union

For over an hour Tuesday night, Presidential Trump vied with pugnacious Trump.

The White House had promised a conciliatory and uplifting State of the Union address, which stood to reason. It’s one thing to inveigh against the mess Trump said he inherited a year ago and another to laud the job he claims to have done cleaning it up.

FULL COVERAGE: State of the Union »

Gone, then, was the wreckage, the ruin and the dystopian “American carnage” he deplored in the glowering speech at his inauguration. Instead, Trump offered a vision of hopefulness and light — for a time, anyway.

“This is our new American moment,” he said loftily in the early moments of his address. “There has never been a better time to start living the American dream.”

But those grace notes were soon overshadowed by an increasingly harsh tone, as though the president couldn’t or didn’t care to contain his more ad-libbed and aggressive self.

He needled Democrats over the partial dismantling of the Affordable Care Act, one of his predecessor’s proudest achievements. He resurrected the controversy over the national anthem and the dissent of kneeling black athletes.

When he spoke of immigration, perhaps the touchiest issue facing a gridlocked Congress, he placed it in a dark frame, with talk of gang violence, of alien intruders stealing jobs and a suggestion of unending “chain” migrants — aunts, uncles, cousins and other family members — leaching taxpayer dollars.

In his closest approximation to an olive branch, Trump said he would support a proposal offering a path to citizenship for 1.8 million children — so-called Dreamers — who were brought to America illegally by their parents. But only, he said, if Democrats would agree to a border wall and other changes in legal immigration they consider anathema.

The result was groans and hisses and boos from that side of the House chamber.

The annual speech to Congress is one of Washington’s most carefully choreographed set pieces, and for portions of it Trump hewed closely to a familiar script

He assayed the state of the union, pronouncing it “strong.” He outlined an ambitious agenda — which lawmakers will mostly ignore — crowed about his achievements, made a feint in the direction of bipartisanship and saluted a large number of invited guests who served as props representing different bullet points (immigration, a strong military, the opioid addiction crisis) of his speech.

It was all terribly conventional, but only to a point.

There were many long sections that could just have easily been delivered at one of Trump’s roisterous “Make America Great Again” campaign rallies, down to the moment when the ranks of Republican lawmakers broke into a lusty chant of “USA! USA!” as the president, chin out, approvingly took in the scene.

The contrast to the last time Trump stood in the well of the House was striking.

Eleven months ago, he delivered a more subdued performance, earning plaudits and generating widespread talk of a presidential turning point or, in that most overused expression, a pivot toward a more staid and conformist style of governance.

Then, days later, Trump was back to tweeting about a “bad (or sick)” President Obama bugging Trump Tower, a figment that roused his political base but instantly banished any Democratic goodwill or notions of presidential normalcy.

Trump has shattered political convention in so many ways that it is difficult to enumerate them all. One of the most significant is this: Although the economy is perking smartly along and Americans tell pollsters they feel better about their financial well-being than they have in years, the president has gotten very little credit.

Indeed, his approval rating stands at a historical low for a chief executive this early in his term, severing the long-standing correlation between economic good times and voter satisfaction.

His speech Tuesday night, with its prime-time prominence and audience reaching in the tens of millions, offered a chance to address that problem. “Over the last year, we have made incredible progress and achieved extraordinary success,” Trump said, reeling off a number of favorable economic statistics.

But much of the address seemed aimed at a far narrower audience.

To a greater degree than any recent president, Trump has used his time in office to appease the relatively narrow slice of the electorate — older, whiter, alienated, aggrieved — that placed him in power, opting not to reach out, bend and seek to broaden that coalition.

His uncompromising performance Tuesday night perfectly encapsulated that approach. Supporters found much to like and detractors plenty to reinforce their contempt.

It is too much to expect any single speech, much less one as politically freighted as the State of the Union, to instantly bridge such a yawning gap. If anything, though, Trump’s provocative remarks seemed likely to push warring Democrats and Republicans even further apart.

[email protected]

@markzbarabak

Four new labour codes come into force as India seeks to attract investment and strengthen manufacturing.

India has announced a sweeping set of labour reforms, saying it will implement four long-delayed labour codes that the government says will modernise outdated regulations and extend stronger protections to millions of workers.

Prime Minister Narendra Modi said on X on Friday that the overhaul would provide “a strong foundation for universal social security, minimum and timely payment of wages, safe workplaces and remunerative opportunities”.

He said the changes would spur job creation and lift productivity across the economy.

The labour ministry echoed that message, saying the reforms place “workers, especially women, youth, unorganised, gig and migrant workers, firmly at the centre of labour governance”, with expanded social security and portable entitlements that apply nationwide.

The government says replacing 29 fragmented laws with four unified codes covering wages, industrial relations, social security and occupational safety will simplify compliance and make India more attractive for investment.

Many of India’s existing labour laws date back to the British colonial era and have long been criticised by businesses as complicated, inconsistent and a barrier to scaling up manufacturing, an industry that still accounts for less than 20 percent of India’s nearly $4-trillion gross domestic product (GDP).

The new rules formalise changes approved by parliament in 2020 but stalled for years due to political resistance and pushback from several states and unions.

The reforms introduce significant shifts in how factories operate. Women can now legally work night shifts, firms have greater room to extend working hours, and the threshold for companies requiring prior approval for layoffs has been raised from 100 to 300 workers.

Union opposition

Officials argue this flexibility will encourage employers to expand operations without fear of lengthy bureaucratic delays.

For the first time, the codes also define gig and platform work, offering legal recognition and expanding social protection to a fast-growing segment of the labour force.

Government estimates suggest the gig economy could reach more than 23.5 million workers by 2030, up sharply from about 10 million in 2024/25.

Economists say the changes may initially strain small and informal firms but could strengthen household incomes over time.

“In the short term, they may hurt small, unorganised firms, but in the long run … with minimum wages and increased social security, it could be positive for both working conditions and consumption,” said Devendra Kumar Pant of India Ratings & Research, speaking to the Reuters news agency.

Trade unions, however, remain fiercely opposed. “The labour codes have been implemented despite strong opposition from the trade unions and it will snatch the workers’ rights, including fixed-term jobs and rights available under the earlier labour laws,” said Amarjeet Kaur of the All India Trade Union Congress.

After 14 days, two “College GameDays,” two “Monday Night Footballs” and one election night, the protracted contract dispute between YouTube TV and Walt Disney Co. is finally over.

As my colleague Meg James reported last week, the two sides settled Friday after agreeing on a multi-year distribution deal for YouTube to carry Disney-owned programming.

Financial terms of the deal were not disclosed.

Both sides touted the agreement as a win for consumers. Disney Entertainment Co-Chairs Alan Bergman and Dana Walden and ESPN chief Jimmy Pitaro said in a joint statement that the deal “recognizes the tremendous value of Disney’s programming and provides YouTube TV subscribers with more flexibility and choice.”

For its part, YouTube also noted that the settlement “preserves the value of our service for our subscribers” and “future flexibility in our offers.” The Google-owned platform also apologized to consumers for the “disruption,” saying it appreciated people’s patience during the dispute.

Of course, reaching an agreement is good for customers who had lost access to ESPN, ABC News election coverage and other programming during the two-week blackout.

But this is far from the last impasse that sports fans and other viewers will see — if history is any guide.

In fact, the number of blackouts related to carriage and contract disputes has been increasing over the last decade, particularly as the health of the television business has declined, raising the economic stakes for all sides.

Back in the day, contracts between content providers and distributors would last for five years or more because the industry was more stable and little would change over the course of an agreement.

That’s obviously all different now, with most deals today lasting about two to three years, reflecting rapid changes in a TV business that has been upended by streaming platforms.

In today’s TV landscape — with cable cord-cutters aplenty and many more options to watch your favorite shows and sports teams — negotiations are more fraught.

Traditional pay TV providers like DirecTV and Charter Communications are scrambling to retain their subscribers, while legacy media companies like Disney are trying to support their networks — particularly channels such as ESPN that have invested huge sums for those all-important sports rights that keep viewers engaged.

And in the midst of it all is the growing power of live TV streaming distributors, especially YouTube TV, which has become a much bigger force in the TV business.

The platform’s subscriber base has been quickly growing.

YouTube is approaching 10 million subscribers, making it the third-largest pay-TV distributor, behind Charter Communications and Comcast. Back in February, when it reached a deal with Paramount Global to avert a CBS blackout, that number was reported at 8 million.

Such growth is giving YouTube TV — with the financial backing of tech giant Google — more clout in contract negotiations, making them more willing to push back against fee increases demanded by legacy Hollywood media companies.

Disney sought rates similar to those paid by major distributors, including around $10 a subscriber per month for ESPN, CNBC reported.

“They realize their power,” said Brent Penter, associate analyst at Raymond James. “And they’re trying to use it.”

But Disney is no wilting flower, either. Last week, Disney’s Chief Financial Officer Hugh Johnston struck a tough tone on CNBC when talking about the negotiations, saying, “We’re ready to go as long as they want to.”

The Burbank entertainment giant has some of the most popular programming around, meaning it can command the biggest fees from providers. It also owns a competitor to YouTube TV in Hulu + Live TV and its new ESPN Unlimited direct-to-customer streaming service.

But in this dispute, Disney temporarily lost the distribution fees and potentially advertising dollars for any of its programs that a YouTube TV subscriber didn’t watch, making it a costly standoff.

No one wins in a blackout situation. But if you had to pick a winner, analysts say it might be the alternatives to YouTube TV — services like Fubo, Sling TV, DirecTV Stream and Hulu + Live TV.

If you’re a diehard Eagles fan who also happens to be a YouTube TV subscriber, and you refused to miss the game against the Packers last Monday, you might have signed up for temporary passes through one of these services. And if you liked it, well, you might choose to keep that subscription instead.

That also goes back to the complicated web of options consumers must wade through to find their favorite teams and shows.

“There is friction out there,” said Ric Prentiss, managing director at Raymond James. “Blackouts raise it to a head, where people say, ‘Wait, I don’t know how to navigate this,’ and they start looking at other alternatives.”

Stuff We Wrote

Film shoots

Number of the week

TV station owner Sinclair Inc. has an eye toward dominating the TV market. The Baltimore-based company, which is known for its conservative bent, has acquired about 8% of rival broadcaster E.W. Scripps, according to a recent filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission.

Sinclair also said in the filing that it has had “constructive discussions” with Scripps about potentially combining, though no deal has been reached. Scripps, however, has suggested that it is not interested in a merger.

Finally …

It might be a sign of the economy. My colleague, Suhauna Hussain, wrote about how McDonald’s is seeing lower traffic from one of its core customer bases, low-income households.

The battle to replace storied, 80-year-old union chief Jack Henning as head of the California Labor Federation appears to have been wrapped up with a deal calling for the two leading candidates to join forces and run on a combined slate.

The quietly negotiated pact, averting a potentially divisive battle among California’s unions in a pivotal election year, calls for 43-year-old Art Pulaski, head of the San Mateo County Central Labor Council, to move into Henning’s job as executive secretary-treasurer.

Slated to take the No. 2 job of president is Tom Rankin, 54, who for nearly 13 years has served as Henning’s top legislative aide. As president, Rankin would continue handling similar legislative duties.

Left out of the coalition ticket was the only other declared candidate for the helm of the labor federation, Dan Curtin, director of the California Council of Carpenters. Curtin, considered previously to be a distant third in the running and now believed to hold virtually no chance of derailing the Pulaski-Rankin ticket, could not be reached for comment.

The job of executive secretary-treasurer would catapult Pulaski into a hugely influential role as chief spokesman for the state’s unionized workers. The federation represents 1,200 AFL-CIO local unions covering 1.5-million workers in California.

If elected at the federation’s upcoming convention, which is scheduled for the last week of July in Los Angeles, Pulaski said his main goal would be to promote grass-roots union political campaigning throughout the state.

To that end, Pulaski said he would try to hire as many as 10 political staffers to help labor organizations throughout the state to push union-friendly candidates and issues. “We’ll be targeting districts where we can put in people more responsive to worker interests,” he said.

Leading the Pulaski-Rankin agenda is a proposition expected to be on California’s November ballot to raise the minimum wage, which has been $4.25 an hour since 1988, up to $5.75 an hour as of March 1998.

Both Pulaski and Rankin said they recently were persuaded to team up by union supporters around the state who wanted to avoid a punishing election struggle.

Rankin would replace Albin J. Gruhn, 81, as president. Gruhn, widely expected to retire this year after 36 years as the federation’s No. 2 official, said Monday that he will officially announce his plans next month.

Currently, the executive secretary-treasurer’s job pays $82,500 a year, while the president’s post pays $71,500.

Henning, who has played no public role in the contest to determine his successor, could not be reached for comment.

This week, Lionsgate is betting that the odds will be in their favor when “The Hunger Games: On Stage” opens at London’s Troubadour Canary Wharf Theatre.

The play, which is based on the young adult novel by Suzanne Collins and 2012 film that catapulted actor Jennifer Lawrence into the mainstream, is just the latest film-to-stage adaptation from Hollywood.

This isn’t a new playbook. After all, Disney revolutionized the space by adapting its animated films like “The Lion King,” “Beauty and the Beast” and “Aladdin” into Broadway musical hits. But it is one that studios are turning to again, particularly as they look to connect more deeply with audiences and expand the fan base of their franchises.

Last year, Universal Theatrical Group debuted a musical stage adaptation of the 1992 film “Death Becomes Her” on Broadway.

In addition to “The Hunger Games,” Lionsgate has several other theatrical shows in the works, including a stage adaptation of the 2017 film “Wonder” opening in Boston in December, as well as “Now You See Me Live” opening that same month at the Sydney Opera House.

Next year, there will be a stage version of “La La Land,” as well as a new production of the iconic classic “Dirty Dancing.” (Of course, the opposite is also happening, with “Wicked” as the most recent example of a book-to-stage-to-film pipeline.)

“When you look at the way that fans are engaging with entertainment, there are so many different mediums that are important now, and experiential is a big one,” Jenefer Brown, Lionsgate’s president of global products and experiences, said an interview. “With all of us spending so much time online and in digital mediums, the idea of that shared live experience in a theater is something that’s highly appealing.”

But getting “The Hunger Games” to the stage wasn’t easy — the process took almost seven years from the inception of the idea to first previews. As part of the show’s development, the producers also built a custom theater in London. Brown spoke with The Times about why the dystopian franchise was a good candidate for live theater and why communal experiences are so important.

This interview has been edited for clarity and length.

What made “The Hunger Games” ripe for the stage?

It’s an enduring story that has so much relevance to occurrences that happen in the world today. I think that there’s just a ton of cultural significance.

And what we know about “The Hunger Games” is that there’s always a new wave of fans that discover it. Now we’re seeing Gen Alpha reading the books and watching the movies, and of course, we have Gen Z fans and millennial fans, and parents from other generations who have been on the journey with their children. It’s a way to bring aspects of the book to life, maybe in a different interpretation, or to let fans be able to explore certain things in a greater depth than we were able to do on a movie screen.

What does a stage play do for audiences that, say, a series or ride does not?

When you’re seeing something live, we don’t have the tricks that we have behind a camera in a movie.

You have to really find ways to bring the audience on a journey, and you can’t hide anything. That’s part of the magic of the experience, and for fans to be there and be mesmerized by some of the things that we’re executing in real time on a stage with special effects and illusions and real people doing the stunt choreography and the stunt work right in front of you, I think that there’s a lot of value in that type of experience.

Does this allow you to reach different audiences than those who already saw the films?

Obviously, a lot of fans are interested, but I think theatergoers in general, who maybe haven’t been as exposed to “The Hunger Games” or aren’t super fans, are going to be interested from the theater side of it. There’s been a lot of buzz and excitement in London, in the theater world, knowing that we had a new theater being built.

In general, lots of of people want to engage with experiences. We’re seeing just a huge sort of upward trend in interest, particularly amongst Gen Z and Gen Alpha audiences. Someone who maybe has read the books but hasn’t seen the movie yet will come see the stage show and then watch the movie. And I think this idea of all of it feeding each other, depending on which entry point you choose, is a really interesting thing for us as a studio to think about.

Did the pandemic turbocharge interest in live entertainment?

It’s an interest in live stage and live entertainment, and the idea of getting out again, supporting the arts and supporting shared experiences. We’ve definitely seen, thankfully, a recovery and an upswing in that area.

How big of a business is the stage aspect of Lionsgate global products and experiences?

We have three shows opening before the end of this year, and about that number slated for next year. So it really is a very busy and active space for us, and I think more in the pipeline. We probably are spending about a third of our time in this space, and I don’t see that changing.

Stuff We Wrote

Film shoots

Number of the week

$80 million

After a sleepy October, Walt Disney Co. and 20th Century Studios’ “Predator: Badlands” conquered the box office this past weekend, grossing $40 million in the U.S. and Canada for a total of nearly $80 million worldwide.

The haul is the highest global opening for any film in “Predator” franchise history, surpassing 2018’s “The Predator,” which notched $73.5 million.

The strong start for the Elle Fanning-led “Predator: Badlands” provides a hopeful start for November’s theatrical fortunes. So far this year, domestic box office revenue is about $7.2 billion, up 3.1% compared with the previous year, according to Comscore. But when compared with pre-pandemic 2019, that number is still down 24.7%.

Finally …

My colleague, Malia Mendez, wrote about a TV writer who found a second career in ceramics after the slowdown in Hollywood left him out of work. His most popular workshop — Tattoo a Mug.

Los Angeles County Museum of Art management on Wednesday declined to voluntarily recognize the union its employees announced they were forming last week. This means LACMA United cannot move forward with collective bargaining efforts until it is formalized by a National Labor Relations Board election. Complicating matters further, NLRB activities — including elections — are on hold amid the federal government shutdown.

The disconnect between staff — a clear majority of whom signed union authorization cards — and management comes at a significant moment in the museum’s history as LACMA works tirelessly to open its $720-million David Geffen Galleries. The new home for its encyclopedic permanent collection, designed by Pritzker Prize-winning architect Peter Zumthor, contains 110,000 square feet of gallery space and is scheduled to open to the public in April after more than a decade of planning, fundraising and building.

In a news release, the union noted that organizing efforts — in the works for more than two years — have taken on added urgency as workloads have increased in the face of opening the new building.

“Staff across departments — many performing demanding physical labor — are stretched thin as deadlines accelerate,” LACMA United wrote. “Without adequate protections, this pace is unsustainable and has already contributed to burnout and turnover among dedicated employees who deserve better from an institution they’ve helped build.”

The union’s organizing committee added in a statement, “We are disappointed that LACMA leadership has chosen to delay rather than embrace the democratic will of its workers. While the museum reimagines itself as a more collaborative, less hierarchical institution in its new David Geffen Galleries, it has declined to extend that same vision to its relationship with the very people who bring LACMA’s mission to life every day.”

“LACMA’s leadership has great respect for our team and for everyone’s right to make their own choice on this important issue,” Michael Govan, the museum’s director and chief executive, said in an email. “No matter the outcome, my commitment to our employees — to listen, to support them, and to continue building a strong and respectful workplace — remains unchanged.”

Management’s decision stands counter to those made by other cultural institutions across the city, including the Museum of Contemporary Art, the Academy Museum and the Natural History Museum, all of which voluntarily recognized their unions over the last six years.

LACMA United represents more than 300 workers from across all departments, including curators, educators, art installers, conservators, registrars, visitor services staff, facilities workers, researchers and designers. The union is asking for improved wages, benefits and working conditions in what has proved to be a challenging climate for museum workers across the county.

The union did not demonstrate at last week’s celebrity-packed LACMA Art + Film Gala, which was co-hosted by Leonardo DiCaprio and fashion designer Eva Chow, and raised more than $6.5 million in support of the museum and its programs.

The cuts in Hollywood just keep coming, following a sadly familiar script.

Last week it was Paramount, which laid off about 1,000 workers in the first wave of a deep staff reduction planned since tech scion David Ellison’s Skydance Media took over the storied media and entertainment company.

The cuts affected a wide swath of the company, from CBS and CBS News to Comedy Central, MTV and the historic Melrose Avenue film studio, my colleague Meg James and I reported. Another 1,000 layoffs are expected in the coming weeks.

But Paramount isn’t the only one in the media business that’s shedding jobs and payrolls.

Earlier, cable giant Charter Communications said it would lay off 1,200 people nationwide, as the company faces increased competition for its broadband internet packages. NBC News, too, laid off 150 employees last month amid declining TV ratings and lessening ad revenue.

Other recent media-adjacent layoffs included 100 cuts to Disneyland Resort’s Anaheim-based workforce and the massive 14,000 worker reduction at Amazon, including at the company’s gaming and film and TV studios.

And that doesn’t even include widespread job losses that happened earlier this year at companies such as Walt Disney Co., Warner Bros. Discovery, NBCUniversal and Six Flags Entertainment Corp.

It all adds up to a grim picture for Hollywood’s workers, who have faced a near endless marathon of economic hurdles for the last five years.

First it was the pandemic, followed by the dual writers’ and actors’ strikes in 2023, cutbacks in spending after studios splurged on streaming productions, and the outflow of production to the U.K. and other countries with lower costs than California.

Then, in January, nature struck a blow, with the fires in Altadena and the Pacific Palisades destroying many industry workers’ homes.

Topping it off, Saturday marked the first day that millions of low-income Americans lost federal food assistance due to the government shutdown that began Oct. 1. That has affected some 5.5 million Californians and probably some who work in the entertainment industry.

“It’s been one crisis after another, without enough time in between,” said Keith McNutt, western regional executive director of the Entertainment Community Fund, which provides social services for arts and entertainment professionals. “People are concerned and very worried and really trying very hard to figure out where they go from here.”

McNutt reports that the nonprofit group has already heard from some people who were recently laid off, and has experienced a sharp increase in demand for its services, particularly from those in the film and TV industry. The fund offers healthcare and financial counseling and operates a career center. It also provides emergency grants for those who qualify.

Clients include not only low-income people who are always hit hardest in downturns, but also veteran entertainment industry professionals who’ve worked in the business for 20 to 30 years.

Those who were lucky enough to have savings saw those wiped out by the pandemic, and then were unable to replenish their rainy-day funds after the strikes and industry contraction, said David Rambo, chair of the fund’s western council.

“It has been snowballing very slowly for about five years,” Rambo said.

Many in the industry are hopeful that California’s newly expanded film and television tax credit program will bring some production — and jobs — back to the Golden State. That’s what backers campaigned on when they lobbied Sacramento legislators to bolster the program. Dozens of TV shows and films have received credits so far under the revamped program, but it’ll take some time to see the results in filming data and employment numbers.

And that doesn’t help the workers who were just laid off last month. For those folks, McNutt suggests calling the fund’s health insurance team to make sure they understand their options and also to spend some time with career counselors to understand how Hollywood skills can be transferable to other employers, whether that’s on a short- or long-term basis. Most importantly, don’t isolate yourself.

“You’re not alone,” he said. “Nobody’s alone in this situation that the industry is finding itself in right now, and so reach out to your friends, reach out to your colleagues. If you’re not comfortable with that, reach out to the Entertainment Community Fund.”

Stuff We Wrote

Film shoots

Number of the week

The Los Angeles Dodgers’ wild 11-inning win on Saturday over the Toronto Blue Jays notched nearly 26 million viewers, making it the most-watched World Series game since 2017, according to Nielsen data.

The 2017 Game 7 win by the Houston Astros over the Dodgers had an audience of 28.3 million.

The Dodgers are now the first Major League Baseball team to win back-to-back championships in 25 years. On Monday, thousands of Dodgers faithful turned out for the team’s victory parade through downtown L.A.

Finally …

You’ve no doubt heard of L.A.’s famous star tours. But what about a tour of a historic cemetery?

My colleague, Cerys Davies, wrote about local historian and guide Shmuel Gonzales — or as he calls himself, “Barrio Boychik” — and his walking tour of Boyle Heights’ Evergreen Cemetery.

The cemetery is the final resting place for many of L.A.’s early movers and shakers, including the Lankershims and the Hollenbecks, and it’s also a prime example of L.A.’s multicultural history.

During its 3rd grandiose summit in Luanda that brought together a distinguished panel of leaders, including the ministers of transport from Zimbabwe and Rwanda, the secretary-general of the African Civil Aviation Commission (AFCAC), the director of strategies at Morocco’s Ministry of Transport and Logistics, the CEOs of Ethiopian Airlines and TAAG Angola Airlines, as well as representatives from the World Bank Group and the European Commission (EC), the African Union finally earmarked $30 billion for aviation infrastructure.

In his opening address, João Manuel Gonçalves Lourenço, President of the Republic of Angola and Chairperson of the African Union (AU), stressed that Africa must invest between $130 billion and $170 billion annually to lay the foundation for sustainable growth. “We must move from words to action,” President Lourenço urged. “This summit represents a decisive step toward mobilizing the resources needed to enhance connectivity and integration across our continent.”

The ambitious investment plan strategically aims at modernizing the continent’s aviation infrastructure under the Single African Air Transport Market (SAATM), according to summit reports. Lerato D. Mataboge, African Union Commissioner for Infrastructure and Energy, during the high-level session on Financing and Modernizing African Civil Aviation Infrastructure to Promote Integrated Continental Airspace and Enable Free Movement Under SAATM, emphasized aviation’s pivotal role as both an engine of integration and a cornerstone of Africa’s economic transformation.

“Aviation is not merely a mode of transport,” Mataboge stated, speaking at the session. “It is a strategic engine of continental integration and a core enabler of Agenda 2063 and the AfCFTA. The Single African Air Transport Market will only succeed if we build the modern, safe, and efficient infrastructure that Africa’s growth demands.”

Citing findings from a Continental Aviation Infrastructure Gap Analysis conducted with AFCAC, ICAO, and the World Bank, Mataboge revealed that Africa needs between $25 and $30 billion over the next decade to close critical aviation infrastructure gaps. Passenger traffic is projected to triple from 160 million in 2024 to nearly 500 million by 2050, intensifying the urgency for investment.

Key funding requirements include US$10 billion for airport and aerodrome infrastructure and $8 billion for modernizing communication, navigation, and meteorological systems. The AU’s strategy aims to mobilize $10 billion in catalytic public finance to attract an additional $20 billion in private and institutional investment. Through partnerships with Development Finance Institutions (DFIs) and AUDA-NEPAD, the AU is aligning investment priorities with SAATM and the Programme for Infrastructure Development in Africa (PIDA).

The modernization plan integrates cutting-edge technologies such as Airport Collaborative Decision-Making (A-CDM) and System-Wide Information Management (SWIM) to enable seamless continental airspace. It also incorporates renewable energy solutions at airports to attract green financing and advance sustainability goals.

“As we modernize African skies, we are doing so sustainably,” Mataboge added. “Every project we prepare is designed to meet global green standards, reduce fuel consumption and CO₂ emissions, and make African aviation an attractive asset class for the world’s growing pool of climate-focused capital.”

Mataboge reaffirmed the AU’s commitment to ensuring that a modern, efficient, and sustainable aviation network drives Africa’s economic integration, connectivity, and global competitiveness. The AU’s officials reaffirmed their focus on Africa’s most strategic priorities, including building aviation infrastructure, digital data systems, and data interoperability. The discussion underscored the importance of collaborative efforts in building a better aviation sector across Africa.

Deals and Dollars: Concrete Commitments 

The summit moved beyond dialogue to secure tangible commitments, marked by the signing of three key Memoranda of Understanding (MOUs):

– A partnership between the African Social Security Association and AUDA-NEPAD to channel African pension funds into continental infrastructure.

– An MOU with Qatar Airways establishing a $500 million endowment for renewable energy and climate-aligned industrialization.

– The establishment of the Angola Export and Trade Facility to promote regional cooperation and trade.

Ms. Nardos Bekele-Thomas, CEO of AUDA-NEPAD, reported significant progress since the previous summit in Dakar, Senegal. She announced that the AU, alongside African financial institutions, has already raised $1.5 billion to execute high-impact cross-border projects.

“The lesson from Dakar is clear: we can no longer treat financing as a fragmented market of scattered deals. We must transform it into a unified strategy,” Bekele-Thomas stated. She detailed new financial instruments, including the Alliance for Green Infrastructure in Africa’s Project Development Fund, which has achieved a first close of $118 million and is managed by Africa50.

In his contribution, African Union Commission Chairperson Mahmoud Ali Youssouf emphasized that Africa is entering a new phase of self-determination, one in which the continent must take ownership of financing, planning, and implementing its own development. He underscored that infrastructure investment is not merely technical but deeply political and strategic, vital to Africa’s economic sovereignty, competitiveness, and unity. Highlighting progress made under the PIDA framework, he called for an African-driven ecosystem for development financing through domestic resource mobilization, stronger private sector participation, and greater access to climate funds.

Echoing the urgency of the Chairperson of the African Union Commission, framed infrastructure investment as a deeply political and strategic imperative for Africa’s economic sovereignty. “We are shifting from a logic of assistance to a logic of alliance, where partners align their engagement with priorities defined by Africa itself,” he declared. He concluded with a powerful vision: “What we are building here are not merely roads and bridges. We are building an Africa that is connected, confident, and sovereign.”

There were special sessions designed to facilitate in-depth due diligence and accelerate projects toward financial close. The summit for Africa’s infrastructure development stands as a definitive moment, signaling Africa’s unified resolve to finance its own destiny and build the interconnected, prosperous future its people deserve.