I call it ‘project truth’. It’s telling people what’s being discussed right across European capitals.” Ms McDonald told an RTE interview on Wednesday morning that a Sinn Fein government would also be prepared to start borrowing in the event of an economic downturn. Both Mr Harris and Fianna Fail leader Micheal Martin, who were partners in the last coalition government in Ireland, have made clear they will not countenance Sinn Fein as a potential partner in the next administration in Dublin. One day after the only three-way debate featuring the leaders of the main parties, Mr Martin accused Sinn Fein of being “dishonest” about how they will fund their manifesto plans. Speaking in Dublin on Wednesday, he said he is anxious to get clarity on the issue. “I think Sinn Fein have been very dishonest, frankly, in terms of the funds, because if you go through their figures, and this is a matter of fact, not opinion, they’re predicting a surplus of a billion in 2026, a billion in 2027. “Even in 2025, they’re talking about a mini budget, which would mean reducing the surplus that we’re anticipating in 2025. “There’s a legislative obligation now on any new government to put 0.8% of GDP to one side, and into the funds. There’s no way you can do that with a surplus of a billion in 2026 or 2027, and we would argue they would not have enough funds next year either to put into the funds.” He added: “It means they have no room to manoeuvre if things go wrong, if there’s headwinds come externally, or there are shocks internationally, Sinn Fein is not allowing any headroom at all in terms of room to respond or to move it.” Ms McDonald accused the other two parties of conspiring to keep Sinn Fein out of government and prevent change in Ireland. She said the two men were now “indistinguishable” from each other as she claimed they were suffering “acute amnesia” in regard to their records in government. On a visit to Naas fire station in Co Kildare, she said: “To listen to them, you’d imagine they had just arrived on the scene and that they were going to come up with all of these solutions. “They have had ample chances, ample opportunity, to make things better, and they have failed, and in between the two of them I make the case that now we ask for our chance, with our plans, with our team, to demonstrate how change can happen, how your community, your family, yourself, can be supported when the government is actually on your side.” Mr Martin’s and Mr Harris’ coalition partner Roderic O’Gorman, the leader of the Greens, issued a warning to the public over a future government without his party. On Wednesday, he said it is looking likely that Fianna Fail and Fine Gael will be returned to government – but cautioned they may not want the Greens to continue “fighting hard” on policies. He told reporters: “My sense is certainly the mood music from Fianna Fail and Fine Gael is that they’d like an easier life in the next government – and my concern is they use these small populist parties and right-wing independents.” Mr O’Gorman argued that the Greens could continue to provide stability to government at a time when economic shocks may be around the corner. As the Green leader suggested that relying on independents would be unstable, Mr Martin has also argued that “too much fragmentation would lead to incoherence in government”. Reflecting on Tuesday night’s debate, the Fianna Fail leader said the race remained “too close to call” while Mr Harris said it is “all to play for”. The leaders of Ireland’s three main political parties clashed on housing, healthcare and financial management in the last televised debate before Friday’s General Election. The tetchy debate, which was marked by several interruptions, saw the parties set out their stalls in a broadcast that commentators said did little to move the dial before polling day. After the 2020 general election delivered an inconclusive result, Fine Gael and Fianna Fail, two parties forged from opposing sides of Ireland’s Civil War of the 1920s, agreed to set aside almost a century of animosity and share power – with the Greens as a junior partner. From 2016 to 2020, Fianna Fail had supported Fine Gael in power through a confidence-and-supply arrangement from the Opposition benches in the Dail parliament. Sinn Fein won the popular vote in 2020 but a failure to run enough candidates meant it did not secure sufficient seats in the Dail to give it a realistic chance of forming a government.
Israel and Lebanon’s Hezbollah agree to a cease-fire to end nearly 14 months of fightingNEW YORK , Dec. 3, 2024 /PRNewswire/ -- Nicsa , a prominent asset and wealth management industry association, awarded its 2024 NOVA "Innovation in Operations" award to Broadridge Financial Solutions, Inc. (NYSE:BR), for its Tailored Shareholder Reports solution designed to address complexities introduced by the SEC's TSR ruling, which came into effect in July 2024 . The awards recognize best-in-class initiatives, technologies and leadership in the asset and wealth management industry. "Since the Tailored Shareholder Reports rule took effect in July 2024 , Broadridge's solution has empowered 342 fund companies by processing more than 14,000 CUSIPs, delivering more than 140 million emails and executing approximately 57 million mailings," said Jane Kirkland , Head of Mutual Fund Regulatory Communications at Broadridge. "This industry recognition underscores Broadridge's commitment to being the trusted and transformative partner for shareholder communications." Broadridge's end-to-end solution for funds and fund administrators offers composition, iXBRL tagging, SEC-compliant layered web hosting, and comprehensive SEC filings, along with a personalized communication experience for fund investors that efficiently combines and delivers TSRs just for the funds and share classes investors hold within their accounts. Far more than a simple redesign, the SEC's requirements demanded intricate summarized disclosures aimed at helping individual investors better understand and manage their mutual fund and ETF investments with greater clarity and transparency. In addition, Broadridge's solution facilitated effective oversight of the regulatory reporting process by incorporating robust workflow and approval capabilities About Broadridge Broadridge Financial Solutions (NYSE: BR), is a global technology leader with the trusted expertise and transformative technology to help clients and the financial services industry operate, innovate, and grow. We power investing, governance, and communications for our clients – driving operational resiliency, elevating business performance, and transforming investor experiences. Our technology and operations platforms process and generate over 7 billion communications per year and underpin the daily trading of more than $10 trillion of securities globally. A certified Great Place to Work®, Broadridge is part of the S&P 500® Index, employing over 14,000 associates in 21 countries. For more information, please visit www.broadridge.com . About Nicsa Nicsa is a not-for-profit trade association striving to connect all facets of the global asset and wealth management industry in order to develop, share, and advance leading practices. For over sixty years, Nicsa has promoted a collaborative environment where members come together to help strategically address the industry's most vital issues. Broadridge Contacts: Investors: Edings Thibault Head of Investor Relations, Broadridge broadridgeir@broadridge.com Media: Gregg Rosenberg Global Head of Corporate Communications Gregg.Rosenberg@broadridge.com View original content to download multimedia: https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/broadridge-tailored-shareholder-report-solution-wins-nicsa-nova-innovation-in-operations-award-302321201.html SOURCE Broadridge Financial Solutions, Inc.Baker Mayfield, high-flying Bucs visit Chargers in matchup of teams with winning records
By COLLEEN SLEVIN DENVER (AP) — Amid renewed interest in the killing of JonBenet Ramsey triggered in part by a new Netflix documentary, police in Boulder, Colorado, refuted assertions this week that there is viable evidence and leads about the 1996 killing of the 6-year-old girl that they are not pursuing. JonBenet Ramsey, who competed in beauty pageants, was found dead in the basement of her family’s home in the college town of Boulder the day after Christmas in 1996. Her body was found several hours after her mother called 911 to say her daughter was missing and a ransom note had been left behind. The details of the crime and video footage of JonBenet competing in pageants propelled the case into one of the highest-profile mysteries in the United States. The police comments came as part of their annual update on the investigation, a month before the 28th anniversary of JonBenet’s killing. Police said they released it a little earlier due to the increased attention on the case, apparently referring to the three-part Netflix series “Cold Case: Who Killed JonBenet Ramsey.” In a video statement, Boulder Police Chief Steve Redfearn said the department welcomes news coverage and documentaries about the killing of JonBenet, who would have been 34 this year, as a way to generate possible new leads. He said the department is committed to solving the case but needs to be careful about what it shares about the investigation to protect a possible future prosecution. “What I can tell you though, is we have thoroughly investigated multiple people as suspects throughout the years and we continue to be open-minded about what occurred as we investigate the tips that come into detectives,” he said. The Netflix documentary focuses on the mistakes made by police and the “media circus” surrounding the case. JonBenet was bludgeoned and strangled. Her death was ruled a homicide, but nobody was ever prosecuted. Police were widely criticized for mishandling the early investigation into her death amid speculation that her family was responsible. However, a prosecutor cleared her parents, John and Patsy Ramsey, and brother Burke in 2008 based on new DNA evidence from JonBenet’s clothing that pointed to the involvement of an “unexplained third party” in her slaying. The announcement by former district attorney Mary Lacy came two years after Patsy Ramsey died of cancer. Lacy called the Ramseys “victims of this crime.” John Ramsey has continued to speak out for the case to be solved. In 2022, he supported an online petition asking Colorado’s governor to intervene in the investigation by putting an outside agency in charge of DNA testing in the case. In the Netflix documentary, he said he has been advocating for several items that have not been prepared for DNA testing to be tested and for other items to be retested. He said the results should be put through a genealogy database. In recent years, investigators have identified suspects in unsolved cases by comparing DNA profiles from crime scenes and to DNA testing results shared online by people researching their family trees. In 2021, police said in their annual update that DNA hadn’t been ruled out to help solve the case, and in 2022 noted that some evidence could be “consumed” if DNA testing is done on it. Last year, police said they convened a panel of outside experts to review the investigation to give recommendations and determine if updated technologies or forensic testing might produce new leads. In the latest update, Redfearn said that review had ended but that police continue to work through and evaluate a “lengthy list of recommendations” from the panel. Amy Beth Hanson contributed to this report from Helena, Montana.Big Brother star Reggie Bird reveals her strange health development - and her theory about what has caused it By SAVANNA YOUNG FOR DAILY MAIL AUSTRALIA Published: 17:17 EST, 12 December 2024 | Updated: 17:40 EST, 12 December 2024 e-mail 16 shares 1 View comments Beloved reality television star Reggie Bird has made a shocking discovery during a self-health check. The two-time Big Brother winner, 50, took to Instagram this week sharing a photo of her mouth and chin after feeling a lump inside her mouth. After attempting to take a photo to find the problem, Reggie discovered something much more sinister. 'I could feel a lump in my mouth so I took a photo to try and see what it was...' she captioned her post. 'Zoomed in and to my horror I've just seen how hairy my face is.' The star, who is legally blind but has some vision, attributed the tuft of facial hair on her chin to menopause . Beloved reality television star Reggie Bird (pictured) has made a shocking discovery during a self-health check 'This is just wrong. Gotta be the bloody menopause! I don't know what to do,' she added. 'If I shave it will I grow a beard? I'm more concerned about my hairy face than the lump in my mouth.' While some fans suggested Reggie get laser hair removal for the chin hair, several were concerned for the star and urged her to first get the lump checked by a medical professional. 'Please get lump checked,' one fan commented. 'Get it checked immediately please Reggie forget the hairs for now,' added another. One user said: 'Please get the lump checked either GP or Dentist this is so important. Then once you've done that, look at options for hair.' It comes after Reggie opened about feeling like a failure despite winning Big Brother twice . Speaking on the Mental As Anyone podcast, the mother of two revealed that although she won the reality competition twice, once in 2003 and again in 2022, she is struggling to find a job. It comes after Reggie opened about feeling like a failure despite winning Big Brother twice. Pictured with her children after winning Big Brother 2022 Although she won the reality competition twice, once in 2003 and again in 2022, she is struggling to find a job. Pictured in 2003 Read More Big Brother star Reggie Bird reveals she may be permanently banned from social media The TV personality wondered aloud why no employer will give her a chance. 'I'm starting to think, why doesn't anyone want to give me a job? I want to work and that starts to make you feel like... no one wants you,' she said. 'I could answer phones, you know, I'm good at talking to people,' Reggie said, reflecting that even though she has a disability, she can still be useful. Bird is legally blind after being diagnosed with retinitis pigmentosa, a rare degenerative eye disease that causes severe vision impairment. 'I'm limited to what I can do because of my eyes are so stuffed. I've now got nine degrees of pinhole vision, no peripheral vision and no night vision left. 'I only just see what's in front of me, it is like looking through a straw, that's how I explain it to people,' she explained. Reggie made history when she became the first reality star to win Big Brother twice, the first time in 2003 and again in 2022 . Despite taking home $250,000 in prize money during the 2003 and 2022 seasons of Big Brother , the TV personality has struggled financially over the years. Reggie is also affected by Usher syndrome, a rare genetic disease that affects both hearing and vision. She previously hit back at her critics who doubted her bad run of health in an interview with TV Week. 'A lot of people are saying, "Oh, she's faking it." Who would want to fake being blind?' she told the publication. The former fish and chip shop manager, who says her vision is now like looking through straws, added: 'They don't know me, or the challenges I deal with every day. 'I think people who leave comments like that have issues.' Upon winning the 2022 celebrity edition of the show, Reggie said the prize money would go towards paying rent to ensure she and her children had stable accommodation. Big Brother Topic Share or comment on this article: Big Brother star Reggie Bird reveals her strange health development - and her theory about what has caused it e-mail 16 shares Add comment
Elon Musk calls Trudeau ‘insufferable’ after remark on Kamala Harris defeatNone
5 of the Best Free Android Podcast AppsBy MARY CLARE JALONICK and MATT BROWN WASHINGTON (AP) — Pete Hegseth, President-elect Donald Trump’s nominee to lead the Defense Department, said he had a “wonderful conversation” with Maine Sen. Susan Collins on Wednesday as he pushed to win enough votes for confirmation. He said he will not back down after allegations of excessive drinking and sexual misconduct. Related Articles National Politics | Ryan slams Trump pick to lead defense department National Politics | Donald Trump will ring the New York Stock Exchange bell. It’ll be a first for him National Politics | The Trump and Biden teams insist they’re working hand in glove on foreign crises National Politics | ‘You don’t know what’s next.’ International students scramble ahead of Trump inauguration National Politics | Trump is threatening to raise tariffs again. Here’s how China plans to fight back Collins said after the hourlong meeting that she questioned Hegseth about the allegations amid reports of drinking and the revelation that he made a settlement payment after being accused of a sexual assault that he denies. She said she had a “good, substantive” discussion with Hegseth and “covered a wide range of topics,” including sexual assault in the military, Ukraine and NATO. But she said she would wait until a hearing, and notably a background check, to make a decision. “I asked virtually every question under the sun,” Collins told reporters as she left her office after the meeting. “I pressed him both on his position on military issues as well as the allegations against him, so I don’t think there was anything that we did not cover.” The meeting with Collins was closely watched as she is seen as more likely than most of her Republican Senate colleagues to vote against some of Trump’s Cabinet picks. She and Alaska Sen. Lisa Murkowski, a fellow moderate Republican, did not shy from opposing Trump in his first term when they wanted to do so and sometimes supported President Joe Biden’s nominees for the judicial and executive branches. And Hegseth, an infantry combat veteran and former “Fox & Friends” weekend host, is working to gain as many votes as he can as some senators have expressed concerns about his personal history and lack of management experience. “I’m certainly not going to assume anything about where the senator stands,” Hegseth said as he left Collins’ office. “This is a process that we respect and appreciate. And we hope, in time, overall, when we get through that committee and to the floor that we can earn her support.” Hegseth met with Murkowski on Tuesday. He has also been meeting repeatedly with Iowa Sen. Joni Ernst, a military veteran who has said she is a survivor of sexual assault and has spent time in the Senate working on improving how attacks are reported and prosecuted within the ranks. On Monday, Ernst said after a meeting with him that he had committed to selecting a senior official to prioritize those goals. Republicans will have a 53-49 majority next year, meaning Trump cannot lose more than three votes on any of his nominees. It is so far unclear whether Hegseth will have enough support, but Trump has stepped up his pressure on senators in the last week. “Pete is a WINNER, and there is nothing that can be done to change that!!!” Trump posted on his social media platform last week.
Hegseth meets with moderate Sen. Collins as he lobbies for key votes in the Senate
Trump's picks for key positions in his second administrationJustin Herbert avoiding interceptions at record rate as Chargers target Buccaneers
Light & Wonder, Inc. Announcement: If You Have Suffered Losses in Light & Wonder, Inc. (NASDAQ: LNW), You Are Encouraged to Contact The Rosen Law Firm About Your Rights
Alex Ovechkin lost 33 pounds this summerIn the latest episode of 'The OGs' show, Miami Heat legend (and former Lakers guard) Pat Riley was asked to pick between the Showtime Lakers and the Miami Heat superteam with LeBron James, Dwyane Wade, and Chris Bosh. Riley played a massive role in both title pursuits, but he says that the 1980s Lakers would come out on top. Fan question: "Your Heat vs your Lakers at peak who wins?" Pat Riley: "I'll be very honest with you. I think the 'Showtime' team of Scott, Cooper, Magic, Worthy, Kareem. Those five guys. It would be hard for any other five to beat them. I say this because of the greatness of Kareem Abdul-Jabbar. He was the one guy that you could not guard. You could double him, but you could not guard him. It'd be a great series and I'd go seven with it. Whoever's got the home-court advantage would probably win." Pat Riley has been on some of the greatest teams in NBA history, both as a player and as a coach/executive. Today, he's widely respected across the league for his experience, wisdom, and vast array of accomplishments. Riley's NBA journey began back in 1967 as the 7th overall pick. After three years with the Rockets, he finally landed with the Lakers, where he quickly became an important rotation player. In 1972, Riley won his first and only championship as a player alongside Wilt Chamberlain and Elgin Baylor. Riley took over as the Lakers head coach after retirement and led them during their most prosperous stretch to date: the Showtime era. With Magic Johnson , Michael Cooper, Mitch Kupchak, Kurt Rambis, and others, the Lakers were able to win five championships over eight years to establish one of the greatest dynasties in NBA history. That's not to mention Kareem Abdul-Jabbar , who Riley admits was the star of the show. His greatness alone made the Lakers nearly unbeatable at the time, with averages of 22.1 points, 9.4 rebounds, and 3.3 assists per game on 56.7% shooting. With 38,387 points scored, Kareem ranks second on the NBA's all-time scoring list. The "big three" Miami Heat may not have quite as much firepower but they could certainly put up a good fight in a hypothetical series. LeBron's arrival in 2010 made the Heat a powerful superteam and, along with Dwyane Wade and Chris Bosh, won two championships for the city in four straight trips to the Finals. The Heat's famed 27-game win streak in 2013 marked the height of their powers and it's a level of dominance that hasn't been replicated since. While that Heat squad did not have Karem Abdul-Jabbar , they did have LeBron James in his prime, who many believe to be the greatest player ever. LeBron certainly would have posed a problem for the Showtime Lakers, but it wouldn't have done much to challenge Kareem Abdul-Jabbar. The Heat, who were historically weak at the center position, would have had no answer to Kareem and his dominance on the post. When you look at it like that, it makes sense why Riley chose the Lakers over the Heat. Nowadays, of course, he's a Heat man through and through, but it won't stop him from calling things as he sees them. Related: Pat Riley Says The Heat Could Have Won Six Or More Championships If LeBron James Never Left Thank you for being a valued reader of Fadeaway World. If you liked this article, please consider following us on Google News . We appreciate your support.
Police deny sitting on evidence as Netflix doc brings renewed attention to JonBenet Ramsey’s killing
LAS VEGAS (AP) — A team that previously boycotted at least one match against the San Jose State women’s volleyball program will again be faced with the , this time in the with a shot at the NCAA Tournament on the line. Five schools in the regular season against San Jose State, which carried a No. 2 seed into the conference tournament in Las Vegas. Among those schools: No. 3 Utah State and No. 6 Boise State, who will face off Wednesday with the winner scheduled to play the Spartans in the semifinals on Friday. Wyoming, Nevada and Southern Utah — which is not a Mountain West member — also canceled regular-season matches, all without explicitly saying why they were forfeiting. Nevada players cited fairness in women’s sports as a reason to boycott their match, while political figures from Wyoming, Idaho, Utah and Nevada suggested the cancellations center around protecting women’s sports. In a lawsuit , plaintiffs cited unspecified reports asserting there was a transgender player on the San Jose State volleyball team, even naming her. While some media have reported those and other details, neither San Jose State nor the forfeiting teams have confirmed the school has a trans women’s volleyball player. The Associated Press is withholding the player’s name because she has not publicly commented on her gender identity and through school officials has declined an interview request. A judge on Monday made by nine current conference players to block the San Jose State player from competing in the tournament on grounds that she is transgender. That Tuesday by an appeals court. “The team looks forward to starting Mountain West Conference tournament competition on Friday,” San Jose State said in a statement issued after the appeals court decision. “The university maintains an unwavering commitment to the participation, safety and privacy of all students at San Jose State and ensuring they are able to compete in an inclusive, fair and respectful environment.” Boise State did not immediately respond to a request for comment Tuesday. “Utah State is reviewing the court’s order,” Doug Hoffman, Aggies associate athletic director for communications, said in an email. “Right now, our women’s volleyball program is focused on the game this Wednesday, and we’ll be cheering them on.” San Jose State, which had a first-round bye, would be sent directly to the conference title game if Utah State or Boise State were to forfeit again. If the Spartans make the title game, it’s likely the opponent would not forfeit. They would face top-seeded Colorado State, No. 4 Fresno State or No. 5 San Diego State — all teams that played the Spartans this season. The conference champion receives an automatic bid to the NCAA Tournament. ___ AP college sports: Mark Anderson, The Associated PressNikola Jokic: Runaway MVP has best season everTrump selects longtime adviser Keith Kellogg as special envoy for Ukraine and Russia
Texas probes tech platforms over safety and privacy of minorsNEW YORK , Dec. 12, 2024 /PRNewswire/ -- Report on how AI is redefining market landscape - The truck market in vietnam size is estimated to grow by USD 1.50 billion from 2024 to 2028, according to Technavio. The market is estimated to grow at a CAGR of 8.05% during the forecast period. The report provides a comprehensive forecast of key segments below- Segmentation Overview Get a glance at the market contribution of rest of the segments - Download a FREE Sample Report in minutes! 1.1 Fastest growing segment: Light-duty trucks, which include compact trucks, pickup trucks, and passenger and cargo vans, are essential commercial vehicles in Vietnam , particularly for intra-city and inter-city transport. These trucks, with a gross vehicle weight under 10 tons, are widely used due to their maneuverability in space-strapped urban areas. In Vietnam , the rising traffic congestion and entry restrictions for heavier vehicles have led to increased adoption of light-duty trucks. The home delivery sector's growth is another significant factor driving demand. Dealers serve as the primary distribution channel for these trucks, and vans are the most popular choice for goods distribution from central hubs. Economic uncertainty and competition pressure compel fleet owners to minimize operational costs, further fueling demand for light-duty trucks. Consequently, the less than 10-ton segment is expected to grow in the Vietnamese truck market during the forecast period. Analyst Review Trucks are essential vehicles in Vietnam's thriving economy, serving various sectors such as logistics, construction, and agriculture. The market for trucks in Vietnam is vast, with a focus on pickup trucks, warehouses, and retail outlets catering to consumers' needs. The demand for trucks is driven by the country's extensive road network and the transportation of goods, including cargo and fuel. Manufacturers prioritize fuel efficiency, safety, and electrification in their designs, addressing the increasing concerns of consumers and governments. Powerful engines and suspension systems are also essential features for handling the rough terrain and heavy loads common in Vietnam . The logistics and e-commerce sectors are significant consumers of trucks, requiring efficient and reliable vehicles for the timely delivery of goods. Trailer tracking and cargo management systems are essential for optimizing supply chain operations and reducing vehicle emissions. Safety is a top priority, with vehicle safety regulations becoming increasingly stringent to protect drivers and other road users. The future of the truck market in Vietnam lies in the adoption of advanced technologies and the development of sustainable transportation solutions. Market Overview The Trucks Market in Vietnam is witnessing significant growth due to the increasing demand for transportation of goods, particularly in sectors like construction, mining, agriculture, and logistics. The market caters to various types of trucks, including heavy duty, medium duty, and light duty, with tonnage capacities ranging from a few tons to several tons. Consumers, fleet owners, logistics companies, and e-commerce sectors are the primary buyers of trucks in Vietnam . The market is also witnessing a shift towards electric vehicles (EVs) and hydrogen-based solutions as part of the global move towards carbon neutrality and sustainability. Truck manufacturers are focusing on fuel efficiency, safety, electrification, and telematics to meet the evolving needs of consumers and businesses. These solutions include GPS tracking, connectivity solutions, trailer tracking, and maintenance cost optimization. The logistics industry is undergoing a digital transformation, with the adoption of AI and IoT for fleet management, route optimization, and real-time cargo tracking. Emission norms and vehicle safety regulations are also driving the market, with manufacturers investing in advanced suspension systems, energy storage, and battery design. The market is expected to grow further with the expansion of infrastructure projects, such as highways, bridges, ports, and cold chain logistics, and the increasing popularity of e-commerce and hyperlocal delivery services. The use of EVs, hydrogen-based vehicles, and alternative fuels is also gaining momentum, with companies like Mullen Automotive and OEMs investing in the development of electric heavy-duty trucks. To understand more about this market- Download a FREE Sample Report in minutes! 1 Executive Summary 2 Market Landscape 3 Market Sizing 4 Historic Market Size 5 Five Forces Analysis 6 Market Segmentation 7 Customer Landscape 8 Geographic Landscape 9 Drivers, Challenges, and Trends 10 Venodr Landscape 11 Vendor Analysis 12 Appendix About Technavio Technavio is a leading global technology research and advisory company. Their research and analysis focuses on emerging market trends and provides actionable insights to help businesses identify market opportunities and develop effective strategies to optimize their market positions. With over 500 specialized analysts, Technavio's report library consists of more than 17,000 reports and counting, covering 800 technologies, spanning across 50 countries. Their client base consists of enterprises of all sizes, including more than 100 Fortune 500 companies. This growing client base relies on Technavio's comprehensive coverage, extensive research, and actionable market insights to identify opportunities in existing and potential markets and assess their competitive positions within changing market scenarios. Contacts Technavio Research Jesse Maida Media & Marketing Executive US: +1 844 364 1100 UK: +44 203 893 3200 Email: media@technavio.com Website: www.technavio.com/ View original content to download multimedia: https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/vietnam-truck-market-to-grow-by-usd-1-5-billion-from-2023-2028--report-on-ais-impact-on-market-trends---technavio-302328820.html SOURCE TechnavioTampa Bay (7-6) at Los Angeles Chargers (8-5) Sunday, 4:25 p.m. EST, FOX BetMGM NFL odds: Chargers by 3. Against the spread: Buccaneers 8-5; Chargers 9-4. Series record: Chargers lead 8-4. Last meeting: Chargers beat Buccaneers 38-31 in Tampa, Fla., on Oct. 4, 2020. Last week: Buccaneers beat Las Vegas 28-13; Chargers lost to Kansas City 19-17. Buccaneers offense: overall (3), rush (8), pass (6), scoring (5). Buccaneers defense: overall (28), rush (11), pass (30), scoring (22). Chargers offense: overall (24), rush (19), pass (25), scoring (13). Chargers defense: overall (11), rush (T-14), pass (8), scoring (1). Turnover differential: Buccaneers minus-2; Chargers plus-11. Buccaneers player to watch QB Baker Mayfield is trying to lead Tampa Bay to a fourth consecutive NFC South title. He’s already matched a career-best for touchdown passes with 28, but also hasn’t done as good a job of taking care of the football as a year ago. He threw for 295 yards and three TDs in last week’s 15-point win over Las Vegas. He also turned the ball over three times in the first half to help the Raiders stay close until the fourth quarter. Chargers player to watch WR Quentin Johnston bounced back from a couple of tough performances to make five catches for 48 yards and a touchdown against the Chiefs. But inconsistency has been the defining trait of the slow start to Johnston’s NFL career, so being able to follow it up will be telling. The Chargers needed the 2023 first-round pick to step up with rookie Ladd McConkey sidelined because of knee and shoulder injuries last week. With McConkey's status to play Sunday uncertain, Johnston could be called on again. Key matchup Chargers RB Kimani Vidal vs. Buccaneers LB Lavonte David. Vidal, a rookie from Troy, seems to have increased his standing in the Chargers’ backfield that definitely missed J.K. Dobbins (knee). Vidal had eight carries for 34 yards while playing 53% of the offensive snaps in Kansas City, more than starter Gus Edwards. The Chargers are going to stick to the run under coach Jim Harbaugh, which means the newcomer Vidal will have to outfox a 13-season veteran in David. At 34, David remains a force, making seven tackles, a sack, a tackle for loss and recovering a fumble against the Raiders. He is eight tackles away from his 11th season of triple-digit stops. Key injuries Bucs S Antoine Winfield Jr. left last week’s game with a knee sprain and is expected to be sidelined a couple of weeks. Leading rusher Bucky Irving has a back injury that will be evaluated as the week progresses. ... Chargers QB Justin Herbert is dealing with a sprained left ankle, but doesn't believe it is as serious as the right high ankle sprain he sustained in Week 2 against Carolina. Herbert was able to play through that ailment, which should bode well for his availability. Series notes While the Chargers won eight of the first nine meetings between the franchises, Tampa Bay took the past three. ... This will be the Buccaneers’ third trip to Los Angeles and second to SoFi Stadium, where they lost 34-24 to the Rams in September 2021. Stats and stuff The Bucs are 7-1 in December/January regular-season games going back to last season. They’re 19-5 in those games going back to 2020, the first of Tom Brady’s three years with Tampa Bay. ... WR Mike Evans needs 17 receptions and 426 yards over the next four games to finish with his 11th consecutive season with at least 60 catches and 1,000 yards receiving. ... Evans had seven receptions for 122 yards and a TD the previous time Tampa Bay faced the Chargers (Oct. 4, 2020). ... The Bucs have rushed for 100-plus yards in 10 of 13 games. That’s after doing it just nine times over 34 games the past two regular seasons. ... With leading rusher Bucky Irving sitting out most of last week’s game against Las Vegas with a back injury, starter Rachaad White took up the slack with 90 yards rushing on 17 attempts — both season highs. He also scored two TDs, one receiving. ... White’s rushing TD was the 14th for Tampa Bay. That’s more than the Bucs scored on the ground in 2022 (five) and 2023 (eight) combined. ... The Chargers have turned the ball over a league-low six times. The franchise record for fewest giveaways in a season is 15, which they did in 2006 and 2017. ... Herbert hasn’t thrown an interception in 11 straight games. That is tied with Brady for the longest streak in NFL history. Brady closed out the 2010 regular season for New England without being picked off after Week 5. ... S Derwin James Jr. has three tackles for loss and two sacks in his past three games. ... PK Cameron Dicker has made 65 of 66 field goals under 50 yards in his career, with his 98.5% success rate the best in league history. Dicker has made all 30 attempts inside of 50 yards at home. ... The Chargers defense allowed 17 of 31 third down conversions (54.8%) in two games against the Chiefs. They have held their other 11 opponents to 45 of 146 (30.8%). Fantasy tip The Buccaneers find ways to play shootouts, with eight of their games seeing the winner score 30 or more points. The Chargers find ways to play grinding affairs, with only two of their games seeing the winner score 28 or more points. Whoever dictates the style of play will determine how much fantasy value comes out of this game. AP NFL: https://apnews.com/hub/NFL
OTTAWA — As Canada looks to beef up its border security after president-elect Donald Trump threatened tariffs while raising concerns about illicit fentanyl pouring into his country, border officials pointed out there's barely any coming from Canada. Though, none of them wanted to say the name Trump when they said so. “Canada is not a significant source of fentanyl in the United States," said Aaron McCrorie, vice-president of intelligence and enforcement at the Canada Border Services Agency. He made the comment to a House of Commons committee studying the impact of president-elect Donald Trump's plans for border security and migration. McCrorie said border officials seized 4.9 kg of fentanyl in the first three quarters of the year, with the biggest amount being 4.1 kg bound for the Netherlands. The other seizures were all small, personal amounts caught along the land border, and there are no statistics to suggest significant shipments out of Canada. CBSA President Erin O'Gorman also said the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration has characterized the amount coming from Canada as "slippage" — small amounts sent over for personal use, mostly by post. Still, that doesn't trivialize the problem. Small package shipments are where CBSA is focusing its efforts, she said, which are hard to detect and can result in many lives lost. Trump has threatened 25 per cent tariffs against Canada and Mexico unless the two countries step up on border security to tamp down on flows of illicit fentanyl. During the presidential race, Trump also threatened to deport millions of undocumented people, stirring fears that could trigger an influx of migrants into Canada. When questioned by NDP MP Alistair MacGregor about what Canada could face if Trump follows through and if the country's immigration detention centres are up to the task, O'Gorman said her organization does not have projections or estimates of what that could look like. “We are prepared for a surge,” O'Gorman said. Ottawa is compiling new measures to bolster border security through more staff and equipment in the face of Trump's tariff threats. Prime Minister Justin Trudeau shared his border plan with the premiers during a Wednesday evening meeting, and Ottawa plans to add their suggestions into the soon-to-come package of measures. Several media outlets have reported that the tab for that could surpass $1 billion, citing confidential sources. RCMP Commissioner Michael Duheme said he was surprised to see that figure bandied about in headlines, but he's not clear whether Ottawa will actually put that much into beefing up the border. He would not share with reporters any of the specifics on his wish list -- or how much money he's asked for, saying the announcement is coming soon enough. "You heard the minister in the past saying drones, helicopters, and we want to modernize everything we have with technological equipment and additional human resources," he said outside the committee room. "We have drones right now that we use to patrol areas that are hard to get to and what not. We just want to modernize the equipment and go to the more advanced technology that they have so we can better secure the border." An RCMP official said the police force currently has more than 900 drones and nine helicopters located across the country, with six helicopters that occasionally provide border surveillance. Meantime, Alberta Premier Danielle Smith, when announcing Alberta's own new border security plan Thursday featuring a new patrol unit and drones, said the province doesn’t support retaliatory tariffs and prefers the diplomatic route. Saskatchewan Premier Scott Moe said he and other premiers support the need for stronger border security to deal with illegal migrants and street drugs. “There is broad support to increase the investment in border security on behalf of Canadians, not just because President-elect (Trump) has asked for it,” Moe said. According to the CBSA, there are 1,200 ports of entry across the country staffed by approximately 8,500 front-line employees. CBSA also employs over 200 criminal investigators and some 60 international officers at 40 missions in 35 countries abroad. "The CBSA strategically dedicates its resources to address the threats that Canada faces while supporting the flow of legitimate trade and travel across the border," said CBSA spokesperson Rebecca Purdy. In the past fiscal year, she said CBSA seized close to 51 million grams of illicit drugs, more than 27,000 banned weapons and almost 900 firearms. This report by The Canadian Press was first published Dec. 12, 2024. -- With files from Chris Purdy in Edmonton and Jeremy Simes in Regina. Kyle Duggan, The Canadian PressWho Is Stephen Feinberg? Trump Picks Billionaire Investor As Pentagon Deputy
The lies in the middle of the Indian Ocean and comprises 58 islands including Diego Garcia, which houses a major joint British and American military base. The Archipelago has been under continuous British sovereignty since 1814. However, in October 2024, a joint statement was issued by the United Kingdom and Mauritius explaining that the two governments had agreed to draft a new treaty which will that the “United Kingdom will agree that Mauritius is sovereign over the Chagos Archipelago, including Diego Garcia.” As the author has previously , the intended surrender of the Chagos Archipelago would represent a major strategic blow to Western security. Moreover, the plan offers no discernible benefit to the British people or to the Chagossian Islanders, many of whom have come out in against it. In practice, the UK seems to be making this concession based on fear of a negative future court judgment, with the Foreign Secretary that “a binding [judgment] against the UK seemed inevitable.” However, the source of this putative future judgment has not been specified. Surely, if any court with the ability to produce a binding judgment had been available, Mauritius would have already availed itself of that court. Instead, the legal position of the British Government should be based on existing legal circumstances. As this article will show, there is no binding legal judgment compelling the UK to relinquish sovereignty of the Chagos Archipelago. The adverse statements rendered by the International Court of Justice, the United Nations General Assembly and the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea were respectively: (i) non-binding legal advice, (ii) political assertion and (iii) a judgment on the territorial boundary between other States (namely Mauritius and the Maldives). The result is that the UK is not bound by any of their terms. In 2019, the ICJ an Advisory Opinion on the legal status of the Chagos Archipelago. The opinion had three main conclusions. First, “the process of decolonization of Mauritius was not lawfully completed when Mauritius acceded to independence in 1968” (paragraph 174). Second, “it follows that the United Kingdom’s continued administration of the Chagos Archipelago constitutes a wrongful act entailing the international responsibility of that State” (paragraph 177). Third, “[a]ccordingly, the United Kingdom is under an obligation to bring an end to its administration of the Chagos Archipelago” (paragraph 178). Certainly, the Advisory Opinion was extremely adverse on the merits from a British perspective. However, the purpose of this piece is not to relitigate the merits of the case but, rather, to show that as a matter of procedure the opinion is not binding on the UK. Critically, the ICJ considered the case under its “ ” jurisdiction (Articles 65-68 ICJ Statute) rather than its “contentious” jurisdiction (Articles 34-36 ICJ Statute). Proceedings that occur under the auspices of the ICJ’s advisory jurisdiction do not have binding legal effect. If one is in doubt about this point, the ICJ’s own website sets out the position clearly. It that “[c]ontrary to judgments ... the Court’s advisory opinions are not binding. The requesting organ, agency or organization remains free to decide, as it sees fit, what effect to give to these opinions ... [although] the Court’s advisory opinions nevertheless carry great legal weight and moral authority.” This merely reflects a long-standing acceptance that Advisory Opinions are non-binding that stretches back as far as the in 1962 where it was noted that “an advisory opinion ... would not have binding force” and an party “could continue to turn a deaf ear” to such a pronouncement. As Thin , “there is no legal basis upon which the ICJ AO would have [binding legal] effect ...There is nothing in previous case law to indicate that ICJ AOs could have [binding legal] effect. There is nothing in the purpose behind ICJ AOs (to provide legal advice to international institutions, particularly the UNGA) to indicate that ICJ AOs could have this effect.” To treat the ICJ’s Advisory Opinion as legally binding would be deeply problematic as it would set a precedent that allows the Court a route by which to circumvent the lack of State consent to its contentious jurisdiction. States are not bound by default to accept the contentious jurisdiction of the ICJ (for example, in territorial delimitation cases). Instead, they must actively consent to its contentious jurisdiction. There are several ways in which this can occur such as express agreement with the other State involved in the dispute, acceptance of jurisdiction in a treaty, issuing a accepting jurisdiction and submission to the court. None of these applied in this particular case: the UK had strongly resisted the ICJ’s contentious jurisdiction and the general declaration that the UK has issued accepting ICJ jurisdiction in most matters specifically “any dispute with the government of any other country which is or has been a Member of the Commonwealth” and this would include Mauritius. As the US Judge in her dissenting opinion, this was a “quintessentially bilateral” contentious case and rendering an opinion “has the effect of circumventing the absence of United Kingdom consent.” To allow a “work-around” whereby the ICJ can simply pretend that what are really “contentious” cases are “advisory” requests and then, further, to claim that their decisions on those cases are binding, would represent a staggering enlargement of the ICJ’s competence that has no grounding in the UN Charter or the ICJ Statute. What should have happened here is that the ICJ should have acknowledged that this was a contentious case wearing an advisory mask. On that , it should have declined to render an opinion as it is entitled to do under (Article 65 ICJ Statute). Dunne that there was no judicial overreach here as the ICJ was not “creating” law or passing a legal judgment per se but, rather, that the Advisory Opinion was “declaratory of the customary international law ... of self-determination as it existed in 1965.” The effect of this position is that we should recognize the ICJ’s opinion as an authoritative statement of already binding law. However, that point does not stand up to scrutiny. As Milanovic , “when it comes to self-determination, the key question for the Court to decide was whether it was already a rule of customary law by 1968 [but] the Court completely fudges it. It simply relies on a series of GA resolutions, to which it expressly ascribes a normative character ... and just asserts that self-determination was already customary at the relevant time. No state practice, no , no nothing – just good plain assertion.” This confirms that what we see in this case is an unprecedented attempt by the ICJ to enlarge its competence by creating new law under the guise of its advisory jurisdiction. That effort should be resisted by States. In short, the ICJ’s Advisory Opinion was non-binding. Regardless of its merits or lack therefore, it was not the product of a contentious process and therefore it did not have the capacity to impose obligations on the United Kingdom. Moreover, for the UK or any other State to treat the Opinion as if it did create such obligations, would be to give tacit approval to the Court to ignore the lack of State consent in future cases and to expand the jurisdiction of the ICJ far beyond what was intended. Three months after the release of the ICJ’s Advisory Opinion, the United Nations General Assembly passed reaffirming the Court’s decision. It demanded that that all States respect the Chagossians’ right to self-determination (paragraph 2), that “the United Kingdom ... withdraw its colonial administration from the Chagos Archipelago unconditionally within a period of no more than six months” and that the UK facilitates the resettlement of Mauritian nationals (paragraph 3). Mauritius was unsurprisingly thrilled with this expression of support from the UNGA. Its legal team’s leader, Philippe Sands (a Briton, somewhat confusingly), that “I think this may be the first time in history that every African country has supported the resolutions at the General Assembly, the referral of the questions to the ICJ and then the subsequent question. There is absolute unity.” He went on to that “the UN and the ICJ had definitively resolved the dispute” and that “[v]ery frankly, what the United Kingdom wants in relation to the Chagos archipelago is, in a sense, neither here nor there.” However, his confidence seems to be either feigned or misplaced. As noted above, the ICJ Advisory Opinion was non-binding (nor could it credibly be said to reflect existing customary international law). The UNGA resolution which builds on that Opinion is equally non-binding. As the UN Charter , the General Assembly “may make recommendations” to States or to the Security Council but it does not have the capacity to make binding orders (Articles 10-17 UN Charter). This can be contrasted with the position of the Security Council whose decisions are legally binding, with Article 25 UN Charter that members of the United Nations “agree to accept and carry out the decisions of the Security Council.” As the UN website itself , “resolutions adopted by the GA on agenda items are considered to be recommendations. They are not legally binding on the Member States. The only resolutions that have the potential to be legally binding are those adopted by the SC.” In short, it is clear that UNGA assembly resolutions, including Resolution 73/295, are merely recommendations. Thus, Resolution 73/295 has no legally binding effect on the United Kingdom’s sovereignty over the Chagos Archipelago or its administration of the islands. Certainly, many countries have expressed displeasure with the UK’s position, however that is a political matter. Perhaps the countries that voted for the Resolution were unhappy with the UK based on other grievances. Perhaps they were keen to see a European power lose sovereign territory close to Africa. Perhaps lobbying from opposing powers such as Russia and China had encouraged States to lend their support to the Resolution. It matters little. Ultimately, as a matter of law, the UNGA resolution is a political utterance that represents a barometer of sentiment towards the UK. If a Resolution was passed tomorrow to recommend the stripping of overseas territories from France or Portugal, they would be similarly ineffective. The final against the UK in the context of the Chagos Archipelago is from the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea. Again, however, this decision has no binding legal effect compelling the UK to relinquish sovereignty of the Chagos Archipelago or affecting the delimitation of the UK’s territory. As will be explained in more detail below, this is because (i) the ITLOS Special Chamber assumed that the ICJ and UNGA pronouncements represented binding law when they did not and because (ii) on the basis of the first point, the UK was inappropriately excluded from the proceedings before ITLOS hence those proceedings cannot bind the UK. On the first point, the ITLOS Special Chamber simply aligned with the prior statements of the UNGA and the ICJ in a manner that amounted to a disregard of its judicial responsibility. As Roeben and Jankovic , the Special Chamber “did accept the GA determination as a given and, on that basis, proceeded to spell out an implication, ruling with constitutive effect on the aspect of sovereignty that is under its jurisdiction.” As noted above, UNGA resolutions have no binding legal effect, therefore to defer to them in this manner is inappropriate. Regarding its reliance on the ICJ Advisory Opinion, the Special Chamber that “it is generally recognized that advisory opinions of the ICJ cannot be considered legally binding”, but observed that “it is equally recognized that an advisory opinion entails an authoritative statement of international law on the questions with which deals” (paragraph 202). However, as noted above, this is incorrect as there was no clear customary international law position surrounding self-determination in the 1950s. The ICJ was simply concealing judicial law making behind a mask of judicial declaration of existing law. Separately, the Special Chamber that “judicial determinations made in advisory opinions carry no less weight and authority than those in judgments because they are made with the same rigour and scrutiny” (paragraph 203). This is also incorrect. There is a material difference between judgments and Advisory Opinions – if there was not then there would have been no need to furnish the ICJ with two separate jurisdictional capacities in the first place. As noted above, ICJ Advisory Opinions are not binding (and thus do not require State consent to jurisdiction) whereas ICJ judgments are biding (and thus do require State consent to jurisdiction). The fact that Advisory Opinions are made with the same “rigor and scrutiny” is irrelevant; otherwise we might get to the point where the ICJ bench could render a binding legal opinion by co-writing a monograph together. When it comes to law, forum and form matter. On the second point, the result of the ITLOS Special Chamber’s deference to the UNGA and ICJ above was, as Thin , the “rather remarkable conclusion ... that the dispute between the UK and Mauritius had in fact already been determinatively resolved ... and that there was therefore no bar to jurisdiction.” Of course, this conclusion was wrong as the decisions were non-binding and so the UK remained sovereign over the Chagos Islands. However, the ITLOS Special Chamber’s error led it to decide that the UK was not an “indispensable” party to the present proceedings and that it could resolve a putative territorial dispute between Mauritius and the Maldives without allowing the UK to make representations. This was a violation of the established in the that a court cannot exercise its jurisdiction over a question when a third state’s legal interests would “form the very subject-matter of the decision.” By definition, a UK legal interest (territorial sovereignty) was the subject matter of the present dispute between Mauritius and the Maldives and yet this was entirely ignored. The result was that, as Roeben and Jankovic , the Special Chamber “found that it had jurisdiction to adjudicate upon the dispute between Mauritius and the Maldives [and] conclude[ed] that Mauritius can be regarded as the coastal State in respect of the Chagos Archipelago.” What ought to have happened in the ITLOS proceedings was that the Special Chamber acknowledged that neither the ICJ Advisory Opinion nor the UN General Assembly Resolution resolved the Chagos Archipelago dispute. Thus, it should have declined jurisdiction in the absence of UK representation. Indeed, this was the view expressed in the dissenting of Judge Oxman. Instead, the judgment was rendered and it prompted the UK Foreign Office to , correctly, that, “as not being a party to the proceedings, the UK is under no requirement to comply with the ruling.” In short, the ITLOS decision to take jurisdiction over the putative territorial dispute between Mauritius and the Maldives was flawed because there was no extant binding international law or judgment that removed UK sovereignty over the Chagos Archipelago and thus the UK should have been a party to any proceedings concerning the sovereignty or territorial delimitation of those islands. In the absence of its participation, the UK cannot be said to be bound by the Special Chamber’s decision. Sovereignty over the Chagos Archipelago has been the subject of a long dispute between the UK and Mauritius. A narrative is beginning to form that the combination of the ICJ advisory opinion, the UN General Assembly Resolution and the ITLOS Special Chamber decision furnish Mauritius with a solid claim to sovereignty over the island chain. This narrative is flawed. None of the decisions discussed above impose a binding legal obligation on the UK to vacate sovereignty: (i) the ICJ Advisory Opinion is “advisory” only; (ii) the UN General Assembly resolution is a “recommendation” and (iii) the ITLOS proceedings did not involve the UK and therefore do not have the capacity to bind the UK. For the UK to relinquish sovereignty based on a false narrative that lacks the foundation of an enforceable legal judgment would be an error. John Jay born John Jay, the first Chief Justice of the state of New York, co-author of the Federalist Papers and first Chief Justice of the United States Supreme Court, was born on December 12, 1745.Read a of John Jay, and pay a virtual visit to the , to which he retired in 1801. Kenya becomes independent On December 12, 1963, Kenya attained independence from the United Kingdom.US House passes defense bill banning gender care for minorsNone