MasterChef Australia should not display India’s national Flag disrespectfully!

Indian FlagMasterChef Indian Flag 

(Correct display)                                                     (Incorrect Display)

I was called by Ms Sandhya Reddy (INDAUS committee member) who was quite concerned about the upside down display of Indian Flag. Mr Shravan Reddy too sent me a Tweet with the screen shot of the offending display yesterday.

We know that the upside down display of Indian Flag or national Flag of any country is a disrespectful act.

I called Channel 10 yesterday itself and then sent an email to them as well as MasterChef Australia, asking them to remove the disrespectful display of India’s national Flag.

I also sent tweets to Channel Ten and MasterChef Australia. It is a Logie-award winning popular cooking Game Show, based on original British MasterChef show. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MasterChef_Australia

————————————————————————————————————————–

Tweets:

“Yadu Singh@dryadusingh 22h

Guys, U are using Indian Flag upside down, which is disrespectful. Pl correct it ASAP. Right pic here.”

“Yadu Singh@dryadusingh 23h

is using Indian Flag upside down. Please correct this disrespectful display ASAP.”

—————————————————————————————————————————–

I followed this by calling Channel Ten, MasterChef Australia and Shine Australia (producer of MasterChef Australia) today.

I have asked them all to rectify the mistake and apologise for it during the programme broadcast.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flag_of_India

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_does_it_mean_when_the_flag_is_flown_upside_down

http://www.australiaday.com.au/about/flag-flying-protocols/#.U89-CGuKDIU

Improper and incorrect display including upside down display of Indian Flag is not permitted by law. Display and use of Indian Flag is governed by Flag Code of India 2002. Improper (intentional)misuse and display are punishable by Law at least in India.

We ask MasterChef Australia, Shine Australia and Channel 10 to stop improper display of India’s national Flag immediately.

May I ask Indian High Commission, Canberra and various Consulates in Australia to do their bits to get it rectified urgently.

Dr Yadu Singh

http://www.twitter.com/dryadusingh

http://www.facebook.com/dryadusingh

dryadusingh@gmail.com

 

INDAUS going for fresh elections on 20th July, 2014!

Sydney 8th July, 2014

INDAUS Inc had some difficulties due to issues inside the Executive Committee. Since it became impossible to resolve them, it called an Executive Committee meeting on 18th May, 2014, after Secretary, Mr Anagan Babu refused to call an EC meeting despite repeated requests. Not only did Mr Anagan Babu and Mr Stanley D’Cuz not attend the meeting, but also they tried to sabotage it. They were calling others to not attend it.

So, What is their agenda?

Not calling an EC meeting, not attending an EC meeting, telling others to not attend it, not doing anything on behalf of INDAUS and writing to people outside INDAUS seem to fit with their agenda to destroy INDAUS.

People had had enough and were not prepared to be blackmailed by these two. You expect Public Officer to play a constructive role, but he was very much part of this destructive game. Mr D’Cruz is in fact the mentor of Mr Babu in their destructive games.

This was an extra-ordinary situation, needing extra-ordinary steps.

EC meeting was called by the President and Vice President. See below.

EC Meeting passed an unanimous resolution to dissolve the committee and request an independent person and Lawyer, Mr Navjot Singh, to be returning Officer for the election on 20th July, 2014. Members will elect a new team then. There was no other option. The dysfunction created by these two had to end.

We have the unfortunate situation where these two disgruntled persons, Mr Stanley D’Cruz and Mr Anagan Babu, whose contributions have been negligible, if not negative, have tried to damage us by writing a public email to our adversaries and media. Some of our senseless adversaries are running a social media campaign against us.

There is no office bearer in INDAUS right now, until 2oth July election. There is no President or Secretary anymore.

Mr Babu wrote himself as the secretary, which is not correct. There is no Executive Committee anymore until 20th July, 204.

Contrary to their claims, INDAUS is not under the supervision of Dept of Fair Trading or anyone else. It is a disgusting and untrue claim.

Harming INDAUS of which they held high positions is exactly the behaviour of what Jai Chand and Mir Zaffer did in our Indian history. This is an ultimate disloyal conduct. This is an outrageous and despicable act on behalf of Mr D’Cruz and Mr Babu.

This indiscipline and their anti-INDAUS activities will not be tolerated and actions will take place in due course.

I enclose the EC meeting notice dated 5th May, 2014 and the Minutes of our EC meeting dated 18th May, 2014.

EC meeting request 5th May, 2014
————————————————————————————————————-
5th May, 2014
To
The EC members of INDAUS Inc
(By email)
Despite many requests to secretary to call an EC meeting, an EC meeting has not been called.
Similarly, despite several requests to Secretary, the list of INDAUS members has not been given to
the EC members. This is harmful to INDAUS and is clearly not satisfactory or acceptable.
We are therefore calling the EC meeting:
At 4 PM, 18th May, Sunday, 2014, Wenty League, 50 Smith St, Wentworthville NSW 2145
Agenda:
1. Payment approval for pending invoices and expenses incurred on INDAUS behalf
2. Financial statement and status
3. List of INDAUS members
4. Complaints about INDAUS members
5. Setting the process for Constitutional amendment to overcome the clause stating that the
first Executive Committee will work for 3 years
6. Any other issue with the approval from the Chair
Secretary, Mr Anagan Babu, and Treasurer, Mr Anil Sharma, are requested to bring all relevant
documents/statements in hard copy form to the meeting. Public Officer is requested to bring the
papers he has submitted to Dept of Fair Trading Dept, after AGM.
All EC members are requested to attend this important EC meeting.
Best regards
Dr Yadu Singh Mr Gurdeep Singh
President Vice President
INDAUS INDAUS
—————————————————————————————————————–
—————————————————————————————————————–
INDAUS Inc Minutes 18-5-14

Minutes of Executive Committee Meeting, Sunday, 18th May, 2014, Wenty League, Wentworthville, NSW.

Present:
1. Dr Yadu Singh, President
2. Gurdeep Singh, Vice President
3. Mr Jagdish Lodhia, Committee member
4. Venkata Prasad Ragipani , Committee member
5. Chidanand Puttarevanna, Committee member
6. Sarath Madhavapeddi, Committee member
7. Arun Nanda, Committee member
8. Mr Anil Sharma (who could not attend the meeting physically but came over phone, heard the resolutions and agreed with them, and who had sent an SMS earlier in the day favouring dissolution of EC, and holding fresh election)

Apologies:
1. Mr Abhilash Narendran (via Sarath Madhavapeddi)
2. Anagan Babu (who sent a long SMS with many words including “Anyway, I am not available today”)
Absent:
1. Mr Stanley D’Cruz
2. Dr Ray Pallath
3. Mr Gaurav Nirwal (currently overseas, but has earlier expressed his desire in writing to resign from his position in EC)

Chaired by Mr Jagdish Lodhia

Meeting Chair welcomed members and declared that the quorum (which is 5 for INDAUS EC meetings) is met, and that the meeting is constitutionally valid and proper meeting. Mr Gurdeep Singh was little late but took part in all resolutions and decisions.

Background of the today’s Executive Committee was outlined as below.

On 5th May, 2014, President (Dr Yadu Singh) and Vice President (Clr Gurdeep Singh), called for an Executive Committee (EC) meeting to be held on May 18, 2014, after repeated requests for an EC meeting were not acted upon by Secretary (Mr Anagan Babu). Requests from EC members for INDAUS membership list was also declined by Secretary (Mr Anagan Babu) and Public Officer (Mr Stanley D’Cruz). It is clear that current EC is grossly dysfunctional. No EC meeting has taken place since Dec, 2013, despite numerous requests, no activity has been done by INDAUS since Aug, 2013. There is a serious question mark on the survival and reputation of INDAUS now. INDAUS is in extra-ordinary situation.

All agreed that the current EC is not functioning at all and everyone, including those who were not in the meeting today, wants the current EC to be dissolved and fresh elections to be organized to elect a new Executive Committee.

It was also debated and agreed that Community Justice Centre (CJC) route to get rid of current EC is not practical because CJC cannot force attendance of anyone without their consent. It was felt that Mr Stanley D’Cruz or Mr Babu approaching CJC on behalf of INDAUS is not appropriate because EC has not given any such authority or direction to either of them. Executive Committee (EC) meetings are the right forum to discuss, debate and decide issues in any association.

It was also debated and agreed that removal of current EC via Special General Meeting (SGM) is also not practical or necessary for various reasons, including availability of easier and more practical route of an EC meeting.

It was debated and agreed that the best, the most practical and the least harmful/disruptive option is to dissolve EC via an EC meeting, and organize fresh election under supervision of a neutral person. After all, everyone including those who were not in the meeting today wants to have current EC dissolved and new one elected.

All accepted that there is no other practical option to deal with gross dysfunction and infighting inside INDAUS EC, except to dissolve it and order fresh election under supervision of a neutral person with legal background.

Following resolutions were passed unanimously, signed by members.

1. Treasurer, Mr Anil Sharma, is requested to pay Maya Da Dhaba and Website providers within 7 days from today.
2. Current EC is hereby dissolved effective from close of business (COB) on 30/5/2014 and fresh election is to be held within 30 days, under supervision of a neutral person (Mr Navjot Singh), who is also a practising legal professional and is not a member of INDAUS.
3. Mr Navjot Singh is appointed as the Public Officer, and previous Public Officer Mr Stanley D’Cruz is removed from this position.
4. Mr Navjot Singh will take over the responsibility immediately and will complete formalities with Dept of Fair Trading Dept.
5. Mr Navjot Singh will be the returning Officer who will supervise the election, to be conducted within 30 days from 30/5/2014.
6. Mr Navjot Singh will supervise and execute the process of notice for election of INDAUS Executive committee, seeking help from outgoing President and secretary.
7. EC dissolution will be effective from COB of 30/5/14.
8. Fresh election of EC to be held on/before 30/6/14.
Mr Anil Sharma (Treasurer) came over phone, heard above resolutions, and agreed with them.

Executive Committee also decided to authorize Dr Yadu Singh (current President) to deal with any and all urgent matters, including media enquiries involving INDAUS, while new committee is getting elected. (This part was passed by everyone except Sarath Madhavapeddi, who had left the meeting by this time.)

Meeting minutes written by Dr Yadu Singh

Signed by Meeting chair: Mr Jagdish Lodhia
——————————————————————————————————————-

I urge OFBJP Australia’s Balesh Singh Dhankar, Nitin Gupta, Vijeth Shetty and others to be balanced in their commentary and include INDAUS EC meeting minutes if they can not stop from making senseless comments against us.

This is not a core OFBJP job to abuse community associations and people in them in their mad rush to become community leaders themselves. OFBJP needs to stay away from community politics and work with all associations. If they do not mend their ways, they will be harming OFBJP and BJP.

I am ashamed to have trusted Mr Stanley D’Cruz and Mr Anagan Babu, but that is life.

I did not wish to wash internal laundry publicly but have no option but respond in this manner.

I am happy to answer any question.

Dr Yadu Singh/Sydney/8th July, 2014

Outside loudspeakers from places of worship in India should be banned!

Loudspeakers

I read a story in Indian Express newspaper today, which talks about communal tension in a village in Western Uttar Pradesh, India because of loudspeakers from a temple.

http://indianexpress.com/article/india/politics/up-bjp-calls-mahapanchayat-against-removal-of-loudspeaker-from-temple/

I am aware of several such examples in India over the years. It is not just one off.

If you think about it, and use logic, you will start questioning the use of loudspeakers from such places. Why do we need loudspeakers from any place of worship? One of my friends , Ravi Bhatia, made a light-hearted, but brilliant, comment in my Facebook wall saying, “agreed. God is not deaf”. Another friend, Yogi Chouhan, made a very reflective comment that “God is usually found in silence”.

Outside use of loudspeakers is not needed because,

1. it can cause, and has caused, communal troubles in the past,

2. it also causes sound pollution,

3. it disturbs sleep and consequent harming of physical health of people,

4. it causes hearing damage,

4. it become a real nuisance to students during their exam times.

I remember vividly how I was disturbed by blaring sound of Devi Jagran overnighters and loud sound of Aazans from nearby mosques when I was in India.

Devotees of any religion do not need reminders from loudspeakers. If they are true followers of their religions, they will remember when to go to their temples or mosques. They will remember what they have to do as part of their religion. Religion is a private matter between us and our God, and it should remain this way!

Just in case you do not know, no Western country allows use of loudspeakers in the manner it is in India!

Why do people who are not from a particular religion need to be forced to hear the religious sounds and sermons from that religion?

Places of worship can use loudspeakers inside the premises (if needed), but not outside.

Indian Govt should ban them for outside use and enforce the ban effectively and without any exception,  favour, bias or discrimination.

Let this become a part of new India, which practises true secularism, not only in spirit but also in letters!

Let this become part of “Achchhe Din” (Good days) for India!

Dr Yadu Singh/Sydney/3rd July, 2014

http://www.facebook.com/dryadusingh

http://www.twitter.com/dryadusingh

The time for Hindi as the true national (Link) language in India has come!

Hindi

India has many states and many languages. Some states were formed on the basis of the language. It has its positives and it also has its negatives. It is not uncommon to experience difficulties in communicating things when visiting interiors of various states. While English often acts like a link language, but this is mostly confined to cities and bigger towns. A person from typical North Indian interior will struggle to communicate inside the interior of South India and vice versa.

I believe India needs a language which can act as a true Link language or National language, which can facilitate communications among Indians throughout the country

English can not be this language, even though it is an important language. It is mostly confined in the cities and bigger towns of India, where many can use it. Approx. only 10% are able to do it.

Hindi, on the other hand is the language spoken by 45% and understood by many more. Bollywood movies have been a great help in making Hindi understood everywhere in India.

Today, it will be impossible for any other Indian language to match Hindi’s reach and popularity in India.  Saying this should not mean that we are recommending disrespect to other languages or undermining them. It is a practical matter, and should be taken as such.

I love all Indian languages as well as English, which, of course is the language of science, Medicine, international trade, business and diplomacy. English is a must for Indians. I have no doubt about it.

There has to be ONE language in India, which should be able to act as the true LINK language for communication among all and sundry in India. That language will be HINDI if we analyse this matter rationally and logically.

I have not read views of any other person on this matter. My thought process here is not influenced by any other.

In my view, India should adopt and implement “Three Language Formula”, which means;

1. everyone learns Hindi, English and their mother tongue/language of their state,

2. everyone in Hindi speaking North India learns Hindi, English and one language from South India.

I believe it will promote integration, understanding and communication. It may also promote intra-national trade and business.

It is not at all about imposing hegemony of Hindi language, but it is all about pragmatism and practical need of a language which can be an instrument to improve communication among Indians in the country.

This will also be a “Win Win” decision for India, Hindi and South Indian languages!

I hope the new HRD Minister, Ms Smriti Irani and Prime Minister, Sri Narendra Modi do something in this direction.

 

Dr Yadu Singh/Sydney/20th June, 2014

http://www.twitter.com/dryadusingh

http://www.facebook.com/dryadusingh

 

Views of Tim Wilson, Australian Human Rights Commissioner, on section 18c of Racial Discrimination Act!

Sydney, 19th June, 2014

I met Tim Wilson, Commissioner, Australian Human Rights Commission, at an event to celebrate Israel’s 66th Independence Day recently. Our brief chat was focused on Section 18c of Racial Discrimination Act. He has some views in regards to this and its impact on Freedom of Speech. When informed that I have a Blog and have written a post (http://tinyurl.com/pqfv8ct) which has also been published by many newspapers (http://tinyurl.com/qcs2gvv, http://tinyurl.com/ldnwkar, http://tinyurl.com/qd6xjjv) with my views arguing why Section 18c should not be repealed, he expressed his interest to write his views on my Blog. I agreed to have his views as a “Guest Blogger”.

Here are Tim Wilson’s views, which have been reproduced without any changes.Tim Wilson Australian Human Rights Commissioner

———————————————————————————————————————————–
It is not in anyone’s interests, especially minorities, to undermine Australia’s liberal democratic values, impose censorship or encourage inequality before the law.

Australia is a great country. Like all countries it is on a long journey to become a more perfect society.

People come to Australia from across the world because it offers a liberal democracy and respects the human rights of individuals to stand up, speak out and seek out opportunities. It doesn’t matter who you are, or where you came from.

Everyone in Australia is expected to treat others equally and with respect, and that includes treating everyone equally under the law.

Equality before the law is a basic human right. It is also an important principle for minorities. Inequality before the law rarely favours minorities.

If there is anything that is likely to lead to resentment between different sections of multicultural Australia, it is that laws treat some more favourably than others.

Yet, that is precisely what the current wording of Section 18C of the Racial Discrimination Act does.

Coupled with the importance of free speech, that is why so many people support changes to the law. Supporters range from academics, to politicians, newspaper columnists, to representatives of minority communities and civil rights activists.

The current Racial Discrimination Act has always been controversial.

It was preceded by three significant national inquiries that dealt with tackling racism. None of the three recommended that Section 18C should exist in its current form. The then Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission expressly recommended against laws of this kind.

Under Section 18C it is unlawful to “offend, insult, humiliate or intimidate” a person on the basis of their race.

The current laws go much further than hate speech laws in India which focus on the promotion of disharmony between groups in the community.

Australia’s laws have a chilling effect on free speech and can lead to censorship.

The debate is not about if we should change the law, it is about how the law should be changed.

The Attorney-General, George Brandis QC, has put forward an exposure draft of a possible reform.

The proposal is not final. Feedback from members of the general community is being considered for inclusion to improve its current wording and identify shortcomings.

The principle objective of the Attorney-General’s proposal is to shift the focus from stopping speech that people simply do not like, toward outlawing vilification and abuse.

Australia’s law sets an incredibly low bar on restricting free speech. The bar is set so low the standard in the law is based on the emotional response that people have to speech they don’t like.

Free speech is a basic human right. It is afforded to everyone. From a human rights perspective, the basis of limiting free speech is when it comes into conflict with other core human rights. No one likes hearing things they find offensive. But there is no right to not hear offensive speech.

By comparison, we know that censorship is dangerous. Censorship is rarely used as a tool against the majority, its axe normally falls on minorities.

But the problem with the law isn’t just about the type of speech that is censored, it is also how it is censored.

The test to see whether speech offends, insults, humiliates or intimidates is highly subjective. It is not based on the standard of a reasonable Australian based on all of the circumstances.

The test is based on the attitudes of a person within the group mentioned. That means the test shifts depending on what is said. That is not fair.

That is why the Australian Human Rights Commission accepted the proposal of the Attorney-General in his exposure draft to amend the Racial Discrimination Act that the test should be based on the attitudes of an average Australian.

So long as the test takes regard of all of the circumstances, the Attorney-General’s revised test is much fairer than the current law. It would also make the Racial Discrimination Act more consistent with other anti-discrimination laws.

The Racial Discrimination Act does not operate like any other anti-discrimination laws. For example, the Sex Discrimination Act does not have a test like 18C. The Sex Discrimination Act does not restrict public speech on the basis of gender or sexuality that is offensive or insulting.

The Sex Discrimination Act targets harassment in the workplace where one person clearly has  a power relationship over another. The definition of harassment under he Sex Discrimination Act can just as easily apply to men as it can to women.

Ironically, the Racial Discrimination Act doesn’t have a specific measure targeting workplace harassment.

Section 18C of the Racial Discrimination Act is also highly ineffective in targeting the sort of behaviour that we all want to wipe out.

Racism can have real and harmful impact on people. That is not in dispute.

The question is not if we end racism, it is how?

We cannot legislate racism out of existence. If we could we would have done so already.

Racism can only be ended through cultural change. Cultural change is not aided by having the law treat people unequally. It is aided by having a culture that expects people to stand up against racism.

As Sydney Football Star and Australian of the Year, Adam Goodes, said recently “what we want people to do is self-regulate. That’s what we want all of us to do in the community, is self-regulate when we see something we don’t agree with”.

He continued “we all have core values, and when we see people go outside those core values, we should feel the right to say something and call that person out”.

The law is an incredibly ineffective way to stop racism. It provides for a long and drawn out process. Creating a culture where people are held to account for their conduct by their peers is more effective.

A cultural response is quick, immediate and others know what other Australians think of their conduct.

Importantly it doesn’t require inequality before the law, censorship or undermine the liberal democratic values that are central to why so many people came to Australia in the first place.

Tim Wilson is Australia’s Human Rights Commissioner. tim.wilson@humanrights.gov.au

Tim Wilson
Human Rights Commissioner
Australian Human Rights Commission

Level 3, 175 Pitt Street, Sydney NSW 2000
GPO Box 5218, Sydney NSW 2001

What Indians in Australia expect from the Modi Govt

 

 
 
 

The new government should be proactive in considering the interests and welfare of the Indian community down under.

It is not a hyperbole to say that a new era has dawned in India with the swearing-in of the Modi Government on Monday, 26 May, 2014.

A decisive, “can do” leader, Sri Narendra Modi, is the Prime Minister. Indians, not just in India but around the world, are confident that things will change for the better and the Indian economy will grow rapidly.

People have expectations from the new government. While people have a wide variety of expectations, which they want the Modi Govt to deliver, there are some common themes in their expectations. Based on my interactions with many Indians in Australia, and based on my own thinking, there are a few things that people expect the new government to consider.

Prime Minister’s visit to Australia: There has not been any state visit by an Indian PM to Australia after the late Shri Rajiv Gandhi’s visit in 1980s. PM Modi should accept the invitation from Australia to schedule a state visit to Australia this year itself. Several Australian PMs have already visited India, but a reciprocal visit by an Indian PM is yet to happen. There should be time for the PM to interact with the community in at least one, but preferably two, major cities. The G20 summit is scheduled to happen in Brisbane on November 15 and 16, 2014. This will be a perfect opportunity for the Indian PM’s long overdue official visit to Australia too.

Genuine dual citizenship: This has been discussed and debated for long. There is an almost universal demand that overseas Indians be given a right to hold genuine dual citizenship with voting and property rights, if the country of their citizenship has no issue with this and if there are no security issues with granting dual citizenship to any particular overseas Indian. After all, Australia, USA, UK, NZ and many other developed as well as developing countries already offer this facility.

Visa on arrival for Australian citizens: Australian citizens, like many others including New Zealanders, should get the same visa-free arrival facilities in India. If this is not the case at present, it should be implemented without further delay.

Black money in overseas banks: Genuine, proactive and effective steps should be taken to tackle this menace and bring the money back to India within 12 months. No favour should be given to anyone irrespective of who they are or what connections they have. The decision to constitute a Special Investigation Team (SIT) for this purpose is good.

Effective anti-corruption body: A group of 10-15 people from civil society including judges, eminent jurists and overseas Indians (if possible) should be asked to review the Lok Pal Act, passed by the Lok Sabha earlier in the year, and suggest steps to rectify weakness to make it an effective corruption fighting body. This should be completed in the next 12 months.

The PM’s global Overseas Indians Advisory body: The PM should revamp his Global Advisory Body, constituted by the previous PM. People in it should be those who have significant presence and influence in their countries. The habit of Indian diplomats recommending non-descript and non-influential people for this body should eliminated.

Country specific Overseas Indian Advisory body: Countries with significant overseas Indian population (Australia is certainly one such country) should have an advisory body of not more than 10 people, which can be used for consultations and other advisory purposes, not only by the local GOI authorities/agencies, but also the relevant authorities/agencies in India.

Annual dialogue between Indian and Australian leaders: PMs, Foreign Affairs Ministers and Defence Ministers should hold annual meeting/dialogue, with venues for such meeting/dialogue alternating between India and Australia.

Free Trade Agreement (FTA): The pace of the discussions and negotiations should be accelerated so that FTA can be concluded by the end of 2015.

Bilateral Nuclear Trade negotiations: The pace of the discussions and negotiations should be accelerated with the goal to conclude it by the 30 June, 2015.

Bilateral and multi-lateral defence exercises between India and Australia: India and Australia should work actively to enhance their defence & strategic relations bilaterally and multilaterally in the pattern agreed prior to the 2007 Rudd Govt in Australia.

Hindi teachings in Australian Universities: To increase India’s soft power and increase the numbers of India-literate Australians, India should consider funding such teaching courses in some select Universities in Australia.

Facilitations of Australian Universities and TAFE to have campuses in India: Many Australian institutions are ranked quite highly in various world Universities ranking systems. Collaborations in this field should be actively facilitated and encouraged, following a pragmatic and win-win module.

Indian Consulate in Brisbane: Queensland is an important state for Indian investment. Indian business houses like the Adani group have an important and a significant presence in this state. It is important to have an Indian Consulate in Brisbane.

India House or Indian Cultural Centre in major capital cities: The Indian community has grown significantly in Australia. It is increasingly felt that such centres are required, at least in Sydney and Melbourne. While some funding will be raised locally, a significant part of the funds should come from Indian Govt. Govt of India (GOI) Funds, if any, allocated for something of this nature to be established in the Indian Consulate premises in Sydney CBD should be reviewed and re-allocated for a centre of this nature in areas like Parramatta or Blacktown, where the Indian community has a substantial presence. Sydney CBD is not a practical or appropriate site for an Indian Cultural Centre.

Overseas Indians’ property in India: Many overseas Indians are seeing that their properties are illegally occupied and face threats to their safety when they visit India. Court cases go on for extended periods of time. IPC should be amended to tackle this menace.

Interactions between GOI agencies and Indian Australian community: It is often felt that GOI authorities in Australia do not interact with people sufficiently, thus leading to a communication gap. It is a common experience that there is a significant gap between what we expect and what is delivered. Steps should be implemented to improve the situation.

Minister for Overseas Indian Affairs visit to Australia: With approx. 500,000 people of Indian heritage in Australia, a biennial visit of Minister of Overseas Indian Affairs (The Hon Sushma Swaraj) or her deputy, The Hon Gen (Retd) V K Singh, should be included in the official GOI travel calendar. This will help facilitate interactions with the community and facilitate Overseas Indians’ investment in India.

Streamlined grievance redressal mechanism for Overseas Indians: Overseas Indian Affairs ministry has often not been very helpful and help has often not come in a timely fashion due to excessive bureaucratic influences. This should be reviewed and streamlined.

Exchanges between Academicians and civil Society leaders: We need regular bilateral exchange visits of academics, journalists, leaders and civil society leaders. This will help improve relations between the two countries. The scope and numbers should be increased.

This is our wish list, which we believe is doable, not difficult and will provide multiple benefits to various stake-holders, including India.

Dr Yadu Singh/Sydney/13th June, 2014

http://www.twitter.com/dryadusingh

http://www.facebook.com/dryadusingh

au.linkedin.com/in/dryadusingh/

======================================================================================================= 

This was originally published in Indian Sun News magazine, Sydney on 10th June, 2014.  http://www.theindiansun.com.au/top-story/indians-australia-expect-modi-govt/

=======================================================================================================

 

Australian Skilled Occupations List (SOL) for 2014-15 announced!

Skilled Occupations List for 2014-15 Announced

webster By Mark Webster
Tuesday, 10 June 2014

The Department of Immigration has announced the new Skilled Occupations List (SOL) which will apply from 1 July 2014.

Occupations Removed from the SOL

There have been no occupations removed from the Skilled Occupations List.

This will be a great relief to Accountants who were slated for removal from the Skilled Occupations List in February 2014.

Occupations Added to the SOL

The following occupations have been added to the Skilled Occupations List:

“Tilers” have also been added to the list – it is not entirely clear which occupations are affected, but the new occupations could be as follows:

Rationale for Changes

The Assistant Minister for Immigration, Michaelia Cash, has indicated in her joint press release that Chefs have been added due to the occupation being in short supply. Strong growth is also projected in the cafe and restaurant sector.

The Assistant Minister also indicated that there is a “known deficit” of skilled workers in the hospitality and construction industries in Regional Areas.

Effect of Changes

The SOL is used in the following contexts:

As a result, Chefs, Bricklayers and Tilers will now be able to apply for the above visa types.

Change of Advisor on Skilled Occupations List in Future?

The Skilled Occupations list has traditionally been set every year based on advice from AWPA (Australian Workforce and Productivity Agency).

Given that AWPA has now been axed, advice on the SOL will presumably be given by a different body in future, and it will be interesting to watch developments in the next year.

References

Assistant Minister Press Announcement – In-demand trades added to the Skilled Occupation List The Australian – AWPA Axing Short Sighted,

———————————————————————————————————————————————————————————–

This article has been taken from https://www.acacia-au.com/skilled-occupations-list-2014-2015-Announced.php, with permission from Mr Mark Webster. Please note that I have no financial interest or interest or relation of any type with Acacia Immigration Australia or any conflict of interest in this matter. I picked this article because it is comprehensive and covers the relevant matter well. People should check with Dept of Immigration & Border Control or Australian Embassy/High Commission or professional & reputed migration advisor/agent in their area before making any decision in regards to their immigration/studies matters.

———————————————————————————————————————————————————————————

Dr Yadu Singh/Sydney/12th June, 2014

http://www.twitter.com/dryadusingh

http://www.facebook.com/dryadusingh