Latest news with #IndianWorkers
Malay Mail
a day ago
- Business
- Malay Mail
Sibu's new Sri Maha Mariamman Temple undergoes final touch-ups, on schedule to open on July 7 (VIDEO)
SIBU, June 12 — Construction work on the new Sri Maha Mariamman Temple at Jalan Orchid here is almost completed with only final touch-ups remaining. Temple president Manogaran Krishnasamy said everything is expected to be completed by the end of this month, in time for the opening on July 7. 'The construction work was delayed for about four years due to the Covid-19 pandemic. We are grateful that the temple is nearly complete, accommodating around 400 devotees in Sibu. 'In light of this, we wish to extend our heartfelt thanks to the Sarawak government, through the Unit for Other Religions (Unifor), for their significant assistance, as well as to the public and everyone who has contributed in various ways,' he told The Borneo Post at the site today. The new ornate building is situated next to the existing temple. 'The temple was built in 1920, which was just a small hut back then. Later on, this existing building was built in 1971,' said Manogaran. He pointed out the cost of construction was nearly RM2 million from the initial RM1.1 million due to rising building material costs and wages. Skilled workers from India were involved in the temple's intricate design. — The Borneo Post pic Initially, 10 skilled workers from India were involved in the project but as it nears completion, only four remain. 'Each worker earns a salary ranging from RM3,000 to RM4,000. Yes, they are skilled workers, which is why they all have certificates,' he explained. Manogaran said 16 stone sculptures were recently brought in from India. 'The shipping expenses amounted to nearly RM22,000 for transporting these statues from there to here,' he said. He added 63 statues were already built in the temple by the specialist workers. On July 3-7, there will be a final prayer session involving some 30 priests, including six from India. 'For this final prayer session, we estimate to spend almost RM150,000 for expenses such as airfares, accommodation, and other related expenses. That's the reason we require further assistance from Unifor or other organisations. 'This will be followed by the 48-day prayers; each day will cost around RM2,000 totalling RM96,000, which is separate from the expenses of the final prayer,' Manogaran said. The current temple building is seen framed by the new archway. — The Borneo Post pic The current double-storey building accommodating the temple will be repurposed. 'We need to use the top floor as a hall and the ground floor will be for the priest's accommodation and related purposes. So, for now, we don't have any plan yet to knock it down. 'Moreover, the building is of significant historical and cultural importance, having been constructed in 1971,' he added. — The Borneo Post
Yahoo
17-05-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
UK-India trade deal: how the social security arrangements will work
When you buy through links on our articles, Future and its syndication partners may earn a commission. A landmark trade deal has been agreed between the UK and India but there are concerns over the National Insurance concessions it contains for Indian workers. The UK government claimed the deal was a win for working people and British business, pointing to reduced tariffs on goods such as whisky, gin and chocolate. It is an agreement that has been in the making since 2022 and touted as a "big Brexit boon", said The Guardian. But since the announcement there have been "political fireworks", said Politico, namely over a perceived relaxation of social security or National Insurance payments for Indian workers in the UK. The UK-India trade deal includes what is known as a "double contributions convention", where "neither Indian nor British workers" will need to pay National Insurance contributions "in both their home country and the one they are working in", said Politico. Instead, workers will only need to pay it in one nation for the first three years of their placement. But the announcement means ministers have been "left on the defensive", said The Times, as critics claim Indian workers will be "paying less in tax than their British counterparts for doing the same job". It comes after the government controversially increased employer NI payments during the Autumn Budget. Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch described the NI issue in the UK-India trade deal as "two-tier taxes from two-tier Keir". Business secretary Jonathan Reynolds has insisted the deal "would not impact British workers", said the BBC, stating the UK has 16 agreements designed to prevent "double taxation of work". Such agreements cover more than 50 countries, "including the US, EU and South Korea". Even influential Tory figures such as Oliver Dowden and former Brexit minister Steve Baker have backed the deal, said The Guardian, highlighting that opt-outs for seconded workers "were routine in trade deals". Delhi has also argued that its workers "would not receive any of the benefits that National Insurance is supposed to pay for", said The Times, such as pensions and welfare payments. The exemption also doesn't apply to all Indian nationals working in the UK, said FullFact, "though this hasn't been made clear". Trade minister Douglas Alexander told LBC the exemption would be for "a very specific and limited group of Indian business people for a period of three years". Indian workers seconded here will still have to pay the UK immigration health surcharge on NHS care, said FullFact. Plus, the arrangement is reciprocal. Consequently, British workers sent by their companies to work in India will benefit as "they won't have to make Indian social security payments for up to three years".
The Independent
07-05-2025
- Business
- The Independent
UK-India deal does not undercut British workers, says Trade Secretary
The UK's new trade deal with India does not undercut British workers, the Trade Secretary has said. Opposition politicians have criticised a provision in Tuesday's deal exempting some temporary Indian workers from national insurance payments, claiming this would undercut British staff. On Wednesday, Jonathan Reynolds described the claim as 'completely false', telling the BBC: 'There is no situation where I would ever tolerate British workers being undercut through any trade agreement we would sign. That is not part of the deal.' Under the terms of the agreement, staff working for an Indian company who transferred to the UK for less than three years would pay into the Indian social security system rather than paying into both British and Indian systems as they do now. UK workers temporarily in India would remain subject to national insurance, but be exempt from Indian social security levies. Mr Reynolds pointed to similar deals with 50 other countries, including the EU, the US, Canada and Japan, saying that the previous Conservative government signed a similar deal exempting Chilean workers from national insurance for five years. Seconding Indian staff to the UK will also involve additional costs such as the immigration health surcharge and relocation costs, Mr Reynolds said. He added that the overall impact of the deal would mean more tax revenue for the Treasury, and said he expected more UK workers to be seconded to India as a result of British companies gaining access to Indian government procurement contracts. Speaking to Sky News, he added: 'This is not a tangible issue. This is the Conservatives – and Reform – unable to accept that this Labour Government has done what they couldn't do and get this deal across the line.' Mr Reynolds also dismissed reports that the Home Office had not been informed about the terms of the deal until shortly before it was announced, saying it was 'absolute nonsense reporting'. The deal includes some easing of rules on 'business mobility' for temporary visitors and up to 1,800 chefs, yoga instructors and musicians providing contracted services. But the Government has insisted it will involve 'no impact' on the immigration system or immigration numbers. The deal, which has lowered tariffs on UK exports including whiskey, gin and cars as well as imports of clothing from India, is estimated to add '£4.8 billion to GDP per year' from 2040. But the Tories have seized on the national insurance contribution (NICs) exemptions, known as a double contributions convention, as an example of what they claimed was 'two-tier taxes' under the Labour Government. Shadow business minister Dame Harriett Baldwin told MPs the arrangement would be 'subsidising Indian labour while undercutting British workers'. 'A double contribution convention will come at a significant cost to the British taxpayer and to British businesses,' she told the Commons on Tuesday. Reform UK leader Nigel Farage described the deal as 'truly appalling', adding: 'This Government doesn't give a damn about working people. The Labour Party has this time in a big, big way betrayed working Britain.'
Daily Mail
06-05-2025
- Business
- Daily Mail
ALEX BRUMMER: This two-tier trade deal is a shameful missed opportunity and a blunder of the first order
Free trade deals are meant to provide a boon to consumers, enrich the economy – and be fair to both sides. Keir Starmer 's landmark accord with Indian strongman Narendra Modi is none of the above, at least when it comes to the British people. At the very moment our economy buckles under the weight of Labour's swingeing increase to employers' National Insurance contributions, the PM has agreed that many Indian workers will be welcomed with open arms into Britain, free from the obligation to pay employment taxes for three years. Predictably, the move has provoked outrage. As senior Tory Robert Jenrick put it: 'Starmer has hiked National Insurance on Brits while giving an exemption to Indian migrants. British workers come last in Starmer's Britain.' With their expertise in technology and accounting, their fluency in English and their undeniable work ethic, Indian immigrants have long made a valuable contribution in this country. But exempting them from paying National Insurance, even temporarily, is unconscionable after Rachel Reeves squeezed an extra £40 billion from British taxpayers – killing consumer and business confidence and bringing the economy screeching to a standstill. Of course, greater access to India, one of the world's largest and fastest-growing markets, is useful for the Government after Donald Trump's tariff war wreaked havoc on the global economy. Keir Starmer and Rachel Reeves have, since the US President's so-called 'Liberation Day' on April 2, repeatedly promised a trade deal with the US. Yet despite Reeves holding talks with US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, nothing has materialised. (Cruelly, the Americans look closer to forging their own trade deal with India than they do with the UK.) After three years of negotiations, the Government has boasted that the new deal with India will eventually be worth £4.8 billion in extra trade to Britain over ten years. That is frankly pitiful from an economy the size of India – one to which Britain already has centuries-old ties. Tory leader Kemi Badenoch, a former business secretary, has declared she would never have signed the new agreement. Why? Because, in her view, it breached three red lines. It allows for tax rebates to Indian residents in the UK not available to people already in the country; it allows too many visas for Indian incomers; and it penalises British industries that are already under pressure, from aluminium to ceramics. Yes, it is welcome that barriers against UK car exports, whisky and other goods sold into India will fall. Similarly, levies charged on India's exports of shoes and clothing to Britain will be cut, lowering prices in shops here. But the focus of this trade deal is on physical trade. The cornerstone of the British economy is services – financial, legal, and business. And these appear to have been given short shrift. The Law Society claimed that the deal's failure to include legal services, a powerhouse of what economists call our 'invisible exports', was a shameful missed opportunity. Also anxious are British farmers. The Business Department has claimed that the new deal will 'lock in' reductions in agricultural goods, but experts fear that Indian farming practices, including the use of pesticides banned in Britain, will undermine this country's high food standards and pose health risks to customers. It seems extraordinary that Britain should be lowering the barriers to Indian farm products while holding firm against allowing 'chlorinated chicken' and hormone-enhanced beef from the United States. Starmer's critics – Tesla billionaire Elon Musk among them – like to call him 'two-tier Keir' given his apparent fondness for the unequal treatment of different groups in Britain. To me, Labour's decision to offer Indian employees a break on National Insurance is only the latest and most brazen example of this unedifying nickname. It is also explosive in the current political climate, for obvious reasons. Overall, this deal is a blunder of the first order – and Starmer may yet pay a serious price for it.
Telegraph
06-05-2025
- Business
- Telegraph
Our destiny is not with Europe but India and the rest of the world
The India-UK Free Trade Agreement has finally been signed, removing 90 per cent of Indian tariffs on UK exports and UK tariffs on Indian imports such as clothes and footwear. Negotiations have been going on for several years, having begun back in the period when Liz Truss was trade secretary. The Tories were keen to complete a deal and seemed close several times, potentially with some controversy had there been easy visas included. It will be interesting to see the details on the visas once there is time to study the full agreement. Another contentious area was the so-called Double Contribution Convention. On the one hand this might seem to help facilitate high-income Indian workers temporarily basing themselves in the UK, by avoiding their incomes being double taxed (taxed by both the Indian and UK authorities). That might even provide some much-needed welcoming signals, following the non-dom status abolition. However, the other component to the Convention is that there is agreement that contributions made whilst in each other's countries will create entitlements. UK negotiators were keen that that did not create a situation in which Indians could emigrate to the UK and immediately be entitled to benefits. (In other trade agreements there are entitlement provisions, but full entitlement in the UK requires a sufficiently long UK contribution record.) Suspicious reviewers, some of whom worry that this might make Indian workers cheaper to hire than British equivalents, will scrutinise the legal details closely. A further set of issues may concern the degree of control, if any, that the agreement offers over imports from China into India passing through into the UK. This may be particularly sensitive in the context of any upcoming UK-US trade deal. These caveats offered, this agreement is surely positive, potentially the most significant UK trade deal, so far, enabled by Brexit, perhaps even bigger than the deal with Japan, and by some metrics the largest trade deal India (historically notorious for its high import duties and scepticism about trade deals) has ever done. It illustrates the capacity of the UK to be attractive to trade partners outside Europe and the conceptual and strategic errors of the attempted 'EU reset'. Europe is not the UK's future. The EU can be close friends and allies over matters such as Ukraine, and perhaps there are still minor tweaks we can make to our trade deal with the EU over academic research collaboration and the like. But, ultimately, the UK has reach and interests that extend far beyond Europe. We have made trade agreements with Japan, Australia, New Zealand, and the host of countries in the CPTPP. We now have an agreement with India. We may yet do a deal with the US. Britain is not a regional European player. It is a global player and has been such for hundreds of years. We should embrace that destiny, not run from it into a European cul-de-sac comfort zone. Big prizes still await us. Let's seize them.
