Latest news with #Reporter
Yahoo
6 hours ago
- Politics
- Yahoo
Donald Trump Was Asked About His Message To Texas Families Who Are Angry About Late Flood Alerts, And His Response Is Going Viral For Being "Sick Beyond Belief"
At this point in Donald Trump's presidency, many people have given up hope of Trump behaving like a leader during a tragedy. Most recently, a bizarre moment from Trump's visit to Texas after the floods proves that he's not changing anytime soon. Related: A clip of Trump insulting a reporter for questioning Texas's late flood alerts on behalf of victims' families is going viral: Reporter: Several families are upset because they're saying the alerts didn't go out in time. What do you say to those families?Trump: I think everyone did an incredible job under the circumstances… Only an evil person would ask a question like that — Acyn (@Acyn) July 11, 2025 CSPAN / Twitter: @Acyn "Several families we've heard from are obviously upset because they say that those warnings, those alerts, didn't go out in time, and they also say that people could've been saved. What do you say to those families?" a reported asked. Related: "Well I think everyone did an incredible job under the circumstances. This was, I guess, Kristi said, a one in five hundred, one in a thousand years, and uh, I just have admiration for the job that everybody did." "Only a bad person would ask a question like that to be honest with you. I don't know who you are, but only a very evil person would ask a question like that." Related: "I think this has been heroism. This has been incredible, really. The job that you've all done. It's easy to sit back and say, 'Ooh, what could have happened here or there,' you know. Like we could've done something differently. This was a thing that's never happened before." As you can guess, this clip is not going over well online. "He fucked up. They fucked up. And the kids died. So he's trying to act like it's an offensive question because he thinks you are stupid," one person wrote. This person called Trump's comments "horrific." Related: "Showing concern for your family is evil to him because he despises his own family. This is sick beyond belief," another person wrote. "This is so so so pathetic. He's like a child who will do ANYTHING except admit a mistake and apologize. Clearly there were things your administration could do better moving forward. Talk about THAT to learn how we can better mitigate this in the future instead of being like." What are your thoughts? Let us know in the comments below. Also in In the News: Also in In the News: Also in In the News:
ABC News
02-07-2025
- Climate
- ABC News
South Coast NSW inundated with over 200mm of rain as storm peaks
Reporter Romy Gilbert gives an update from Berry on the South Coast of NSW, where the area was inundated with over 200 millimetres of rain.
Scoop
21-06-2025
- Politics
- Scoop
Curious, Concerned: Picton Residents Weigh In On SH1 Changes
Article – Kira Carrington – Local Democracy Reporter Picton residents have stopped by an NZTA display to show the proposed relocation of SH1 through the town. In a small room in Picton's library, dozens of people have gathered to discuss the intricacies of truck routes, intersections, school crossings and parking spaces. They pored over stands and wall displays, showing the proposed permanent State Highway 1 route along Kent Street to the ferry terminal, instead of through central Picton. The proposed changes have already caused controversy, with one resident calling them 'horrible', when they were announced on 11 June. NZ Transport Agency Waka Kotahi's pop-up sessions on Tuesday and Wednesday hummed with questions, fresh ideas and a bit of debate, but not from Heather Hopkins, a resident of upper Kent Street, who had popped in to see how the highway would go past her home. She was pretty happy, she said. 'I'm not really affected, I just wanted more information,' Hopkins said. '[I have] no concerns at all, it'll be free flowing, once everyone gets used to it.' In the evening session, people were most drawn to the board showing where Kent Street met the Wairau Road/SH1 intersection, which would take ferry passengers and freight trucks from the terminals out of town under the new proposal. Lara O'Brien, who lived around the corner from Kent Street, said the intersection's new alignment would cut residents off from their own town centre during peak traffic. Drivers on SH1 south of Kent Street wanting to get into central Picton would need to make a right-hand turn onto Wairau Road towards Nelson Square. During peak ferry traffic, they would be stuck in a right-turning lane with no gaps, O'Brien said. 'These people [leaving the ferry terminal] get to just go, but people going to town, when do they get to go?' O'Brien said. 'You get 60 trucks coming out of the ferry terminal. This is going to be a congestion point for locals coming out of town.' Another group lingered around the board showing the relocation of the Picton School crossing on Kent Street. Many of the attendees were reluctant to speak publicly about their opinions on the divisive subject. The loss of roadside parking and problems with trucks parking along the road were common complaints. A truck driver from Levin, whose cousin was a Picton-based truckie, came along to the evening session. He said NZTA did a similar consultation about a pedestrian overpass in Levin and he was sceptical that feedback would alter the proposal. A Picton resident praised NZTA for moving the crossing outside Picton School back to its original position, saying he didn't know why it was put there a few years ago. 'They're just putting it back to where it was, because people don't use it.' NZTA regional manager of system design Robert Osborne said the sessions were a valuable way of sharing information with Picton residents and getting their feedback. 'The drop-in sessions were all well attended, with around 30 – 40 people each session and some coming to visit us a couple of times to ask further questions,' Osborne said. 'We received a great range of questions and comments, which will help us with our detailed design work. 'We also understand… that there will likely be a wide range of opinions about them. However, this project is aimed at improving Picton's roads and making it easier for people to get around. 'We look forward to continuing to hear from the community about our plans.' Design plans would now be finalised and work would start next winter.
&w=3840&q=100)
Business Standard
18-06-2025
- Business
- Business Standard
Banks' supervisory data quality index improved in March 2025, says RBI
RBI reports sDQI for scheduled commercial banks improved to 89.3 in March 2025; small finance banks scored above 90, reflecting higher data accuracy and compliance BS Reporter The Supervisory Data Quality Index (sDQI) of scheduled commercial banks (SCBs) improved to 89.3 in March 2025 from 86.8 in March 2024, the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) said on Wednesday. The sDQI measures data quality in terms of accuracy, timeliness, completeness, and consistency in the submission of regulatory returns by banks. According to the RBI, a score between 80 and 90 is considered 'acceptable', while a score between 70 and 80 indicates that improvement is required. Any score below 70 is deemed 'not acceptable', and a score above 90 is considered 'good'. In March 2025, state-owned banks, private sector banks, and foreign banks recorded sDQI scores in the '80–90' range, whereas small finance banks reported scores above 90, placing them in the 'good' category. The sDQI for SCBs covers 87 banks and assesses the quality of key regulatory returns, including: * Return on Asset-Liability and Off-Balance Sheet Exposures (ALE) * Return on Asset Quality (RAQ) * Return on Operating Results (ROR) * Risk-Based Supervision Return (RBS) * Liquidity Return (LR) * Return on Capital Adequacy (RCA)
Scoop
13-06-2025
- Health
- Scoop
Experts Warn Regulatory Standards Bill Threatens Future Public Health Laws
Article – RNZ One of the experts said it would have a 'chilling effect' on public health measures. , Reporter Public health experts are worried the government's proposed Regulatory Standards Bill will act as a disincentive for future law-makers to limit harmful industries. A group of scholars in health and policy have worked together on a briefing, titled 'Regulatory Standards Bill threatens the public interest, public health and Māori rights'. It's authors are Jonathan Boston, Michael Baker, Andrew Geddis, Carwyn Jones and Geoffrey Palmer. The Regulatory Standards Bill was introduced to Parliament in May, and is now being considered by the finance and expenditure committee. It would set up a Regulatory Standards Board to consider how legislation measures up to the principles. It was part of ACT's coalition agreement, and in putting the bill forward, party leader David Seymour said: 'In a high-cost economy, regulation isn't neutral – it's a tax on growth. This government is committed to clearing the path of needless regulations by improving how laws are made.' The bill wants politicians to show their workings, he said. 'This bill turns the explanation from politicians' 'because we said so' into 'because here is the justification according to a set of principles'.' But Baker said the bill had prompted a large number of concerns, not least from a public health perspective. He said it was problematic that the bill failed to mention public harm in its ethical framework, which was needed to balance out private benefits. Another issue was the 'takings or impairment principle'. The bill in its current form would allow commercial interests, such as the tobacco or alcohol industries, to seek compensation – paid with public money – if any future legislation caused them to lose money. Baker explained this would have a 'chilling effect' on public health measures. He said it would make it less appealing for governments to create any new legislation aimed at protecting public health which could negatively impact harmful industries, which might then seek compensation. This could include the denicotinisation of cigarettes, alcohol restrictions like sponsorship bans, controls on unhealthy food and drink such as limiting marketing to children, and clean air provisions such as mandating emissions reductions by industry. This bill would mean taxpayers paid to compensate these businesses for the money lost because of moves to protect public health. 'And that's going to make it very difficult for any groups – even governments – promoting new public health laws and regulations, that are intended to protect the public interest.' The briefing notes that, rather than this being a by-product of the legislation's overall goal, it 'appears to be the Bill's intention'. Seymour response Seymour accused Baker of 'alarmism'. 'What the bill actually says is that if a politician or government department wants to pass a regulation that infringes on your private property rights, they'll need to justify why. Inconsistency with the principles does not prevent any new legislation from being passed. All it requires is transparency to the taxpayer. That's not radical, it's democratic accountability. If a policy is justified, it will stand up to scrutiny.' 'The Regulatory Standards Bill will help New Zealand get its mojo back. It requires politicians and officials to ask and answer certain questions before they place restrictions on citizens' freedoms. What problem are we trying to solve?' Seymour asked. 'What are the costs and benefits? Who pays the costs and gets the benefits? What restrictions are being placed on the use and exchange of private property?' 'This Bill turns 'because we said so' into 'because here's the evidence'.'
