Indian Union Minister Hardeep Puri emphasises commitment to attract investors in energy sector
New Delhi: Hardeep Singh Puri, Indian Union Minister for Petroleum and Natural Gas on Friday emphasised the country's commitment to fostering a predictable, stable, and growth-oriented business environment in the energy market.
Participating in a discussion on the sidelines of India Energy Week 2025 in New Delhi, the Union Minister highlighted the government's commitment to provide ease of business in the energy sector, mentioning the Oilfields (Regulation and Development) Amendment Bill, 2024 which was tabled in the Parliament.
The Minister said that the moves by the government aim to attract international investments and further strengthen India's position on the global energy map.
Puri stressed that the law's enactment will end the unpredictability, increasing confidence in the sector.
He further emphasised that India's rapidly expanding energy needs, driven by its ambition to become a developed nation by 2047, would create substantial opportunities in both traditional and green energy sectors.
He stressed that India's approach is not just about securing its own energy future, but about contributing to the global energy market, with collaborations in clean energy technologies already in place with countries like Italy, the UK, Brazil, and the Middle East.
Moreover, Puri underscored India's willingness to share innovative solutions with the world.
He noted that technologies like clean cooking and energy-efficient products developed in India have the potential to be scaled internationally, contributing to the global effort to transition to cleaner energy.
Going further, Union Minister Puri also spoke about India's efforts for the collaborations and said, "Apart from the discussions taking place in Washington, one of them said that the USIBC (US-India Business Council) want to set up a small informal working group with us to look at the application of AI. The words which struck me from that conversation were frugality, efficiency and innovation. So it's a very positive thing. Today, we've had fantastic meetings with the USIBC. We've had excellent meetings with representatives and ministers from the Gulf, people from Latin America, Petrobras, and Oil India Ltd."
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Observer
3 hours ago
- Observer
UK and India discuss cooperation amidst Lammy's visit
NEW DELHI: Britain and India on Saturday discussed expanding their "counter-terrorism" collaboration following recent fighting between India and Pakistan, Britain's foreign minister said after meeting Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi. British foreign minister David Lammy is the highest-profile Western official to have visited both New Delhi and Islamabad since the South Asian neighbours agreed to a ceasefire last month after their worst fighting in nearly three decades. The latest tensions began in April after the killing of 26 men in Indian Kashmir that New Delhi blamed on "terrorists" backed by Pakistan, a charge Islamabad denied. India then attacked what it called "terrorist infrastructure" in Pakistan, leading to escalation from both sides until a May 10 ceasefire. "We want the situation to be maintained, but of course we recognise fragility, particularly in the backdrop of terrorism, terrorism designed to destabilise India," Lammy said in an interview at the residence of the British High Commissioner in New Delhi. "We are keen to continue to work with our Indian partners on counter-terrorism measures." He said he discussed the next steps with both Modi and Indian Foreign Minister S Jaishankar, but gave no specifics. Last year, India and Britain discussed combating the financing of terrorism, cooperation between law enforcement and judicial bodies; and information sharing. Lammy said he also discussed boosting trade between the world's fifth and sixth largest economies. The countries concluded talks for a free trade deal early last month. "I know that Prime Minister Keir Starmer is very much looking forward to coming to India very soon to sign the free trade agreement," Lammy said. "There is so much that our two nations can continue to do together." Meanwhile, Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney invited his Indian counterpart Narendra Modi to the upcoming Group of Seven summit in a phone call, as the two sides look to mend ties after relations soured in the past two years. The leaders agreed to remain in contact and looked forward to meeting at the G7 summit later this month, a readout from Carney's office said. India is not a G7 member but can be invited as a guest to its annual gathering, which will be held this year in Kananaskis in the Canadian province of Alberta, from June 15 to 17. "Glad to receive a call from Prime Minister (Carney)... thanked him for the invitation to the G7 Summit," Modi said in a post on X. Modi also stated in his post on Friday that India and Canada would work together "with renewed vigour, guided by mutual respect and shared interests." Bilateral ties deteriorated after Canada accused India of involvement in a murder and of attempting to interfere in two recent elections. Canada expelled several top Indian diplomats and consular officials in October 2024 after linking them to the murder and alleged a broader effort to target Indian dissidents in Canada. New Delhi has denied the allegations and expelled the same number of Canadian diplomats in response. India is Canada's 10th largest trading partner and Canada is the biggest exporter of pulses, including lentils, to India. Carney, who is trying to diversify trade away from the United States, said it made sense for the G7 to invite India, since it had the fifth-largest economy in the world and was at the heart of a number of supply chains. "In addition, bilaterally, we have now agreed, importantly, to continued law enforcement dialogue, so there's been some progress on that, that recognises issues of accountability. I extended the invitation to Prime Minister Modi in that context," he told reporters in Ottawa. — Reuters
Muscat Daily
4 days ago
- Muscat Daily
Good news expected soon on India-Oman FTA: Minister
Muscat – India and Oman are close to finalising a Free Trade Agreement (FTA), with some 'good news' expected very soon regarding the signing of the deal, according to India's Minister of Commerce and Industry, Piyush Goyal. As reported by several Indian media outlets on Monday, Goyal stated that negotiations between India and Oman on the proposed free trade agreement are progressing towards a conclusion. The talks gained renewed momentum following Goyal's visit to Muscat in January this year. The negotiations for the agreement, officially known as the Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement (CEPA), formally commenced in November 2023. 'I think you will see some good news very soon on the Oman FTA,' Goyal told reporters during his official visit to France, when asked whether the agreement could be concluded this year, according to PTI. Goyal was in France to hold discussions with French leaders and businesses aimed at enhancing trade and investment ties. He was also scheduled to attend a mini-ministerial meeting of the World Trade Organization (WTO) on Tuesday. Oman is India's third-largest export destination among the GCC countries. India already has a similar agreement in place with another GCC member, the United Arab Emirates, which came into effect in May 2022. India's key imports from Oman include petroleum products and urea, which together account for over 70% of total imports. Other significant imports from Oman comprise polymers of propylene and ethylene, petcoke, gypsum, chemicals, and iron and steel. Speaking about such FTAs, Goyal remarked that these agreements not only promote trade in goods and services, but also strengthen supply chains and instill confidence among businesses on both sides through stable policies and predictability, according to the PTI report. 'So, in a way, it's a big message when you conclude an FTA,' he added.
Observer
31-05-2025
- Observer
I'm normally a mild guy. Here's what's pushed me over the edge
When I was a baby pundit, my mentor, Bill Buckley, told me to write about whatever made me angriest that week. I don't often do that, mostly because I don't get angry that much — it's not how I'm wired. But this week, I'm going with Bill's advice. On Monday afternoon, I was communing with my phone when I came across a Memorial Day essay that Notre Dame political scientist Patrick Deneen wrote in 2009. In that essay, Deneen argued that soldiers aren't motivated to risk their lives in combat by their ideals. He wrote, 'They die not for abstractions — ideas, ideals, natural right, the American way of life, rights, or even their fellow citizens — so much as they are willing to brave all for the men and women of their unit.' This may seem like a strange thing to get angry about. After all, fighting for your buddies is a noble thing to do. But Deneen is the Lawrence Welk of postliberalism, the populariser of the closest thing the Trump administration has to a guiding philosophy. He's a central figure in the national conservatism movement, the place where a lot of Donald Trump acolytes cut their teeth. In fact, in his acceptance speech at the Republican National Convention, JD Vance used his precious time to make a point similar to Deneen's. Vance said, 'People will not fight for abstractions, but they will fight for their home.' Elite snobbery has a tendency to set me off, and here are two guys with advanced degrees telling us that regular soldiers never fight partly out of some sense of moral purpose, some commitment to a larger cause — the men who froze at Valley Forge, the men who stormed the beaches at Normandy and Guadalcanal. But that's not what really made me angry. It was that these little statements point to the moral rot at the core of Trumpism, which every day disgraces our country, which we are proud of and love. Trumpism can be seen as a giant attempt to amputate the highest aspirations of the human spirit and to reduce us to our most primitive, atavistic tendencies. Before I explain what I mean, let me first make the obvious point that Deneen's and Vance's assertions that soldiers never fight for ideals is just plain wrong. Of course warriors fight for their comrades. And of course there are some wars such as Vietnam and Iraq, where Vance served, where the moral causes are unclear or discredited. But when the moral stakes are made clear, most soldiers are absolutely motivated in part by ideals — even in the heat of combat. For his book 'For Cause and Comrades: Why Men Fought in the Civil War,' the great historian James M McPherson read about 25,000 letters and 249 diaries from soldiers who fought in that war. Their missives were filled with griping about conditions, about the horrors of war — they had no need in their private writings to sugarcoat things. But of the 1,076 soldiers whose writings form the basis of his book, McPherson found that 68 per cent of the Union soldiers and 66 per cent of the Confederate soldiers explicitly cited 'patriotic motivations' (as they interpreted them) as one reason they went into combat. Other soldiers were probably also motivated by their ideals, but they found it too obvious to mention. 'Sick as I am of this war and bloodshed as much oh how much I want to be home with my dear wife and children,' a Pennsylvania officer wrote, 'every day I have a more religious feeling, that this war is a crusade for the good of mankind.' An Indiana man wrote, 'This is not a war for dollars and cents, nor is it a war for territory — but it is to decide whether we are to be a free people — and if the Union is dissolved I very much fear that we will not have a republican form of government very long.' People who are more theologically advanced than I have a name for that kind of dehumanisation: spiritual warfare. All of us humans have within us a capacity for selfishness and a capacity for generosity. Spiritual warfare is an attempt to unleash the forces of darkness and to simultaneously extinguish the better angels of our nature. Trump and Vance aren't just promoting policies; they're trying to degrade America's moral character to a level more closely resembling their own. Years ago, I used to slightly know both Deneen and Vance. Vance has been in my home. We've gone out for drinks and coffee. Until Inauguration Day, I harbored him no ill will. Even today, I've found I have no trouble simultaneously opposing Trump policies and maintaining friendship and love for friends and family who are Trump supporters. In my experience, a vast majority of people who support Trump do so for legitimate or at least defensible reasons. But over the past four months, a small cabal at the top of the administration — including Trump, Vance, Miller and Office of Management and Budget Director Russell Vought — have brought a series of moral degradations to the nation those Union soldiers fought and died for: the betrayal of Volodymyr Zelenskyy and Ukraine, the cruel destruction of so many scientists' life projects, the ruination of PEPFAR. According to the HIV Modeling Consortium's PEPFAR Impact Tracker, the cuts to that programme alone have already resulted in nearly 55,000 adult deaths and nearly 6,000 dead children. We're only four months in. Moral contempt is an unattractive emotion, which can slide into arrogance and pride, which I will try to struggle against. In the meantime, it provoked this column from a mild-mannered guy on a beautiful spring day. — The New York Times. David Brooks Brooks is a book author and political and cultural commentator
