Consortium of Indian Defence Websites
https://forums.bharat-rakshak.com/
why was this not done so far?The CBI is likely to approach Interpol for a Red Corner Notice against absconding billionaire jewellers Nirav Modi and Mehul Choksi who are allegedly the brains behind the over $2 billion scam in Punjab National Bank, agency sources said. http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/c ... 941656.ece
He attended Monaco Grand Prix this year. He certainly has a second passport which allowed him entry into Monaco.Suraj wrote: * Mallya's passport has been cancelled. He cannot travel out of UK, since he has no government issued travel document (left India March 2016, passport canceled April 2016).
What the cluck ? I haven't seen that he's actually left UK to the GP. Any press reports about it ? There's clearly more that needs to be done to establish whether people have another passport and don't report this to GoI so that their citizenship can be formally renounced.panduranghari wrote:He attended Monaco Grand Prix this year. He certainly has a second passport which allowed him entry into Monaco.Suraj wrote: * Mallya's passport has been cancelled. He cannot travel out of UK, since he has no government issued travel document (left India March 2016, passport canceled April 2016).
LONDON: The British Parliament's foreign affairs committee has slammed the government for "turning a blind eye" to the role London's financial centre plays in laundering the proceeds of Russian corruption, saying it helps the Kremlin finance its aggressive foreign policy.
The committee says in a report published today that despite the tough rhetoric over the nerve agent attack on a former spy in Britain earlier this year, President Vladimir Putin's allies were able to continue "business as usual" in the UK.
The committee says "the use of London as a base for the corrupt assets of Kremlin-connected individuals is now linked to a wider Russia strategy with implications for the UK's national security."
It adds that failing to act signals that "the UK is not serious about confronting the full spectrum of President Putin's offensive measures."
IIRC, he has had a virtual pit stop built with latest audio/video/communication gadgets in his mansion in UK from and he communicate's with his F1 team in real time during the races.panduranghari wrote:He attended Monaco Grand Prix this year. He certainly has a second passport which allowed him entry into Monaco.Suraj wrote: * Mallya's passport has been cancelled. He cannot travel out of UK, since he has no government issued travel document (left India March 2016, passport canceled April 2016).
LONDON — India is no rush to do a post-Brexit trade deal with Britain and will demand easier access for Indians to migrate to Britain as part of a future trade relationship, the country's high commissioner has said.
Many Brexiteers, including Trade Secretary Liam Fox, argue leaving the European Union will allow Britain to sign prosperous new trade deals with global economic powerhouses, including India, the USA and China.
Speaking to Politico, Yashvardhan Sinha, the Indian High Commission in London, said India would like to the "best deal possible" with Britain, however, it is not a priority for its prime minister, Narendra Modi.
"I don’t think India is in a rush. I think India would like certainly, and I’m sure the U.K. would too … to get the best deal possible," Sinha said.
Sinha also reiterated previous warnings that India will want a trade deal with post-Brexit Britain to make it easier for Indian nationals to travel to and work the UK.
"I think for us it is very important that if we need to step up our engagement we need to have that easier access, the ease of travel has to be looked into," he said.
In November, Sinha told The Telegraph that Britain must be prepared to accept more Indian migrants as a price of any free trade deal agreed between London and New Delhi.
"You’ve all read about issues of freer mobility of professions. That is something right up there as far as India is concerned," he said.
"I’m not talking about unfettered access or unrestricted travel, I’m talking about movement of professionals, movement of doctors, technicians, engineers. I think both sides will benefit from this exchange."
That could be dangerous political ground for Theresa May, who remains committed to bringing net migration to the UK down to below 100,000 and has vowed to "respect" the Brexit vote by "taking back control" of national borders.
Britain currently cannot sign its own free trade deals as part of the EU's customs union. It will be able to sign new deals during the proposed transition period, but these cannot be implemented until the transition is over.
Writing for Business Insider on Thursday, trade expert Sam Lowe warned that countries will make tricky and in some cases unacceptable demands in free trade deal negotiations with post-Brexit Britain.
"When it comes down to it, I wouldn’t be surprised if the most valuable lesson we learn from our first post-Brexit forays into the world is that, when lofty free trade ambition runs up against domestic political reality, the UK is really quite 'European' after all," the Centre for European Reform research fellow wrote.
Sinha also expressed disappointment with the "very dated or very incomplete" knowledge of Indian culture and history he has encountered in Britain.
“I don’t know whether it is what is taught in schools here … what is taught about India for instance, whether it is the old Raj-based history, or whether anything at all," he told Politico.
"As a people we are so close and there is so much interaction, so we need to do something there in terms of reaching out to the youth, to important decision-makers in the country."
Thank you. I've stated this many times here in the past few months - India is not going to give post-Brexit UK the deal it would like. We're going to get the deal they're compelled to give us due to the circumstances they've placed themselves in. Despite what the UK fans here post, the Indian government (and this is not party specific) does not value enhanced ties with the UK. The UK has put itself in a precarious position due to Brexit. One does not offer lifelines to desperate parties - one extracts the most they can out of their circumstances, and gives out the least required in return.IndraD wrote:http://uk.businessinsider.com/india-in- ... ?r=US&IR=T
LONDON — India is no rush to do a post-Brexit trade deal with Britain and will demand easier access for Indians to migrate to Britain as part of a future trade relationship, the country's high commissioner has said.
Many Brexiteers, including Trade Secretary Liam Fox, argue leaving the European Union will allow Britain to sign prosperous new trade deals with global economic powerhouses, including India, the USA and China.
Speaking to Politico, Yashvardhan Sinha, the Indian High Commission in London, said India would like to the "best deal possible" with Britain, however, it is not a priority for its prime minister, Narendra Modi.
"I don’t think India is in a rush. I think India would like certainly, and I’m sure the U.K. would too … to get the best deal possible," Sinha said.
Sinha also reiterated previous warnings that India will want a trade deal with post-Brexit Britain to make it easier for Indian nationals to travel to and work the UK.
So when are you returning to India?ashish raval wrote:I still think migrants should not be made sticking point as it creates brain drain but instead we should ask for thousands of scholarships for Indian students who should return back to India after studying and contribute to Indian growth story. We can get argue for better business access that would fetch 10x times more growth in India than sending few migrants to earn piddly sum in these nations and wasting their lives settling in a foreign land. If there are 10 Facebook like organisations opened after students returning back to India, it would have contributed enough to Indian growth story that zillions of NRI ever did by staying outside results.
Nothing about India-UK relations, but some of your points on labor laws are legitimate.ashish raval wrote:I am really surprised how people view Brexit as a negative thing when in reality none of those crap doomsday scenario has even close to materialisation and conversely UK has been growing steadily even in such a bumpy scenario. Ombaba even came down as preacher to advice People how to vote..lol. People were loftily claiming London is dead Frankfurt is new London and how bankers will be seeping champagne in moulin rouge in 6 months time. Instead Google, Apple and Facebook are making London their European headquarters. 400+ sky scrapers are under development in London surely there are no more than 20 russian billionaires which are supposedly making London run, funnily enough as claimed by some posters, Japanese raise the money and build their next generation electric vehicles. UK is still overflowing with migrants arriving busloads on a daily basis from Europe everyday and I don't see any sign of slowing down of its service sector and students still flock to three of top world 5 places in the world to study.
As far as I know every UK banks and businesses has been running every scenario and not a single company has left UK despite Brexit being less than a year away minus the transition period. If I was british business worried enough I would have packed the bag and left for Paris but hey try firing an employee in France and thy shall see the consequence!!! Why do you think TCS do not hire people from Berlin or Paris?
...
Ok. I understand the point about transit visa and that is something we as a country can take it up in greater business access and exchange forums. Alternatively, India can replicate what they do to Indian business concerns. The whole purpose of brexit was to stop free movement of labour from continent to UK and stop undercutting UK labour and distort minimum wage market. We can push for scheme allowing graduate to work here for couple of years before they can transition to work visa as company knows their capability well enough. More often than not, I have felt that people who has stayed here after studies could have made much more difference in India. I can cite few examples eho returned to India and are principal investigators or pharma laboratory heads now whereas here they could have made less difference here compared to back home. In this context, I believe pushing for people making their livelihood here is basically bleeding Indian talent who can make more difference in India and become famous. This is precisely I am dont see labour movement being a sticky point. Business access, student staying after graduation to learn the ropes & experience yes, transit facilities yes.Suraj wrote: India's fundamental demand is greater access to UK for Indian labour and students. A regime of anti-immigrant hardliners in UK will never work out in improving these ties. The bar they need to clear to win favour with India is VERY high - one cannot even transit Heathrow airport without a transit visa, an incredibly stupid requirement from them of us. I've never transited using LHR as a result.
You are completely wrong here. It is *you* who is asserting historical baggage in favor of UK ties (English language, culture, ties, food yadda yadda). I am the one who's talking business and business alone. You can replace UK with Burkina Faso, and the argument is exactly the same in my case.ashish raval wrote:I dont see why we can be friends with other colonists like Japan, france, germans and spain but not with britain all based on historical baggage. Afterall business is business, betterment of people on fastest possible way should be our aim and to us, it is a big export market nothing else. Once India achieve self sufficiency in technology and production, we can play ball like chinese do.
It's not about students alone, its about work visas for Indian companies like Infosys, TCS etc. There is no comparison between immigration from the rest of Europe or Gulf countries to immigration from India. Indian immigration is mostly high tech. We don't care what UK policies are with respect to the other countries. We wan't better access to Indian high tech workers.ashish raval wrote:Ok. I understand the point about transit visa and that is something we as a country can take it up in greater business access and exchange forums. Alternatively, India can replicate what they do to Indian business concerns. The whole purpose of brexit was to stop free movement of labour from continent to UK and stop undercutting UK labour and distort minimum wage market. We can push for scheme allowing graduate to work here for couple of years before they can transition to work visa as company knows their capability well enough. More often than not, I have felt that people who has stayed here after studies could have made much more difference in India. I can cite few examples eho returned to India and are principal investigators or pharma laboratory heads now whereas here they could have made less difference here compared to back home. In this context, I believe pushing for people making their livelihood here is basically bleeding Indian talent who can make more difference in India and become famous. This is precisely I am dont see labour movement being a sticky point. Business access, student staying after graduation to learn the ropes & experience yes, transit facilities yes.Suraj wrote: India's fundamental demand is greater access to UK for Indian labour and students. A regime of anti-immigrant hardliners in UK will never work out in improving these ties. The bar they need to clear to win favour with India is VERY high - one cannot even transit Heathrow airport without a transit visa, an incredibly stupid requirement from them of us. I've never transited using LHR as a result.
I dont see why we can be friends with other colonists like Japan, france, germans and spain but not with britain all based on historical baggage. Afterall business is business, betterment of people on fastest possible way should be our aim and to us, it is a big export market nothing else. Once India achieve self sufficiency in technology and production, we can play ball like chinese do.
How degrading. We are asking some country to make it easier for our people to migrate to that country. So we do not need educated educated and qualified people in India? Do we want UK to grant even easier access for our criminals? Ashamed of our babus and their tark-vitark. And nobody is this insult on India? Shame.LONDON — India is no rush to do a post-Brexit trade deal with Britain and will demand easier access for Indians to migrate to Britain as part of a future trade relationship, the country's high commissioner has said.
The report may be misguided.rsingh wrote:How degrading. We are asking some country to make it easier for our people to migrate to that country. So we do not need educated educated and qualified people in India? Do we want UK to grant even easier access for our criminals? Ashamed of our babus and their tark-vitark. And nobody is this insult on India? Shame.LONDON — India is no rush to do a post-Brexit trade deal with Britain and will demand easier access for Indians to migrate to Britain as part of a future trade relationship, the country's high commissioner has said.
It's not degrading. There are three aspects to capitalism - goods, capital and labour. The west once wanted free movement of goods to suit their mercantilism. Now that they're flush with wealth, they want easy movement of capital so that they can gain from the growth in developing countries. But labour ? They are richer, and don't want cheaper labour moving in and depressing wages.rsingh wrote:How degrading. We are asking some country to make it easier for our people to migrate to that country. So we do not need educated educated and qualified people in India? Do we want UK to grant even easier access for our criminals? Ashamed of our babus and their tark-vitark. And nobody is this insult on India? Shame.LONDON — India is no rush to do a post-Brexit trade deal with Britain and will demand easier access for Indians to migrate to Britain as part of a future trade relationship, the country's high commissioner has said.
I had mistakenly believed that the Indian government spent huge sums of money on training doctors to provide medical care to Indian people. I stand corrected. It’s an export industry.Suraj wrote:
You have 10 doctors. You can employ them at home, each making Rs.1000, or you can send them abroad, where they earn multiples of that and each send Rs.10,000 home . The local economy gains more from exporting that labour even if arguably that sector has a deficit. It's basic economics.
.
Just a small intervention from my part. Do you think those doctors send money to home? First thing they do is try to stay for ever. Buy a lil apartment or cottage. And that is it. AT Delhi Airport Departure there is a big line of UK Indians trying to change their unspent Rupees back to pounds. Most of the remittences come from unskilled or semiskilled workers. Once you start doing hamstring race ( work to pay for car and need car to go to work), You can't save much.Suraj wrote:Your argument is a logical fallacy that asserts that "labour" == "physician" , and as such, meaningless.
Cost arbitrage of sending skilled labour abroad where they earn and send back foreign currency is a completely normal and legitimate economic paradigm. The entire Gulf employment sector is about it. India is the world's largest labour exporter. Our entire 'remittances' figure is essentially earnings from exported labour, and we have continuously ranked as the nation with the largest or second largest annual remittance earnings for quite some time now.
You have 10 doctors. You can employ them at home, each making Rs.1000, or you can send them abroad, where they earn multiples of that and each send Rs.10,000 home . The local economy gains more from exporting that labour even if arguably that sector has a deficit. It's basic economics.
India earns:
* $300 billion a year exporting goods
* $130-140 billion a year exporting services
* $70 billion a year exporting labour (remittances)
These are all legitimate avenues of economic gain. As the world's biggest earner of remittances, i.e. the nation with the largest labour export earnings, it's entirely our business to insist that access to our labour be priority in any bilateral discussions.
The cost of training labour needs to exceed $70 billion a year for there to be an economic deficit . The central budget is $200 billion odd . Training of all labour combined , doesn’t even come close to $70 billion . We run a surplus .eklavya wrote:I had mistakenly believed that the Indian government spent huge sums of money on training doctors to provide medical care to Indian people. I stand corrected. It’s an export industry.Suraj wrote:
You have 10 doctors. You can employ them at home, each making Rs.1000, or you can send them abroad, where they earn multiples of that and each send Rs.10,000 home . The local economy gains more from exporting that labour even if arguably that sector has a deficit. It's basic economics.
.
Not only skilled indian labor sends money back home but they also start doing these things in their adopted landrsingh wrote:Just a small intervention from my part. Do you think those doctors send money to home? First thing they do is try to stay for ever. Buy a lil apartment or cottage. And that is it. AT Delhi Airport Departure there is a big line of UK Indians trying to change their unspent Rupees back to pounds. Most of the remittences come from unskilled or semiskilled workers. Once you start doing hamstring race ( work to pay for car and need car to go to work), You can't save much.Suraj wrote:Your argument is a logical fallacy that asserts that "labour" == "physician" , and as such, meaningless.
Cost arbitrage of sending skilled labour abroad where they earn and send back foreign currency is a completely normal and legitimate economic paradigm. The entire Gulf employment sector is about it. India is the world's largest labour exporter. Our entire 'remittances' figure is essentially earnings from exported labour, and we have continuously ranked as the nation with the largest or second largest annual remittance earnings for quite some time now.
You have 10 doctors. You can employ them at home, each making Rs.1000, or you can send them abroad, where they earn multiples of that and each send Rs.10,000 home . The local economy gains more from exporting that labour even if arguably that sector has a deficit. It's basic economics.
India earns:
* $300 billion a year exporting goods
* $130-140 billion a year exporting services
* $70 billion a year exporting labour (remittances)
These are all legitimate avenues of economic gain. As the world's biggest earner of remittances, i.e. the nation with the largest labour export earnings, it's entirely our business to insist that access to our labour be priority in any bilateral discussions.
And the dekhonomonist says:eklavya wrote:^^^^^
The UK does not export capital. It runs a huge current account deficit, which is balanced by a capital account surplus. The UK imports capital. Fact.
ECONOMISTS often worry about a country’s current-account deficit. Turkey’s is around 4% of GDP. Last year Britain’s was around 4.5% of GDP. America has also run a large current-account deficit for years. What does this mean, and should people worry about it?
At its simplest, a country running a current-account deficit is a net borrower from abroad. Think of it as a measure of the flow of a country’s assets from residents to non-residents. If Britain is running a current-account deficit, for instance, it means that non-British residents are accumulating British assets. A deficit usually arises when a country is importing more than it is exporting (ie, it is running a trade deficit). But it can also arise when overseas investors’ returns on assets held in the domestic economy exceed the returns held by domestic investors in overseas economies.
A current-account deficit is not necessarily a bad thing. The main reason Britain has run a large current-account deficit in recent years is because its investments abroad, largely in Europe, have performed badly (hardly a surprise given the weak economic performance of Europe in recent years). So the flow of investment income back to Britain has been low. But overseas investors in Britain have seen fairly decent returns. With Britain generally a stable, well-run place, it is not surprising that foreign investors choose to park money in Britain each year. Their investments prop up the value of the pound, and thus allow Britons to enjoy cheaper imports. Their capital can also be put to good use, in the form of investment.
Yet a big deficit is a vulnerability. If investors decide that they don’t much like the look of a country, they can refuse to finance the deficit, sending the currency plunging. (The worry is that precisely this may happen to Britain, if it falls out of investors’ good books.) And to finance a current-account deficit can require selling off assets, such as factories and firms, which can ultimately damage the economy’s productive potential. So although a big current-account deficit does not necessarily set alarm bells ringing, it is worth keeping an eye on.
Also, the UK has a negative net International Investment Position, notwithstanding the significant depreciation of GBP since the Brexit vote.The financial account is the counterpart to the current account, showing how the UK is financing its borrowing from the rest of the world. Despite the economic uncertainties surrounding the EU referendum result in 2016, the UK remained attractive to outside investors and the UK was able to fund its current account deficit with investments into the UK.
The net inflow of investments into the UK rose to £119.6 billion in 2016, the highest recorded in the series history which started in 1946. The UK continued to attract inward investment after the EU referendum, with Quarter 2 (April to June) 2016 registering £171.0 billion of inward investments (the highest in just under six years). Most of this amount was attributable to direct investments and portfolio investments made in the UK (see Figure 17). Direct investments are frequently characterised by stable and long-lasting economic links, as well as the provision of technology and management, therefore the financing of the current account deficit with direct investment inflows could be seen as a more sustainable approach for the UK economy.
However, the net IIP liability position narrowed substantially from 18.4% of nominal gross domestic product (GDP) in 2015 to 1.1% of nominal GDP in 2016 (see Figure 18), which was a result of total assets increasing by £1,356.7 billion to £10,944.7 billion, the highest value of assets held in five years. However, due to the make up of the IIP as explained previously, the increase in total assets is not necessarily driven by an increase in investment abroad.