WHAT does the Free Trade Agreement (FTA), welcomed on Tuesday (6) by the British and Indian prime ministers, Sir Keir Starmer and Narendra Modi, mean for Eastern Eye readers?
The FTA certainly opens up many more opportunities for British Indian businessmen (and women).
As Eastern Eye’s Asian Rich List demonstrates year on year, there are thousands of successful British Indian business folk. Basically, there is the chance for a lot of people to make a lot of money. They won’t be held back by the “can’t work” or “won’t work” philosophy currently crippling parts of UK society. Some of India’s dynamism is bound to be rub off on the UK.
First, many Eastern Eye readers are familiar with the way Indian bureaucracy works and have learned to navigate their way through subcontinental officialdom. Prominent industrialists – like the Hindujas or Lakshmi Mittal or Lord Swraj Paul – don’t need any lessons on how to do business in India.
But British businesses, run by white people, may need a helping hand. This is where a little handholding or joint partnerships could be very useful.
No one is going to spell this out, but when the FTA is formally signed, India will effectively replace the US as the UK’s trusted partner. While US president Donald Trump is in power, the British government will not know from one day to the next where it stands on tariffs.
To be sure, the UK’s relationship with Europe is of the greatest importance, but Germany, France, Italy and Spain, all with ageing populations, are going through difficult economic challenges. In marked contrast, the economy of India, which has a young population, is expected to grow by around seven per cent for the foreseeable future. For the UK to ride piggyback on the Indian economy offers this country a lifeline.
Politically, too, the FTA is more important for prime minister Sir Keir Starmer than it is for India’s Narendra Modi. In the local elections, Labour (and the Tories) took a hammering from Nigel Farage’s Reform party. The FTA with India is Starmer’s first major success.
It has certainly been a long time in the making.
It is worth remembering that in 2022, Boris Johnson, when he was prime minister, promised the FTA would be signed “by Diwali”. Progress was made under Johnson’s successor, Rishi Sunak, but he couldn’t get the treaty over the line. One reason was that he would not do anything that would be interpreted by the right wing of the Conservative party as making concessions on migration.
Kemi Badenoch, who was secretary of state for business and international trade under Sunak, even boasted that she had held up the FTA because she would not give ground on migration. In fact, India had not sought any concessions on immigration. It was just that Badenoch wanted to appear tough on immigration to the far right of her party.
Labour’s links with India had weakened in the 14 years the party was in opposition. But Jonathan Reynolds, the understated but competent business and trade secretary, was able to build on the negotiations that had been conducted under the Tories. He and the Indian commerce minister, Piyush Goyal, were able to reach agreement.
The FTA does give Labour a chance to rebuild its relationship with British Indian voters. On such issues as Kashmir and terrorism, Starmer will now go against his Pakistani-origin MPs and not do anything to upset Modi. Politically, the FTA is a godsend for Starmer. There are reports that in a cabinet reshuffle that is apparently imminent, he will sack the culture secretary, Lisa Nandy. That would undermine his efforts to repair relations with Indian origin voters. On her recent visit to Mumbai and Delhi, Nandy was able to sign a far-reaching cultural agreement with India. She also emphasised that she was the only Indian origin cabinet minister in Starmer’s government. But the prime minister, who is said to be “thin skinned”, has apparently not forgiven her for not backing him for the party leadership.
How the FTA works out in practice remains to be seen. But the British public will become aware, probably for the first time, that nearly a thousand companies from India have invested in the UK and created thousands of jobs.
Bilateral trade, currently $60 billion (£45bn), is projected to double by 2030 – that is only five years away.
The FTA will come as very bad news to the likes of Farage and the former Tory home secretary, Suella Braverman, because obviously the planes from India will be full of Indian executives. It may become difficult to get business class seats in both directions. Bur that is the price of prosperity.
In a post Brexit world, in which China is seen as an enemy and America no longer as a friend, India has the potential to become one of the UK’s most important trading partners. And that does have implications for Eastern Eye readers who work in the UK-India business corridor.
What the FTA means for India was explained by Vikram Doraiswami, the Indian high commissioner in the UK.
“This is our biggest and most ambitious FTA,” he told Eastern Eye.
It contained 26 chapters covering a wide range of areas, including notably IT security.
Young Indians who came to the UK to work for short periods would not be required to make National Insurance contributions for three years.
Students would also benefit, he said. The figures for 2023-2024 showed that out of 752,000 international students in the UK, the biggest cohort – 107,480 – came from India. China had been pushed into second place with 98,400.
“The FTA will create new opportunities for India and the UK,” the high commissioner declared.
That appears to be especially true for Eastern Eye readers.
Bertrice Pompe (CL) and Bernadette Dugasse (CR), who were both born on Diego Garcia, speak outside High Court following their campaign's failed bid to prevent Britain transferring ownership of the Chagos Islands to Mauritius, on May 22, 2025 in London.
A BRITISH court on Thursday cleared the way for the government to proceed with a deal to return the Chagos Islands to Mauritius, lifting a temporary injunction that had blocked the signing of the agreement.
The deal would involve the UK transferring the Indian Ocean archipelago to Mauritius and paying to lease the US-UK military base on Diego Garcia, the largest island in the territory.
Prime minister Keir Starmer was scheduled to finalise the agreement in a virtual signing ceremony with Mauritian representatives on Thursday. However, a last-minute injunction granted to two Chagossian women by London's High Court delayed the process.
The injunction, granted early Thursday morning, temporarily blocked the deal, leading to criticism of the government. At a 10:30am hearing, Judge Martin Chamberlain lifted the ban, stating that extending it could harm the UK’s national and public interest. He added that any further legal challenges must be brought before the Court of Appeal.
“We welcome the judge's ruling today,” a government spokesperson said.
The opposition Conservatives criticised the proposed agreement. “You’re seeing British sovereign territory being given away to an ally of China, and billions of pounds of British taxpayers’ money being spent for the privilege,” said Conservative MP Robert Jenrick. “This was always a bad deal,” he added.
Earlier, the two Chagossian women, Bernadette Dugasse and Bertrice Pompe, had sought the injunction after a leaked newspaper report on Wednesday night indicated that the deal was set to be announced.
Outside the court, about 50 protesters gathered. The women's lawyer, Philip Rule, said the government was acting “unlawfully” and argued that Thursday could be the court’s last chance to intervene.
Starmer has said Britain’s ownership of the Chagos Islands has been questioned by international legal rulings and that an agreement with Mauritius is the only way to ensure the base remains operational.
The base on Diego Garcia is leased to the United States and is considered a key military facility in the Asia-Pacific, having been used during the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.
Ahead of the court’s ruling, a government spokesperson told AFP, “The deal is the right thing to protect the British people and our national security.”
The Conservative Party called the agreement a “sellout for British interests”.
Britain retained the Chagos Islands after Mauritius became independent in the 1960s. Thousands of Chagossian residents were later removed from the islands and have pursued legal claims for compensation.
In 2019, the International Court of Justice recommended that the UK return the islands to Mauritius following decades of legal disputes.
Under the proposed deal, the UK would obtain a 99-year lease for the base, with the option to renew. The government has not disclosed the cost but has not denied reports of a £90 million annual fee.
Mauritian prime minister Navin Ramgoolam has said Mauritius would continue to pursue full sovereignty over the islands if the United States did not support the agreement.
NET migration to the UK dropped to 431,000 in 2024, down from 860,000 in the year to December 2023, according to new estimates released on Thursday by the Office for National Statistics (ONS). The drop is the largest since the Covid pandemic and reflects changes to work and study visa rules.
"Long-term net migration is down by almost 50 per cent," the ONS said. "We are seeing reductions in people arriving on work- and study-related visas, and an increase in emigration over the 12 months to December 2024, especially people leaving who originally came on study visas once pandemic travel restrictions to the UK were eased."
The figures also showed that immigration from non-EU+ countries had declined. The term ‘non-EU+’ refers to countries outside the EU as well as Norway, Iceland, Liechtenstein and Switzerland. Recent years have seen high numbers of arrivals from countries such as India, Nigeria and Pakistan.
Net migration had peaked at 906,000 in the year to June 2023. The latest fall of 297,000 comes in the year that included the first six months of the Labour government under prime minister Keir Starmer, who took office in July 2024.
The ONS noted that fewer people were arriving on work and study visas, following rule changes aimed at reducing arrivals. The previous Conservative government had tightened visa conditions, including higher salary thresholds and restrictions on family members joining migrants.
Starmer, who earlier in May said he would reduce migration over the next four years, had announced new immigration policies including a cut in overseas care workers, a longer qualifying period before migrants can settle, and new powers to deport foreign criminals.
The drop in net migration is expected to offer some political relief to Starmer amid pressure from the anti-immigration Reform UK party, which made gains in recent local elections.
Thinktank British Future said the figures would surprise most of the public. Citing new Focaldata research, it said only 10 per cent of people in Britain had expected net migration to fall, while 58 per cent thought it would increase. Another 28 per cent expected it to stay the same.
Sunder Katwala, Director of British Future, said: “This significant fall in net migration will surprise 90 per cent of the public, who expected numbers to keep going up.
“So Keir Starmer is in the unusual position for a PM of having exceeded expectations on immigration – though largely by not cancelling measures introduced by his predecessors.
“That gives him an opportunity to take a more pragmatic approach, managing the pressures and keeping the gains of immigration – rather than competing in a political auction over which party can pretend to eliminate it.”
British Future said the lower numbers largely reflect the continuation of policy changes made by the previous administration. It added that further reductions of around 100,000 were expected based on measures outlined in the recent Immigration White Paper.
Focaldata’s previous research also showed a divided public opinion on immigration. About 50 per cent want immigration reduced, while 45 per cent prefer numbers to stay the same or increase.
Among those who want a reduction, 49 per cent cited irregular migration and small boat Channel crossings as their priority. Only 26 per cent said they wanted overall net migration numbers reduced.
When asked what types of immigration they would reduce, most people said they would not cut migration of workers such as doctors (77 per cent), care home staff (71 per cent), fruit pickers (70 per cent), catering staff (63 per cent), lorry drivers (63 per cent), and engineers (65 per cent). Two-thirds (65 per cent) also preferred not to reduce the number of international students.
Among people who voted Labour in 2024, 55 per cent preferred immigration numbers to remain the same or rise.
Keep ReadingShow less
British Chagossians demonstrate in Westminster asking for the right to determine their own future on October 07, 2024.
THE UK government has been temporarily stopped from finalising a deal with Mauritius over the Chagos Islands, after a High Court judge granted an injunction on Thursday.
The injunction prevents Britain from going ahead with an agreement that would transfer sovereignty of the Chagos Islands to Mauritius, while allowing the UK to keep control of the Diego Garcia military base in the Indian Ocean.
The proposed deal, which was first announced in October, includes a 99-year lease for the UK to retain the base on Diego Garcia, the largest island in the Chagos archipelago.
The injunction was issued after legal action brought by Bernadette Dugasse and Bertrice Pompe, both British nationals born on Diego Garcia.
The Telegraph reported that prime minister Keir Starmer had been expected to attend a virtual signing ceremony with officials from the Mauritian government.
In 1965, Britain separated the Chagos Islands from Mauritius – which became independent in 1968 – to establish the British Indian Ocean Territory.
No official financial terms of the deal have been made public, though media reports have estimated the cost to Britain at 9 billion pounds.
US president Donald Trump, who took office in November, expressed his support for the agreement in February following a meeting with Starmer in Washington. Former president Joe Biden had also backed the deal.
(With inputs from agencies)
Keep ReadingShow less
Keir Starmer gestures during a reception in Downing Street, central London. (Photo by HANNAH MCKAY/POOL/AFP via Getty Images)
PRIME MINISTER Keir Starmer on Wednesday (21) signalled he was open to reversing a widely criticised cut in winter fuel payments to the elderly, weeks after a bruising set of local election results for his Labour party.
Starmer told parliament he recognised that older people were still feeling the pressure of a cost-of-living crisis and he wanted to ensure that more pensioners become eligible for winter fuel payments.
"As the economy improves, we want to take measures that will impact on people's lives, and therefore we will look at the (winter payment) threshold, but that will have to be part of a fiscal event," he said, referring to a budget expected in October.
Starmer's Labour government announced the cut soon after taking office last July as part of wider spending reductions which it said were necessary to fix a hole in the public finances left by the previous Tory administration.
The cuts were cited as one factor in Labour losing ground to Nigel Farage's right-wing Reform UK party in local elections earlier this month. Reform also leads in opinion polls.
The payments, worth £200-£300, subsidise winter heating bills for millions of older people.
Offering them to more pensioners by adjusting the threshold at which people receive them will be viewed as an embarrassing U-turn for Starmer, who had refused to back down on the issue despite opposition from dozens of Labour lawmakers as well as trade unions close to the party.
Government ministers had argued that many of the fuel payments were received by wealthy people who did not need the help.
Media reports in recent weeks have said the government was considering reversing the cuts following the poor local election results.
(Reuters)
Keep ReadingShow less
The Consumer Prices Index reached 3.5 per cent last month, up from 2.6 per cent in March.
THE UK's annual inflation rate rose more than expected in April due to sharp increases in energy and water bills, according to official data released on Wednesday.
The Consumer Prices Index reached 3.5 per cent last month, up from 2.6 per cent in March, the Office for National Statistics (ONS) said. Analysts had expected a rise to 3.3 per cent.
At 3.5 per cent, the inflation rate was the highest since the start of 2024, the ONS said.
"I am disappointed with these figures because I know cost of living pressures are still weighing down on working people," chancellor Rachel Reeves said.
From April, UK regulators allowed private companies to raise household utility bills, reflecting changes in oil and gas markets and the financial positions of water companies.
"Significant increases in household bills caused inflation to climb steeply," ONS acting director general Grant Fitzner said.
"Gas and electricity bills rose... compared with sharp falls at the same time last year," he said.
He added, "Water and sewerage bills also rose strongly... as did vehicle excise duty, which all pushed the headline rate up to its highest level since the beginning of last year."
Analysts expect energy bills to fall from July, following recent declines in oil prices after US President Donald Trump's tariffs actions.