bet999 casino

bet999 casino Over the past two seasons, Colorado Rockies third baseman Ryan McMahon has hit at an All-Star level . But that statement should come with an asterisk. Because in each of those seasons, McMahon would consistently endure a second-half slump. His production fell off a cliff once the Midsummer Classic passed. Since Nolan Arenado was traded to the St. Louis Cardinals , McMahon has played excellent defense at the hot corner. With the offensive production he has shown at times, McMahon has a high ceiling. But in 2025, he has to work on putting a full season together at the plate. Ryan McMahon First-Half/Second-Half Splits 2023-24 When McMahon plays at his best, he is a solid anchor for the Rockies’ lineup, which is full of young players who sorely need that production from McMahon. Center fielder Brenton Doyle , shortstop Ezequiel Tovar , and outfielder Nolan Jones are forming a solid, young core in Colorado. If McMahon can put together a full season offensively, the Rockies now have enough weapons around him on paper to be dangerous. Below are the first-half/second-half splits for McMahon during 2023-24. 2023 First Half 88 games .260/.341/.471 20 doubles 14 home runs 45 RBI 2023 Second Half 64 games .211/.297/.375 11 doubles nine home runs 25 RBI 2024 First Half 95 games .272/.350/.447 21 doubles 14 home runs 45 RBI 2024 Second Half 58 games .188/.283/.309 seven doubles six home runs 20 RBI In both seasons, McMahon saw a steep drop-off in almost every offensive category. His stellar 2024 first-half performance earned him his first career All-Star appearance. He ranked near the top in several offensive categories among National League third basemen. He was taking full advantage of Coors Field, using its spacious outfield and high altitude to the tune of 14 home runs and 45 RBI. But his second-half drop-off was even more pronounced than in 2023. His production vanished from the Rockies lineup. As a hitter who already ranks near the bottom of the league in whiff % and K% per Statcast , McMahon can’t afford the drop in production. Possible Reasons for Second-Half Slump McMahon will be entering his ninth season in Major League Baseball in 2025, which provides plenty of sample size. The 30-year-old has spent his entire career in Colorado. McMahon is an extraordinarily durable player, playing in at least 151 games in each of the last four seasons. He truly is the Rockies everyday third baseman. He is always a top-tier defender, finishing as a Gold Glove finalist in 2024. However, the drastic ball movement difference in Colorado compared to other ballparks can make it very difficult for Colorado hitters. But McMahon was fairly even in his performances at home and away in 2024. He finished with 16 doubles and 11 home runs on the road compared to 12 and nine at home in 2024, respectively. If McMahon replicates his 2024 performance on the road, that will not be the main reason for another second-half slump. Instead, where the Rockies are in the standings could play a big factor. The Rockies were nowhere near contention by the All-Star break the last two seasons. Since they are rebuilding, the second half was devoted to getting younger players as much development as possible. But McMahon plays every day, no matter what. Perhaps being surrounded by young, unproven players in the second half allowed opposing pitchers to focus more on him. Outlook for McMahon Moving Forward Ryan McMahon, during his career, has been an average hitter with a high ceiling and an elite defender. He has hit .243/.324/.422 with a career WAR of 15.0 over his eight seasons. In 2024, he hit .242/.325/.397. Perhaps the second-half slump is inevitable, and McMahon will continue to regress towards the mean after above-average first halves offensively. But in 2022, he hit .246/.306/.459 with 13 home runs and 26 RBI in the second half compared to .246/.341/.382 with seven home runs and 41 RBI in the first half. While he never put up earth-shattering numbers, he gave the Rockies consistent, solid production all season. If he can do that in 2025, supplementing the young emerging stars in the Rockies lineup, it could do wonders for the overall outlook for McMahon and the Rockies offense. This article first appeared on Last Word On Sports and was syndicated with permission.5 Relatively Secure And Cheap Dividend Stocks For December 2024: Yields Up To 9% - Seeking Alpha

CHICAGO (AP) — The Chicago Cubs acquired All-Star outfielder Kyle Tucker in a trade with the Houston Astros on Friday, paying a big price for one of baseball's best hitters. The Cubs sent third baseman Isaac Paredes, right-hander Hayden Wesneski and Cam Smith, one of their top infield prospects, to the Astros for Tucker, who is eligible for free agency after the 2025 season. Tucker was limited to 78 games this year because of a fractured right shin, but he hit .289 with 23 homers and 49 RBIs for the AL West champions. He batted .284 with 29 homers, an AL-best 112 RBIs and 30 steals for Houston in 2023. Tucker, who turns 28 on Jan. 17, joins a crowded situation in Chicago's outfield, but the Cubs are reportedly looking to trade Cody Bellinger, who also can play first base. They also have talked to Seiya Suzuki's agent about the outfielder's no-trade clause. The Cubs have finished second in the NL Central with an 83-79 record in each of the past two years, and there is increased pressure on president of baseball operations Jed Hoyer to get the team back into the playoffs for the first time since 2020. The New York Yankees also were in the mix for Tucker before the trade was completed. “We certainly had many conversations with the Astros.” Yankees general manager Brian Cashman said. “At the end of the day I’m glad that Mr. Tucker is not in the American League East or the American League at all. But it’s a big get for the Chicago Cubs.” Paredes is an option for Houston at third base if Alex Bregman departs in free agency. The 25-year-old Paredes hit .238 with 19 homers and 80 RBIs in 153 games this year. He made the AL All-Star team with Tampa Bay and then was traded to Chicago in July. Wesneski, a Houston native who played college ball for Sam Houston State, likely will compete for a spot in the Astros’ rotation. The right-hander, who turned 27 on Dec. 5, went 3-6 with a 3.86 ERA over 21 relief appearances and seven starts this year. He was on the injured list from July 20 to Sept. 20 with a right forearm strain. Houston is hoping the addition of Paredes and Wesneski will help the team continue its impressive run as one of baseball's best teams. It has made the playoffs for eight straight years, winning the World Series in 2017 and 2022. It was swept by Detroit in the wild-card round this year. While Paredes and Wesneski could have an immediate impact, Smith also was a key component of the deal. Smith, 21, was selected by Chicago with the No. 14 pick in this year's draft out of Florida State University. He hit .313 with seven homers and 24 RBIs in 32 games over three minor league stops, finishing the year with Double-A Knoxville. Tucker was Houston's first-round pick in 2015, taken No. 5 overall. He made his big league debut with the Astros in 2018. Tucker had a breakout performance three years after his debut, hitting a career-best .294 with 30 homers and 92 RBIs in 140 games in 2021. He won a Gold Glove the following year. The Tampa, Florida, native is a .274 hitter with 125 homers, 417 RBIs and an .869 OPS in 633 career games — all with Houston. He also has appeared in 64 postseason games, batting .229 with eight homers and 28 RBIs. AP Baseball Writer Ronald Blum contributed to this report. AP MLB: https://apnews.com/hub/mlbAmerica is at a crossroads

SEOUL, South Korea (AP) — South Korea's embattled President Yoon Suk Yeol avoided an opposition-led attempt to impeach him over his short-lived imposition of martial law , as most ruling party lawmakers boycotted a parliamentary vote Saturday to deny a two-thirds majority needed to suspend his presidential powers. The scrapping of the motion is expected to intensify public protests calling for Yoon’s ouster and deepen political chaos in South Korea, with a survey suggesting a majority of South Koreans support the president’s impeachment. Yoon’s martial law declaration drew criticism from his own ruling conservative People Power Party, but it is also determined to oppose Yoon’s impeachment apparently because it fears losing the presidency to liberals. After the motion fell through, members of the main liberal opposition Democratic Party rallied inside the National Assembly, chanting slogans calling for Yoon's impeachment or resignation. The party's floor leader, Park Chan-dae, said it will soon prepare for a new impeachment motion. “We'll surely impeach Yoon Suk Yeol, who is the greatest risk to Republic of Korea,” party leader Lee Jae-myung said. “We'll surely bring back this country to normal before Christmas Day or year's end.” Despite escaping the impeachment attempt, many experts worry Yoon won’t be able to serve out his remaining 2 1⁄2 years in office. They say some ruling party lawmakers could eventually join opposition parties’ efforts to impeach Yoon if public demands for it grow further. On Saturday, tens of thousands of people densely packed several blocks of roads leading up to the National Assembly, waving banners, shouting slogans and dancing. Protesters also gathered in front of PPP’s headquarters near the Assembly, angrily shouting for its lawmakers to vote to impeach Yoon. A smaller crowd of Yoon’s supporters, which still seemed to be in the thousands, rallied in separate streets in Seoul, decrying the impeachment attempt they saw as unconstitutional. Impeaching Yoon required support from two-thirds of the National Assembly, or 200 of its 300 members. The Democratic Party and five other small opposition parties, which filed the motion, have 192 seats combined. But only three lawmakers from PPP participated in the vote. The motion was scrapped without ballot counting because the number of votes didn’t reach 200. National Assembly Speaker Woo Won Shik called the result “very regrettable” and an embarrassing moment for the country’s democracy that has been closely watched by the world. “The failure to hold a qualified vote on this matter means we were not even able to exercise the democratic procedure of deciding on a critical national issue,” he said. Opposition parties could submit a new impeachment motion after a new parliamentary session opens next Wednesday. If Yoon is impeached, his powers will be suspended until the Constitutional Court decides whether to remove him from office. If he is removed, an election to replace him must take place within 60 days. Earlier Saturday, Yoon issued a public apology over the martial law decree, saying he won’t shirk legal or political responsibility for the declaration and promising not to make another attempt to impose martial law. He said would leave it to his party to chart a course through the country’s political turmoil, “including matters related to my term in office.” “The declaration of this martial law was made out of my desperation. But in the course of its implementation, it caused anxiety and inconveniences to the public. I feel very sorry over that and truly apologize to the people who must have been shocked a lot,” Yoon said. Since taking office in 2022, Yoon has struggled to push his agenda through an opposition-controlled parliament and grappled with low approval ratings amid scandals involving himself and his wife. In his martial law announcement on Tuesday night, Yoon called parliament a “den of criminals” bogging down state affairs and vowed to eliminate “shameless North Korea followers and anti-state forces.” The turmoil resulting from Yoon’s bizarre and poorly-thought-out stunt has paralyzed South Korean politics and sparked alarm among key diplomatic partners like the U.S. and Japan. Tuesday night saw special forces troops encircling the parliament building and army helicopters hovering over it, but the military withdrew after the National Assembly unanimously voted to overturn the decree, forcing Yoon to lift it before daybreak Wednesday. The declaration of martial law was the first of its kind in more than 40 years in South Korea. Eighteen lawmakers from the ruling party voted to reject Yoon’s martial law decree along with opposition lawmakers. PPP later decided to oppose Yoon's impeachment motion. Yoon’s speech fueled speculation that he and his party may push for a constitutional amendment to shorten his term, instead of accepting impeachment, as a way to ease public anger over the marital law and facilitate Yoon’s early exit from office. Lee told reporters that Yoon’s speech was “greatly disappointing” and that the only way forward is his immediate resignation or impeachment. His party called Yoon’s martial law “unconstitutional, illegal rebellion or coup.” Lawmakers on Saturday first voted on a bill appointing a special prosecutor to investigate stock price manipulation allegations surrounding Yoon’s wife. Some lawmakers from Yoon’s party were seen leaving the hall after that vote, triggering angry shouts from opposition lawmakers. On Friday, PPP chair Han Dong-hun, who criticized Yoon’s martial law declaration, said he had received intelligence that during the brief period of martial law Yoon ordered the country’s defense counterintelligence commander to arrest and detain unspecified key politicians based on accusations of “anti-state activities.” Hong Jang-won, first deputy director of South Korea’s National Intelligence Service, told lawmakers in a closed-door briefing Friday that Yoon had ordered him to help the defense counterintelligence unit to detain key politicians. The targeted politicians included Han, Lee and Woo, according to Kim Byung-kee, one of the lawmakers who attended the meeting. The Defense Ministry said Friday it suspended three military commanders including the head of the defense counterintelligence unit over their involvement in enforcing martial law. Vice Defense Minister Kim Seon Ho has told parliament that Defense Minister Kim Yong Hyun ordered the deployment of troops to the National Assembly after Yoon imposed martial law. Opposition parties accused Kim of recommending to Yoon to enforce martial law. Kim resigned Thursday, and prosecutors imposed an overseas travel ban on him.World Series vision that got Nathan Eovaldi to the Rangers is the same one that got him to re-sign

"Surely, there cannot be any coincidences here. There is certain consistency," Peskov said, when asked about the doctrine update. The spokesman added that Russia constantly has to respond to unprecedented escalation incited by the West. "Although President Putin assigned to prepare the amendments in order to adapt our [nuclear] doctrine to the conditions of the current confrontation, which is incited by the Western states, Putin has to respond to the unprecedented escalation which is primarily spurred by the outgoing administration in Washington," Peskov said. And the United States is continuing to take even more reckless steps to escalate the Ukrainian conflict, the spokesman added. When commenting on the Oreshnik missile strike, Peskov said that Putin had sent a clear signal to the West in September. Peskov added that a "frenzy" among decision-makers in Washington had led to the current situation. 19 November, 13:18 GMT "They chose to ignore Putin's warnings and this situation arose as a result. This required such decisive steps and firm statements from our president," the spokesman said. Peskov also said that the Biden administration had effectively halted dialogue with Russia, adding that "political foresight" is in short supply in Washington. "During the election campaign, [US President-elect Donald] Trump spoke about his intention to somehow ensure peace and bring everyone into a peaceful course. And now they are trying to escalate the situation so much that these peaceful conditions are doomed to failure," the spokesman said. Russian President Vladimir Putin said in a televised speech on Thursday that Ukraine had fired US-supplied ATACMS missiles and the UK's Storm Shadows at facilities in the Kursk and Bryansk regions this week. In response, Russia launched a strike against a defense industry facility, the Yuzhmash plant, in Dnepropetrovsk on November 21, using its newest medium-range missile, dubbed Oreshnik. Moscow also earlier in the week. US President Joe Biden’s outgoing administration's decisions on Ukraine are an attempt to take revenge on for his victory in the presidential election, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov has said. "In many ways, yes," Peskov said in an interview out on Sunday when asked if Biden is trying to take a revenge for the Democrats' defeat in the election. Biden’s administration is trying to leave "some kind of heritage" to Trump and bring him to bay in the Ukraine conflict settlement, Peskov added. The statements about the possibility of Kiev obtaining a dirty bomb are dangerous and represent much more than "play with fire," Dmirty Peskov said. "They [Ukraine] understand how dangerous it is and that it is not even a play with fire any more, it’s more than that," Peskov said in an interview with Russian journalist Pavel Zarubin out on Sunday when asked about claims that Kiev may get a dirty bomb. Earlier this month, UK newspaper reported, citing a report prepared by Ukrainian researchers for the Defense Ministry, that Ukraine could develop a nuclear bomb within a few months if the United States reduces military aid to Kiev. Ukrainian Foreign Ministry spokesperson Heorhii Tykhyi said later that Ukraine does not possess nuclear weapons, does not intend to create them, and closely cooperates with the International Atomic Energy Agency. However, Kiev’s existing capabilities allow it to create a dirty bomb, Lt. Gen. Igor Kirillov, the head of the radiological defense troops of the Russian armed forces, has said.Published 5:15 pm Friday, December 13, 2024 By Data Skrive In the upcoming tilt against the Philadelphia Flyers, which starts at 2:00 PM ET on Saturday, can we expect Matthew Boldy to find the back of the net for the Minnesota Wild? Let’s dive into the most important numbers and trends to figure out which prop bets you should be strongly considering. Sign up for ESPN+ today to watch 1,000+ out-of-market NHL games, ESPN+ Hockey Night & more. Odds to score a goal this game: +145 (Bet $10 to win $14.50 if he scores a goal) Place your bets on any NHL matchup at BetMGM. Sign up today using our link. Catch NHL action all season long on Fubo. Catch NHL action all season long on Max. Bet on this or any NHL matchup at BetMGM. Not all offers available in all states, please visit BetMGM for the latest promotions for your area. Must be 21+ to gamble, please wager responsibly. If you or someone you know has a gambling problem, contact 1-800-GAMBLER .Ange Postecoglou relishing Tottenham’s key run of fixtures before Christmas

n recent years, major new studies have tried to rehabilitate the presidency of Jimmy Carter, who died on Dec. 29 at age 100. They’ve emphasized a range of underappreciated accomplishments in everything from foreign policy to environmental protection and racial equity. These accounts still acknowledge Carter’s failures but balance them with a longer-term perspective on how his presidency changed the United States and the world. This positive reappraisal, however, hasn’t extended to . This makes sense considering how devastating the battle over health care was to Carter during his presidency. Congress rejected his major health care policy initiatives, and his grudging support for a much more limited national health insurance plan in part spurred Sen. Ted Kennedy (D-Mass.) to challenge the incumbent Carter from the left in the 1980 Democratic presidential primary. Yet Carter’s health care record deserves a more nuanced evaluation. More than any other modern president, he took on the health care industry, as well as his own allies, by attempting to address the high costs of American health care. And his health care proposals pushed his party toward the policy strategies that eventually produced the landmark Affordable Care Act in 2010. Carter’s willingness to tackle the politically perilous task of offers a template for the kind of leadership and focus needed to address the health care system’s enduring flaws in 2024. Carter entered office at a moment when health care spending was skyrocketing. Between 1970 and January 1977, total national health expenditures had more than doubled, from $74 billion to $152 billion. As a percentage of gross domestic product, health care spending had risen from 6.9% to 8.1%. Much of this increase stemmed from the enactment of Medicare in 1965, with its generous . These formulas not only raised direct costs, but, critically, also allowed hospitals to generate new revenue streams that enabled them both to build capital reserves and take on debt by entering the bond markets. Hospitals in turn used this access to capital to build new facilities, renovate old ones and add sophisticated new equipment. This created a cost spiral as hospitals competed with one another on facilities and technology, rather than affordability. Carter tried to duck the issue of health care policy in the 1976 Democratic primary, but exploding prices, along with continued interest in national health insurance on the left flank of the Democratic Party, made that impossible. After Carter’s victory in the Florida primary in March 1976, the United Automobile Workers (UAW) union demanded that he endorse national health insurance as a condition for receiving its critical endorsement. As an outsider from Georgia, Carter needed the union’s support. So after extended negotiations, he agreed to satisfy the UAW’s demand in an April 1976 speech. Even then, however, Carter refrained from backing Kennedy’s “Health Security Bill”—which offered complete single-payer public health coverage with no cost sharing and no role for private insurers—despite all of his main rivals for the Democratic nomination endorsing it. Instead, he described the general principles of a program that would be introduced in phases. Carter envisioned relying on private as well as public insurance, and his plan included checks on both hospital and physician fees to control costs. Carter also tied his program, in some unspecified way, to reductions to welfare. Since the union wanted to maintain influence if Carter won, this proposal was enough to secure its support. Carter went on to win the nomination and the election in 1976. As the president-elect and his team evaluated their priorities, concerns about the federal budget deficit and rising inflation took precedence over his campaign promise on health insurance. They decided to focus on hospital costs instead. As later put it, they couldn’t “even begin talking about affording a national health insurance program if hospital costs had an unlimited straw into the Federal Treasury.” Kennedy and other supporters of a deferred to the new president—but they were unhappy about it. They agreed about the need to control costs, but believed the two goals could be pursued simultaneously. By April 1977, the Carter team had drafted an innovative, two-part hospital cost containment proposal. The first part capped total hospital revenue growth at nine percent annually, with limited exceptions, achieved through a limit on average revenue per admission. The second part of the Carter bill audaciously proposed limiting total annual hospital capital expenditures to $2.5 billion nationally. This would cut spending for new facilities, and thus was key to slowing the rapid growth of the hospital sector. Together, the two prongs had the potential to be as transformative as Kennedy’s “Health Security Bill” because of the way they challenged unchecked hospital expansion and cost increases. The proposal triggered a brutal war. The industry organized an aggressive local lobbying campaign against the bill while implementing a much-hyped “voluntary effort” to control costs. , Carter’s special assistant for public liaison, explained that every local hospital board included "the president of the bank, the president of whatever local community organizations there were, the leading lights in all the religious organizations in town and so forth.” The hospitals’ powerful allies meant that Carter had lost public opinion, “before we ever got going.” Congress voted down Carter’s proposal multiple times between 1977 and 1979, dealing what he considered to be a crucial blow against his domestic agenda. Meanwhile, a frustrated Kennedy pressed the president to announce a national health insurance plan before the 1978 midterm elections. Carter recognized, however, that Kennedy had no support from moderate and conservative Democrats in Congress and pushed to defer release of a specific plan until the following year. Kennedy grudgingly agreed, but at the midterm Democratic convention that December, he savaged Carter’s inaction. Finally, in June 1979, Carter released a plan for the first phase of a program to achieve universal coverage. It relied on both public and private insurance to cover “catastrophic” medical costs, and it proposed federalizing Medicaid by combining it with Medicare into a new federal program known as “Healthcare.” This would have eliminated the state-to-state variations that made Medicaid an inconsistent and unequal vehicle for insuring low-income Americans. While covering all expenses for the poor, Healthcare had a $1250 deductible ($5151 in 2023 dollars) for higher income recipients. In addition, the Carter plan retained employer-provided private insurance with a mandate that employers offer at least catastrophic coverage for their workers for costs above a deductible of $2500. On the cost control side, the bill limited hospital capital expenditures and added a new system of physician fee controls. More comprehensive coverage, the administration argued, could be added as economic conditions allowed. Kennedy balked at the skimpy benefits, understanding that Congress could not be relied on to regularly expand coverage. Even so, Carter’s vision influenced him. Kennedy’s own proposal began to include public and private elements, including an employer mandate and a requirement that insurance companies provide marketing and administrative services for the plan’s public elements. It also included an annual national health budget to control costs. Neither bill made any real progress in Congress, and Kennedy’s frustrations fueled his decision to challenge Carter for the 1980 Democratic nomination. Despite the political damage done by Carter’s twin defeats on health care, he achieved two major things. First, he recognized the burgeoning cost control problems in the American health care system. His proposal, if passed, would have laid the foundation for a more cost effective and equal system. He understood that such hospital cost containment was a prerequisite for achieving universal coverage. Second, Carter changed the terms of the health care debate for Democrats. No longer would they push universal federally provided insurance like Kennedy’s proposal from the early 1970s had done. Instead, Bill Clinton (unsuccessfully) and eventually Barack Obama in his signature bill in 2010 both embraced a mixture of public and private health insurance that built on Carter’s legacy. Its debatable whether this shift was positive, but it marked a key step toward our current system. The other element of Carter’s health care agenda—the critical but politically perilous problem of high costs—remains largely unaddressed. While President Biden’s Inflation Reduction Act took important steps to control the costs of prescription drugs, those only account for nine percent of healthcare costs. Also under Biden, the Federal Trade Commission has increased its scrutiny of both horizontal and vertical hospital mergers, but this has had limited effects and is largely after-the-fact, as the industry has already undergone significant consolidation. Unlike Carter, Biden has not pursued the direct regulation of costs stemming from hospitals, physicians, and clinical services, despite them accounting for 51 percent of health care costs. With cost problems still plaguing Americans in 2023, Carter has proved right on health care. While he couldn’t bend Congress to his will, his hospital spending caps could have prevented many of the challenges we continue to confront. The question now is whether today’s political leaders have the courage to follow his lead. ,World Series vision that got Nathan Eovaldi to the Rangers is the same one that got him to re-sign

Lifeist Announces Reorganization of the Board of Directors

Neely scores 16 as Albany (NY) beats Stony Brook 77-70

Brock Purdy will miss Sunday's game for the 49ers with a shoulder injury

(ASX: XJO) stock ( ) is dipping into the red today. Shares in the property investment company closed yesterday trading for $4.48. In early trade on Friday, shares are changing hands for $4.457 apiece, down 0.2%. For some context, the ASX 200 is down 0.7% at the same time. As you can see on the chart above, the GPT share price is up 2.0% since last year. The ASX 200 stock also trades on an unfranked trailing yield of 5.4%. Here's what investors are mulling over today. The GPT share price has yet to post gains after the ASX 200 stock it was forming a new retail partnership with private investment company Perron. As part of that new partnership, GPT will acquire a 50% interest in two Perth retail assets – Cockburn Gateway and Belmont Forum – from Perron. The deal is valued at approximately $482 million. GPT said that the shopping centres offer a combined 119,000 square metres of gross lettable area and a moving annual turnover of more than $1 billion. Atop the existing space, the ASX 200 stock noted that Cockburn Gateway has secured development approval for a 20-year transformation project. Stage 1 of that development reportedly has the potential for some 20,000 square metres of incremental new retail in the "near term". Commenting on the ASX 200 stock's partnership with Perron this morning, GPT CEO Russell Proutt said: This is an exciting partnership which further expands our $14 billion portfolio of retail assets with two centres that are top performing in their respective trade areas and extremely well positioned, in catchments with strong population growth and favourable demographics. Our investment is consistent with GPT's strategy to build and diversify the group's management platform, in alignment with like-minded investment partners. Prout added that he expects the new shopping centre acquisitions will "leverage the group's outstanding retail operational capability to drive asset performance and pursue compelling development opportunities". Perron Group CEO Adam Irving was clearly pleased that his company had successfully concluded negotiations with the ASX 200 stock over the 50% sale in both retail properties. "We identified GPT as an ideal partner for both Cockburn Gateway and Belmont Forum because of its industry leading experience in both retail and mixed-use developments, as this will be crucial to maximising the value of the assets over time," he said. Irving added: This transaction also aligns with the evolution of Perron Group's broader strategic objectives as a permanent endowment to support the work of the Stan Perron Charitable Foundation. GPT and Perron expect the transaction to be completed in February.

Sinn Fein was accused of “ignoring” the role 3,000 Troubles deaths had in damaging community relations in Northern Ireland in a memo sent to a direct rule minister in 2003. Declassified files show the note to former MP John Spellar also said the republican party had ignored the “visceral component of sectarianism” in responding to a new government good relations strategy. Mr Spellar, then a Northern Ireland Office minister, had launched a consultation on the “A Shared Future” document, an attempt to address community divisions, segregation and sectarianism in the region at a time when the devolved powersharing institutions were suspended. A file at the Public Record Office in Belfast shows that OFMDFM official Chris Stewart wrote to the minister in July about a response to the document from Sinn Fein representative Bairbre de Brun. Mr Stewart told Mr Spellar that Ms de Brun’s letter had been critical of the document and was clearly intended to “mark your card”. He said among a number of points raised by de Brun was that “the promotion of equality is the key to improving community relations”. His memo adds: “Sinn Fein is clearly seeking to position or align the issue of community relations within its equality and human rights agenda. “This general Sinn Fein position has resulted in a simplistic analysis of community relations, which is flawed in its description of the causes and necessary policy response. “There is of course, no doubt that a lack of equality has been a contributing factor to poor community relations. “However, Sinn Fein ignores the many other factors, not least the violent conflict that resulted in over 3,000 deaths. “Sinn Fein also portrays poor community relations (for nationalists) as being a purely rational response to the political situation. “This ignores the more visceral component of sectarianism, which is all too prevalent in both communities.” Mr Stewart continues: “To suggest, as Sinn Fein does, that the promotion of equality should be the key component of good relations policy is to ignore the key message in A Shared Future, that indirect approaches alone are insufficient to deal with sectarianism and the abnormal relationship between sections of the Northern Ireland community.” The official recommended the minister invite representatives of Sinn Fein to a meeting to discuss the policy. The file also contains a note about Mr Spellar’s meeting with DUP representatives Maurice Morrow and Peter Weir the following month to discuss the document. The note says: “Morrow said he had no problem with sharing the future and suggested that the first step to that would be an election to decide who spoke for whom – though he was quick to say he didn’t want politics to dominate the meeting.” It adds: “Weir said that the biggest step towards improving community relations would be the creation of a political environment that had the broad support of both unionism and nationalism, and the GFA (Good Friday Agreement) could not create that environment.”