 Okay. Thank you very much, Michael. As we know the outcome of the referendum on the 23rd of June has set in motion a process whereby the UK is supposed to be leaving the European Union in a time frame which is still to be considered and decided, and with an outcome that is still very much uncertain. Now the specific question I will try to address tonight whether Brexit could offer opportunities for Indian businesses in the UK, and these opportunities could pertain to exports of goods and services to the UK, to direct investment in the UK, and also to movement of people. Now the approach which I shall try to follow is very much based on economic theories, so I'm afraid it's somewhat unfashionable. I will try to look at economic fundamentals in the UK economy and to examine whether we can say something about whether it will still be profitable for Indian companies to export to the UK or to invest in the UK given the possible scenarios that might emerge following Brexit. And I will also have very much a macro economic focus, so I will try to concentrate on the big aggregates of the economy rather than a specific sectoral analysis for which I believe my panelist colleagues are much more competent than I am. So briefly, background on trade in India, foreign trade specialisation, and I'd like to start by reminding that until relatively recently, India was very much a closed economy. If we consider an index of trade openness, export plus imports divided by GDP, in 1960, this index was about 11%. And even in 1990, it was only about 15%. So India was still very much a closed economy up until then. But as we know, there have been a number of economic reforms that took place, really some from the mid-80s, the pro-business reforms undertaken under Rajiv Gandhi. But then very prominently, the pro-market reforms undertaken by Manmohan Singh when he was the finance minister under Narasimha Rao's premiership from the early 1990s onwards. And these reforms have resulted in a slashing of tariffs to imports and liberalisation of the economy. And the index of trade openness shot up from about 15% in 1990 to about 50% now. So now India is a much, much more open economy than it was until just about 25 years ago. Import tariffs have also been reduced quite substantially, and this played a huge part in the improvement of trade openness. The average import tariff was estimated to be about 80%, in excess of 80%, actually in 1990, and now it's about 20%. So there was a sharp reduction in tariffs, which really promoted meditation to import goods into India, but also stimulated Indian firms to become more productive and to compete in open markets. And so there was a very substantial opening up on the Indian economy. At the same time, there was a very significant change in the profile of trade specialisation in India. And I done some research with colleagues at SOA SOX for the Asian Development Bank. We looked at the profile of trade specialisation in India manufacturing over the past few decades. And at the beginning of the process of reform, India had a comparative advantage in relatively low-tech products. So in products with a relatively low technological component. But there had been a very substantial shift in the pattern of trade specialisation. And now India has a comparative advantage in sectors with a fairly high technological component, which includes medicinal and pharmaceutical products, passenger motor vehicles, organic chemicals, and of course IT software. So there was an improvement in the technological content of India specialisation. And also at the same time a shift towards some of the most dynamic sectors of world trade. So some of the sectors that were growing fastest in terms of global trade. So India was really in an excellent position to take advantage of its opening up of markets and of the expansion of world trade. And interestingly, trade liberalisation played a very significant role in this process. And we have been able to establish, for instance, that the sectors which experienced the sharpest decline in tariffs were also the sectors that experienced the greatest increase in productivity. So the sectors that became the most open to world trade also were those where the productivity of Indian firms increased the most. So it looks as if liberalisation was on balance, a very profitable process for the Indian economy. Now, what is status today of the trade relations between the UK and India? And India runs actually a trade surplus with the UK. So it exports into the UK more than it imports. And the main exports to the UK are textiles, machinery and electrical equipment and chemical products. The main imports are precious metals, mainly silver from the UK, and also some base metals. And Indian companies are also significantly the third largest foreign investor in the UK after the US and China. But still, from an Indian point of view, the trade with the UK is only a relatively modest share of total trade. The UK accounts for only about 3% of the total merchandise exports from India. So only about 3% of total exports from India are directed to the UK. And the bilateral trade with the UK accounts for only about 2% of Indian international trade. So the UK is still a relatively minor player when it comes to Indian foreign trade. And there was also, well, if we look at the trade of India with the rest of Europe, that's quite significant because until a few years ago, about three quarters of total Indian investment in the European Union came to the UK. And now it's only about a half. So in terms of foreign direct investment, we have seen a redirection already away from the UK and towards other European countries. So given this background, what could Brexit imply for the export of goods from India to the UK for the investment into the UK and for the movement of people? Now briefly, in terms of exports into the UK, well, that will depend on what will happen to the demand for imports in the UK. And the main factors will be the domestic demand in the UK economy, which in turn is affected by exchange rate and by tariffs and non-tariff barriers to trade. So briefly, domestic demand in the UK, in the short run, we have seen a great increase in uncertainty and post-Brexit. Now the effects of the increasing uncertainty have been mitigated by a very aggressive and effective policy by the monetary and fiscal authorities, especially the Bank of England, which intervened very, very promptly and effectively to implement expansionary monetary policies, keep interest rates down, expand its programs of quantitative easing, inject liquidity into the market, and therefore staving off the risk of a recession. So I think the Bank of England, despite criticism, took the only really sensible course of action given these circumstances. And given fiscal policy, the Treasury has all but abandoned its plans of fiscal consolidation in a very short timeframe. So the expansionary monetary and fiscal policies have helped reduce the risk of a recession. But in the longer run, what will depend to, what will happen to the UK economy? And what we know from growth theory that there are three main factors that determine the growth of an economy, labor input and improvement in the labor force, capital investment and technical progress. Now in terms of labor input, this, the possible restrictions to immigration could have a negative effect on the rate of growth of the Indian economy. And it's quite significant that only a few days after the outcome of the referendum, one of the main credit rating agencies fixed downgraded the rating of UK sovereign bonds. And one of the reasons was that reduced immigration would reduce the rate of growth of the UK economy. So even these very hard-nosed credit rating agencies could see that immigration is actually a positive effect on the UK economy. So there could be scale shortages. And also it could be, well, to anticipate the decline in exchange rate would make it less profitable to settle into the UK because the real value of remuneration and startling will be less. So it would be less attractive to move to the UK given the weakness of startling. So in terms of capital, well, it's quite, well, an investment is quite well accepted in the economic literature that reduced trade could adversely affect the investment opportunities and investment profitability. So the loss of single market access, the difficulties of trading with Europe could act as a disincentive to invest. And finally, technical progress and research and development. Now, the UK is quite advanced in the field of research and development as some of the best universities in the world. And often these universities have been able to create synergies with industry. But many of these synergies will be at risk from a possible cut in funding to research. And already a number of research institutions have expressed their concerns about the reduction in funding for research. So in the long run, these potentially negative consequences on labor, capital and investment and technical progress could lead to a smaller economy, an economy that grows at a smaller pace. Now, the exchange rate also affects the demand for imports and the depreciation of the pound sterling has increased the competitiveness of UK firms, but many for expensive, many more expensive to purchase commodities produced abroad. So the depreciation of the sterling has reduced the competitiveness and the profit margins for Indian firms who are seeking to export to the UK. So that's an additional threat that they face. Of course, there could be some substitution against imports from the European Union. If some trade barriers are put in place, then British consumers might redirect towards goods produced in India or other Commonwealth countries or from non-EU countries. But that will depend very much on possible barriers to trade and on the outcome of the trade negotiations. And I think it's fair to say that at present nobody knows what the outcomes will be, what will be the access if any to the single market and what tariff and non-tariff barriers will be put in place. Of course, a very important non-tariff barrier is the financial passport that companies based in the UK need in order to be trade in the Euro area. And so barriers to trade could also either improve or reduce the potential for British, for Indian firms to try with the UK. Now, very briefly, determinants of inward foreign direct investment and again, this depends on the density of infrastructure in the UK. This is one of the empirical regularities found in the literature on FDI. And we all know that the infrastructure in the UK needs a lot of investing. And we've also seen the difficulties of planning for improvement infrastructure in additional airport runway and the controversies that have risen are testimony to that. So the UK should really invest heavily in infrastructure in order to improve its attractiveness at the destination for FDI and should try to remove restrictions even to human capital movements, which leads me to the last point, the determinants of migration flows. So apart from exporting into the UK or investing in the UK, why should professionals from India move to the UK? There are historic links, common language, a similar education system, which would make it easier for Indian professionals to move to the UK. There would also be a skill shortage in the UK in crucial sectors, such as in the health sector, that again could make it more profitable for Indian professionals to move. And high-qualified Indian professionals could benefit from a point entry system. Against that, the current UK visa system is not particularly friendly to Indian nationals. And for instance, we have experienced a decline in the number of Indian students in UK universities. And that's something that should really be addressed by the UK government and the Home Office. Because at present, the rules make it very, very difficult for Indian people to locate in the UK. And that's nothing to do with the EU. It's just a domestic policy of the Home Office. So if I could conclude very briefly. Yes, so I believe that it is fair to assume that as a consequence of Brexit, a very likely scenario is that the UK will be a much smaller economy with a volatile currency. And the UK will find itself in a very, very difficult position in terms of negotiating trade deals, which means that really it will be in a very, very weak bargaining position, which could be an advantage for India could exploit the weakness of the UK in terms of negotiating profitable deals. Certainly the UK has insufficient capacity for trade negotiations. So I believe that India would be in a privileged position to take advantage of some opportunities given the great expansion in its global outlook and foreign trade. And India companies could still find it profitable to buy UK assets because they could buy them quite cheaply because of the weak startling. And also if there is a recession, they could buy companies in distress, which would make it even cheaper for them. Because the profits will be denominated in startling, which will possibly not be worth very much. But I think there is a possibility also of India playing off the UK and the EU against each other because there are trade negotiations with the EU that are going on since 2007 and are still stalling. So maybe India could play the UK and the EU and try to get a better deal. But I think that I know with careful trade negotiations, there is a scope for a trade partnership with the UK. But I will see very much in this partnership with the UK as a junior partner. Thank you. Thanks to you and the UK off against each other. I don't think you get far, but you might get further with the UK than you did with the EU. Thank you, Michael. Great to be here. I'm often in London, I live in Delhi, I have done for many years as you've heard, though I'm usually only here in the summer, but it's great to be here for an extra week and be able to be here at my second service event. I've been more involved thinking over the last couple of days and writing about after Ratan Tata's palace coup of what one might now call Cyrexit as opposed to Brexit. And that led me today to think about the similarities that the UK's vote to leave the EU and Tata's vote, most boardroom vote to separate itself from Sarah's mystery, do have at least one parallel. And that's the both involve a top person who is convinced that he in one case and she in the other that what they think is right and is right and will be driven through. And that goes for both those people. So it will be interesting to see how they both fare in the future. I think I know which one is probably the more flexible. And that's a she. But that will come through, of course, that flexibility if it ever does happen on visas, but that's a long haul. The Financial Times had a revealing profile on Theresa May, just as an aside, based on a reporter going to the Oxfordshire village where she grew up and where her vicar, her father was a strict high Anglican vicar. And that was part of her breeding and the things that make her as she is now. And she said in a conservative campaign video a few weeks ago, which was included in this article, I got an early interest in politics. And he, he, that's her father always encouraged me to see no boundaries, no barriers, just go out there and do the best you can and aim high. And that I thought when I read that is what we've been seeing with Theresa May on all sorts of things. And it'll be interesting to see how she behaves when she gets to Delhi in about 10 days time. So now we have this driven politician as prime minister who comes to number 10 with what many might think of as baggage from her time in the home secretary, which in the context of this session, of course, is her refusal to relax visa regimes. And I'll be coming back to that in a moment as well. But let me first take a step back and look at some of the background and first the positives for the UK. It may be good from an Indian point of view that it's leaving the EU because India does not like dealing with federations of countries. It prefers to deal direct with top people running a single country. And although this is not strictly relevant to this session either, that's most poignant, of course, on defence deals. I never thought the Eurofighter in the recent contest for a fighter jet contract. I never thought the Eurofighter ever stood a chance against France's Dassault Raphael because it is so much simpler to arrange all those things that have to be agreed and arranged on defence deals with a single country. India's also had, I thought I might get a laugh for that and I didn't get any reaction at all. India's, well, I expected silence here, but I thought somebody else might react. India's also had dreadful experiences with the EU. Since some 16 rounds of meetings, as we've just heard, on a free trade agreement since 2007 and still nothing concluded, held up by the EU wanting India to lower duties on autos and wine and spirits, which India's interests resist, plus stricter intellectual property protection, which India probably says is adequate as it is, and India wanting easy access for temporary IT staff and students in particular. There's also been frustration on an India-EU summit, which eventually happened this summer after endless delays. Mainly, and this shows how dysfunctional the EU is, mainly because India had locked up in the Delhi Italian Embassy pending trial, two Italian marines who had killed two Indian fishermen off the Kerala coast in 2012. Consequently, Italy blocked the summit for many years until this year. How dysfunctional can you get? Moving on, I asked a very senior Ministry of External Affairs official casually a week or two ago what he thought of doing a post-Brexit FTA deal. He paused because his mind was on other synonyms, but then said, well, it's not my patch, but if it was, I'd do it tomorrow. So if only it was so simple. The UK apparently cannot negotiate until Brexit is through. That's the official line, and that's what I was told at the British High Commission in Delhi when I checked formally before I came here, though lots of people seem to believe that's not so, and I can't imagine that there won't be behind-the-scenes talks at least between Britain and non-European countries, even if it doesn't happen between India and European countries. But the issues that have stopped the EU FTA would presumably be equal-sized problems on one with Britain, because Theresa May would be determined to keep strong visa controls and to maximize UK exports that probably wouldn't give India what it wanted. And I leave it to the experts to tell me whether an FTA is really a primary aim that we all want to get terribly worried about, or whether there aren't really much more sensible things that you can do. I mean, journalists love things that you can just write about simply. I often think that FDI, as the initials, lead to endless stories about foreign direct investment in newspapers which really aren't worth the space and enable people like me to divert, not to bother with the much more complicated stories, which don't have nice little initials at the top and percentages and things. And I suspect that, will you do an FTA, you won't do you an FTA, is the sort of question that journalists are sitting at the back will instantly ask with a pen in their hand or a television camera and microphone in their hand as a quick answer. And in fact, one ought to be talking about broadening relationships and developing things in real terms. The UK in there is, of course, based on a very strong and historic relationship, complex and contradictory of a former colonial power and it's part of its former empire, which is now immensely more important. But it's limited in real terms. Look at David Cameron, he visited India three times in 2010, twice in 2000, a total three times in 2010 and 2013, but had little to show for his efforts, showing, in my view, that the UK is just not the top priority in Delhi. Then Narendra Modi came to London for what was a very good visit, but my main memories, and I was here for during it, are of his giant tamasha in Wembley Stadium and of all the demonstrations that shut part of Whitehall and Parliament Square, does anybody remember anything else? I'm open to be corrected on this, but I haven't seen much happening as a result of that visit. I wrote on my blog at the time, there was nothing dramatic or unexpected in the announcements that the two sides said, that the two sides said total some nine billion pounds, but there were useful initiatives on climate change, defence collaboration, cybercooperation and counter-terrorism. The test, Dinesh, is whether anything has happened on those four things, which were the main ones, since November last year. There was a list of over 20 commercial deals, most of which I wrote would have happened without the Modi visit. They range from a madham two swords waxworks in Delhi, which for some reason are the top one of the lists, and I haven't seen that happening, from a madham two swords waxworks in Delhi to mostly smallish banking, insurance, healthcare and energy investments in both countries. But this doesn't just apply to Britain. If you total up all the million dollars, and we're moving to dollars now, that Narendra Modi has signed up to, and we've all written about around the world, it comes to about 150 billion of dollars, of which scarcely anything has happened from any country, even Japan which has got very fed up with not much happening. So although I'm arguing it as part of the fact of the argument that the UK is not that important to India, it is a general problem of implementing these things. And now Theresa May is about to visit India, and no doubt all sorts of good things will be said. But the realities are that she will be stubborn on visas, just as India will be questioning about whether she intends to produce, what she intends to produce out of her Brexit talks, which she probably won't tell them. I've read that you've been saying optimistic things about short-term visas, quoting you, I think it was in the Hindustan Times, I'm not sure if it was PTI or not. I hope we will have a deal on Britain facilitating short-term visas for students, academicians, I always call them academics, academicians and businessmen from India. These categories should not be in the migration list, Pat and I, sorry about that, told reporters. And then the report went on to say India wants Britain to extend visa concessions given to the Chinese to be extended to India on six months to two-year visas for 87 pounds. Well, I hope you're right, but I fear you might be wrong. I'm told that Amber Rudd, the new Home Secretary, got nowhere with Theresa May when she suggested in the summer that students should be excluded from immigration stats, and of course, so they should be. And it would be a break of faith, for a faith-oriented Prime Minister to change that. Also, sadly, India's just not in the same league as China. The new administration here is, thank God, pulling back from the pro-China, extreme pro-China stance that was led by George Osborne, but reality is reality. And finally, to investments. How am I doing on time? All right. And finally, investments. No one is keen to invest in the UK, while the future of its relations with the EU is so unclear. I reckon the EU, that the investments will go ahead if an Indian company wants to buy a British company, which is based here, and which has got a lot of sales in the UK or in non-European countries. But it will not, I reckon, there will not be investments in fresh ventures, where the future will be more uncertain. For example, and my use of Tata here is a coincidence from what I was saying earlier, Tata would go ahead, I guess, to buy Jaguar Land Rover because it's firmly based here and has got strong UK sales. But it wouldn't have gone ahead on course, which you shouldn't have anyway, because of that depends much more on relations with Europe. Much has been made in some newspapers and by the Brits of an invest a £600 million pound deal by an Indian company called Intas, to buy a UK and Irish business called Activis, which was a pharmaceuticals, I think, which was presented as being evidence that India companies were still buying into the UK. But in that case, of course, the companies also got a base in Ireland, so they win both ways because Ireland will still be in the EU. And the FT, I'm sad to say this, it just came up as I was leaving my flat. The FT is running a story today saying that the volume of Indian investment into the UK has plummeted this year, according to figures from Greenfield Investment Monitor FDI Markets, an FDA FT data service organisation. Indian companies have announced Greenfield investments of $172 million from January through to August of this year, compared with $917 million in the same period last year. 16 projects were unveiled in those months compared with 29 last year, and no investments have been larger than $40 million coming in from India to the UK. And that comes at a time when overall investments from India abroad have almost doubled from $8.7 billion to $16 billion. Being the FT, my old newspaper, it does, of course, caution that it's too early to blame Brexit for this, but it surely is a sign of things to come. So to sum up, strong binding relationship between the two countries which will continue and could grow stronger once the EU is established outside the EU. I've been talking about things much more in the shorter term. The Indian government and the Indian businesses, and I'm sure we'll hear this one from our thickie friend, would have much preferred the UK to stay in the EU, and maybe I should have said that right at the beginning. An FDA is probably problematic as our relaxed visa instructions and investments into the UK will be very, very slow. It's all totally uncertain. Basically, no one knows. Sir Bhaskali. November is a very important month for India-UK relations. Alistair Cook's England cricket team goes from Bangladesh to India to play five test matches, and if you read cricket info, there's an article today that says Alistair Cook could be the person to take over such in Tendulkar's batting records, and he's played an uninterrupted, I think, 100 test matches in a row, something like that, and he could be the number one. He's 31 years old. He's got five, six years of experience left to them, and of course, November is also important because Theresa May is going to India, and we're the business delegation of 150 from the pharmaceutical sector, from the chemical sector, industrial sector. Just following on from a few of the thoughts that we've heard already, Indian-UK do share great historical bonds. There are 1.5 million Indians in the UK, and there are a number of bilateral initiatives that have matured and flourished over the last few years. But when David Cameron first went to India in November 2010 as Prime Minister, he said that he wanted to double trade between India and the UK within five years. So that's 100% increase. In subsequent five years, trade probably went up by about 10 to 15%. Of that, we heard that India has been exporting a lot more. Indian exports to the UK have gone up by a lot more. UK exports to India have actually fallen over the last couple of years by value, and this represents a real conundrum for, if I think, India-UK watches. I haven't got to the bottom of this. I think investment figures are pretty robust both ways. So we heard that India is the third largest investor in the UK, and UK trade and investment figures show something like 9,300 jobs were either created or safeguarded by Indian companies in the UK in the last fiscal. And it was a similar story the year before. But on the trade side, in the last five years, since that David Cameron announcement, the number of the footprint that the UK India Business Council has in India has expanded very significantly. So UK India Business Council is a UK government-funded organisation to promote trade between the two countries and support UK businesses in India. Government funding for UK ABC last year was 2.4 million. It's expanded. Its services in Indian cities quite significantly over the last two and a half years. The diplomatic core that the UK government has in India has grown to the biggest. It is anywhere in the world much higher than it is in China in the same period. The number of deputy high commissions Britain has in India have expanded quite significantly and they cover different regions of India. The UK RE grant system has also had additional injections of funding over the last few years. And so there are a lot of bilateral engagements like this. Indians are the second highest in terms of remittances to Indians here. The second highest in terms of remittances back home to India. Nigeria is first, India is second, and Pakistan and others are in the list. So there are a number of economic ties there, whether it's in the education sector, whether it's in the other sectors we heard of, pharma, textiles, etc. But the amount of effort that has gone in quite evidently from the UK side has not necessarily materialised into UK exports to India increasing significantly over the last five years. Brexit, of course, poses additional level one certainty as we've heard. And although the one thing that's certain in business is change, the one thing that all businesses would want is certainty. And so Brexit would clearly make things more difficult. The pound has fallen 16%, 18% in the last couple of months, and that has posed a big issue in terms of those trade statistics. So textiles is the biggest of the exports from India to the UK. In value terms, even if the export figures are not much affected, in volume terms they will be definitely affected. So following on from the economics we heard about earlier, the elasticity of demand for something like textiles, if you go to the high street and buy something from John Lewis or Primark or elsewhere, that elasticity of demand for textiles is much greater. So the fact that these goods cost 18% more will mean that UK consumers buy a lot less from India. In some of the other sectors where there are bigger deals possible, in the pharmaceutical sector and elsewhere, maybe it won't be a question of a moderation in demand. Maybe it will just be a postponement in some of those big deals that are announced. And we just heard that the deal flow activity has fallen. I want to just quickly go back to the early 90s when the Indian markets were opened up. At that time, looking at the India-UK relationship, it was probably quite uneven. So India maybe needed the UK more than was vice versa the case. Fast forward to today, India only has 3% of its trade with the UK, and the UK in a post-Brexit world probably needs India more than is the case the other way around. Partly it's to do with trade opportunities and investment opportunities into the UK. Partly it's also engagement with the diaspora that are already here. Peter Mandelson, who used to be Trade Commissioner in the EU, his think tank or his consultancy that he set up afterwards, I think it's called General Council, they published a report just after Brexit that said that India should be, for the UK, the 11th most important country following China first, the US, and then I think 10th was Switzerland, and then India was 11th. And that was based on a different lens from where some of us in the public affairs arena in the India-UK space see it. And that's a very sobering assessment. But just suppose that with Theresa May choosing to go to India with such a big delegation, the answer to what happens after Brexit between India-UK, I'm not quite sure, and hopefully the acting High Commissioner will shed more light on it. In terms of any trade negotiations, formal trade negotiations that can happen, we've already heard that the Article 15 needs to be triggered, then Britain needs to leave the EU, and then only can there be formal negotiations between India and the UK. But the same issues that were impediment between India and Europe negotiating in FTA will definitely stay. So the tariffs on automobiles and wine and spirits that you mentioned, that's definitely an issue. So that's very much a tariff barrier, whereby tariffs on the Indian side are much higher than they are on the European side. So if the negotiation is around reducing barriers on both sides, then the barriers on the Indian side have to reduce by more than they do on the European side. So European exporters would benefit more. In terms of non-tariff barriers, the EU has much stricter packaging controls, has much stricter labeling controls and quality controls generally, quality standards generally. And we saw that a couple of years ago, there was particularly a motive issue for the Indian diaspora in the UK where Alfonso mangoes from India, as well as a couple of other vegetables were not let in to the EU because of those quality controls. Those non-tariff barriers in the EU make it much more difficult for Indians to export here. So that's been a stumbling block. Both those tariff and non-tariff barriers will be an issue in an India-UK agreement too. On the IP side, the EU would like India to actually adhere to much stronger IP laws than have already been agreed in mutual kind of international forums like the WTO. So in a sense, IP negotiations have moved from multilateral forums like WTO to bilateral investment discussions. That is also something that India would and has over the last 16 rounds of negotiation pushed back on because we believe very much that our IP protection is on par with the best in the world and in some cases goes beyond that. So if those challenges exist between the EU and India, they will exist in terms of negotiating some kind of formal agreement between the UK and India. India, however, the thing that has changed over the last two, two and a half years since the new government has come in, and this goes back to my earlier point that maybe in 1991 the two countries were, there was an asymmetry of power where there was a kind of a different balance. Now that's changed and India has become much more confident on the global scale, more confident in terms of the way it portrays itself and events like Narendra Modi coming to Wembley have definitely helped with that. Whether there was a tangible set of outcomes in terms of trade and investments came out of it, that's one part of it, but another part of it is also to get, after you take into account what the wind chill was, it was probably minus two or minus three degrees, it was really cold in that stadium, but there were 60,000 people there and they were there to listen to Prime Minister Modi. Who else does that happen for in terms of global leaders? For India to be standing on a global stage much taller than it may have done in the past, that then means it's much more confident in terms of negotiating trade deals, it's much more confident in the way it presents itself, and it means that when the two Prime Ministers meet just in a few days' time, there's a real meeting of equals where Theresa May can offer and discuss options post Brexit and the Indian Prime Minister can equally say, well Delhi is the place where a lot of Prime Ministers come to now, so just a few days ago in the FICI office in Delhi we had a big investment forum with France and we discussed a lot of ways in which the French government is working with India often much more closely, not just with defence but in a whole range of other areas. So I think there is great opportunity, I think the standard line that in the India-UK public affairs space in any speech that's to do with something like this we always try and talk about is India and the UK are great partners and there is a great opportunity in that bilateral relationship and there is much more to do. And where you, I think where you put the emphasis and where you concentrate the efforts depends very much on which side of the fence you're sitting on, where if you're an Indian businessman looking to the UK there's greater uncertainty, not just the exchange rate but with policy and with regulation, there's greater uncertainty with immigration and Amber Rudd's comments in the Conservative Party conference again reinforced those opinions and that view in India. If you're looking at as an Indian businessman coming to the UK that bilateral scenario is probably different, if you're one of the tech businesses that have joined the delegation going to India in a couple of weeks that view is probably different. If you are in Brussels and you're looking at India and thinking that the next round of negotiation may go easier then perhaps that also is a different perspective given that we've seen in the last few days that the EU trade deal with Canada hasn't worked because of the balloons because of one region in one country. Trade negotiations take a long time, they take a lot of negotiation but as we've already heard today there can be many other things we can look on which are maybe piecemeal but they may add up to much more than the sum of the parts. Try to be as pragmatic as I can in terms of post-Brexit relations between the two countries but the next couple of weeks will tell whether there are some significant new announcements and some progress made in terms of trade policy and the next two and a half months will tell where Alastair Cook will be in terms of catching up with Sachin Tendulkar. Thank you. Well I don't know about final words but thank you very much. I'm going to take off from him as to Indians not looking at UK as being a country of importance. If you look around the world how many other countries can you think of who has the same kind of things as UK? You know it's still one of the five largest economies in the world. It's a member of the Security Council, he's got a large Indian diaspora, umbilical relationship, historical relationship. You know if you look at around the world and you want to develop relations it'll always be in the top ten or top five. Well that doesn't mean that maybe the importance has come down but overall in terms of strategy, in terms of relations with countries around the world, it still is one of the top countries. So let's not pull UK down for the time being. It's still an important country and we really value our relation with it but on this question of Brexit I asked myself the other question. If there was no Brexit what would have happened to India-UK trade? Would you have just muddled along or were we planning something big? And there were lots of plans on the angle. Prime Minister Modi gave a fillip and what Pratik said just now the British High Commission expanding its presence in India showed that there were plans of doing more in the future. You wouldn't increase if you're a company you wouldn't increase your number of people unless you're planning to do something with it. And the same with India. So essentially there were a lot of things which were on the anvil which are going to happen no matter whether Brexit happened or doesn't happen. So what happens when Brexit happens? When Brexit happens and right now we don't know what contours it's going to take but there will be both opportunities and challenges for India. Now we are unlike other countries. Many of the Indian companies have a presence in UK because they want to target Europe also. So which means that many of those companies will follow the UK negotiations on Brexit very closely because it affects them deeply. But none of them are waiting. Many of the companies are already asking for licenses in Europe like many other American countries and others because you see the licensing authority in the European Union are going to have about 5,000 companies from Britain going in to ask for licenses. And if you take 5,000 companies imagine how long it will take you to just approve them. It'll take you at least two to three years. They don't have the capacity of licensing authorities to approve so much. Even if it takes a week to clear a license you're looking at 5,000 companies. It's a huge. So nobody's waiting. For many companies Brexit has already happened. So they're already on their way out and we're getting the feedback that all of them want to find a present. They want to hedge their bets. If tomorrow UK has a great deal on Brexit, wonderful. But if it doesn't have they all want to hedge their bets. And this is what countries are doing. I go back to something they said that David Cameron went to India thrice and they're nothing to show for it. But he got 40% of Indians to move from the labour tutorials. See the point with it is he didn't go just for trade and commercial deals and others. That's all part of the things the Prime Minister does. But he's also a political animal. He went there because he recognized the importance of the Indian diaspora in UK. And he went there. He was a man who understood that the Tories need to bring in the large amount of the votes that are in the industry. He got 40% now moved from labour to Tories. So he succeeded. Now the same the same reason Prime Minister may wants to go to India because it's important for her to show both to her people that she is going out and doing deals while she has a negotiating with the EU. And she also wants to tell the EU that I have other options. Now everybody says there's weakness in the UK. The UK knows it. It's weak. But why is it going out and doing because it knows it cannot sign any deal till Brexit is over. So it really doesn't is not weak. It just negotiated will find what are the low hanging fruit? What is the parameters that you can put in? What is the system that you put in place? And end of two years when Brexit happens, it looks to see what it has a deal with you. So then it will decide whether it has to agree on the things it has agreed with the rest of the world or not. But it cannot actually come to a final thing before Brexit. So this is games all countries play. And we will play the thing. You know, sometimes I'm worried, please don't quote me. Okay, I'm being very honest here. So these are games countries play. And we all have to play the game because it's in the interest of each country. Each country goes to another country because of its own interest. Prime Minister may is not going to India because it's an India's interest going because it's a Britain's interest. The same for us. We're not going to pull her down because she has strong views on certain things. We'll see what we can work with her. She's a prime minister who's shown to the world that India is important. I'm coming to India and we're not going to be petty about it and say, Oh, you're coming on a week ticket. So we're going to make you suffer for it. No way. We want to be as gracious as you can. And we will tell her, Yes, how can we help you? And how can we work together? Because for us, it's very clear. In this time of uncertainty, we have to prove ourselves to be a certain partner. Like a company needs certainty. Same way, Britain needs to know for certain that India has its back. And that's something we're going to tell them. We have your back. And here I will debunk some of the small myths that are there. First of all, visa. Okay, we speak about it, but frankly, it doesn't concern us too much. You know, we speak about it because the industry wants us to speak about it. Other people want us to speak about it. Look, think of it. If Indian students won't get a visa to come to UK, the Australian High Commissioner, they were saying, He's very happy because they're all of them are going to Australia. Some of them are going to US. They're even going to Germany, France, all of the country. The loss is Britain's. It's not ours. You know, so it's not us who are pushing Britain to get more Indian students. It's in Britain's interest to get the students in because their whole research and development and students and universities, everything depend on this. So Britain has to take a decision. When I say, I say it because it's in Britain's interest. If not, we have options. It's not that we don't have options. It's the same thing for anything. I like tier two visas. I mean, there's this whole thing in industry that tier two visas have become more expensive. You have to have a 41,000 pounds, which anywhere with 18% drop, it's now more affordable. But the point with it is Britain's financial services industry, the IT industry, the commercial services industry depend on these short term workers. And for them, it's very important to understand that the city of London will suffer if they don't get these people. Not only this, the intracompany transfers. I mean, these are things which they know. Now they can't do it because of their political compulsions or maybe because like my friend here, he says there's somebody who doesn't believe that they help. Now the point is you can be different as a home secretary, but you'll be different as a prime minister that I'm very sure of because there you see the larger picture. So things, it's not the end of the road. I mean, in Britain, everybody understands. I mean, whomever I talk to understands that this is a situation. If Britain has to do well later on, they have to take steps now to ensure that post Brexit, they have an economy which is vibrant. If economy goes down, you already have lost 18% the value of the pound. If you don't put in things together, you will reach the end of two years. And then even after two years, you can't do and it's a hard Brexit, which in my case, if I look around me, it's going to be hard Brexit. There's no way it's going to be a soft Brexit. If you leave it to industry in both you and UK, it will be a soft Brexit. But the problem is the people are negotiating a political animals. And political animals, they're already the rhetoric is very high on both sides. And after the German and French elections, if by some chance, the right wing gets into power, imagine the rhetoric. Of course, somebody told me that in two years time, there'll be no you left. So there's nothing to negotiate about. But that is just hope. So the point with it is post Brexit, India and UK would have done the same thing that I've done, whether there was a Brexit or not. And we are going to do much more. Investments will come in right now. What has bought this whole process is done, it's made people wary. Investments are not coming in as much as they should come in. That is probably economic cycle because Mahindra just bought a company last week, which is a motorcycle company in UK. And like my friend Pascal said, it's cheaper now to buy in UK than it was before, 18% fall in value is a big thing. For investments into India, it has become difficult for UK companies to invest because their value of investment has gone up by 18%. I mean, if I had planned a thousand crores of investment, now it takes more pounds to 2000 crores than before. So these are small glitches, which will happen. But this will continue. There is too much of synergy between both sides not to continue. We just need the political players to put in the right atmosphere for this to take off. It still hasn't taken enough because of many reasons. I mean, I agree, our trade is much below. But let's look at the FDA. What are the two most biggest taking points between India and Europe? One is tariffs on automobiles and wines and spirits. We can give tariff reduction on automobiles to UK because you're going to send us Jaguars, which is ours anyway. So, wines and spirits, I mean, technically India drinks more Scotch whisky than is produced in Scotland. So, I mean, it's not undoable. We can do it. But the other side is difficult, which is we want access for mode four and mode one issues, where there is some hesitation on the UK side. But again, it's UK's call. Post Brexit is there who have to decide whether for their own country they need a deal or not. We are ready to talk and we're ready to help UK in dealing with any situation post Brexit. But it's for UK to take a call and we're ready to. And like I told you, we're not going to pull them down. Friends stand by friends in times of crisis. And we're going to stand by UK at this time of crisis. There's no question about it. The point is, will UK stand by UK in the time of crisis? And that's the main question. There are many issues I can talk about. We can do it, but I think we'll tackle it in the question and answer session if you have any questions. Thank you. Thank you all very much indeed for most interesting presentations and comments and presentations of views. You're sitting in the university in the UK that's probably got the highest proportion of overseas students in the whole country. And it's very interesting that the prospect of Brexit has actually increased our student body this year, particularly from continental Europe. We assume this is because students are coming to study so as sooner rather than later because of uncertainty about what might happen to tuition fees in the years to come, but also makes this university particularly vulnerable to those uncertainties. And our director actually reported to Academic Board last week that number of university organisations in the UK and others have taken data to show that putting international students into the overall immigration figures is, as you said, sir, very much contrary to the UK's interests, but came up with really very little in way of the positive response because it's clearly a deeply political position here, which I think we can all see is not in the UK's interest, but it's a very difficult one to shift. So thank you again for all of you for your very interesting comments and presentations. I wondered if any of you would like to add to what you said in the light of what you've heard from other panellists before I open it to the floor. Are there any further things that have occurred to you? No? Okay. Well, in that case, we'll open it to the floor. House rules are that you please say before you ask your question, you say who you are and where you're coming from. And if you could keep your questions and comments fairly brief as we have limited time, we'd be very grateful. So I see a hand at the back there, please if we could start with you. Yes. So I can comment anecdotally. I'm in the UK office, so probably I can only talk about the UK, but anecdotally from what I've heard from colleagues particularly in Belgium, in Baden-Wootenberg in Germany and in France, they're certainly looking at increasing the presence in India in terms of engaging much more particularly in two or three cities in India, engaging with Indian businesses at a much earlier stage. So each of these regions or each of these countries already has a presence in India, but it's a question of for them looking at whether they increase their presence, whether local presence or have people from the home countries coming in. And when, as you know, when Prime Minister Modi was here, he was asked a question around UK's role in Europe. And he said that Indian companies very much see the UK as a gateway to Europe. So that I think that is still the case today. So Indian companies would still see London in particular, but the UK more widely is a gateway to Europe. But if it is less of a gateway to Europe, then Indian companies will see London and the UK a bit differently. Having said that, London Mayor and the Deputy Mayor, who's Indian himself and a very successful tech entrepreneur himself, a great kind of rags, richer story of coming to London and setting up a business and growing, they in the last couple of months have been very vociferous in saying that London in particular is open for business. So I think there are certainly moves from within the UK and across Europe to engage much more regularly and much more robustly with Indian business. Can I say just one? One thing is for sure, most Indian companies are not going to move out of UK unless it becomes really difficult. I mean, for most Indians, the only language they'll understand is English anyway. So this is going to be their first place of stop. So it's going to take a lot of negativity for Indian companies to really move away from UK lock, stock and barrel. They'll have a presence if it necessitates, they will do it. But what is happening is a lot of UK companies and a lot of foreign companies based in UK, which have dealings with India are actually moving a lot of offices to India. In the last two, three months I've heard of many companies, some Japanese companies, some other companies, which are moving a large number of jobs to India. And basically, because what is happening, many of these companies cannot get the right kind of people from India to come here. I won't name the company which is moving almost 1400 jobs to India, which is a big number. And this is something which we're telling the British government, I mean UK government, is that if you do not allow short term people to come here to feed into these companies, you will have them move the jobs there, which is what you're going to lose anyway.