Thursday, November 17, 2011
Wednesday, November 16, 2011
Tuesday, November 15, 2011
Monday, November 14, 2011
Sunday, November 13, 2011
Saturday, November 12, 2011
Friday, November 11, 2011
Thursday, November 10, 2011
Wednesday, November 09, 2011
Tuesday, November 08, 2011
Pakistan LoC build-up worries panel
NEW DELHI: Taking note of huge construction activities across the border by Pakistan, which is resulting in erection of 97 additional 'observation post' towers and 162 barracks, a Parliamentary panel has come out with a number of suggestions for the government to counter such logistic build-up and asked it to urgently implement the proposal for construction of an earthen 'bund' on the home side of the fencing.
The panel has noted that all such additional constructions along the border in Pakistan had taken place in the past eig-ht years after both the nations had agreed for a 'ceasefire' in November, 2003.
Pitching for implementation of the proposal that has been pending for over two years, the Parliamentary standing committee on home affairs has noted that the 'bund', which was constructed to provide security cover to the persons engaged in fencing work, has become "counterproductive" as it has been helping militants (during infiltration bids).
The committee had submitted its report to the Rajya Sabha chairman Hamid Ansari on November 3.
The report, while referring to the government's response, has mentioned that the Cabinet Committee on Security (CCS) is "actively considering" a proposal for the construction of the 'bund' - naka-cum-machan-(raised platform)cum fighting bunkers - and road in the Jammu region of the state.
Besides the 'bund' issue, the panel, chaired by BJP member M Venkaiah Naidu, has taken a serious view of the logistics st-rategy for border surveillance and management.
It noted that the government has not commented on the observations of the committee regarding the manning of 60km-62 km by only one battalion (nearly 1,000 personnel) that deters operational efficiency.
The panel in its report on "Border Fencing and Flood Lighting Projects along Indo-Pak borders in the Country" has also asked the government to replace floodlights and cables along the Indo-Pak border that have "outlived" their life and have become "obsolete".
"Keeping in view the fact that the floodlight equipments have outlived their life and cables have also become obsolete and damaged, the committee recommends that it is necessary to replace the existing border flood light system with utmost expedition," the 32-page report said.
The government told the committee that a proposal regarding upgrade/replacement of the existing border flood lights system in Punjab sector, with new and more illuminating devices, was under examination.
The panel has noted that all such additional constructions along the border in Pakistan had taken place in the past eig-ht years after both the nations had agreed for a 'ceasefire' in November, 2003.
Pitching for implementation of the proposal that has been pending for over two years, the Parliamentary standing committee on home affairs has noted that the 'bund', which was constructed to provide security cover to the persons engaged in fencing work, has become "counterproductive" as it has been helping militants (during infiltration bids).
The committee had submitted its report to the Rajya Sabha chairman Hamid Ansari on November 3.
The report, while referring to the government's response, has mentioned that the Cabinet Committee on Security (CCS) is "actively considering" a proposal for the construction of the 'bund' - naka-cum-machan-(raised platform)cum fighting bunkers - and road in the Jammu region of the state.
Besides the 'bund' issue, the panel, chaired by BJP member M Venkaiah Naidu, has taken a serious view of the logistics st-rategy for border surveillance and management.
It noted that the government has not commented on the observations of the committee regarding the manning of 60km-62 km by only one battalion (nearly 1,000 personnel) that deters operational efficiency.
The panel in its report on "Border Fencing and Flood Lighting Projects along Indo-Pak borders in the Country" has also asked the government to replace floodlights and cables along the Indo-Pak border that have "outlived" their life and have become "obsolete".
"Keeping in view the fact that the floodlight equipments have outlived their life and cables have also become obsolete and damaged, the committee recommends that it is necessary to replace the existing border flood light system with utmost expedition," the 32-page report said.
The government told the committee that a proposal regarding upgrade/replacement of the existing border flood lights system in Punjab sector, with new and more illuminating devices, was under examination.
LONDON: A leading organisation espousing the cause of Indian and non-EU professionals has strongly opposed the recommendation of a key committee that the salary threshold for professionals seeking to permanently settle in the UK be raised considerably.
Raising the threshold as recommended by the Migration Advisory Committee (MAC) will make thousands of Indian and non-EU professionals working here ineligible for permanent settlement, which is called the Indefinite Leave to Remain (ILR).
The latest report of the MAC says: "To ensure greater differentiation in the selection decision, we suggest implementing a minimum annual pay threshold. This could reasonably be between 31,000 pounds and 49,000 pounds per year".
The Highly Skilled Migrant Programme (HSMP) Forum, which successfully challenged Home Office's immigration decisions in the past, has criticised the recommendation and said that the "whole idea of introducing such an income criteria is a blatant mockery of the system".
The current criterion for ILR is to show the salary drawn at the time of applying for previous extension.
Indian and other non-EU professionals can apply for ILR after working for five years and demonstrating continued employment.
If the MAC recommendation is accepted by the Home Office, which usually accepts its recommendations, it will mean that those earning an annual salary below 49,000 pounds or the final agreed figure will not be able to apply for the ILR.
However, MAC chairman David Metcalf has stated that some exceptions should be made in the public sector jobs "which will contribute to future economic growth".
Amit Kapadia, Executive Director of HSMP Forum said: "This is nothing but victimisation of migrants".
"After letting them stay on for five years and profiting from their taxes, the government cannot impose a new criteria to evict them from the country after they have invested their time and earnings into building a life in the UK, and contributed towards the UK economy".
The HSMP forum, he said, believed that introducing the income criterion will only create more problems and insecurity for the "already troubled migrants, who are hanging to their stability by a thread due to constant immigration changes".
Kapadia said: "We vehemently oppose these changes. The government is constantly victimising migrants and treating them like a punching bag to score their political points".
"A migrant who is good to come here, pay taxes and contribute to the UK economy, is the best and the brightest and should not be forced out from the UK when she seeks settlement.
"This is exploitation of the highest order. This is not good for the UK economy and UK's image in the long run".
Raising the threshold as recommended by the Migration Advisory Committee (MAC) will make thousands of Indian and non-EU professionals working here ineligible for permanent settlement, which is called the Indefinite Leave to Remain (ILR).
The latest report of the MAC says: "To ensure greater differentiation in the selection decision, we suggest implementing a minimum annual pay threshold. This could reasonably be between 31,000 pounds and 49,000 pounds per year".
The Highly Skilled Migrant Programme (HSMP) Forum, which successfully challenged Home Office's immigration decisions in the past, has criticised the recommendation and said that the "whole idea of introducing such an income criteria is a blatant mockery of the system".
The current criterion for ILR is to show the salary drawn at the time of applying for previous extension.
Indian and other non-EU professionals can apply for ILR after working for five years and demonstrating continued employment.
If the MAC recommendation is accepted by the Home Office, which usually accepts its recommendations, it will mean that those earning an annual salary below 49,000 pounds or the final agreed figure will not be able to apply for the ILR.
However, MAC chairman David Metcalf has stated that some exceptions should be made in the public sector jobs "which will contribute to future economic growth".
Amit Kapadia, Executive Director of HSMP Forum said: "This is nothing but victimisation of migrants".
"After letting them stay on for five years and profiting from their taxes, the government cannot impose a new criteria to evict them from the country after they have invested their time and earnings into building a life in the UK, and contributed towards the UK economy".
The HSMP forum, he said, believed that introducing the income criterion will only create more problems and insecurity for the "already troubled migrants, who are hanging to their stability by a thread due to constant immigration changes".
Kapadia said: "We vehemently oppose these changes. The government is constantly victimising migrants and treating them like a punching bag to score their political points".
"A migrant who is good to come here, pay taxes and contribute to the UK economy, is the best and the brightest and should not be forced out from the UK when she seeks settlement.
"This is exploitation of the highest order. This is not good for the UK economy and UK's image in the long run".
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
