Indian lawmakers to review aviation safety weeks after Air India crash
NEW DELHI, - A panel of Indian lawmakers will review safety in the country's civil aviation sector and has invited several industry and government officials to answer questions on July 9, with topics set to include Air India's recent plane crash.
The upper house of India's parliament has asked airport operators, air traffic controllers and airlines including Air India and IndiGo to take part in a comprehensive review of passenger safety, according to a memo drafted for the meeting and seen by Reuters.
The gathering comes after the June 12 Air India disaster that killed 260 people, including 241 on board, when a Boeing 787-8 jet crashed within a minute of take-off from India's Ahmedabad. Investigators are still probing what caused the world's worst aviation accident in a decade.
Though the memo did not mention the crash, R K Chaudhary, a lawmaker on the panel, told Reuters that it planned to discuss the matter internally and during the meeting.
"If we will not raise questions on it, they will not become vigilant about these issues," he said.
The Indian government has said data from the front recorder of the crashed plane was accessed by a team led by India's Aircraft Accident Investigation Bureau, with the U.S. National Transportation Safety Board.
Air India has been getting warning notices for compliance lapses in recent days.
India's aviation watchdog last month warned the airline over "repeated and serious violations" related to pilot duty scheduling. It has also warned Air India for breaching safety rules after three of its Airbus planes flew despite being overdue checks on escape slides.
This article was generated from an automated news agency feed without modifications to text.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Indian Express
28 minutes ago
- Indian Express
What India is hoping for on US deal: Up to 20% tariff differential vis-a-vis China rate
AS THE India–US trade talks enter their final decisive phase in Washington DC, policy makers here hope that three implicit assumptions of New Delhi materialise, the most important being a steady differential between the US tariffs on China and India. Despite US President Donald Trump's vacillations on trade policy, the government is confident that the administration in Washington DC will maintain a differential of 10-20 per cent in tariffs between China and countries such as India. 'The deal needs to be clinched precisely for this gap to be maintained,' an official said. The official said the US is driving hard for market access in politically sensitive sectors such as agriculture and dairy, and there are strong red lines here. But a section of officials also reckon it is important to ensure a good differential between the US tariffs on India and China, for which a deal is vital. 'The question is whether the Indian negotiators would have to settle for a limited early- harvest type of deal, or would they have to turn away from the negotiations for now, let the July 9 deadline pass, and then rebuild efforts to bridge the gaps. A full-scale deal looks out of the question for now,' another official with experience of trade negotiations said. Second, there is now a realisation that cutting tariffs across segments, especially intermediate goods, might be a net positive for India. New Delhi did back out at the last minute from signing the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (a trade deal among Asia-Pacific countries including China) given the sensitivities of agri livelihoods. But there is greater receptiveness now within India's policy circles to cut tariffs on some industrial goods, including automobiles, and some agri products of interest to the Americans such as apples, almonds, walnuts, avocados and spirits. There is also more openness on the GM (genetically modified) foods issue too. Also, India has headroom to import more from the US, especially in three sectors – crude, defence equipment and nuclear, to manage Trump's constant references to the trade gap. Third, there is a growing view that the baseline tariffs are here to stay. So, effectively, what India would be negotiating for is a rate between 10 per cent and 26 per cent. Prior to Trump's taking over in January, the effective US duty on India was just 4 per cent, and there were virtually no non-tariff barriers. What is more consequential today is the effective duty on Chinese products on a landed basis across US ports in commodity categories where Indian producers are reasonably competitive. The net tariff differential with India, and how that curve continues to move, is of particular interest here, given the belief that Washington DC would ensure a reasonable tariff differential between China and India. Officials said a 20 per cent differential is expected to tide over some of India's structural downsides — infrastructural bottlenecks, logistics woes, high interest cost, the cost of doing business, corruption, etc. On the face of it, Trump's announcement of 55 per cent tariffs on China on June 14 could theoretically mean a nearly 30 percentage point difference with respect to the 26 per cent on India. But there are a few caveats: for the Trump administration, whose tariff proposals generally have had a half life of less than 10 days, it is not clear how long the new tariffs announced on China after the latest round of talks between the two sides in London would last. Also, in the talks earlier in Geneva in May that led to a temporary truce, US tariffs on Chinese products were brought down to 30 per cent from 145 per cent and Beijing slashed levies on US imports to 10 per cent, while promising to lift barriers on critical mineral exports. While in a social media post, Trump claimed the US would impose tariffs on Chinese goods of 55 per cent, the catch here is that the figure included tariffs put in place during Trump's first term. So, while the 55 per cent tariff on imported Chinese goods might seem to retain a reasonable differential over the tariffs imposed by the US on India, this figure of 55 per cent crucially, includes a 25 per cent pre-existing tariff that was imposed by Trump in his first term, and that the Biden administration persisted with. The remaining components of this 55 per cent tariff are the 10 per cent baseline 'reciprocal' tariff and the 20 per cent tariff imposed initially by the Trump administration on China citing fentanyl trafficking. So, the real tariff calculation on China should ideally exclude the 25 per cent pre-existing tariff, which pretty much negates the impression of a big tariff difference with India; at least for now. The upside for India is that the trade deal under discussion with the US, which New Delhi is working to clinch before July 19, could see a further drop in tariffs from the current 26 per cent to closer to 10 per cent. The problem, though, is that China's leverage in its trade discussions with the US could mean a further downward revision in tariffs from the effective 30 per cent that was arrived upon at the Geneva talks. Though the details of the deal were still unclear, analysts predicted China seems to have gained the upper-hand after China's rare earth restrictions prompted US carmakers, including Ford Motor and Chrysler, to cut production. Ravi Dutta Mishra is a Principal Correspondent with The Indian Express, covering policy issues related to trade, commerce, and banking. He has over five years of experience and has previously worked with Mint, CNBC-TV18, and other news outlets. ... Read More Anil Sasi is National Business Editor with the Indian Express and writes on business and finance issues. He has worked with The Hindu Business Line and Business Standard and is an alumnus of Delhi University. ... Read More
Indian Express
28 minutes ago
- Indian Express
Strawberry & pomegranate up, cereals down: Agriculture output report
Reflecting changing food habits and consumption patterns, and how farmers are adjusting to this, new data released by the Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation (MoSPI) shows that the Gross Value of Output (GVO) of fruits like strawberries and pomegranates and vegetables like parmal (parwal) and mushrooms recorded the biggest increase over the last decade or so. Also, while the share of meat in the GVO of agriculture and allied sectors rose from 5 per cent in 2011-12 to 7.5 per cent in 2023-24 (at constant prices), the share of cereals fell from 17.6 per cent to 14.5 per cent during the same period. Gross Value of Output, or GVO, is a measure of production that refers to the total value of the items produced before subtracting the value of inputs used in production. According to the ministry's report on 'Value of Output from Agriculture and Allied Sectors' released on June 27, for the period between 2011-12 and 2023-24, production of strawberries rose by more than 40 times, from a GVO of Rs 1.32 crore to Rs 55.4 crore (at constant prices). Without adjusting for inflation, the strawberry GVO increased by almost 80 times to Rs 103.27 crore. Among the other fruits and vegetables which saw a sharp rise in GVO are: parmal (parwal), which increased by nearly 17 times to Rs 789 crore; pumpkin which increased by nearly 10 times to Rs 2,449 crore; pomegranate, which increased by over four times to Rs 9,231 crore; and mushroom, which increased by three-and-a-half times to Rs 1,704 crore. Meanwhile, improved processing helped increase the GVO of condiments and spices, particularly dry ginger (up 285 per cent at Rs 11,004 crore). Indicating that people consumed more animal products as incomes rose, the data also showed that the share of meat in the GVO of agriculture and allied sectors increased from 5 per cent to 7.5 per cent (at constant prices). However, the rise in the GVO of the meat group was 131 per cent, well below that of strawberry. Among the other fruits which showed an increase in GVO are watermelon (119 per cent), cherry (99 per cent), banana and mosambi (both 88 per cent), and muskmelon (87 per cent). While this is a key indicator from a nutrition perspective, the headline numbers from a consumption perspective aren't as impressive, with the share of fresh fruits in rural Monthly Per Capita Consumption Expenditure (MPCE) edging up to only 2.66 per cent in 2023-24, from 2.25 per cent in 2011-12, as per the results of the Household Consumption Expenditure Survey (HCES) released last year. For urban India, the share actually declined from 2.64 per cent to 2.61 per cent. It is worth noting that even as the share of fresh fruits in monthly consumption expenditure rose only marginally in rural areas, people across more income categories are now eating them. The data reveals a structural shift in Indian agriculture, from traditional staples like cereals toward high value crops like fruits, vegetables and spices. This transition, according to MoSPI, reflects technological shift, changing consumer preferences, market opportunities and policy orientation toward nutritional security and export potential. According to a 2024 paper co-authored by Shamika Ravi, member of the Economic Advisory Council to the Prime Minister, the proportion of rural households consuming fresh fruits rose from 63.8 per cent in 2011-12 to 90.3 per cent in 2022-23. Further, their analysis suggested a 'very dramatic increase' in the percentage of households that were eating fresh fruits, particularly among the bottom 20 per cent of rural households. On the other hand, staples like cereals saw a decrease, with the share in urban MPCE falling from 6.61 per cent in 2011-12 to 3.74 per cent in 2023-24, and from 10.69 per cent to 4.97 per cent in rural areas over the same period. The findings of MoSPI's agriculture output value report released last week were in line with this, with the share of cereals in the GVO of agriculture and allied sectors having declined from 17.6 per cent in 2011-12 to 14.5 per cent in 2023-24. In line with Engel's Law — as household income increases, the proportion of income spent on food decreases — the most recent HCES for 2023-24 showed a fall in the share of food in MPCE, from 52.90 per cent in 2011-12 to 47.04 per cent in 2023-24 for rural areas, and from 42.62 per cent to 39.68 per cent in urban areas. Siddharth Upasani is a Deputy Associate Editor with The Indian Express. He reports primarily on data and the economy, looking for trends and changes in the former which paint a picture of the latter. Before The Indian Express, he worked at Moneycontrol and financial newswire Informist (previously called Cogencis). Outside of work, sports, fantasy football, and graphic novels keep him busy. ... Read More
News18
34 minutes ago
- News18
Janata Experiment Failed As Post-Emergency Coalition Leaders Sought To Undermine Sangh's Role
As mere anti-Congressism proved to be a weak glue to keep the Janata Parivar parties together, similarly, anti-BJPism would not take the INDIA bloc very far It's been about a week since the commemoration of the 50th anniversary of the imposition of the Internal Emergency by the Government of India headed by Indira Gandhi started. Unfortunately, the posters and banners put up by the Bharatiya Janata Party units have already started to fade. Newspapers in their own way tried to commemorate the dark chapter in post-Independence history by commissioning articles. These articles have been written mostly by those who were part of the movement itself and ended up being anecdotal in their write-up. The best among the plethora of articles has been the one written by Kuldip Nayar, who was editor of The Indian Express when Emergency was imposed, and this article was published on the morning of June 26, 1975. Last week, The New Indian Express, one of the heirs to the Express legacy, reproduced the article on its editorial page. Reels and posts on the social media handles on the atrocities of Emergency, too, have gone dry. What has really been missing are articles that could have indicated with firm references whether Emergency or the movement against it managed to change the trend of Indian politics, or was it just an aberration? The imposition of Emergency and the valiant movement against it led by Jayaprakash Narayan did not bring a structural change in the Indian polity, as did the implementation of the Mandal Commission report for reservations in government jobs for candidates from the Other Backward Classes in 1990. No wonder the role of the Mandal Commission has been much more discussed and debated, but again, not in as much quantum as the Ramjanmabhoomi movement. This is a very sharp indicator that the turmoil in society, which started with the Mandal report implementation, has somewhat settled for a stable polity following the political success of an essentially social Kamandal (Ramjanmabhoomi) movement. This brings us to the question, was the decision to impose Emergency and the movement against it have a social quotient too? In the understanding of this writer, there was no element in either the action or the reaction which affected society the way it rattled the polity. The biggest evidence of this premise is that the Janata Party got dismantled with the same speed and momentum with which it was formed. What was the main reason for it? The Janata Parivar disowning the contribution of the Sangh Parivar in the movement and the role it played in the electoral defeat of the Congress in the 1977 general elections. In a recent newspaper interview, RSS sarkaryavah (general secretary) Dattatreya Hosabale mentioned that the Socialists and the Sangh had common ground in the movement against Emergency. 'The underground movement was sustained greatly because of the Sangh's personal contacts and through the help of their families. To run an underground movement, it is necessary to escape from the eyes of the police… The RSS had this informal contact and communication," Hosabale mentioned in the interview. However, soon after coming to power, a struggle within the Janata government began. The lack of a cohesive ideology beyond anti-Congressism made it difficult to sustain the government and present a unified front, leading to its eventual collapse. Despite their shared goal of restoring democracy, the alliance, when it came to sustaining the government, fell prey to internal conflicts, particularly over the association of members of the government with the RSS. In turn, it facilitated the return of the Congress to power within three years of being voted out. The Janata experiment, though in the short term contested a constitutional dictatorship vigorously, it failed to bring a long-term paradigm shift either in polity or in society. Without the organisational structure of the Sangh, the Janata Parivar was no match for the Congress's political behemoth, which was essentially built by Mahatma Gandhi during the freedom struggle. Though in 1989, the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) once again became part of the move to replace the Congress government, it kept a distance and did not settle to be part of the National Front governments, first led by Vishwanath Pratap Singh and later Chandra Shekhar. It instead focused on the social agenda of cultural nationalism and harvested the political fruits of the movement in the formation of the first NDA government in 1998 under Atal Bihari Vajpayee, which remained in office till 2004, and the second government in 2014 under Narendra Modi, which continues to rule. There is a very strong message from the failure of the Janata experiment for the present-day Opposition too. As mere anti-Congressism proved to be a weak glue to keep the Janata Parivar parties together, similarly, anti-BJPism would not take the INDIA bloc very far. What's today called the BJP's election machinery is a synonym for the Sangh's well-entrenched social networking. There indeed are limitations to building political movements solely around an anti-incumbency sentiment. The writer is author and president, Centre for Reforms, Development & Justice. Views expressed in the above piece are personal and solely those of the author. They do not necessarily reflect News18's views. tags : BJP congress emergency rss Location : New Delhi, India, India First Published: July 02, 2025, 04:08 IST News opinion Opinion | Janata Experiment Failed As Post-Emergency Coalition Leaders Sought To Undermine Sangh's Role
