India asks IMF to reconsider Pakistan loan over 'terror funding'
The IMF last week approved a review of its loan programme for Pakistan, unlocking about $1 billion and approving a further $1.4 billion bailout. India objected to the decision but abstained from the review vote.
India's defence minister Rajnath Singh said, 'I believe a big portion of the $1 billion coming from IMF will be used for funding terror infrastructure.'
Vivek Mishra works as an Assistant Editor with Eastern Eye and has over 13 years of experience in journalism. His areas of interest include politics, international affairs, current events, and sports. With a background in newsroom operations and editorial planning, he has reported and edited stories on major national and global developments.
INDIA's defence minister Rajnath Singh on Friday said the International Monetary Fund (IMF) should reconsider its decision to approve a $1 billion loan to Pakistan, alleging that Islamabad was using the funds to support terrorism.
"I believe a big portion of the $1 billion coming from IMF will be used for funding terror infrastructure," Singh told troops at an air force base in western India. "I believe any economic assistance to Pakistan is nothing less than funding terror."
India and Pakistan had engaged in missile, drone and artillery strikes last week before a ceasefire began on Saturday.
The IMF last week approved a review of its loan programme for Pakistan, unlocking about $1 billion and approving a further $1.4 billion bailout. India objected to the decision but abstained from the review vote.
India, which represents Bhutan, Sri Lanka and Bangladesh on the IMF board, said in a finance ministry statement that it had "concerns over the efficacy of IMF programmes in case of Pakistan given its poor track record".
Pakistan was on the verge of default in 2023 amid a political crisis and economic downturn. The IMF extended a $7 billion bailout to Pakistan last year, its 24th such assistance since 1958.
Singh said, "It is now clear that in Pakistan terrorism and their government are hand in glove with each other.
"In this situation there is a possibility that their nuclear weapons could get their way into the hands of terrorists. This is a danger not just for Pakistan but the entire world."
The recent fighting between India and Pakistan began on May 7, when India launched strikes on what it called "terrorist camps" in Pakistan. The strikes followed an April attack in Indian-administered Kashmir that killed 26 people.
India blamed Pakistan for supporting the terrorists it said were responsible for the attack. Pakistan has denied the charge.
The four-day exchange of missiles, drones and artillery killed around 70 people on both sides, including dozens of civilians.
Uber Eats and Deliveroo will tighten ID checks, including facial verification, to curb illegal migrant work after UK government pressure. (Photo: Getty Images)
FOOD delivery companies Deliveroo, Uber Eats and Just Eat have agreed to strengthen security measures, including facial verification checks, to prevent irregular migrants from working through their platforms, following criticism from the UK government.
The announcement came after the Labour government summoned the three firms for a meeting in response to a report by The Sun which exposed how some migrants were bypassing rules and working illegally in the gig economy sector.
Although the companies already have controls to verify workers’ legal right to work in the UK, the Home Office said "there continues to be abuse in the sector" through account sharing.
Facial verification checks to be expanded
According to the government, many asylum seekers who cross the Channel and await decisions on their asylum claims are using verified delivery driver accounts rented from others to work illegally. These individuals do not have the legal right to work while their claims are pending.
The Home Office said the delivery platforms have “agreed to increase the use of facial verification checks” to ensure “only registered account holders can work off their platforms.” The companies also committed to “combat illegal working”.
“We are taking a zero-tolerance approach to illegal working across the board,” said Border Security and Asylum minister Angela Eagle.
Immigration pressure and proposed legislation
Prime minister Keir Starmer has faced pressure from the anti-immigration Reform UK party led by Nigel Farage to reduce irregular migration. A new immigration bill currently before parliament seeks to expand police powers against smuggling networks and tighten work eligibility controls.
Since January, over 19,000 people have crossed the Channel in small boats to reach the UK from France, marking a record number for this point in the year despite efforts to deter such journeys.
French officials, including former interior minister Gerald Darmanin, have said that the availability of illegal work opportunities in the UK continues to act as a pull factor for migrants making the crossing.
By clicking the 'Subscribe’, you agree to receive our newsletter, marketing communications and industry
partners/sponsors sharing promotional product information via email and print communication from Garavi Gujarat
Publications Ltd and subsidiaries. You have the right to withdraw your consent at any time by clicking the
unsubscribe link in our emails. We will use your email address to personalize our communications and send you
relevant offers. Your data will be stored up to 30 days after unsubscribing.
Contact us at data@amg.biz to see how we manage and store your data.
Do not expect any parties in Downing Street to celebrate the government’s first birthday on Friday (4). After a rocky year, prime minister Sir Keir Starmer had more than a few regrets when giving interviews about his first year in office.
He explained that he chose the wrong chief of staff. That his opening economic narrative was too gloomy. That choosing the winter fuel allowance as a symbol of fiscal responsibility backfired. Starmer ‘deeply regretted’ the speech he gave to launch his immigration white paper, from which only the phrase ‘island of strangers’ cut through. Can any previous political leader have been quite so self-critical of their own record in real time?
This unconventional approach could be a reminder of Starmer’s best quality: that he is the antithesis of US president Donald Trump. Trump has a narcissistic need to be the main character, a hyperactive addiction to conflict, the attention span of a toddler and no interest in policy substance beyond the television and social media optics. So Trump is the disruptor in chief of global trade, security and the US constitutional order. Given a binary choice, it is infinitely better to have the serious sobriety of Starmer, trying to cooperate with allies to limit Trump’s chaotic contributions to increased insecurity.
Yet, it is a contrast that could be taken too far. Trump realises that politics is about what you say as well as what you do. What Starmer is palpably still missing is a clear public story of what his government is for. This was partly a matter of choice. A gritty public mood has little appetite for new visions, unless shown tangible progress first. It reflects the taciturn character of the leader too. Yet the issue is not simply one of communication. The challenge of finding a narrative reflects uncertainty about the strategic direction of the government.
Judged by its actions, this is a centre-left government. It has made many decisions that the previous Conservative government would not have taken. It changed the fiscal rules, borrowing much more for investment. Despite the constraints of its manifesto pledges on most taxes, it did raise taxes so as to have more to spend on the NHS, and on housebuilding. The government is committed to higher defence spending, and also to net zero, to closer UK-EU relations, within the ‘red lines’ which Labour set out, as it takes care to check if it can take the public with it. It will work with multilateral institutions, rather than quitting treaties and conventions. If this is a centre-left government in its deeds, it may prefer to self-identify as something else, without quite managing to articulate what that is.
So this has been a very tactical government, which has changed its mind about most of its tactical choices. The Comprehensive Spending Review was intended as a reset moment, in giving the government clearer priorities, though it has been challenging to make the numbers add up. But the parliamentary rebellion over its welfare bill could prove a more significant turning point. A government which won a landslide had lost its majority once 125 of its MPs - a majority of the backbench - declared they were unable to pass a government bill without a significant change. This was about the substantive impact of heavy income losses for disabled people - and the lack of a rationale beyond saving money. This rebellion is also about the political strategy of the government. Much of the parliamentary group seem diminishing returns in actively picking fights with progressives who Labour will need to keep the populism of Reform leader Nigel Farage out.
Can Starmer fix his government? The prime minister is 62 years old. He cannot change his personality or working style, not metamorphosis into a visionary speech-maker. There is little point in advisers inventing hypothetical strategies - such as choosing to present Starmer as a radical insurgent, rather than the sober incumbent, which cannot fit with the prime minister they have got, and his gradualist agenda for long-term change. Yet Starmer could use his evident capacity for self-reflection to identify feasible changes. He needs to repair how his Downing Street operation makes decisions - and now knows that backbench support is not unconditional.
Facing a fragmented opposition, Labour’s chances of re-election in four years time may be underestimated. Yet most of Labour’s tactical mistakes have come from trying to run a permanent election campaign in government, four years early. The government needs to govern to generate the substantive record and future agenda it would defend from the populist right in 2029. Australia's Anthony Albanese, who faced many similar criticisms to Starmer, bounced back to get re-elected, though the Canadian Liberals changed leaders to defeat the right. How many years Starmer has left in Downing Street is anybody’s guess. This time next year, he would need a stronger story to tell.
Sunder Katwala is the director of thinktank British Future and the author of the book How to Be a Patriot: The must-read book on British national identity and immigration.
Keep ReadingShow less
People take part in a protest against disability welfare cuts on June 30, 2025 in London. (Photo: Getty Images)
DOZENS of Labour MPs are expected to vote against the government’s welfare reforms despite recent concessions aimed at easing opposition.
The government had initially planned to tighten eligibility for Personal Independence Payment (Pip) but later said the stricter rules would only apply to new claimants from November 2025.
Ministers also promised a review of the Pip assessment process, in partnership with disability organisations, due to conclude by autumn 2026.
More than 120 Labour MPs had signed an amendment to block the legislation, though a revised amendment supported by 39 MPs and backed by disability charities remains active.
Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch told the BBC her party would oppose the bill, saying, “The benefits bill is too high. It was £40bn just before Covid. It is now projected to be a £100bn by 2030. And what Labour is doing is not making any savings at all.”
Labour MP Olivia Blake, who opposes the reforms, told BBC Newsnight, “I strongly believe that these kind of punitive measures of cutting welfare are not going to have the outcomes that we've been told they will.”
According to Department for Work and Pensions modelling, the revised proposals could push 150,000 people into poverty by 2030, down from an earlier estimate of 250,000.
Sir Stephen Timms, who will lead the review, told BBC Newsnight the government’s measures would help reduce poverty and make Pip more sustainable.
Keep ReadingShow less
Rescue workers look for survivors after an explosion and fire at a chemical factory, in Sangareddy, Telangana, India, June 30, 2025. (Photo: Reuters)
THE DEATH toll from the explosion and fire at the Sigachi Industries chemical factory in Sangareddy, Telangana, has risen to at least 39, officials said on Tuesday, as rescue teams continued clearing debris for a second day.
The explosion occurred on Monday and turned large parts of the building into rubble. State authorities confirmed the toll had risen to 39, Reuters reported. Thirty-four others were injured in the incident, according to officials.
Factory building collapsed completely, says fire official
Telangana state chief minister Revanth Reddy visited the site on Tuesday. A video released by his office showed twisted metal and wreckage at the factory site. Reddy’s office said a five-member committee had been formed to investigate the cause of the explosion. The company has not yet disclosed the cause.
GV Narayana Rao, director of the Telangana fire disaster response service, told Reuters, “We are still clearing the debris. Once we are all done with the clearing, only then we will be able to assess if any other body is still remaining under the debris or if it is all clear.” He confirmed that the building had completely collapsed.
District administrative official P Pravinya said more than 140 people were working at the factory when the incident occurred. Twenty-five of the deceased had not been identified.
Eyewitness account of blast and escape
Chandan Gound, 32, who had been working at the factory for six months, said he escaped after hearing a loud blast while outside the building.
“It sounded like a bomb blast. I came out and saw fire. A part of the fire also spread towards me. I jumped the wall and escaped,” he told Reuters. “Many of them managed to escape, but a large number were trapped and could not come out.”
Sigachi shuts plant for 90 days, stock falls 8 per cent
Sigachi Industries supplies microcrystalline cellulose (MCC) to the pharmaceutical, food, cosmetic and specialty chemical sectors, serving clients in countries including the United States and Australia. The Telangana plant contributes a little over a fourth of the company’s total production capacity of 21,700 million metric tons per annum.
In a statement, Sigachi said, “The incident has unfortunately resulted in the loss of human life.” The company said the plant had been shut for 90 days from Monday due to damage to equipment and structures. The facility is fully insured and claims are being initiated.
Shares of Sigachi dropped about 8 per cent on Tuesday and were on track for their sharpest two-day fall on record.
India’s industrial safety record under scrutiny
Industrial accidents are frequent in India, with experts citing poor planning and weak enforcement of safety regulations.
In a separate incident on Tuesday, five people died and four others were injured in a fire at a fireworks factory in the Sivakasi manufacturing cluster in Tamil Nadu, a fire department official said.
(With inputs from agencies)
Keep ReadingShow less
FILE PHOTO: A mother and daughter sit atop the Covid memorial wall on September 9, 2024 in London, England. (Photo by Carl Court/Getty Images)
THE Covid inquiry has started examining how the pandemic affected care services for older and disabled people, with families describing the crisis as one of the worst failures of the pandemic.
Nearly 46,000 care home residents died with Covid in England and Wales between March 2020 and January 2022, with many deaths happening in the first weeks of the outbreak.
Families have waited years for this part of the inquiry, which will look at key decisions including why hospital patients were moved quickly into care homes in March 2020 without being tested for Covid.
Pete Weatherby KC, representing bereaved families, told the inquiry that a top government official had called what happened a "generational slaughter" in care homes.
"We call out the callous way that family members were treated by politicians and policy makers, referring to them as bed blockers and people nearing the end regardless of the virus," he said.
The inquiry heard how care homes were told to take patients from hospitals to free up beds. Between early March and early June 2020, around 25,000 patients were moved to care homes, many without Covid tests.
Government advice on April 2, 2020 said "negative tests are not required" before patients went to care homes. This only changed on April 15, 2020.
A 2022 High Court ruling found this policy was unlawful because it failed to consider the risk to vulnerable care home residents.
Geraldine Treacy's mother Margaret Stewart died in a care home in Northern Ireland. She said: "The home had to accept people from the hospital, who hadn't been tested and subsequently they became very sick."
She described visiting her mother while wearing protective gear: "She couldn't see who I was and she was very, very upset. She was 87 and she was screaming for her mum."
Care workers described being left without proper protective equipment and testing kits early in the pandemic. One worker in Durham said their home lost 25 residents in three weeks.
"Once Covid was in our care home, it spread like wildfire and we could not do anything about it," they said. "At one point, 67 out of 87 residents tested positive."
Staff had to help families say goodbye over video calls. One worker recalled holding a resident's hand up to an iPad screen so his daughter could pretend to hold hands through the screen as he died.
The inquiry will also examine why "do not resuscitate" orders were placed on some elderly residents without their agreement, and policies that stopped families visiting for months.
Maureen Lewis, who manages St Ives Lodge care home in northeast London, lost seven residents to Covid. She remains angry about former health secretary Matt Hancock's claim in May 2020 that the government had "thrown a protective ring around care homes".
"There was no ring of protection for care homes at all," she was quoted as saying. "He needs to take accountability for the decisions he made."
Hancock will give evidence on Wednesday (2). Bereaved families say they want him to "tell the truth" about decisions made during the pandemic.
Jean Adamson, whose father Aldrick died with Covid in April 2020, called the hospital discharge policy "reckless".
"The way that my father and tens of thousands of other care home residents were sacrificed really gets me because I think it smacks of ageism and disability discrimination," Adamson said. The inquiry is expected to last five weeks, with 55 witnesses giving evidence. The final report will not be published until next year.