India among preferred FDI destinations: E&Y

According to the ‘9th Annual European Attractiveness Survey’ by Ernst & Young, India will rank fifth among the most attractive destinations for European firms within the next three years, mainly on account of its perceived specialisation as a hub for low-cost outsourcing business

According to the ‘9th Annual European Attractiveness Survey’ by Ernst & Young, India will rank fifth among the most attractive destinations for European firms within the next three years, mainly on account of its perceived specialisation as a hub for low-cost outsourcing business

New Delhi: Despite regulatory hurdles, India continues to be among the preferred destinations for foreign direct investment (FDI) due to the country’s high economic growth, with both Mumbai and Delhi being touted as among the cities likely to produce the next Microsoft or Google, reports PTI.

According to the ‘9th Annual European Attractiveness Survey’ by Ernst & Young, India will rank fifth among the most attractive destinations for European firms within the next three years, mainly on account of its perceived specialisation as a hub for low-cost outsourcing business.

“Foreign investors are not deterred by current regulatory issues to invest in India... India’s perceived specialisation as a low-cost business process outsourcing (BPO) hub continues to appeal investors across the globe,” the report said.

As per the E&Y report, a huge number of respondents felt that India would be the home to the next big brand name in the IT sector.

“... Eight per cent of global respondents named Mumbai and 4% named New Delhi as the best cities to produce the next Microsoft or Google,” it said.

Around 800 executives from top-level global firms participated in the survey.

As per the survey, 31% of the participants each felt that Western Europe and China would be among the attractive markets for investing within three years.

“India ranked at the fifth position, with 17% of respondents believing the country to be a profitable economy for expansion of business,” E&Y said.

Experts have been warning against regulatory hurdles and a slowdown in the reform process, including failure to liberalise the retail and insurance sectors further, as likely irritants in attracting FDI.

FDI into the country fell to $19.43 billion (Rs88,520 crore) in 2010-11 as against $25.83 billion (Rs12.31 lakh crore) in the previous fiscal, a decline of 25%.

“India is undergoing a transition in terms of investor perception of its market potential, bolstered by economic growth projected to surpass 8% annually,” the report said.

The Indian economy expanded by 8.5% in 2010-11, up from 8% in the previous fiscal. The Reserve Bank of India, in its annual monetary policy, said that growth is likely to slow down a bit but still clock around 8% this fiscal.

The survey also found that Asian countries find Europe to be a good investment destination, with India ranking 11th among the top investors globally to the continent.

User

How safe is your water purifier? HUL makes exaggerated claims

RTI activist exposes exaggerated claims by HUL that its water purifier kills one crore viruses per litre of water

"Ek litre pani mein ek crore virus marta hai", or one crore virus die in one litre of water. That's the claim by the water purifier maker Pureit, in a television commercial. The company tries to substantiate this claim with test results from the Pune-based National Institute of Virology (NIV). However, an RTI query has found Pureit's claim to be false.

According to a reply from NIV to an RTI application, the test was conducted on a sample of water of 0.67x105 Hepatitis E virus particles per litre, and not one crore virus as the sample size claimed. Therefore, the claim that one crore virus are killed, is not backed up. A copy of the test report and the RTI reply is available is with Moneylife.

NIV, which conducts comprehensive research on human viruses of public health concern, tested eight domestic water purifiers using 0.67x105 Hepatitis E virus particles per litre of water.

None of the water purifiers were named, but they were labelled as units, namely Unit I to VIII. The report revealed that only two water purifiers, that is Unit VII and Unit VIII passed the test.

Mumbai-based RTI activist Dr AR Shenoy evoked the RTI Act to seek details of the study by NIV. According to the reply, Unit VIII was the Pureit model manufactured by Hindustan Unilever (HUL). Mr Shenoy had asked whether any one of the brands was successful in removing/killing one crore viruses from one litre of water. The reply stated clearly that none of the water purifier brands tested had achieved this.

The report does not mention the names of any of the other water purifiers tested, apart from Pureit, which it says, removes 99.9% of virus particles.

Mr Shenoy says, "The test was conducted using 0.67x105 Hepatitis E virus particles per litre of water, which is less than one million virus particles. Pureit passed the test of removing/killing less than one million virus particles, as that was the sample size. The study did not take one crore as sample size, so this is a blatant lie and a claim made by the company that is misleading."

He said, "Pureit of Hindustan Unilever (HUL) has taken the liberty of twisting and misrepresenting the NIV report to its advantage. There is also a deliberate attempt on the part of NIV to please HUL, as the report does not mention the names of the other seven water purifiers, while it has no hesitation in mentioning Unit VIII as Pureit"
 
Dr Shenoy also pointed out that "Pureit has markets in Indonesia and Mexico, but, in these countries they don't make such tall claims of killing one crore viruses per litre, probably for fear of repercussions from the governments there."

In a reply to a query by Moneylife, HUL said the claim in the advertisement was based on the US EPA Log 4 standard for virus removal. Log 4 removal of virus from one millilitre of water would translate to one crore of virus in one litre of water. These claims are made based on strong scientific evidence.

User

COMMENTS

Ranit singh

6 years ago

in this country make the fool is best policy for selling anything,the quality controllers are big fool.

nagesh kini

6 years ago

This is a fit test case to lodge a claim of Rs. 1 crore announced by HUL for challenging.

Waman Karmarkar

6 years ago

I feel HUL claim is big and they are just looting the customers at the time of recharging the battries

ajit joglekar

6 years ago

Thanks Dr Shenoy.
With a significant percentage of population not even getting assured drinking water,due to failure of civic administration across metroes,cities and towns and villages,these profit oriented companies are spreading fear psychosis among those who can afford such equipments at home.It is upto ASCI(Advt.standards council of India )to take an active role and streamline the advertisers of such products from making such tall claims.
Creative admen like Prasoon Joshiji,Piyush Pandeyji have a constructive role to play here.

Sunil Date

6 years ago

I believe they were challenging with a price of Rs 1 Cr. Why don't you claim it ?

showerob

6 years ago

The system should be subject to an independent testing by organizations like the NSF International, or the WQA.

BHARAT KANANI

6 years ago

From the TV Ad, Common men interprets that HUL is offering a Price of One Crore.

nagesh kini

6 years ago

HUL as a part of its CSR come out with its take on publishing such misleading ads.
It is for the Fair Business Practices and Advertising Standards Board to initiate suo moto action.
No entity however large can get away with blue murder.

deepaksb

6 years ago

Its not HUL-but all big players are equally worst and dishonest-and govt.authorities are equally corrupt,including Indian Medical Association , BIS and Advt.standards of India.

TWO YEARS back - I had very BITTER experience with Eureka Forgbe's ( Aquaguard) -Water purifier costing Rs.10,000/-+.Brand new water purifier was leaking when power is switched OFF. ( I was staying on second floor of a 4 storey building-no question of excessacive water pressure ) .

I did not allow the installation technician of Aquaguard to open and repair-BRAND NEW equipment and asked for a replacement.

Another brand new piece also had the same problem.Finally I asked Eureka Forbes to REFUND my payment - by a a/c payee cheque-issued by the company-NOT A DEALER.I got my refund and then only returned defective machine.There after I had sent MANY LETTERS to Eureka Forbes,Tata Empire (Eureka Forbes is a TATA group co/ tata holds stakes in Eureka Forbes),BIS-Delhi and Mumbai,Indian Medical Council,Advt.statndards of India.

Eureka Forbes NEVER REPLIED TO MY SINGLE EMAIL/LETTER.I personally visited BIS office at Mumbai(MIDC,Andheri-east) and spoke to conscerned persons connected with testing of water purifiers.I was told that out of 20/25 models of Aquaguard-only one or two models are certified for ISI standards.However while advertising in print and media-uncertified models are advertised as ISI certified.There is a CLEAR UNDERSTANDING between BIS officials and water purifiers manufacturers to play above referred tricks to FOOL public .Some of my communications were marked to senior official (leading consumer activist) of MONEYLIFE for information.

Dolphy Dsouza

6 years ago

Thank you Dr. Shenoy for this effort.

It is unfortunate that HUL which speaks of CSR and other initiatives is lying to the consumer. This is a fit case for all those who have purchased this to move the consumer court. Maybe Moneylife could guide the consumers.

Secondly, the NIV Institute must come out with the entire report or face action.

Dolphy D'souza

B V KRISHNAN

6 years ago

We must thank Dr. Shenoy for calling the bluff of this mighty multi-national. But sadly, the major print-media who thrive on political scandals, are yet to pick up this fraud by HUL. And the reasons are not far to seek: HUL has a generous ad budget and the print media is prepared to eat out their hands for a share of this ad pie.

REPLY

muthukumar

In Reply to B V KRISHNAN 6 years ago

Why is electronic+print media not reporting this. Scary that ads are so misleading

Indian Oil whistleblower hasn’t received HC-ordered compensation yet; drain on company still unchecked

Delhi High Court had rebuked the CVC for harassing MK Tyagi, who exposed the drain on the public exchequer. But the Court order has not been implemented as yet

The Whistleblower's Bill is under the consideration of Parliament, to protect and reward those who expose corruption. But over the years, the government has shown little concern towards those who have sounded the alarm. Satyendra Dubey and Amit Jethwa became big names only after their death. But one other successful whistleblower has yet to be restored his dues.

Former Indian Oil Corporation chief sales manager and IIT alumnus MK Tyagi made headlines last year, when he won a case in the Delhi High Court, in which the Central Vigilance Commission (CVC) was rebuked for harassing him and the Court directed that he be compensated.

The High Court asked the CVC to compensate Mr Tyagi with a payment of Rs22,000 for the delay in the letter to Indian Oil Corporation (IOC) to release his promotions and to pay him Rs30,000 by way of costs of his petition. But Mr Tyagi has not received his promotion letter, and Indian Oil's losses have not stopped.

"The Delhi High Court order of 5 August 2010 vindicated my exposure of loss of Rs99,000 per month till the year 2014 to the public exchequer, by Indian Oil. But the loss is still continuing, thereby nullifying my efforts. In spite of the observation of the High Court, Delhi police has not filed a factual report under section 173(8) of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, to prosecute the then chairman MS Ramachandran for swindling public money," Mr Tyagi told Moneylife.

Despite Mr Tyagi's victory, his fight hasn't grabbed eyeballs. The company has refused to implement the CVC order, while the IIT alumnus association has not offered him support either. While the association had voiced vehement protests against the murder of Satyendra Dubey, another IIT alumnus, it has not extended any cooperation to Mr Tyagi.

Indian Oil senior officials were interested in supplying paraffin wax to a private company and supplying free equipment worth Rs15 crore to another company in Karnataka, both of which Mr Tyagi refused to sanction. Three promotions were withheld and Mr Tyagi was transferred from Mumbai to Bangalore, after he complained about the corrupt practices of the general manager MS Ramachandran in December 1999. In May 2000, Tyagi wrote to the CVC about his transfer and sought appropriate action against the "corrupt officers".

The CVC issued a letter to his company, saying that his promotions should not be withheld, and it put a stop to the official inquiry that was being conducted, accusing Mr Tyagi of making false allegations against his senior. While the IOC closed the proceedings against Mr Tyagi, it warned him not to expose such corrupt practices again and he was not called to give his testimony.

When Mr Tyagi evoked the RTI Act to get information about how much IOC was spending on the case monthly, the then chief information commissioner refused to provide him with the documents. Also, his superiors got away with a trifling penalty in the CVC case.

When Mr Tyagi approached the Delhi High Court, the ruling went in his favour. Yet, for all his troubles, neither has the then information commissioner MM Ansari (he is now an interlocutor for Kashmir), nor have his company superiors been punished. Mr Tyagi has also written to the prime minister and the home minister, but nothing has happened.

Mr Tyagi says, "In line with the CVC's advice dated 31 March 2005 to the then chairman, Sarthak Behuria, Mr Behuria had taken a decision to release my withheld promotions as out of court settlement of WP-29013 of 1998 & WA-1470 of 2005. But the decision has not yet been implemented, to wear me out. On top of everything I was called corrupt by the then information commissioner MM Ansari and I had to file a criminal defamation suit."

Mr Tyagi is disappointed by the entire experience. "In India, the corrupt are awarded, while the honest are punished. A whistleblower is eliminated, so it is to be seen how long I will continue my fight against corruption," he said.

User

COMMENTS

M K TYAGI

6 years ago

Mr M S ramachandran, the then Chairman was given vide D.O.No C-13015/15/2002-Vig dated February 28,2005 DISPLEASURE OF GOVERNMENT for cautioning me not to expose corruption in future thus having proved proverb-BOSS IS ALWAYS RIGHT, DARIA ME REH KAR MAGARMACH SE KYA BAIR- wrong. Can any Indian justify such victimisation of WHISTLEBLOWER ?

REPLY

Babubhai Vaghela

In Reply to M K TYAGI 6 years ago

Secret letter of displeasure, obtained through RTI, Govt issued to then Chairman IOC MS Ramachandran. https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=e...

SAROJ

6 years ago

On 17-09-2005 out of court settlement was decided because there was no NOTIFIED PROMOTION policy as is evident from indianoi affidavit in 1995 in Andhra high court as well as PRIME MINISTER OFFICE letter no DPG/PMO /2008 dated 29-01-2009. This decision has not been implemented because IndianOil wants to continue loss of Rs 99000 per month and favour SRAACL by the same amount for obvious reasons

REPLY

Babubhai Vaghela

In Reply to SAROJ 6 years ago

Public Grievances Prime Minister Office Letter dated 29 January 2009 was addressed to Chairman IOC with a copy to me as complainant - It is in public domain at https://docs.google.com/leaf?id=0B2yyHG3...

Vijay Raj Dewan

6 years ago

1. IOC : Mr Chairman : Is This True?
2. Pl note that we will pull you out of your retirement and impose damages after 2014 elections. Bring in Ordinance if required.
3. Rest is your choice.You have been cautioned.
Thanx,

Vijay Raj Dewan

M K TYAGI

6 years ago

Apropos PIONEER news of 17th June, 2010 Mr V C Agrawal, the then Director(HR) had misrepresented to Ministry of Petroleum &Natural Gas in respect of award of 114 dealerships to persons who matter. Will Mr Butola give names and addresses of these dealerships in reply to my RTI application MKT/MISC-22 dated 06-07-2010 ?

M K TYAGI

6 years ago

Will Mr Butola, Chairman IndianOil tell how much we tax payers money has been spent in Karnataka High Court, Delhi High Court and Delhi trial courts after decision of out of court settlement was taken in line with CVC DO NO.000/POL/021/6384 dated 31-03-2005

Shweta

6 years ago

Finally truth would prevail and guilty would be punished.

Raj Kumar

6 years ago

Indian Oil Chairman Mr Butolia is defying CVC by not giving 3 promotions to Mr Tyagi who is oldest living whistleblower ? Does he think that he is outside the perview of CVC ?

Saroj

6 years ago

Will Chairman IndianOil tell why promotions have not been released when his predecessor had taken a decision based on advice of CVC ?

Guninder

6 years ago

How can Chairman IndiaOil continue loss and not release promotions when High court has observed that Tyagi's allegation is vindicated ?

B B Sharan

6 years ago

I never thought that MAHA RATANA Indianoil would spend lacs of rupees in courts to defend its loss of Rs 99000 per month and wear out whistleblower M K Tyagi by using his as well as we tax payer's money against him.

M K TYAGI

6 years ago

Delhi Police is not submiting factual report by violating section 173(8) of Cr.P.C. 1973. When High Court obseves that my allegation had been vindicated how can SHO report that no criminal case is made out in swindling of Rs 99000 per month by Indian Oil. Since SHO is not above High Court, there has to be a reason not to submit factual report. If reason is not that I had not bribed Delhi Police I would certainly like to know the real reason so as to ensure that money of poor Indian is no more wasted.

M K TYAGI

6 years ago

IndianOil is following LAW OF INDIAN OIL instead of LAW OF LAND by continuing loss of Rs 99000 per month and spending my money ( I am Indianoil share holder as well as income tax payee ) against me in courts. Chairman IndianOil is defying CVC advice to release my illegally with held promotions to debiliate promosing whistleblowers.

Ravi Srivastava

6 years ago

this is the most shameful act of so called maha ratna company and the Govt. who call themselves a Model employer Tyagi's dues with interest be released immediately

Babubhai Vaghela

6 years ago

Other than Shri Mahendra Tyagi, two more Whistle Blowers are Shri Mahendra Gaur of Jaipur and Shri Babubhai Vaghela - myself. Story of my struggle on HR Policies and victimization in brief at http://tinyurl.com/6c6lwyw
Heroic struggle of Shri Mahendra Gaur as Advocate at Jaipur in IOC Jaipur Inferno.
http://tinyurl.com/6cyj6gz

Nagesh KiniFCA

6 years ago

This makes it imperative that the Whistleblower Act is not only passed in the ensuing 2011 Monsoon Session.
Our Governments have been guilty of exposing the whistleblower to death as in the case of Dubey and Jethwa.
In one case is the PMO of Atal Bihari's NDA which is professing all sorts of statements without meaning to do anything positive

We are listening!

Solve the equation and enter in the Captcha field.
  Loading...
Close

To continue


Please
Sign Up or Sign In
with

Email
Close

To continue


Please
Sign Up or Sign In
with

Email

BUY NOW

The Scam
24 Year Of The Scam: The Perennial Bestseller, reads like a Thriller!
Moneylife Magazine
Fiercely independent and pro-consumer information on personal finance
Stockletters in 3 Flavours
Outstanding research that beats mutual funds year after year
MAS: Complete Online Financial Advisory
(Includes Moneylife Magazine and Lion Stockletter)