What is the G-20
The Group of Twenty (G-20) Finance Ministers and Central Bank Governors was established in 1999 to bring together systemically important industrialized and developing economies to discuss key issues in the global economy. The inaugural meeting of the G-20 took place in Berlin, on December 1516, 1999, hosted by German and Canadian finance ministers.
Mandate
The G-20 is an informal forum that promotes open and constructive discussion between industrial and emerging-market countries on key issues related to global economic stability. By contributing to the strengthening of the international financial architecture and providing opportunities for dialogue on national policies, international co-operation, and international financial institutions, the G-20 helps to support growth and development across the globe.
Origins
The G-20 was created as a response both to the financial crises of the late 1990s and to a growing recognition that key emerging-market countries were not adequately included in the core of global economic discussion and governance. Prior to the G-20 creation, similar groupings to promote dialogue and analysis had been established at the initiative of the G-7. The G-22 met at Washington D.C. in April and October 1998. Its aim was to involve non-G-7 countries in the resolution of global aspects of the financial crisis then affecting emerging-market countries. Two subsequent meetings comprising a larger group of participants (G-33) held in March and April 1999 discussed reforms of the global economy and the international financial system. The proposals made by the G-22 and the G-33 to reduce the world economy's susceptibility to crises showed the potential benefits of a regular international consultative forum embracing the emerging-market countries. Such a regular dialogue with a constant set of partners was institutionalized by the creation of the G-20 in 1999.
Membership
The G-20 is made up of the finance ministers and central bank governors of 19 countries:
- Argentina
- Australia
- Brazil
- Canada
- China
- France
- Germany
- India
- Indonesia
- Italy
- Japan
- Mexico
- Russia
- Saudi Arabia
- South Africa
- South Korea
- Turkey
- United Kingdom
- United States of America
The European Union, who is represented by the rotating Council presidency and the European Central Bank, is the 20th member of the G-20. To ensure global economic fora and institutions work together, the Managing Director of the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the President of the World Bank, plus the chairs of the International Monetary and Financial Committee and Development Committee of the IMF and World Bank, also participate in G-20 meetings on an ex-officio basis. The G-20 thus brings together important industrial and emerging-market countries from all regions of the world. Together, member countries represent around 90 per cent of global gross national product, 80 per cent of world trade (including EU intra-trade) as well as two-thirds of the world's population. The G-20's economic weight and broad membership gives it a high degree of legitimacy and influence over the management of the global economy and financial system.
Achievements
The G-20 has progressed a range of issues since 1999, including agreement about policies for growth, reducing abuse of the financial system, dealing with financial crises and combating terrorist financing. The G-20 also aims to foster the adoption of internationally recognized standards through the example set by its members in areas such as the transparency of fiscal policy and combating money laundering and the financing of terrorism. In 2004, G-20 countries committed to new higher standards of transparency and exchange of information on tax matters. This aims to combat abuses of the financial system and illicit activities including tax evasion. The G-20 also plays a signficant role in matters concerned with the reform of the international financial architecture.
The G-20 has also aimed to develop a common view among members on issues related to further development of the global economic and financial system and held an extraordinary meeting in the margins of the 2008 IMF and World Bank annual meetings in recognition of the current economic situation. At this meeting, in accordance with the G-20s core mission to promote open and constructive exchanges between advanced and emerging-market countries on key issues related to global economic stability and growth, the Ministers and Governors discussed the present financial market crisis and its implications for the world economy. They stressed their resolve to work together to overcome the financial turmoil and to deepen cooperation to improve the regulation, supervision and the overall functioning of the worlds financial markets.
Chair
Unlike international institutions such as the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), IMF or World Bank, the G-20 (like the G-7) has no permanent staff of its own. The G-20 chair rotates between members, and is selected from a different regional grouping of countries each year. In 2009 the G-20 chair is the United Kingdom, and in 2010 it will be South Korea. The chair is part of a revolving three-member management Troika of past, present and future chairs. The incumbent chair establishes a temporary secretariat for the duration of its term, which coordinates the group's work and organizes its meetings. The role of the Troika is to ensure continuity in the G-20's work and management across host years.
Former G-20 Chairs
- 1999-2001 Canada
- 2002 India
- 2003 Mexico
- 2004 Germany
- 2005 China
- 2006 Australia
- 2007 South Africa
- 2008 Brazil
Meetings and activities
It is normal practice for the G-20 finance ministers and central bank governors to meet once a year. The last meeting of ministers and governors was held in São Paulo, Brazil on 8-9 November 2008. The ministers' and governors' meeting is usually preceded by two deputies' meetings and extensive technical work. This technical work takes the form of workshops, reports and case studies on specific subjects, that aim to provide ministers and governors with contemporary analysis and insights, to better inform their consideration of policy challenges and options.
Towards the end of 2008 Leaders of the G-20 Countries meet in Washington. See the Declaration and action plan from the Washington Summit (PDF 72KB) . This meeting remitted follow up work to Finance Ministers. In addition to their November meeting in order to take forward this work in advance of the Leaders summit in London on 2nd April Finance Ministers and Central Bank Governors will also meet in March 2009. A deputies meeting will be held in February 2009 to prepare for the Ministers meeting.
G-20 Events
Deputies Meeting 1st February 2009
Officials Workshop Financing for Climate Change 13th & 14th February 2009
Deputies Meeting 13th March 2009
Finance Ministers and Central Bank Governors Meeting 14th March 2009
Officials Workshop on Global Economy 25th 26th May 2009
Deputies Meeting 27th & 28th June 2009
Officials Workshop on Sustainable Financing for Development July 2009
Deputies Meeting 3rd & 4th September 2009
Finance Ministers and Central Bank Governors Meeting 4th & 5th September 2009
Finance Ministers and Central Bank Governors Meeting 6th & 7th November 2009
Interaction with other international organizations
The G-20 cooperates closely with various other major international organizations and fora, as the potential to develop common positions on complex issues among G-20 members can add political momentum to decision-making in other bodies. The participation of the President of the World Bank, the Managing Director of the IMF and the chairs of the International Monetary and Financial Committee and the Development Committee in the G-20 meetings ensures that the G-20 process is well integrated with the activities of the Bretton Woods Institutions. The G-20 also works with, and encourages, other international groups and organizations, such as the Financial Stability Forum, in progressing international and domestic economic policy reforms. In addition, experts from private-sector institutions and non-government organisations are invited to G-20 meetings on an ad hoc basis in order to exploit synergies in analyzing selected topics and avoid overlap.
External communication
The country currently chairing the G-20 posts details of the group's meetings and work program on a dedicated website. Although participation in the meetings is reserved for members, the public is informed about what was discussed and agreed immediately after the meeting of ministers and governors has ended. After each meeting of ministers and governors, the G-20 publishes a communiqué which records the agreements reached and measures outlined. Material on the forward work program is also made public.
 | Finance departments can give a boost to broader reforms to improve performance and financial management. |
The proposal to set up a National Higher Education Finance Corporation is welcome.
Debating in a knowledge vacuum
Not a single evaluation of NREGA has been conducted that would throw light on implementation issues hobbling the programme.
Maoists kill MP's son in Chhattisgarh
Raipur, Sep 26 (IANS) In a daring attack, suspected Maoists in Chhattisgarh Saturday shot two sons of Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) leader and Bastar Lok Sabha MP Baliram Kashyap, killing one of them, police said.
"Maoists fired several rounds at Kashyap's sons, Dinesh and Tansen, when they were at a Mahashthami Durga Puja celebration in Bastar district," a top police official told IANS.
According to police sources, Tansen succumbed to bullet injuries at the Maharani Hospital in Jagdalpur, the district headquarters of Bastar.
Source: Indo-Asian News Service
26/09/2009
Recession hits hard Durga Puja business in Bengal
Kolkata: Recession has hit hard the export of Durga Puja idols. Potters are getting fewer orders from Bengalis abroad for Durga images that normally do booming business this time of the year."Last year Kumartuli sent 46 idols. This year it has dropped to 34," idol maker Babu Pal, secretary of the Kumartuli Mritshilpa Sanskriti Samity, an association of idol makers, told IANS.
Added Prodyut Paul: "I usually send six to seven idols. But for the last two years our business is suffering. This year I have sent only four idols."
Prodyut Paul's family has been in idol-making business for over 50 years. His grandfather Gorachand Paul began the tradition.
"I make 24-25 idols ever year, out of which I export one or two," Basudeb Rudra Pal told IANS.
The idols are exported to Britain, the US, Australia, Malaysia, Canada, South Africa and Indonesia.
Most bookings are done online. Many artists have their own websites. The prices for Durga idols along with accompanying images range between Rs.5,000 and Rs.150,000.
Kumortuli (also spelt Kumartuli) is a traditional potters' quarter in northern Kolkata. The artisans supply clay idols of Hindu gods and goddesses to community pujas in Kolkata and its neighbourhood and export them too.
There are around 100 artisans working in the dingy earthen houses in Banamali Sarkar Lane.
Artisans start exporting idols to foreign countries two-three months before the Durga Puja because it takes at least takes 45 days to reach the destination by ship.
Till four years back the artisans used to send earthern idols abroad but now they send fibre glass idols, which are much lighter, easy to transport and long lasting.
"This has also to some extent affected our business as these idols are long lasting our non-resident Bengali clients will not require to change idols fast," another artisan said.
Source: Indo-Asian News Service
25/09/2009
PM warns against premature withdrawal of stimulus package
Pittsburgh: Prime Minister Manmohan Singh Friday warned against "premature" withdrawal of the stimulus package for revival of the global economy hit by worst crisis since the Great Depression and to resist the temptation to resort to protectionist pressures.
"First, the problem must be tackled at its root by ensuring the quickest possible return to normalcy in the global economy. This requires a commitment that we will not undertake any premature withdrawal of stimulus," he said, addressing the G-20 Summit here hosted by US President Barack Obama.
"We must certainly plan for an orderly exit when the time is right, but that time is not now. The global economy may be bottoming out, but it is not expected to reach 3 per cent growth until the end of 2010," he said.
In the address at the Summit attended by world leaders belonging to the developed countries and major emerging economies, Singh made a strong pitch for a restoring the momentum of growth in the developing world and said there was need to replace lost export demand and to expand investment.
Singh expressed confidence that despite a drought that will effect agricultural production, India expects to grow by 6.3 percent in 2009-2010 and then recover to 7 to 7.5 percent growth next year.
After growing at 9 per cent per year for four years the economy slowed down to 6.7 per cent in 2008-09.Print Print
"The prospects of convergence, which seemed bright before the crisis, have receded. We must take steps to counter these developments and restore the momentum of growth in the developing world," the Prime Minister said.
26 Sep 2009, 0943 hrs IST
 |
| Union Finance Minister Pranab Mukherjee performs puja at Durga Mandir in his ancestral village Mirati in Birbhum district of West Bengal on Friday, Sept 25 2009. (PTI) |
Air defence along LAC, LoC to be strengthened
Statesman News Service
NEW DELHI, 25 SEPT: As part of its modernisation plan, the Indian Air Force (IAF) is strengthening its air defence by putting in place a series of special mountain and light-weight radars along the Line of Actual Control (LAC) in Ladakh bordering China as also the Line of Control (LoC) with Pakistan.
"Since it is difficult to monitor the mountain terrain, the IAF has undertaken the exercise of placing different types of radars in place along the 667-km LAC with China. Don't keep getting locked up in LAC, there is also the LoC," Western Air Command (WAC) chief Air Marshal N A K Browne told reporters here ahead of the preparations for the 77th anniversary of IAF on 8 October.
"The Air Force is keenly examining the option of special type of radars, which we call the mountain radars and we are also looking at low level light weight radars (LLLWR). So there is a definite plan," Air Marshal Browne said when asked about future air defence systems.
On Chinese helicopters intruding into Ladakh, he said, "I don't know why so much attention is being given to the China issue. Enough has been said. What we need to do is to keep everyone engaged in the neighbourhood and keep our preparedness level for all contingency."
On the strength of IAF being one-third of China's as recently observed by the Chief of Air Staff, Air Marshal P V Naik, Air marshal Browne said "it is not numbers issue alone and how old or new is my equipment. Everything has to be factored into the equation. We are extremely well balanced on all fronts."
Asked whether the development of airfields near the Line of Actual Control (LAC) like Nyoma, Daulat Beg Oldi and Fukche, was being done in the wake of the recent Chinese moves along the border, he said it has "nothing to do with threat. The support is for the army and also it gives you far more options to convey men and equipment to that area."
The IAF had recently landed a fixed wing aircraft, AN-32, at Nyoma airfield which is about 25 km from the LAC. On the MMRCA trials, he said "F16 and F18 trials are over and currently the French aircraft Rafael is undergoing cold weather trials in Leh to be followed the Russian, Swedish and Eurofighter. Everything is going on track and there is no hiccup."
Asked whether IAF would be in charge of providing air cover during the Commonwealth Games in the Capital next year, Air Marshal Browne said "we have always provided foolproof air cover for January 26 and August 15 and when a request comes, we will take on the task but nothing so far." Meanwhile, preparations are in full swing for celebrating IAF's 77th anniversary on 8 October.
While the movements are meant to strengthen air-power capabilities against Pakistan and China, they are also replacements for squadrons of older fighter aircraft that the IAF is phasing out.
"It is a compromise figure," Singh told a news conference at the conclusion of the G-20 Summit in Pittsburgh, during which the Prime Minister also said the emergency financing for the Fund has been successfully completed.
"We now have to address the issue of the Fund Quota increase by early 2011. We have agreed to shift five per cent to countries that are under-represented," Singh said.
The Prime Minister said this is a compromise figure because as of now the quota for developing countries is about 44 per cent. "The BRIC countries, the poor countries, have suggested a rebalancing to the extent of seven per cent, in which case the developing countries would have more than 50 per cent," he said.
"So this is a compromise. The demand was seven per cent, we got five per cent," Singh said.
"...we have weathered the crisis relatively well given the circumstances...In 2009, despite a drought, which will affect agricultural production, we expect to grow by around 6.3 per cent in 2009-10 and then recover to 7 to 7.5 per cent growth next year," Prime Minister Manmohan Singh said at the Plenary Session of G-20 meeting here.
He said this relatively strong performance is partly due to the strong stimulus measures introduced in the second half of 2008-09, which have been continued in this fiscal.
However, the global financial crisis has affected the developing world significantly, Singh said adding an estimated 90 million people in the developing world are likely to be pushed below the poverty line.
This may lead to social and political tensions undermining the national consensus in support of much needed structural reforms and adjustment.
He said the prospects of convergence among the nations was bright before the crisis but has now receded.
"We must take steps to counter these developments and restore the momentum of growth in the developing world," Singh said, adding the nations must take a commitment that they will not withdraw stimulus prematurely.
French Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner, who co-chaired today's session, appealed to the nine states which have yet to ratify the pact to do so so the treaty can come into force.
"With their ratification, they will send a message of hope by strengthening the international non-proliferation regime and collective security," he said.
In a statement, the 150 countries which have ratified the CTBT said they reaffirm that the ultimate objective of the efforts of states in the disarmament process is general and complete disarmament under strict and effective international control.
"We call upon all states which have not yet done so, to sign and ratify the Treaty without delay, in particular, those States whose ratification is needed for entry into force," the statement said.
North Korea, India and Pakistan have not signed the treaty, which bans any nuclear blasts for military or civilian purposes, while six countries, the United States, Indonesia, Iran, Israel, China and Egypt have signed but not ratified the pact.
"We have been assured (by the US) that this is not a resolution directed against India and that the US commitment to carry out its obligations under the civil nuclear agreement, which we have signed with the United States, remains undiluted," Singh, who interacted twice with President Barack Obama during the G-20 Summit, told reporters here.
"That (commitment on the nuclear deal) we have been assured officially by the US Government," Singh said wrapping up his two-day visit.
He was replying to a question about the UNSC resolution asking all non-NPT states, including India, to sign the NPT.
"Last night I met him (Obama) and today I was seated to his right during lunch. I discussed some important issues with him," Singh said on being asked whether he had any bilateral meetings with the US President. Singh said because of paucity of time, Obama did not have bilateral meetings with any leaders.
In New York, after a meeting between External Affairs Minister S M Krishna and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, a senior US official said India's position on NPT and the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT) will not impact the nuclear deal.
"We've said before that the resolution that was passed on Thursday unanimously by the Security Council does not have any bearing on our bilateral civil nuclear cooperation," Assistant Secretary of State for South and Central Asia Robert Blake said.
Blake was briefing journalists after a bilateral meeting between Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and External Affairs Minister S M Krishna here.
The UNSC had adopted a resolution seeking all non NPT signatories to join the treaty but India, which views it as discriminatory, refused to accept it.
The senior US official said that discussion between Krishna and Clinton also included cooperation between India and the US on higher education, referring to Indian Lok Sabha bill that will enable more foreign participation in the higher education sector.
"There are a number of American universities who are very eager to do more. So we're very excited about that as well," he said.
He made it clear that there was no change in India's stand on Pakistan since the Sharm-el-Sheikh talks with his counterpart Yousuf Raza Gilani, a position he has made clear in Parliament.
"India's message is that India seeks to normalise its relationship with Pakistan. But the only obstacle is that it should shed its old attitude of using terror as a state policy," Singh told a press conference winding up his two-day trip to Pittsburgh where he attended the G-20 Summit.
"We have supplied our material and evidence for them to carry out investigation. Although the tragedy took place in India, the conspiracy took place in Pakistan. Pakistan has admitted to this. We want them to bring to book the culprits involved in the November 26 attacks," he said.
Singh recollected that he has already said that if Pakistan took proper action India would move the extra mile to normalise relations.
The Prime Minister's comments come as Foreign Ministers of India and Pakistan are set to meet tomorrow during which Islamabad's action against terror emanating from its soil will be discussed.
Singh said India and Pakistan are neighbours and they have an obligation to move as neighbours.
Asked how he looked forward to moving ahead with the relations with Pakistan after the Sharm-el-Sheikh episode, Singh said "If you read my statements in Parliament, I have explained the Government's position and I think there is no change on this."
Asked about a report by US General Stean McChrystal that India was doing good work in Afghanistan but it could lead to instability in the region, he said: "I think to my knowledge there US and other European powers are appreciative of the role played by India in Afghanistan.
"We have not supplied any arms, we are also helping them in construction and financing of projects in power health and education sectors. Untill today we have committed USD 1.5 billion in Afghanistan.
"Not only people of Afghanistan is appreciate but Europe and American leaders are of the same view. As far as Afghanistan is concerned, I agree that we have to sail in these difficult waters," he said.
Iran should fulfill its obligations as NPT signatory: PM
Prime Minister Manmohan Singh today said Iran should fulfill all its obligations as a signatory to the Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty (NPT), while it also enjoys rights under that agreement.
Answering a question on US, Britain and France threatening sanctions against Iran for secretly pursuing uranium enrichment facility, Singh told a press conference here that Iran issue did not come up during the G-20 Summit.
"Our position is that Iran as a signatory to the NPT has all rights to peaceful use of atomic energy and also should carry out its obligations," he said.
| PC pledge to crush extremism in state | ||
| AMIT GUPTA | ||
Ranchi, Sept. 25: Jharkhand and Chhattisgarh have become epicentres of Left-wing extremism and the Centre is committed to end the so-called armed liberation movement, Union Home minister P. Chidambaram said here today. He chaired a meeting to review the security situation in the state and steps being taken by the administration to counter the Naxalite menace. The meeting, held at Raj Bhavan, was attended by Governor K. Sankaranarayanan, his advisers G. Krishnan and T.P. Sinha, director-general of police V.D. Ram and other top police officers. "The CPI(Maoist) has already been declared an outlawed organisation. We reject any form of armed rebellion against the state. The Centre will leave no stone unturned to counter and end the menace at the earliest," said the home minister who arrived in a BSF flight around 1pm. Chidambaram, however, categorically denied any plan to involve the army in counter-insurgency operations during a possible major offensive against Naxalites but maintained that the Centre would provide adequate paramilitary forces to the states to curb the menace. Ironically, he hailed the state administration, declaring that it had been able to contain Left-wing extremism at many places. However, he refused to declare possible dates for major strikes against Naxalites in the region, but rather chose to maintain that the fight was on and it would be turned towards a logical end. Chidambaram seemed much impressed on the development front with the performance of the state, currently under President's rule. "I learnt that 87 per cent of beneficiaries under the National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme (NREGS) are paid wages through bank and post office accounts. I have advised authorities to raise the level to 100 per cent," he said. Moreover, he said that though the public distribution system was in a sorry state for two years, it had now been virtually re-invented. "Those eligible are getting rice, wheat, sugar and kerosene oil either free or at controlled prices. Suvidha shops are offering goods at cheaper prices, while disbursement of old-age pension has been regularised. Administration here has done excellent work for the poor and the needy," said Chidambaram. Apparently forgetting that the state has been under the UPA-supported regime since 2006, Chidamabram said that people here had suffered a lot in the past and now were enjoying better facilities under the current administration. "I must say that whichever government comes in future, it will oblige by extending the sops to the poor that were started of late," he claimed. After a hurricane tour, the home minister left for Delhi at 5.30pm. However, he conceded that the state was facing difficulty in laying roads in Naxalite-affected rural areas. The state is to lay over 3,500km of rural roads under the Pradhan Mantri Gram Sadak Yojana and other state and Centre-sponsored schemes. Asked about the arrest of top-rung leaders like Kobad Ghandy in Delhi, Chidambaram said that people like Ghandy and frontal organisations take a romantic view of Left-wing extremism but it was a challenge for our democracy that many studies have proved. |
| Oil everywhere: It's a boom year for new finds 25 Sep 2009, 2200 hrs IST, New York Times | |||
These discoveries, spanning five continents, are the result of hefty investments
"That's the wonderful thing about price signals in a free market – it puts people in a better position to take more exploration risk," said James T Hackett, chairman and chief executive of Anadarko Petroleum.
More than 200 discoveries have been reported so far this year in dozens of countries, including northern Iraq's Kurdish region, Australia, Israel, Iran, Brazil, Norway, Ghana and Russia. They have been made by international giants, like Exxon Mobil, but also by industry minnows, like Tullow Oil.
Just this month, BP said it found a giant deep-water field that might turn out to be the biggest oil discovery ever in the Gulf of Mexico, while Anadarko announced a large find in an "exciting and highly prospective" region off Sierra Leone.
It is normal for companies to discover billions of barrels of new oil every year, but this year's pace is unusually brisk. New oil discoveries have totaled about 10 billion barrels in the first half of the year, according to IHS Cambridge Energy Research Associates. If discoveries continue at that pace through year-end, they are likely to reach the highest level since 2000.
Although recent years have seen speculation about a coming peak and subsequent decline in oil production, people in the industry say there is still plenty of oil in the ground, especially beneath the ocean floor, even if finding and extracting it is becoming harder. They say prices and the pace of technological improvement remain the principal factors governing oil production capacity.
While the industry is celebrating the recent discoveries, many executives are anxious about the immediate future, fearing that lower prices might jeopardize their exploration drive. The world economy is weak, oil prices have tumbled from last year's records, corporate profits have shrunk, and global demand for oil remains low. After falling to $34 in December, oil prices have doubled, stabilizing near $70 a barrel. But if the world economy does not pick up, some analysts believe the price could fall again.
Oil companies contend that is not a prospect they can afford. Despite reaping record profits in recent years, many executives have warned that they need prices above $60 a barrel to develop the world's more challenging reserves. In fact, some exploration activity has already slowed this year, as producers seek better terms from service companies and contractors.
It is not just oil that is benefiting from the exploration boom. Repsol, Spain's biggest oil company, said this month that it had discovered what could turn out to be Venezuela's biggest natural gas field. In recent years, companies have found substantial natural gas reserves in the United States, from shale rocks once believed to be impossible to drill.
"The No 1 question that exploration teams have right now is, Where do we go next?" said Robert Fryklund, who ran the operations of ConocoPhillips in Libya and Brazil, and is a vice president in Houston at Cambridge Energy Research Associates.
26 Sep 2009, 0104 hrs IST, Chidanand Rajghatta, TNN
But for what it is worth, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh listed out a series of measures that he felt would ensure the quickest possible return to normalcy in the global economy. Among them, replacing lost export demand - which has hurt India badly - by expanding investment in infrastructure, including energy, transport and other public services.
The Prime Minister asked the World Bank and other multilateral institutions to step up to fulfill this role, in effect asking richer nations to commit additional resources to fund them. And in a snarky aside to his rich colleagues who may hesitate to commit additional public resources for such recapitalization, the normally soft-spoken had this to say: We must keep in mind what is needed for these institutions is small compared
to the massive scale of public money used to stabilize the private financial system in industrialized countries.
No one said 'ouch' but you could feel it.
Indian Taxation News | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||
 ISRO found water on moon 10 months ago The Moon Impact Probe on Chandrayaan-I appears to have sensed water earlier than NASA's M3 but protocol did not allow ISRO to declare the discovery.  India's own probe also found water on moon: ISRO India's own Moon Impact Probe (MIP) on board the country's maiden lunar craft had discovered water on the moon.  Chandrayaan-I mission was a complete success, says ISRO chairman Terming the finding of water on the Lunar surface a 'historic' one, ISRO Chairman G Madhavan Nair on Friday said that the Chandrayaan-I mission was a complete success.  NASA finds ice on the moon and on Mars International space missions have found ice on the moon and more evidence of ice on Mars -- good news for future settlements and also for scientists looking for extraterrestrial life.  Courtesy ISRO, we found water on Moon: NASA NASA revealed Chandrayaan-I had traced water molecules on the moon's surface. It also 'thanked' ISRO for making the discovery possible.  Chandrayaan-1 finds water on moon: Report India's first lunar mission,Chandrayaan-1, has found evidence of water on its surface. In pics: Chandrayaan finds water on moon | Hubble Space Telescope  PSLV places seven satellites including Oceansat 2 in the orbit ISRO successfully launched seven satellites in 1,200 seconds with the help of its most trusted PSLV- C-14 from the Sriharikota spaceport in Andhra Pradesh coast.  ISRO to launch 7 satellites in 1,200 seconds today The stage is set for the launch of the ISRO's workhorse Polar Satellite Launch Vehicle for placing into orbit the country's 16th remote sensing satellite, Oceansat-2, and six European nano satellites.  Did Chandrayaan find water on Moon's surface? Did India's maiden Moon mission Chandrayaan-1 find water on the lunar surface before the project was aborted?  Chandrayaan-I was 'killed' by heat stroke The reasons for early termination of the Chandrayaan-I mission are now tumbling out and they reveal that ISRO had kept the Moon orbiter's problems tightly under wraps.  Data from Chandrayaan-1 being used for second moon mission Further research was being carried out for the Chandrayaan-2 project, based on the quality data and photographs taken by Chandrayaan-1.  Chandrayaan confirms moon was once completely molten: Scientist Chandrayaan's moon mineralogy mapper has confirmed the magma ocean hypothesis, meaning that the moon was once completely molten, a senior scientist said Wednesday.  Chandrayaan-1 off radar, but will work for 1000 days Though 'Chandrayaan-1' was officially 'retired' on Sunday it will continue to go around the moon for about 1,000 days more before it crashes on its surface.  Mars mission by 2013-2015, says ISRO ISRO chairman G Madhavan Nair on Monday said India will have its mission on Mars by 2013-2015.  Did ISRO goof-up on predicting Chandrayaan-1 mission life? Did Indian Space Research Organisation (ISRO) goof-up when it announced that Chandrayaan-1 would have a mission life of two years as none of the lunar craft launched by other nations lasted that long? | ||
26 Sep 2009, 0055 hrs IST
| | ||||
 | ||||
| Durga puja is being celebrated in the US and Europe this time with the same fervour and gaiety as any other year, but with a bit of austerity thrown in. | ||||
This cooption of large, fast-growing economies, such as India and China, into global decision making found its resonance in the flurry of bilateral meetings held by Prime Minister Manmohan Singh with leaders of other nations. He had meetings with the prime ministers of Britain, Japan and Australia.
While the summit and the bilateral that meet on its sidelines are not yet over, as this goes to print, a meeting with the Dutch premier is in the offing. But there are no signs yet of the widely anticipated meeting of Mr Singh with South Africa's President Zuma materialising.
In his speech at the summit, Mr Singh focused on three things: the need to sustain the coordinated stimulus measures by national governments around the world for some more time, at least till the end of 2010, the developed countries' obligation to take the lead in quelling protectionist eruptions and concluding the Doha Round of trade negotiations fast and stimulating investment in the developing countries.
All these three imperatives flow, he said, from the major blow received by the developing countries from the financial crisis wrought essentially by the developed world. Developing country growth has dipped to 1.5%, they have lost $900 billion worth of non-oil exports and lower domestic revenues have deprived them of essential public investment in vital social infrastructure, hurting future growth.
The prime minister also indirectly held out a hand of friendship and cooperation to China by virtue of the prescriptions that he recommended for regaining global growth momentum.
Dr Manmohan Singh posited stepped up investment in developing countries as the way out for both developing and developed countries. And for this, it is vital, in the present context of vastly reduced developing country access to commercial capital flows, for multilateral loans such as from the World Bank to expand significantly. The PM urged developed countries to recapitalise the World Bank, doubling its capital, so that it could undertake steeply stepped up infrastructure financing in the developing countries.
Such investment in infrastructure would compensate developing countries for lost exports and boost their capacity for future growth. Developed nations would also gain from greater infrastructure investment in developing countries — such investment tends to be import-intensive, spreading the growth impulse further.
These products turned — in the hands of the common variety of bankers and pension fund managers who picked them up — into toxic bombs that blew up in their starry-eyed faces. The guys who gave these delayed action toxic bombs and bomblets triple-A ratings were also experts. So were the regulators. Nothing very sophisticated, of course, about the mess they left behind.
That mess has to be cleaned up by the aam aadmi and his aam representatives. Of course, expertise is called for in designing the clean-up and in carrying out the salvage and in devising new operating procedures to ensure that such a mess is not created yet again. What the appropriate expertise is, however, cannot be left to the experts to choose. The people's representatives must supervise that process.
They can take their time doing it, consult a large enough number of experts, ask probing questions about the rationale for each proposal and come to a conclusion about what is right for the people at large. The short point is that the people's representatives should not abdicate this responsibility to professional experts. Once new regulation is put in place, its implementation should be left to the professionals, once again. The people's representatives should carry out institutionalised oversight of that regulation. There is, of course, a clear difference between oversight and meddling.
Securitisation of mortgages and engineering of assorted derivatives that had these securities as their underlying assets were key components of the crisis. Securitisation, however, should not stop it being an effective method of increasing liquidity and reduce the cost of borrowing. One reason why student loans in the US are so cheap is that they are securitised.
A Rs 10 lakh loan given to a home-buyer or a student, say, is broken up into 1,000 bonds of Rs 10,00 each, and these bonds are sold to investors. The bank that made the loan no longer has to wait for the loan to be repaid for it to lend that money again – an amount close to Rs 10 lakh has been recovered by the sale of these bonds. Of course, the bulk of interest payments on the loan will now accrue to the bondholders, and not to the bank. This is securitisation.
Day made similar comments in May, saying at that time that a deal was imminent.
He told reporters on a conference call that he was now ironing out a few final stumbling blocks.
"I had a telephone meeting just last week with India's national security adviser. We are down to four fine points ... He and I both agree that final agreement is possible within days, if not just a matter of a few weeks," Day told reporters on a conference call from India.
Day said he did not foresee any threat of Canadian materials being diverted to military uses elsewhere in the region because of India's commitment to allow inspections by the International Atomic Energy Agency as well as tough transparency and reporting requirements.
"These are very strong provisions," he said.
Canada halted nuclear co-operation with India after the country diverted material from Canadian-designed reactors to make a nuclear bomb in 1974. The conflict between India and Pakistan at the time led to widespread international concerns about India's nuclear intentions.
Canada and other countries lifted their moratorium on nuclear trade with India last year.
Day said one of the four items to be resolved before signing a deal was the "question of reprocessing", without providing details.
"I'll let our negotiators make progress on those and the others without unduly trying to raise pressure points publicly on them," he said.
The deal means Canadian uranium producers will be able to sell to an Indian market that is seen, along with China's, as one of the top areas of growing demand for nuclear fuel.
G-20 major economies
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
| This article documents a current event. Information may change rapidly as the event progresses. |
| Group of Twenty Finance Ministers and Central Bank Governors | |
 Areas in dark blue represent the member countries in the G-20; light blue represent members of the EU not individually represented. | |
| Abbreviation | G-20 |
|---|---|
| Formation | 1999 |
| Purpose/focus | Bring together systemically important industrialized and developing economies to discuss key issues in the global economy.[1] |
| Membership | 1.  Argentina2.  Australia3.  Brazil4. Canada 5.  China6. France 7. Germany 8. India 9. Indonesia 10. Italy 11. Japan 12.  Mexico13. Russia 14.  Saudi Arabia15.  South Africa16.  South Korea17.  Turkey18.  United Kingdom19. United States 20. European Union |
| Staff | None[2] |
| Website | http://www.g20.org/ |
The G-20 (more formally, the Group of Twenty Finance Ministers and Central Bank Governors) is a group of finance ministers and central bank governors from 20 economies: 19 countries, plus the European Union (EU). It has also met twice at heads-of-government level, in November 2008 and again in April 2009. The most recent meeting was the September 24-25, 2009 meeting of heads of state in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.
Collectively, the G-20 economies comprise 85%[3] of global gross national product, 80% of world trade (including EU intra-trade) and two-thirds of the world population.[2]
The G-20 is a forum for cooperation and consultation on matters pertaining to the international financial system. It studies, reviews, and promotes discussion among key industrial and emerging market countries of policy issues pertaining to the promotion of international financial stability, and seeks to address issues that go beyond the responsibilities of any one organization.
With the G-20 growing in stature since the 2008 Washington summit, its leaders announced on September 25, 2009 that the group will replace the G8 as the main economic council of wealthy nations.[4]
Contents[hide] |
[edit] Organization
The G-20 operates without a permanent secretariat or staff. The chair rotates annually among the members and is selected from a different regional grouping of countries. The chair is part of a revolving three-member management group of past, present and future chairs referred to as the Troika. The incumbent chair establishes a temporary secretariat for the duration of its term, which coordinates the group's work and organizes its meetings. The role of the Troika is to ensure continuity in the G-20's work and management across host years.
[edit] Member countries and organizations
In 2009, there are 20 members of the G-20. These include the finance ministers and central bank governors of 19 countries:[2]
- Argentina: President Cristina Fernández de Kirchner
- Australia: Prime Minister Kevin Rudd
- Brazil: President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva
- *Canada: Prime Minister Stephen Harper
- China: President Hu Jintao
- *France: President Nicolas Sarkozy
- *Germany: Chancellor Angela Merkel
- India: Prime Minister Manmohan Singh
- Indonesia: President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono
- *Italy: Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi
- *Japan: Prime Minister Yukio Hatoyama
- Mexico: President Felipe Calderón
- *Russia: President Dmitry Medvedev
- Saudi Arabia: King Abdullah
- South Africa: President Jacob Zuma
- South Korea: President Lee Myung-bak
- Turkey: Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan
- *United Kingdom: Prime Minister Gordon Brown
- *United States: President Barack Obama
*Also members of G-8
The 20th member is the European Union, which is represented by the rotating Council presidency and the European Central Bank.
In addition to these 20 members, the following forums and institutions, as represented by their respective chief executive officers, participate in meetings of the G-20:[2]
- International Monetary Fund
- World Bank
- International Monetary and Financial Committee
- Development Committee of the IMF and World Bank
[edit] Membership
The membership of the G-20 comprises:
- the finance ministers and central bank governors of the G7, 12 other key countries, and the European Union Presidency (if not a G7 member)
- the European Central Bank
- the Managing Director of the International Monetary Fund
- the Chairman of the IMFC
- the President of the World Bank
- the Chairman of the Development Committee
Membership does not reflect exactly the 19 largest national economies of the world in any given year. The organization states:[1]
| " | In a forum such as the G-20, it is particularly important for the number of countries involved to be restricted and fixed to ensure the effectiveness and continuity of its activity. There are no formal criteria for G-20 membership and the composition of the group has remained unchanged since it was established. In view of the objectives of the G-20, it was considered important that countries and regions of systemic significance for the international financial system be included. Aspects such as geographical balance and population representation also played a major part. | " |
All 19 member nations are among the top 32 economies as measured in GDP at nominal prices in a list published by the International Monetary Fund (IMF) for 2008.[5] Excluded from the G-20 are Taiwan (19), Switzerland (21), Norway (24), Iran (27) and Venezuela(30), even though they rank higher than some members. Spain (9), Netherlands (16), Poland (18), Belgium (20), Sweden (22), Austria (25), Greece (26) and Denmark (28) are included only as part of the EU, and not independently. When the countries' GDP is measured at purchasing power parity (PPP) rates, all 19 members are among the top 24 in the world in 2008, according to the IMF.[6] Iran (17) and Thailand (23) are not G-20 members, while Spain (12), Netherlands (19) and Poland (20) are only included in the EU slot. However, in a list of average GDP, calculated for the years since the group's creation (1999–2008) at both nominal and PPP rates, only Spain, Netherlands and Poland appear above any G-20 member in both lists simultaneously.[7]
It is often argued[by whom?] that the G20, although it is more representative than the G8, is not entitled to make decisions that affect the whole world, because its member states are selected arbitrarily. The G20 does not have a charter and its debates are not public, making it an "undemocratic institution."[8] Critics propose[by whom?] an alternative as an Economic Security Council within the United Nations, where members should be elected by the General Assembly based on their importance in the world economy and the contribution they are willing to provide to world economic development.[9]
[edit] History
The G-20, which superseded the G33, which had itself superseded the G22, was foreshadowed at the Cologne Summit of the G7 in June 1999, but was formally established at the G7 Finance Ministers' meeting on September 26, 1999. The inaugural meeting took place on December 15–16, 1999 in Berlin. In 2008 Spain and The Netherlands were included by French invitation for the G-20 Leaders Summit on Financial Markets and the World Economy and then were admitted as members de facto by the UK.[citation needed]
[edit] Since 2006
In 2006 the theme of the G-20 meeting was "Building and Sustaining Prosperity". The issues discussed included domestic reforms to achieve "sustained growth", global energy and resource commodity markets, 'reform' of the World Bank and IMF, and the impact of demographic changes due to an aging population.
Trevor A. Manuel, MP, Minister of Finance, Republic of South Africa, was the chairperson of the G-20 when South Africa hosted the Secretariat in 2007. Guido Mantega, Minister of Finance, Brazil, was the chairperson of the G-20 in 2008; Brazil proposed dialogue on competition in financial markets, clean energy and economic development and fiscal elements of growth and development. In a statement following a meeting of G7 finance ministers on October 11, 2008, US President George W. Bush stated that the next meeting of the G-20 would be important in finding solutions to the (then called) economic crisis of 2008. An initiative by French President Nicolas Sarkozy and British Prime Minister Gordon Brown led to a special meeting of the G-20, a G-20 Leaders Summit on Financial Markets and the World Economy, on November 15, 2008.[10] G20 leaders met again in London on April 2, 2009.[11] Another G20 summit is scheduled to be held September 24–25, 2009 in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.[12]
[edit] London summit 2009
As hosts, the UK Treasury produced an extended agenda pamphlet proposing the issues to be covered at the London Summit:[13]
- Coordinated macro-economic actions to revive the global economy, stimulate growth and employment – review measures taken and possible further steps
- Reform and improve financial sector & systems – continue to deliver progress on the Washington Summit action plan
- Reform international financial institutions (IFIs) – International Monetary Fund (IMF), Financial Stability Forum (FSF) and World Bank
[edit] Locations of G-20 meetings
|
[edit] See also
[edit] Notes
- ^ a b FAQ #5: What are the criteria for G-20 membership? from the official G-20 website
- ^ a b c d G-20 Membership from the official G-20 website
- ^ "No Clear Accord on Stimulus by Top 20 Industrial Nations." The New York Times, page A1, March 15, 2009.
- ^ "Officials: G-20 to supplant G-8 as international economic council". CNN. 2009-09-25. http://www.cnn.com/2009/US/09/24/us.g.twenty.summit/index.html. Retrieved 2009-09-25.
- ^ World Economic Outlook Database, April 2009. International Monetary Fund.
- ^ World Economic Outlook Database, April 2009. International Monetary Fund.
- ^ GDP (Nominal). GDP (PPP). World Economic Outlook Database, April 2009, International Monetary Fund.
- ^ Daniele Archibugi, The G20 ought to be increased to 6 Billion, http://www.opendemocracy.net/article/email/the-g20-ought-to-be-increased-to-6-billion
- ^ http://www3.qeh.ox.ac.uk/RePEc/qeh/qehwps/qehwps68.pdf
- ^ The G-20 Summit: What's It All About?, from the Brookings Institute
- ^ UK to host G20 financial summit" November 26, 2008 from the UK Prime Minister's Office.
- ^ http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/8072894.stm
- ^ "Managing the global economy through turbulent times" (PDF). http://www.hm-treasury.gov.uk/d/managingtheglobaleconomy_081208.pdf.
- ^ The G-20 Leaders Summit on Financial Markets and the World Economy from the G-20 Information Centre at the University of Toronto
- ^ Canada Takes Key Role In 2010's Double Summit
- ^ Canada to host 'transition' summit in 2010
- ^ "Korea to Host G20 in November". The Korea Times. 2009-09-25. http://www.koreatimes.co.kr/www/news/biz/2009/09/123_52513.html. Retrieved 2009-09-26.
[edit] External links
| Wikimedia Commons has media related to: G20 |
- Official G-20 website
- G-20 Information Centre from the University of Toronto
- A Guide To Committees, Groups, And Clubs from the International Monetary Fund
| |||||||||||||||||
Personal tools
Search
Toolbox
Languages
- Afrikaans
- العربية
- Български
- Català
- Deutsch
- Eesti
- Español
- فارسی
- Français
- 한국어
- Hrvatski
- Bahasa Indonesia
- Italiano
- עברית
- Basa Jawa
- Lietuvių
- Magyar
- Bahasa Melayu
- Монгол
- Nederlands
- 日本語
- Norsk (bokmål)
- Norsk (nynorsk)
- Polski
- Português
- Română
- Русский
- Sicilianu
- Српски / Srpski
- Srpskohrvatski / Српскохрватски
- Suomi
- Svenska
- தமிழ்
- ไทย
- Türkçe
- Українська
- Tiếng Việt
- 中文
- This page was last modified on 26 September 2009 at 07:05.
- Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. See Terms of Use for details.
Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization. - Privacy policy
- About Wikipedia
- Disclaimers
| Deemed export benefits may be scrapped next yr 26 Sep 2009, 0141 hrs IST, Gireesh Chandra Prasad, ET Bureau | |||
Schemes that may get downsized or may even be scrapped include deemed export benefits that the commerce ministry gives to exporters, with budgetary support from the finance ministry. This is one of the two duty drawback schemes through which the government compensates an exporter for the duty paid in India on products that are exported. The idea is to ensure that taxes paid here do not make the product less competitive abroad.
This benefit, called deemed export benefits or 'duty draw back and refund of terminal excise duty', is believed to be abused by exporters who make fake claims to demand excess refund of taxes paid in India, said a finance ministry official, who asked not to be named. For this scheme, the government provides funds to the commerce ministry as a budgetary allocation.
This scheme compensates exporters on claims that are not generally entertained under the other larger scheme of duty drawback scheme operated by the Central Board of Excise and Customs (CBEC), for which more documentary support is required. The larger duty draw back scheme is a statutory benefit unlike the deemed export benefit.
"We will assess the relevance of the scheme as well as the degree of abuse. If the abuse level is minor, we may tighten the scheme. If it is too high, then we may scrap it," said another official in the finance ministry, who also asked not to be named. "We will not throw the baby out with the bath water if the abuse can be checked in some way," he added.
Since deemed export benefit is an expense provided through the budget, it will be part of a review by the expenditure department in the next two months. Other export benefits that are administered by the revenue department will be reviewed by the revenue secretary by the year end.
"This year, the review of all expenditure schemes will be more rigorous considering the pressure on government finances", said the official. The finance ministry told all other ministries earlier this month to assess the continued relevance of all expenditure schemes before making demands for funds for the next fiscal. The ministry also asked all other government wings to review all schemes that can be eliminated, reduced or be merged with other schemes. The idea is to improve efficiency and reduce duplication.
NEW DELHI: The government has unveiled a draft new law on the much-awaited real estate regulator that when implemented, will protect homebuyers'
The draft bill makes it mandatory for builders to register their projects with the regulator before marketing them. The builders will have to submit documentary proof of ownership of land and requisite licences to the regulator for getting registered. The entire information about the project, verified by the regulator, will be put up on the regulator's website that can be accessed by all. The advertisements as well as the names of brokers will have to be sent to the regulator.
Once a project is registered, a buyer can be sure of the legality of the project as well as be certain about the project development. This will end the current practice of realty firms launching projects even without owning land or getting necessary approvals in place, resulting in buyers getting stuck in wrong or illegal projects.
The biggest relief would be that a property buyer would know exactly what he is buying. The draft bill also makes it mandatory for the builder not to accept any advance from home buyer before a sale agreement is put in place. At present, builders force buyers to pay up 20-30% of the property cost before making a sale agreement, and then allot them a flat which is completely different from what he had initially understood from the developer or his broker.
"The proposed law will protect home buyers from fraudulent builders," said Ajit Krishnan, partner (real estate) of Ernst & Young.
The builders will have to submit a bank guarantee of 5% of the total cost of the project, which will be encashed by the regulator in the event of the builder not completing the project in time or violating any other condition agreed upon at the beginning. In case of a builder not completing the project in time, an allottee can ask for full refund of the amount paid, plus an interest on it.
India to set up real estate regulator, tribunal: Govt
The ministry of Housing and Urban Poverty Alleviation has prepared the draft of a new real estate regulation act and has sought comments from state governments and other stakeholders. The proposed authorities would act to protect public interest "in relation to the conduct and integrity" of realty firms developing housing colonies and facilitate "smooth and speedy construction and maintenance" of colonies, the government said in a statement.
| Rains, govt checks to tame food prices now 26 Sep 2009, 0158 hrs IST, Anto Antony, ET Bureau | |||
"The days of hyper food inflation is coming to an end," said Madan Sabnavis, chief economist at NCDEX, the country's largest agri commodity exchange by volumes.
Economists expect above average monsoon rains in September to dispel fears of a summer (kharif) crop failure and end speculative activity. However, deficient rains in July and August have resulted in a 7% fall in area under the kharif crop. This, along with government's limited ability to effectively intervene in the market to manage the prices of perishable items, will keep prices of vegetable, dairy products and pulses high in short term.
"Output from crops sown during kharif will have better productivity, unsown areas in rabi season will give better output in the winter season, and reservoir levels are comfortable in August," said Planning Commission member Saumitra Chaudhari.
Dr Chaudhari, a former member of the prime minister's economic advisory council (EAC), finds the underlying dynamics of the food price inflation complex. For instance India came under the spell of high food price inflation in 2006-07 despite a good crop.
The monsoon is important for India's agriculture sector that provides livelihood to more than 60% of India's 1.2 billion population.
More than a third of India's 626 districts have been declared draught hit. But revival in rains from mid-August has replenished water levels in India's 81 key reservoirs. The summer crop, harvested in October and November, is rain dependent and accounts for 60% of agri produce and include rice, oil seeds and pulses. The winter crop is sown in November is dependent on irrigation and adequate soil moisture.
The summer crop, harvested in October and November, is rain dependent and accounts for 60% of agri produce and include rice, oil seeds and pulses. The winter crop is sown in November is dependent on ground water availability, irrigation and adequate soil moisture.
Several economists — including chief economic advisor at the finance ministry Dr Arvind Virmani former chairman of Prime Minister's EAC Dr Suresh Tendulkar — attribute high food prices to an uptick in demand, spurred by schemes such as the National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme that have resulted in an increase in rural incomes. They also blame the lack of infrastructure in the country to store perishable commodities for high prices.
Food prices in the country did not go out of hand last year, like they did in other countries in the region such as Bangladesh, Pakistan and Sri Lanka. India had raised support prices for most of the commodities last year, which is stopping the prices from falling beyond a point, said Ashok Gulati, Asia director of International Food Policy Research Institute.
Creation of West Bengal
Pranab Mukherjee's statement that even Shyama Prasad Mukherjee supported Partition is an oversimplification of a complex phase in Indian history, whose roots date back to 1937. Shyama Prasad (1901-53) entered the political arena in 1939 at the age of 38. That initiation was performed by Savarkar who was trying to mobilise public opinion for safeguarding the interests of Hindus.
Among the prominent leaders of the Hindu Mahasabha were Ashutosh Lahiri and Nirmal Chandra Chatterjee, father of the former Speaker, Somnath Chatterjee. Another influence on Shyama Prasad was Swami Pranabananda, the founder of the Bharat Sevashram Sangh. After the Congress came to power in several states following the election of 1937, Shyama Prasad was disenchanted with its policy on Hindu-Muslim relations. Prior to joining the Hindu Mahasabha, he believed in the Congress philosophy and was elected to the Bengal Assembly as a Congress candidate.
In the 1930s, the British took two decisions which greatly dissatisfied the Hindu leadership of Bengal: (a) the communal award of 1932; and (b) the Government of India Act of 1935. As Nirad C Chaudhuri wrote in his autobiography, after these promulgations, Hindus would not be able to come to power unless the Muslims make a charity.
Power-sharing
IN such a situation, the Hindu leadership ought to have reached a power-sharing arrangement with the Muslim leadership on the basis of a loose parity. Such an opportunity arose for the Hindu leadership of the Congress, one that it squandered. In the election of 1937, the contenders for power in Bengal were the Hindu-backed Congress, whose leader was Sarat Chandra Bose, the elder brother of Subhas. A Muslim League supported by the landed aristocracy and the zamindars, led by Khwaja Najimuddin, and a mass party supported by the Muslim farmers, the Krishak Praja Party led by the legendary leader, Fazlul Haq. The result demonstrated that there was no clear winner and it was a hung assembly in a House of 250, in which the Congress had 60, Muslim League 40, KPP 35, Independent Muslims 41, a Scheduled Caste grouping 23 and Europeans 25. The independent Muslims either joined the Muslim League or the KPP, their individual tally being 60 and 58 respectively.
Fazlul Haq disliked the Muslim League because of its class character and wanted to form a coalition with the Congress. This proposal was turned down both by the central Congress leadership led by Gandhi and the provincial Congress, headed by Sarat Chandra Bose. In consequence, a liberal and secular Fazlul Haq had to tie up with the Muslim League. This rigid decision of the Congress defied any political logic and paved the way for the mass killings of the Hindus in East Pakistan. Had the Congress aligned with Fazlul Haq and formed the coalition government in 1937, the history of the subcontinent in general and that of Bengal in particular would have been quite different.
Amidst this confusing political scenario, Shyama Prasad entered the political scene. Fazlul Haq's coalition arrangement with the Muslim League was hobbled by mutual suspicion. Though Haq moved the Pakistan resolution in the Lahore session of the Muslim League in 1940, the gesture wasn't effective enough to sustain the coalition in Bengal. Haq walked out of the alliance with the Muslim League and announced a new coalition arrangement with the Congress along with the young Shyama Prasad, whom he had inducted in his council of ministers. Many of his close associates had serious reservations about Shyama Prasad joining the cabinet but Haq assured them that though he belonged to the Hindu Mahasabha, he was a liberal and a well-wisher of Muslims and whose replacement was impossible by any other Hindu leader of the Congress. Both Haq and Sarat Bose, still in detention, hailed it as glorious examples of Hindu-Muslim unity. But as Rajmohan Gandhi writes: "Though apparently successful, the bud was four years too late. Hindu and Muslim legislators should have been combined in 1937. The opportune moment was missed by Bose and others in the Congress. The November 1941 exercise did not bring Hindus and Muslims together. Haq's exercise was seen by Bengal's Muslims as a Hindu manoeuvre. Elections were held in 1944-45 and the province's Muslim votes went solidly in the League's favour".
The Governor of Bengal, Sir John Herbert, was not happy over the exit of the Muslim League from the governing coalition. Sarat Chandra Bose was supposed to be the second in command after Haq as the deputy Prime Minister. But before he could take the oath of office he was arrested and the Haq ministry took charge without Bose. Shyama Prasad was the second man in the cabinet. The Muslim League was a continuous source of friction and the new coalition was shortlived.
Governor Herbert suggested an all-party government which could be possible only if Haq resigned. The latter agreed and submitted his resignation confidentially. As it turned out, the Governor had other plans and on 24 April 1943, Khwaja Najimuddin became the Prime Minister, leading a Muslim League- led government. Shyama Prasad, as the opposition leader in the midst of the Bengal famine of 1943, exposed the government's inaction and corruption, and emerged as a forceful Hindu leader.
The next phase of Shyama Prasad's political life centres around Suhrawardy in the context of the great Calcutta killing on 16 August 1946. There never was a stronger condemnation of the massacre. Calcutta witnessed a communal riot; Noakali the massacre of Hindus. Shyama Prasad spoke against forced conversions to Islam and favoured the process of re-conversion.
Sovereign Bengal
HIS most important achievement was the creation of West Bengal. Ironically enough, a proposal for an independent sovereign Bengal was mooted by Suhrawardy in the aftermath of the riots. It was backed by the provincial Congress leaders, notably Sarat Chandra Bose and Kiran Shankar Roy. It was supported as well by the Governor, Jinnah and Liaquat Ali. But it wasn't endorsed by the central Congress leadership. The objectives of the Muslim League leadership were clear: there would be no parity in the provincial transitional committee as it would consist of 16 Muslim and 14 Hindus.
Shyama Prasad was totally opposed to this plan. He convinced the Hindus of West Bengal that such a plan would be suicidal. Partition was the only plausible way to safeguard the interests of the Bengali Hindus. The dream of a United Bengal would never have succeeded as Suhrawardy's intentions were not sincere. His ultimate plan was to include sovereign Bengal in Pakistan.
Shyama Prasad has often been blamed for having endorsed Partition. His stand ought to be examined in the historical context. It was plainly a consequence of the blunders committed by the central and provincial leaderships of the Congress in 1937 and subsequently by its provincial leadership, championing a sovereign Bengal.
In the Lok Sabha, Nehru once accused Shyama Prasad of supporting the division of the country. To which the latter retorted: "You have divided India, I have divided Pakistan".
The reply is self-explanatory. As Jinnah's supreme achievement was the creation of a nation, Shyama Prasad's glorious contribution was the creation of West Bengal, which was the only feasible solution in 1947. He ought to be remembered for achieving the best possible arrangement at that point of time.
The writer is a retired Professor of Political Science, University of Delhi
| India at global high table G20 replaces rich club as economic forum | |||
| K.P. NAYAR | |||
Pittsburgh, Sept. 25: After tip-toeing on the fringes of big power status for almost a decade, India was last night formally inducted into a seat at the global high table when the White House announced that the Group of 20 (G20) will replace the Group of Eight (G8) as "the premier forum for international economic cooperation". A White House statement late last night said an agreement tantamount to burying the G8 had been endorsed by world leaders gathered in Pittsburgh "to reform global economic institutions to meet the needs of an interconnected global economy". Within hours of the White House announcement, prime minister Manmohan Singh outlined the rationale for the decision acknowledging a new status in the international economic order for India and some other emerging economies. "India too has been affected" by the economic crisis, Singh said at the plenary session of the G20 today, "but, in common with other Asian countries, we have weathered the crisis relatively well given the circumstances". The Prime Minister told his fellow global leaders here that "after growing at nine per cent a year for four years, our economy slowed down to 6.7 per cent in 2008-09". Explaining what he called a "relatively strong performance", Singh said that "despite a drought, which will affect agricultural production, we expect to grow by around 6.3 per cent in 2009-10 and then recover to seven to 7.5 per cent growth next year". Arguing strongly for a redistribution of economic power in the world order, Singh pointed out that developing countries "were in no way responsible for the (current global economic) crisis, but in many ways, they are the hardest hit". Their GDP had grown at an annual average of 6.5 per cent for seven years, but this year such growth had fallen to 1.5 per cent, "implying a fall in real per capita income".
The White House announcement replacing G-8 by G20, belatedly acknowledged that "dramatic changes in the world economy have not always been reflected in the global architecture for economic cooperation. This all started to change today". The statement described the change as "historic", pointing out that in addition to industrialised countries that formed G8 — originally as G6 in 1975 — India, China, Brazil and other similarly emerging G-20 economies will now be "at the centre of efforts to work together to build a durable recovery while avoiding the financial fragilities that led to the (current global economic) crisis". The Obama administration said "this decision brings to the table the countries needed to build a stronger, more balanced global economy, reform the financial system, and lift the lives of the poorest". The White House announcement made it clear that US president Barack Obama, French President Nicolas Sarkozy and other Western leaders had not come to the decision in any hurry. Nearly a decade ago, India was first invited to the fringes of a G8 summit. In April, at the London summit of G20 leaders, it was decided to expand the Financial Stability Board (FSB) to include India and other G-20 partners in an effort to develop and implement sweeping reforms to transform the system of global regulation.The FSB is the successor to the Financial Stability Forum, created in 1999 by what was then the Group of Seven Finance Ministers and Central Bank Governors. It was also decided this year to add all the G20 members to the Global Forum on Transparency and Exchange of Information, which serves as the primary vehicle in the world economy to promote greater tax transparency. Last night's announcement was a logical progression to this process. Although world leaders meeting here may have acknowledged the need to include emerging economies in the process of global financial decision-making, it is unlikely that they will immediately wind up G8 altogether. Howsoever anachronistic the G8 may have become in the light of changing realities of the world order, the rich countries will not easily give up their cosy club, which is also often used to keep in line India and others on strategic issues like non-proliferation and disarmament. The dominant view here is that industrialised states have merely made a tactical concession to emerging economies in view of their need to seek the support of China, India and Brazil in order to tackle pressing issues thrown up by the present global financial crisis. Alert to this possibility, the prime minister called today for following up decisions made in Pittsburgh by doubling the capital of the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development (IBRD) so that it can lend more to middle-income and creditworthy poorer countries. |
| BEAUTY OF COMPROMISE - An excess of secularism may be as problematic as bigotry | |
| - RAMACHANDRA GUHA | |
In September 2004, the French government formally banned the wearing of headscarves by Muslim girls in schools and colleges run by the State. The decision was opposed by most French Muslims, but supported by an overwhelming majority of the citizens as a whole. The tradition of French republicanism is robustly secular; against King and Church in equal measure. Any sign of religious affiliation in public institutions is frowned upon. The French authorities imposed the ban for two main reasons. The first argument they made was on the basis of gender justice. They claimed that the headscarf was a sign of women's subordination within the home and the family. The second argument rested on the case for assimilation. The headscarf marked the wearer out as Muslim, and hence something foreign and alien to the culture of the French nation. The ban on the headscarf was issued as part of a general edict forbidding all religious signs and symbols in State-run schools. So Sikh boys were barred from wearing the turban, Jewish boys from wearing the skull cap, and Christian children from wearing the crucifix. But it was evident all along that the particular target of the ban was Muslims. There had, in recent decades, been substantial immigration of Muslims from North Africa. The new migrants tended to live in separate neighbourhoods, limiting their interactions with the host population to the workplace. This ghettoization was deemed bad for them, and bad for French culture as a whole. The ban on the headscarf was very clearly an attempt to hasten them into the mainstream. Reading of the controversy in France, I felt at the time that a ban could be counter-productive, encouraging parents to withdraw girls from State-run schools and send them to religious schools instead (or educate them at home). In any case, I thought, it was an odd form of nationalism (or secularism) which insisted that all citizens must, apart from speaking the same language and swearing allegiance to the same flag, also dress exactly alike. So long as an artefact of clothing is not offensive (which a headscarf or turban clearly isn't) and can be worn alongside a regular school uniform (as a headscarf and a turban clearly can) there seemed to be no real reason to forbid a student from wearing it. The question of whether or not to allow the headscarf in schools and colleges is also hotly debated in some other countries, such as Turkey (as discussed in Orhan Pamuk's memorable novel, Snow). In France itself, after imposing the ban in schools, the authorities appear to have — with or without the pretext of the law — extended it to other spheres as well. An essay in The Guardian reports that women wearing headscarves in France have been forbidden to vote, not allowed to open bank accounts, and in some cases, even barred from their own wedding ceremonies! A French businesswoman of Muslim origin, wearing a scarf along with her suit, went for a holiday with her family, only to be turned away by the apartment into which they had been booked on the grounds that she was sporting "an instrument of women's submission and oppression". A human rights activist observes of these cases that "this is clear discrimination by people who wrongly use the school law to claim that France is a secular state that doesn't allow headscarves in public places". A history professor involved in the 'French Collective against Islamophobia' remarked (in terms that would be very recognizable to Indians) that "what people have to understand is that the concept of French secularism is not anti-religion per se, it is supposed to be about respecting all religions". In January 2005, some months after the French imposed their ban, I was speaking at the University of Calicut. The university is located in the district of Mallapuram, which is one of the handful of Muslim majority districts in India outside the Kashmir Valley (the others lie along the West Bengal-Bangladesh border). The Kerala Muslims, known locally as Mapillas, were converted not by the sword but by trade and commerce. They date to at least the eighth century AD, and have (in all senses) a substantial presence in the state, with particular influence in business and politics. Where Muslims in some other southern states claim Urdu as their mother tongue, the Mapillas have a deep identification with the language of Kerala, Malayalam. (Arguably the greatest Malayalam novelist was a Mapilla, Vaikom Muhammad Bashir). My talk at the University of Calicut was held in a gloomy auditorium, but the composition of the audience lit up the event for me. For, of those who attended the lecture at least half were women. This was not in itself surprising, since rates of female literacy in Kerala are close to 100 per cent. What was especially notable was that most of these women (or young girls) were Muslim, their faith marked out for me by the black headscarf they wore, the self-same headscarf that had just been forbidden in schools in France. In that old Western democracy, the scarf was seen by the State as oppressive, and hence banned in public. In this new Eastern nation, the scarf was actually liberating. It permitted these girls to acquire a university education denied to their mothers and grandmothers. For the scarf denoted a certain propriety and modesty; by wearing it, these girls could reassure their parents that they were going to college to study rather than to socialize with members of the other sex. In Calicut, the headscarf is acceptable, but a few hundred miles up the west coast of India, it apparently is not. Thus, in recent months, some colleges in the district of Mangalore have forbidden its use. Mangalore is a stronghold of Hindutva organizations, which have been emboldened by the coming to power in Karnataka of the Bharatiya Janata Party. Earlier in the year, they attacked girls for going to pubs; now, they seek to prevent girls who wear headscarves from attending college. In the first case, they protested against an alleged scantiness of clothing; in the second case, against an alleged excess of clothing. Any stick is apparently good enough, so long as it can be used to intimidate the minorities. It is necessary to make some distinctions here. The burqa, or full veil, is oppressive and demeaning: by hiding a woman's face and eyes, it marks her out as subordinate to (and under the control of) men. But to cover only one's head is another matter. In India, at any rate, the practice is not restricted to Muslim women. Hindu women often cover their heads with their saris, whether to keep out the sun, enter a temple, or convey respect to elders. Sikh men and boys are obliged by their faith to wear a turban, while many Hindu and Muslim peasants voluntarily wear one. Had their students appeared before them in a burqa, some teachers in Calicut University might have been embarrassed or offended; clad as they were, no one in the university, whether teacher, student or staff, could in any way have seen it as other than normal and wholly acceptable. For me, the ubiquity of the headscarf in Calicut University is a perfect illustration of what Mahatma Gandhi liked to call "the beauty of compromise". The pragmatism of the Malayali stands in salutary contrast both to the thoroughgoing secularism of the French and to the narrow bigotry of the Hindutva-wadis. |
| |||||||||
|
Iran defiant amid new nuclear row | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| President Ahmadinejad: "We have no secrecy, we work within the framework'' Iran's newly-revealed nuclear facility is open for inspection by UN experts, the country's president has said. Mahmoud Ahmadinejad insisted that the plant, thought to be under construction near the holy city of Qom, was being built in line with UN regulations. Leaders of the US, UK and France have accused Iran of building a new plant to enrich uranium, in breach of UN rules. They raised the prospect of new, tough sanctions against Iran if it does not fully co-operate with global powers. However, at a news conference in New York, where he has been attending the United Nations General Assembly, Mr Ahmadinejad firmly rebutted the Western criticism. Those leaders who had complained about the plant had made a big mistake and would regret the move, he said. "We don't have any problems with inspections of the facility. We have no fears," he said, referring to calls for immediate access to the site by inspectors from the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), the UN watchdog.
He justified Iran's apparent concealment of the plant by saying there were no international requirements to declare any nuclear facility until 180 days before fissile material was introduced into it. But the BBC's Paul Reynolds says there is a dispute about the amount of notice that Iran is required to give the IAEA before a new nuclear facility becomes operational. In 2003, Iran agreed on what is called a Subsidiary Arrangement, under which it is required to tell the IAEA at the preliminary design stage. Iran later announced that it had repudiated this agreement, but the IAEA says that no such unilateral repudiation is allowed. Mr Ahmadinejad also flatly denied claims - by US President Barack Obama, French President Nicolas Sarkozy and UK Prime Minister Gordon Brown - that the plant was a secret facility. "If it was, why would we have informed the IAEA about it a year ahead of time?" Mr Ahmadinejad was reported as saying. He reiterated Tehran's position that Iran was not interested in developing nuclear weapons, describing them as "against humanity". 'Serial deception' Mr Ahmadinejad spoke out hours after Mr Obama, Mr Sarkozy and Mr Brown took to the stage in Pittsburgh - site of a G20 summit - to condemn the building of the new plant. Iran's decision to build a secret facility represented a "direct challenge to the basic compact" of the global non-proliferation regime, Mr Obama said.
Despite Iran's assertions that the facility was for peaceful purposes, the new plant was "not consistent" with that goal, the US president said. Speaking after Mr Obama, Mr Brown accused the Iranians of "serial deception" and said: "Iran must abandon any military ambitions for its nuclear programme." Mr Sarkozy described the situation as a challenge to the entire international community. Russian President Dmitry Medvedev said he was "seriously concerned", and China urged Iran to work within the IAEA framework. UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon expressed "grave concern" over Tehran's continued uranium enrichment activities, and said: "The burden of proof is on Iran". Talks due The existence of Iran's first enrichment plant, at Natanz, was only confirmed after intelligence emerged from Iranian exile groups several years ago. Western governments are said to have known of the existence of the new enrichment plant for some time. In Washington, US officials said the Western nations decided to reveal their intelligence assessments when the Iranians realised the plant's secrecy was compromised.
The new facility is said to be underground at a mountain on the site of a former missile site belonging to the Iranian Revolutionary Guards, north-east of the holy city of Qom. Construction on the facility - believed by the US to be large enough to contain 3,000 centrifuges, not large enough for commercial work - started in earnest in mid-2006, diplomatic sources said. Iran's letter to the UN watchdog, the IAEA, on Monday informed it that "a new pilot fuel enrichment plant is under construction". Iran told the agency that no nuclear material had been introduced into the plant, and enrichment levels would only be high enough to make nuclear fuel, not a bomb. In response, the IAEA requested Iran to "provide specific information and access to the facility as soon as possible". The disclosure of the new plant comes one day after world leaders stressed the need for greater co-operation against nuclear proliferation and shortly before Iran is due to resume talks with international powers on the issue. Earlier this month, Tehran agreed to "comprehensive" discussions on a range of security issues - but made no mention of its own nuclear programme. The talks are due to be held in Geneva on 1 October with Tehran and the five permanent UN Security Council members - US, UK, Russia, China and France - plus Germany. |  KEY STORIES FEATURES AND ANALYSIS  Unresolved crisis Poll turmoil has still not run its course BACKGROUND VIDEO AND AUDIO  Ahmadinejad: 'No secrecy' on nuclear Iran   Obama: 'Iran must act immediately'  Iran 'on a dangerous path'  Brown on Iran's 'serial deception'  Amateur footage of Tehran rally  Iran poll protests trial begins HAVE YOUR SAY BBC LINKS RELATED INTERNET LINKS The BBC is not responsible for the content of external internet sites FROM OTHER NEWS SITES Irish Times Obama demands Iran come clean on nuclear programme - 1 hr ago Reuters India Obama demands Iran come clean - 3 hrs ago France24 NUCLEAR: Obama declines to rule out military option against Iran - 3 hrs ago Miami Herald Disclosure of nuclear site turns up heat on Iran - 9 hrs ago   News feeds
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/8275997.stm
 Page last updated at 09:47 GMT, Saturday, 26 September 2009 10:47 UK
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Obama hails 'tough regulations' | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| President Barack Obama: ''We have agreed to a strong set of reforms'' The world's leading nations have agreed "tough new regulations" to prevent another global financial crisis, US President Barack Obama has said. These relate to the amount of money banks have to hold in reserve and to excessive pay for bankers. Speaking at the end of a two-day G20 summit, Mr Obama also outlined plans to give emerging economies a greater say in the global economy. The G20 will effectively replace the G8 group of developed economies. Global leaders also announced a deal to shift the balance of voting in the International Monetary Fund (IMF) towards growing nations such as China at the summit the US city if Pittsburgh. 'Reckless few' "We have taken bold and concerted action to forge a new framework for strong, sustainable and balanced growth," said US President Barack Obama. "We have agreed tough new financial regulations to ensure that the reckless few can no longer be allowed to put the global financial system at risk."
He said that leading nations would now be allowed to assess each others' economic policies. Mr Obama added that the leaders had agreed rules to ensure that executive pay would be linked to long term financial performance. Many have criticised excessive bonuses as encouraging the kind of short term risk-taking that contributed to the financial crisis. Despite Mr Obama's declaration, the G20 fell short of agreeing specific rules on the capital reserves that banks need to hold. "We commit to developing by end-2010 internationally agreed rules to improve both the quantity and quality of bank capital and to discourage excessive [borrowing]," a statement from the G20 leaders said following the summit. It added that the rules will be phased in once financial conditions improve and recovery is "assured". The leaders also fell short of agreeing a cap on bonuses, agreeing instead that bonus payments should not be guaranteed for many years, should be deferred in part, and should not exceed a percentage of the bank's revenue. 'Fudging it' "We designated the G20 to be the premier forum for our international economic co-operation," the statement said.
It added that the global leaders would shift "at least 5%" of the quota of votes within the IMF from "over-represented countries to under-represented countries". It described under-represented countries as "dynamic emerging markets and developing countries". Emerging economies will also get a greater say at the World Bank. The leaders also pledged to continue pumping money into their economies until "a durable recovery is secured". But there will be no formal announcement that the G20 will replace the G8 until 2011, said the BBC's economics editor Stephanie Flanders. "The leaders would have liked formally to announce the handover today in Pittsburgh, but the Canadians - who are chairing the G8 next year - kicked up such a fuss that they had to fudge it," she said. There will now be a G20 meeting on the sidelines of Canada's G8 Summit next June, where most of the economic business of the day will be discussed. But, formally at least, the economic side of the G8 will live on another year. 'Distrust' The IMF has 186 member-states. It lends money to countries that are facing problems, but in return economic changes have to be made by those countries. Currently, China wields 3.7% of IMF votes compared with France's 4.9%, although the Chinese economy is now 50% larger than that of France. The IMF has been criticised in the past as being a group of developed countries trying to lay down the law to struggling countries, which is why the decision to give growing nations more votes is important. "If you talk to the Chinese or talk to anyone from emerging markets they say the IMF doesn't have legitimacy and... we don't trust the IMF to come and rescue us in a crisis," Simon Johnson, former chief economist at the IMF, told the BBC. "They don't trust it because it's US and West Europe-dominated. That's not fair... and the IMF doesn't function properly as a result." Nobel prize-winning economist Amartya Sen welcomed the change in voting rights, but said that, "on their own, they won't be able to achieve much... It's not just a question of voting rights, but also a question of broadening the dialogue". |
Page last updated at 05:46 GMT, Saturday, 26 September 2009 06:46 UK 
G8From Wikipedia, the free encyclopediaJump to: navigation, search "Group of Eight" redirects here. For the Australian league of universities, see Group of Eight (Australian universities). For the Pontiac vehicle, see Pontiac G8. For other uses, see G8 (disambiguation). The Group of Eight (G8, and formerly the G6 or Group of Six and also the G7 or Group of Seven) is a forum, created by France in 1975, for governments of the seven richest countries in the world: Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, the United Kingdom, and the United States plus Russia as the eighth member. In addition, the European Union is represented within the G8, but cannot host or chair.[1] "G8" can refer to the member states or to the annual summit meeting of the G8 heads of government. The former term, G6, is now frequently applied to the six most populous countries within the European Union (see G6 (EU)). G8 ministers also meet throughout the year, such as the G7/8 finance ministers (who meet four times a year), G8 foreign ministers, or G8 environment ministers. Each calendar year, the responsibility of hosting the G8 rotates through the member states in the following order: France, United States, United Kingdom, Russia, Germany, Japan, Italy, and Canada. The holder of the presidency sets the agenda, hosts the summit for that year, and determines which ministerial meetings will take place. Lately, both France and the United Kingdom have expressed a desire to expand the group to include five developing countries, referred to as the Outreach Five (O5) or the Plus Five: Brazil, China, India, Mexico, and South Africa. These countries have participated as guests in previous meetings, which are sometimes called G8+5. With the G-20 growing in stature since the 2008 Washington summit, world leaders from the group announced at their Pittsburgh summit on September 25, 2009, that the group will replace the G8 as the main economic council of wealthy nations. [2] [3]
[edit] History At the 34th G8 Summit at Toyako, Hokkaido, formal photo during Tanabata matsuri event for world leaders -- Silvio Berlusconi (Italy), Dmitry Medvedev (Russia), Angela Merkel (Germany), Gordon Brown (UK), Yasuo Fukuda (Japan), George Bush (U.S.), Stephen Harper (Canada), Nicolas Sarkozy (France), José Barroso (EU) -- July 7, 2008. The concept of a forum for the world's major industrialized democracies emerged following the 1973 oil crisis and subsequent global recession. In 1974 the United States created the Library Group, an informal gathering of senior financial officials from the United States, the United Kingdom, West Germany, Japan and France. In 1975, French President Valéry Giscard d'Estaing invited the heads of government from West Germany, Italy, Japan, the United Kingdom and the United States to a summit in Rambouillet. The six leaders agreed to an annual meeting organized under a rotating presidency, forming the Group of Six (G6). The following year, Canada joined the group at the behest of Germany's Chancellor Helmut Schmidt and U.S. President Gerald Ford[4] and the group became the 'Group of Seven' -or G7. The European Union is represented by the President of the European Commission and the leader of the country that holds the Presidency of the Council of the European Union. The President of the European Commission has attended all meetings since it was first invited by the United Kingdom in 1977[5] and the Council President now also regularly attends. Following 1994's G7 summit in Naples, Russian officials held separate meetings with leaders of the G7 after the group's summits. This informal arrangement was dubbed the Political 8 (P8) - or, colloquially, the G7+1. At the invitation of United Kingdom Prime Minister Tony Blair and U.S. President Bill Clinton[6], Russia formally joined the group in 1997, resulting in the Group of Eight, or G8. [edit] Structure and activities The G8 is intended to be an informal forum, and it therefore lacks an administrative structure like those for international organizations, such as the United Nations or the World Bank. The group does not have a permanent secretariat, or offices for its members. In 2008, the president of the European Union Commission participated as an equal in all summit events. The presidency of the group rotates annually among the member countries, with each new term beginning on 1 January of the year. The country holding the presidency is responsible for planning and hosting a series of ministerial-level meetings, leading up to a mid-year summit attended by the heads of government. Japan held the G8 presidency in 2008, Italy is the 2009 president, and Canada will be president in 2010. The ministerial meetings bring together ministers responsible for various portfolios to discuss issues of mutual or global concern. The range of topics include health, law enforcement, labor, economic and social development, energy, environment, foreign affairs, justice and interior, terrorism, and trade. There are also a separate set of meetings known as the G8+5, created during the 2005 Gleneagles, Scotland summit, that is attended by finance and energy ministers from all eight member countries in addition to the five "Outreach Countries": Brazil, China, India, Mexico, and South Africa. In June 2005, justice ministers and interior ministers from the G8 countries agreed to launch an international database on pedophiles.[7] The G8 officials also agreed to pool data on terrorism, subject to restrictions by privacy and security laws in individual countries.[8] [edit] Global energyMain articles: International Partnership for Energy Efficiency Cooperation and Climate Investment Funds  At the Heiligendamm Summit in 2007, the G8 acknowledged a proposal from the EU for a worldwide initiative on energy efficiency. They agreed to explore, along with the International Energy Agency, the most effective means to promote energy efficiency internationally. A year later, on 8 June 2008, the G8 along with China, India, South Korea and the European Community established the International Partnership for Energy Efficiency Cooperation, at the Energy Ministerial meeting hosted by Japan holding 2008 G8 Presidency, in Aomori. [9] G8 Finance Ministers, whilst in preparation for the 34th Summit of the G8 Heads of State and Government in Toyako, Hokkaido, met on the 13 and 14 June 2008, in Osaka, Japan. They agreed to the "G8 Action Plan for Climate Change to Enhance the Engagement of Private and Public Financial Institutions." In closing, Ministers supported the launch of new Climate Investment Funds (CIFs) by the World Bank, which will help existing efforts until a new framework under the UNFCCC is implemented after 2012. [10] [edit] The Annual SummitThe annual G8 leaders summit is attended by eight of the world's most powerful heads of government. However, as noted by commentators the G-8 summit is not the place to flesh out the details of any difficult or controversial policy issue in the context of a three-day event. Rather, the meeting is to bring a range of complex and sometimes inter-related issues. The G8 summit brings leaders together not so they can dream up quick fixes, but to talk and think about them together.[11] The G8 summit is an international event which is observed and reported by news media, but the G8's relevance is unclear.[12] The member country holding the G8 presidency is responsible for organising and hosting the year's summit, held for three days in mid-year; and for this reason, Tony Blair and the United Kingdom accumulated the lion's share of the credit for what went right (and wrong) at Gleneagles in 2005. Similarly, Yasuo Fukuda and Japan hope to garner the greater part of the credit for what went well (and what did not) at the Hokkaido Summit in 2008. Each of the 35 G8 summit meetings could have been called a success if the events had been re-framed as venues to generate additional momentum for solving problems at the other multilateral conferences that meet throughout the year. The G8 summit sets the stage for what needs to be done and establishes an idea of how to do it, even if that idea is, at best, rough and patchy.[11] The summits have also been the site of numerous, large-scale anti-globalization protests.
[edit] G8 member factsAll eight of the ten (10) top-ranked leading export countries are in the G8.[19] The UK, the USA, Canada, France, and Germany have nominal per capita GDP over US$40,000 dollars.[20] Some of the world's twenty (20) largest stock exchanges by market value are in G8 countries[21] (U.S., Japan, UK, France, Canada, Germany). The G8 countries represent 7 of the 9 largest economies by nominal GDP[22] (Russia isn't one of the 9 largest economies by nominal GDP but has the 7th largest real GDP; Canada was 8th in 2006 but in 2007 it lost 8th place to Spain, as it did in 2003,[22] prompting the previous government headed by José María Aznar to request Spain's entrance in the G8). In an article by the Guardian, supported by dubious sources, it was mentioned that there was talk of Italy being removed and replaced with Spain. This fact was not reported by any other media outlet and was seen as unlikely.[23] As a matter of fact, Spain is not even a member of the G20. The 2nd and 3rd largest oil producers (USA and Russia) and the country with the 2nd largest reserves (Canada) are in the G8.[24] Seven of the nine largest nuclear energy producers are in the G8[25] (USA, France, Japan, Russia, Germany, Canada, UK). The 7 largest donors to the UN budget for the 2009 annual fiscal year are in the G8[26] (U.S., Japan, Germany, UK, France, Italy, Canada). Of course, the G8 and the G8+5 make up some of the 14-nation "trillion dollar club of nations." [edit] Cumulative influence of member nationsTogether the eight countries making up the G8 represent about 14% of the world population, but they represent about 60% of the Gross World Product[27] as measured by gross domestic product, all 8 nations being within the top 12 countries according to the CIA World Factbook. (see the CIA World Factbook column in List of countries by GDP (nominal)), the majority of global military power (seven are in the top 8 nations for military expenditure[28]), and almost all of the world's active nuclear weapons.[29]. In 2007, the combined G8 military spending was US$850 billion. This is 72% of the world's total military expenditures. (see List of countries and federations by military expenditures) Four of the G8 members, the United Kingdom, United States of America, France and Russia, together account for 96-99% of the world's nuclear weapons[citation needed]. (see List of states with nuclear weapons) [edit] Criticism and demonstrations Protesters try to stop members of the G8 from attending the summit during the 27th G8 summit in Genoa, Italy by burning vehicles on the main route to the summit As the annual summits are extremely high profile, they are subject to extensive lobbying by advocacy groups and street demonstrations by activists. The best-known criticisms centre on the assertion that members of G8 are responsible for global issues such as poverty in Africa and developing countries due to debt and trading policy, global warming due to carbon dioxide emission, the AIDS problem due to strict medicine patent policy and other issues related to globalization. During the 31st G8 summit in Scotland, 225,000 people took to the streets of Edinburgh as part of the Make Poverty History campaign calling for Trade Justice, Debt Relief and Better Aid. Numerous other demonstrations also took place challenging the legitimacy of the G8.[30] Of the anti-globalization movement protests, one of the largest and most violent occurred for the 27th G8 summit [13]. Since that G8 Summit and the subsequent September 11, 2001 attacks on the United States occurred months apart in the same year, the G8 have gathered at some forms of remote locations every year since then. The 7 July 2005 London bombings were timed to coincide with the 31st G8 summit in Scotland. The group has also been criticized for its membership, which critics argue has now become unrepresentative of the world's most powerful economies. In particular, China has now a larger economy than Canada and Russia and has in recent years surpassed every economy except the United States and Japan. Canada has been in recent years overtaken by Brazil and Spain by nominal GDP. Russia now has a nominal GDP in the top eight (8) in the world by the International Monetary Fund and the CIA World Factbook for 2008 [Ninth (9th), according to the World Bank]. [edit] See also
[edit] Notes, links, and references[edit] External linksFurther information: 35th G8 summit
[edit] Footnotes
Today's PicksBing Searches
 Money Get Quote Sponsored by:    | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Mr Obama is not a nuclear expert. We have to leave it to the IAEA to carry out its duties 
Car bomb hits Pakistan town
News and analysis
Latest World Service bulletin 
Amartya Sen: 'Africa sidelined'
Marketwatch ticker
Click 
No comments:
Post a Comment