The UK said statement to be made to Parliament. UK's emergency response committee discusses the situation. Hunt attends a high-level meeting at 10 downing street. Watch this video to know more.

U.S-Iran tensions Soar after tanker seizure

U.S. President Donald Trump said he planned to speak with the UK on Friday (July 19), after Iran's Revolutionary Guard claimed it had captured a British oil tanker in the Strait of Hormuz. "So, we're going to be speaking with the U.K. and this only goes to show what I'm saying about Iran. Trouble. Nothing but trouble," Trump told reporters on the South Lawn of the White House Britain said it was urgently seeking information about the Stena Impero tanker, which had been heading to a port in Saudi Arabia and suddenly changed course after passing through the strait at the mouth of the Gulf.

Trump to speak with UK following report Iran seized British tanker

The detained British-flagged tanker Stena Impero was in an accident with an Iranian fishing boat and ignored its distress call, Iran's Fars news agency reported on Saturday, quoting an official.

All 23 crew on the tanker were now at Bandar Abbas port and would remain on the vessel until the end of an investigation, Fars quoted the official as saying.

"It got involved in an accident with an Iranian fishing boat... When the boat sent a distress call, the British-flagged ship ignored it," the head of Ports and Maritime Organisation in southern Hormozgan province, Allahmorad Afifipour, told Fars.

"The tanker is now at Iran`s Bandar Abbas port and all its 23 crew members will remain on the ship until the probe is over."

The crew was made up of 18 Indian nationals and five others from Russia, the Philippines, Lithuania and elsewhere, Afifipour said.

The Stena Impero was taken to Bandar Abbas on Friday night by the naval forces of Iran`s Revolutionary Guards and the investigation into the accident began on Saturday, Afifipour said, according to Fars.

Britain said earlier it was urgently seeking information about the tanker, which had been heading to a port in Saudi Arabia and suddenly changed course after passing through the strait at the mouth of the Gulf.

Already strained relations between Iran and the West have become increasingly fraught since the British navy seized Iran’s Grace 1 tanker in Gibraltar on July 4 on suspicion of smuggling oil to Syria in breach of EU sanctions.

The detained British-flagged tanker Stena Impero was in an accident with an Iranian fishing boat and ignored its distress call, Iran's Fars news agency reported on Saturday, quoting an official.

The detained British-flagged tanker Stena Impero was in an accident with an Iranian fishing boat and ignored its distress call, Iran's Fars news agency reported on Saturday, quoting an official. All 23 crew on the tanker were now at Bandar Abbas port and would remain on the vessel until the end of an investigation, Fars quoted the official as saying. "It got involved in an accident with an Iranian fishing boat... When the boat sent a distress call, the British-flagged ship ignored it," the head of Ports and Maritime Organisation in southern Hormozgan province, Allahmorad Afifipour, told Fars. "The tanker is now at Iran`s Bandar Abbas port and all its 23 crew members will remain on the ship until the probe is over." The crew was made up of 18 Indian nationals and five others from Russia, the Philippines, Lithuania and elsewhere, Afifipour said. The Stena Impero was taken to Bandar Abbas on Friday night by the naval forces of Iran`s Revolutionary Guards and the investigation into the accident began on Saturday, Afifipour said, according to Fars. Britain said earlier it was urgently seeking information about the tanker, which had been heading to a port in Saudi Arabia and suddenly changed course after passing through the strait at the mouth of the Gulf. Already strained relations between Iran and the West have become increasingly fraught since the British navy seized Iran’s Grace 1 tanker in Gibraltar on July 4 on suspicion of smuggling oil to Syria in breach of EU sanctions.

Iran says UK-flagged tanker was in accident with fishing boat and 'ignored distress call'

For almost a decade, Alexander Temerko, who forged a career at the top of the Russian arms industry and had connections at the highest levels of the Kremlin, has been an influential figure in British politics.

For almost a decade, Alexander Temerko, who forged a career at the top of the Russian arms industry and had connections at the highest levels of the Kremlin, has been an influential figure in British politics. He's one of the Conservative Party's major donors. He counts Boris Johnson, the frontrunner to be Britain's next PM, among his friends. Temerko, born in what was then Soviet Ukraine, presents himself in public as an entrepreneur who opposes Britain's departure from the European Union because it's bad for his UK energy business, and as a dissident critic of Russian President Vladimir Putin. But in more than half a dozen conversations with this reporter, conducted over the past three years as part of the research for a book, he showed a different side of his career and views. Temerko revealed himself to be a supporter of Johnson's bid to lead Britain out of the EU, describing the 2016 public vote to leave the bloc as a "revolution against bureaucracy." He praised senior Russian security officials, including the current and former heads of the Federal Security Service (FSB), successor to the KGB, and proudly recalled his past work with Russia's Defence Ministry. These new insights into Temerko's private thinking about Johnson, Brexit, and Russia come as the ruling Conservative Party is choosing its next leader, and as some British MPs are increasingly wary of possible Russian influence over British politics. The result of the Conservative Party leadership contest is expected on July 23. Temerko has gifted more than £1 million to the Conservatives since he gained British citizenship in 2011, electoral finance records show - a significant amount by UK standards. Johnson is not among the politicians recorded as having received donations from Temerko. But the industrialist has financed some of Johnson's important allies in parliament, including one of the men running his campaign for the Tory leadership, James Wharton, who also serves as a paid adviser to the UK energy firm where Temerko is a director. Temerko spoke warmly about his "friend" Johnson, telling how the two men sometimes call each other "Sasha," the Russian diminutive for Alexander, which is Johnson's real first name. He described how, at the beginning of Johnson's tenure as Foreign Secretary from 2016 to 2018, they would often "plot" late into the evening over a bottle of wine on the balcony of Johnson's office at parliament in Westminster. Johnson's press secretary Lee Cain didn't respond to repeated requests for comment for this article. The Conservative Party said only that "donations to the Conservative Party are properly and transparently declared to the Electoral Commission, published by them, and fully comply with the law." In one conversation in February this year, Temerko said he'd joined an unsuccessful attempt led by members of a group of hardline Conservative MPs, the European Research Group, to remove Theresa May as the leader in December 2018. The MPs were unhappy at May's failure to take Britain out of the EU almost three years after Britons voted to leave. Temerko didn't detail his role in the move, but a senior Conservative Party member confirmed that Temerko was "very much behind the attempt to oust" May. The party member declined to be named because of the sensitivity of the matter. May finally resigned on June 7. Jacob Rees Mogg, chairman of the European Research Group, said in response to Reuters' questions that Temerko "has no link formal or informal" with the group. Rees Mogg said he didn't know Temerko, but couldn't speak for Temerko's relationship with individual MPs. May's office referred Reuters' questions about the episode to the Conservative Party, which didn't comment. In the same conversation in February, Temerko spoke in positive terms about one of Putin's closest and most powerful allies, Nikolai Patrushev, the hawkish head of Russia's Security Council and former long-time head of the FSB security service, describing him as a "decent family man." On another occasion, he said of Patrushev, "There is much more positive than negative about him." One of Temerko's former business partners in Russia, Leonid Nevzlin, said Temerko had long-standing ties with Russian security agencies but declined to say whether he believes those ties remain active. Nevzlin and Temerko were shareholders in oil firm Yukos before Putin's government seized control of the company. Nevzlin, who was one of the main shareholders, said Yukos's management brought Temerko in "for several projects as well as for his contacts at the top of the Federal Security Service and the Defence Ministry." Nevzlin added that Temerko knew Patrushev "well." Asked to respond, Temerko said in a follow-up interview this week that his role at Yukos encompassed the oil company's connections with the entire Russian state, not just with the Defence Ministry. His relations with people in the security services, he added, were "formal" and not "personal." He denied having any ongoing links with Russian security services. Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said Temerko "has no connection to the Kremlin or the Russian authorities. We do not know this gentleman." Reuters couldn't reach Patrushev for comment. Asked this week about the apparent contradiction between his private and public statements on Brexit, Temerko said his views changed with time and he was "evolutionary." He said he joined the push to oust May because he thought she should be more flexible in negotiating a route out of the EU. In recent weeks, as Johnson's campaign gathered pace, Temerko has appeared to distance himself from his friend. In an interview with the Daily Telegraph in June, Temerko said he was switching support from Johnson to his rival, Foreign Secretary Jeremy Hunt, over Johnson's apparent willingness to take Britain out of the EU without securing an agreement over the terms of the withdrawal. Temerko repeated this stance in a blog post for the Huffington Post on July 3, calling for Conservatives to reject the "fairytale" being offered by the "fun blonde guy," a reference to the fair-haired Johnson. As recently as February, Temerko told this reporter: "Jeremy is very dangerous. He really does occupy the center-ground. He's very clever. He's a person of the system." There is no record of Temerko providing any financing to Hunt, and none of Temerko's longstanding allies work on the Hunt campaign. A spokesperson for Hunt declined to comment. This portrait of Temerko and his activity comes as some MPs worry about possible Russian interference in British democracy. In February this year, parliament's committee overseeing digital and media matters called on the government to investigate attempts by Russia to influence the June 2016 referendum on Britain's EU membership, amid growing evidence in the United States and elsewhere that the Kremlin has been pursuing a campaign to divide and disrupt Western democracies. Ben Bradshaw, a senior Labour parliamentarian who was the first MP to raise concern about potential Kremlin interference in the 2016 Brexit referendum, said Reuters' findings were "extremely troubling." "We know the Kremlin seeks to disrupt, destabilise and influence our democracy in a number of ways. We must have complete confidence that the close relationships between Conservative politicians and Russian business people with ties to the Putin regime are above board and free from Kremlin influencing operations. The fact that an ex-Tory MP who is running Johnson's leadership campaign is employed by Mr. Temerko is extraordinary." The senior Conservative with knowledge of Temerko's efforts to remove May said some members of the party had distanced themselves from the businessman in recent months, as concerns have grown over Temerko's Russian connections. But "others," he said about Johnson, were "still close." The party member indicated that Conservative Chairman Brandon Lewis and Sir Graham Brady, then the head of the Conservative Party's 1922 Committee, a parliamentary group, had been briefed about these concerns. The source declined to give further details about the briefings. Brady did not respond to an emailed request for comment. A spokesperson for Lewis declined to comment. The Conservative Party didn't comment. Electoral Commission records show Temerko, and UK companies linked to him, have made donations to 11 individual MPs, including Lewis, the chairman of the Tory Party, while helping fund as many as 27 local branches of the Conservative Party in areas where Tory MPs won election in the north of England, Wales, and London. There is no record of him providing funds to Johnson or his constituency, and this year much of his funding activity seems to have petered out. In the February 2019 conversation, as May faced overwhelming parliamentary opposition to her EU withdrawal agreement, Temerko forecast that if Brexit isn't implemented, "the time of the mainstream parties will end," and "the old system will be destroyed." His friend Johnson, he predicted then, could lead a new movement backing Brexit. Those comments about a new political era chimed with remarks by Russian President Vladimir Putin. In an interview with the Financial Times in June, Putin trumpeted the rise of national populist movements in Europe and the United States, saying that "the liberal idea has become obsolete." Putin has rarely commented directly on Brexit, which he says is a matter for the British people. At his annual press conference in December 2018, he decried the idea of holding a second referendum on Brexit and said the UK government had to implement Britain's departure from the EU, otherwise, faith in democratic procedures would be undermined. FROM RUSSIA TO LONDON Temerko rose to prominence in the Russia arms industry in the 1990s, in the wild days that followed the collapse of the Soviet Union. Three former Russian business partners, including Nevzlin, as well as a former Russian intelligence officer, said Temerko grew close with the Russian security services. Those ties were forged in the 1990s, these people said when Temerko served as head of a state committee for the military and later as head of a strategic Russian state arms company known as Russkoye Oruzhie, or Russian Weapons. Russkoye Oruzhie no longer exists. Temerko cultivated close relations with the Russian defence minister of the early 1990s, Pavel Grachev. Temerko has described the late Grachev as his "handler." Temerko has boasted to this reporter that he had three-star and four-star Russian generals working under him. In 1999, Temerko became a member of the board and significant shareholder at one of the new Russia's most successful companies, Yukos, led by the charismatic billionaire Mikhail Khodorkovsky. Temerko said he helped Yukos secure a lucrative contract to supply the Russian army with oil. As head of the oil firm's government relations, he'd also led a push by Yukos to build an oil pipeline to China and, according to one of the former business partners, he'd travelled with other Yukos officials on many business trips they made abroad. "He knew the Russian ambassadors and consuls of every country," this former business partner said. Temerko said he knew many but not all of them. Things went sour for Yukos when Khodorkovsky tried to build a political power base for himself. When Khodorkovsky was arrested and jailed on fraud charges in October 2003, Temerko was the only Yukos shareholder who remained in the country to negotiate with the Kremlin. The remaining shareholders fled fearing they would face arrest. Temerko told how his standing with the Kremlin was such that he was able to try to negotiate about ways to preserve Yukos and secure Khodorkovsky's release directly with Igor Sechin, the then-deputy head of the Kremlin administration and the Putin security man seen as the mastermind behind the Kremlin campaign to take over Yukos. Temerko said that in those days his status meant he was essentially untouchable. His security ties, he said, once got him access to a meeting of the Russian Security Council, the circle of 24 top Russian officials, chaired by Putin, who steer national security policy. In the event, Khodorkovsky remained in jail for 10 years, while Temerko also fled. Sechin has previously denied orchestrating the legal campaign to take over Yukos. Sechin could not be reached for comment for this article. NEW FRIENDS IN HIGH PLACES Temerko arrived in Britain in 2005, saying he was a refugee from the politically charged takeover of Yukos. The Russian government had charged him with defrauding the state oil major Rosneft. Temerko denied the charge, saying the case was part of the Russian government's campaign against Yukos and its former top managers. The High Court in London declined a Russian request for Temerko's extradition in December 2005, saying it was politically motivated. The case bolstered his standing as a Russian dissident who'd suffered at the hands of the Russian state, helping secure his footing as a donor who could be trusted. Temerko won entrée to the top of the Conservative Party during David Cameron's premiership that began in 2010. At the time, according to Russian financier and Conservative Party activist, Sergei Cristo, the Tories were seeking new sources of cash following the 2008 financial crisis. Temerko paid £90,000 for a bronze bust of Cameron at a fundraising auction in 2013, now displayed at the Carlton Club, an exclusive London private members club. Cameron couldn't be reached for comment. Temerko's donations translated into access. In 2014, he was appointed by the local branch of the party as a vice-president of the Cities of London and Westminster Conservative Association, which delivered even greater opportunity to mix with leading Tories. Temerko also became part of the Conservative Party donor club The Leader's Group, where £50,000 in annual membership fees grants access to the prime minister and other senior ministers at dinners, cocktail receptions, and other events. In the conversations of the last three years, Temerko boasted he played an important role in securing election victories for the Conservative Party at a time when it "was fighting for every vote." Together with OGN Group, a major steel manufacturer in the UK's northeast, where he served as director, he said he'd sponsored 40 members of parliament in previous elections. "My business was one of the biggest businesses that supported the Conservative Party and its deputies in northern England," he said in the February 2019 conversation, adding he'd brought in supporters from Britain's East European minority. OGN Group is now in liquidation. The Conservative Party didn't comment. In public remarks, Temerko has consistently said he opposes Brexit because it will damage his UK business interests, which now centre on a firm, Aquind Ltd, developing an undersea electric power link between Britain and France. On his website, he says he is a "vocal supporter" of British membership of the EU. While Temerko has publicly spoken out against Brexit and has made donations to parliamentarians who campaigned to remain in the EU, at least two Conservative politicians close to Temerko played key roles on the Brexit side in the run-up to the June 2016 referendum. One of them is Wharton, a former Conservative MP who is overseeing Johnson's leadership campaign, at the same time as being a paid adviser to the power firm Aquind Ltd where Temerko is a director. In June 2013, Wharton put forward the parliamentary bill that first called for a referendum on Britain's EU membership. Temerko made £25,000 in political donations to Wharton between 2013 and 2015, disclosures to parliament show, a relatively large figure for an individual British MP, helping fund his re-election in 2015 in a constituency neighbouring Temerko's OGN Group steelworks. Wharton didn't respond to a request for comment. The minister of state for exiting the EU, Martin Callanan, served on the board of Temerko's Aquind from May 2016 to June 2017, at which time he joined the government. Callanan didn't respond to a request for comment. In a conversation with this reporter in July 2016, shortly after Britons voted to leave the EU, Temerko was jubilant about the possibilities of Johnson leading Britain's exit from the bloc. By then, Johnson was the most powerful figure in the "Leave" campaign. "We know that if Boris is our elected leader then our party membership will grow. There would be massive support for our party at election," he said at the time. The vote to leave the EU, he added, was "a revolution against bureaucracy." During the same conversation, Temerko said "a group of East European businessmen" had helped sway Johnson into a siding in February 2016 with campaigners for Britain's departure from the EU after months of sitting on the fence. But Temerko declined to name any of these East European businessmen and declined to repeat this comment. Temerko's allies are at the helm of Johnson's campaign. Wharton, the adviser to Temerko's power firm Aquind Ltd, has overseen the day to day running of Johnson's campaign, particularly in its initial stages. Gavin Williamson, the former UK defence secretary whom Temerko has frequently described as "a good lad," helped lead Johnson's campaign to win the support of his parliamentary colleagues to replace Theresa May. Conservative parliamentarians whittled the field down to two candidates in a series of votes in June before handing the final choice to the party's estimated 160,000 members. Williamson declined to comment. Temerko says he is "friends" with political strategist Sir Lynton Crosby, whose firm, CTF Partners, gave Johnson a £20,000 interest-free loan and a £3,000 cash donation late last year, according to a disclosure to parliament by Johnson. A co-founder of CTF, Mark Fullbrook, is the Johnson campaign's chief executive. Crosby declined to comment. CTF says it isn't involved in the Johnson campaign and Fullbrook is on a leave of absence, working voluntarily for Johnson's leadership bid. Temerko has said his days as a power player in Moscow are over. He has told this reporter he is now persona non-grata with the Russian authorities, especially after he publicly called in 2015 for the UK to supply weapons to Ukraine to assist it in its war with pro-Kremlin separatists because only a show of force would stop the conflict. "They consider that I am among those who directed the UK government against them. I am a warmonger. I am more of an enemy now than when I was in Yukos," he said. Kremlin spokesman Peskov said he couldn't comment because he doesn't know who Temerko is. Temerko retains at least one powerful connection, however. One of Temerko's former business partners said the industrialist is in contact with Andrei Guryev, the owner of Russian fertilizer giant Phosagro. Guryev, too, has become a notable figure in Britain. He owns Witanhurst, a vast estate in Highgate in the north of London that is the UK's second-biggest house after Buckingham Palace. Guryev declined to comment. Temerko confirmed his friendship with Guryev. "Guryev is a good guy," Temerko said. "He's a very nice character. He's a sportsman. He's a kind fellow."

In British PM race, a former Russian tycoon quietly wields influence

British MPs on Thursday backed a measure that would frustrate any attempt to force through a no-deal Brexit by suspending parliament, helped by several rebel members of the governing Conservatives.

The measure, which passed by 315 votes to 274, is a major setback for former London mayor Boris Johnson, who is expected to be named prime minister next Wednesday and has said he would be prepared to lead Britain into a no-deal Brexit.

The government had called for MPs to vote against the measure, but 17 Conservative legislators supported it and dozens more abstained, including finance minister Philip Hammond.

"The prime minister is obviously disappointed that a number of ministers failed to vote," a spokesman for PM Theresa May's Downing Street office said.

"No doubt her successor will take this into account when forming their government," he said.

Margot James, a junior government minister for the digital economy, resigned to vote in favour of the law.

The scale of the rebellion within the Conservative Party demonstrates the challenge that Johnson would face if he pursues a hardline Brexit agenda once in power.

Catherine Haddon, from the Institute for Government think-tank, said the vote was "a big show of intent" that did not clearly rule out a suspension of parliament.

Sky News television earlier cited sources close to Johnson saying he could call a new session of parliament, which would require its temporary suspension, in order to prevent MPs from attempting to block a no-deal Brexit.

The vote was on an amendment to legislation relating to Northern Ireland and requires parliament to meet on a regular basis to discuss the progress of talks on restoring the Northern Ireland Assembly, which collapsed in 2017.

The legislation now needs to go to the upper House of Lords for approval.

Hilary Benn, an MP from the main opposition Labour Party who put forward the amendment, said it was important that parliament should be sitting at a "crucial time for our country".

"I don't think we could accept circumstances, if I may coin the phrase, in which we were sent missing in action."

Britain is currently scheduled to leave the European Union on October 31 unless an extension is agreed.

Johnson has said he will push for a new deal with Brussels but would be prepared to lead Britain out of the bloc with no overall agreement in place if not.

Business leaders have warned about the prospect of serious economic disruption in the case of a no-deal Brexit and the government's official forecaster on Thursday warned it could trigger a year-long recession.

British MPs on Thursday backed a measure that would frustrate any attempt to force through a no-deal Brexit by suspending parliament, helped by several rebel members of the governing Conservatives.

British MPs on Thursday backed a measure that would frustrate any attempt to force through a no-deal Brexit by suspending parliament, helped by several rebel members of the governing Conservatives. The measure, which passed by 315 votes to 274, is a major setback for former London mayor Boris Johnson, who is expected to be named prime minister next Wednesday and has said he would be prepared to lead Britain into a no-deal Brexit. The government had called for MPs to vote against the measure, but 17 Conservative legislators supported it and dozens more abstained, including finance minister Philip Hammond. "The prime minister is obviously disappointed that a number of ministers failed to vote," a spokesman for PM Theresa May's Downing Street office said. "No doubt her successor will take this into account when forming their government," he said. Margot James, a junior government minister for the digital economy, resigned to vote in favour of the law. The scale of the rebellion within the Conservative Party demonstrates the challenge that Johnson would face if he pursues a hardline Brexit agenda once in power. Catherine Haddon, from the Institute for Government think-tank, said the vote was "a big show of intent" that did not clearly rule out a suspension of parliament. Sky News television earlier cited sources close to Johnson saying he could call a new session of parliament, which would require its temporary suspension, in order to prevent MPs from attempting to block a no-deal Brexit. The vote was on an amendment to legislation relating to Northern Ireland and requires parliament to meet on a regular basis to discuss the progress of talks on restoring the Northern Ireland Assembly, which collapsed in 2017. The legislation now needs to go to the upper House of Lords for approval. Hilary Benn, an MP from the main opposition Labour Party who put forward the amendment, said it was important that parliament should be sitting at a "crucial time for our country". "I don't think we could accept circumstances, if I may coin the phrase, in which we were sent missing in action." Britain is currently scheduled to leave the European Union on October 31 unless an extension is agreed. Johnson has said he will push for a new deal with Brussels but would be prepared to lead Britain out of the bloc with no overall agreement in place if not. Business leaders have warned about the prospect of serious economic disruption in the case of a no-deal Brexit and the government's official forecaster on Thursday warned it could trigger a year-long recession.

UK lawmakers vote in bid to frustrate no-deal Brexit

British lawmakers will vote on Thursday on a beefed-up proposal aimed at making it harder for the <a href="https://www.wionews.com/videos/hunt-in-final-days-of-battle-with-johnson-to-become-uk-236478">next prime minister </a>to try to force through a no-deal Brexit by suspending parliament.

Boris Johnson, the frontrunner to succeed Prime Minister Theresa May next week, has said Britain must leave the European Union on October 31, <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/boris-johnson-says-he-is-serious-about-no-deal-brexit-threat-230167">with or without a deal</a>, and has refused to rule out suspending parliament to prevent lawmakers from trying to block his exit plan.

The measure being voted on does not go as far as an outright block on parliament being suspended but lawmakers have put forward a further proposal which could require parliament to sit for several days even if it has been suspended.

The BBC reported some senior ministers, some of whom are likely facing the sack for their opposition to a no deal if Johnson wins, were considering resigning to support the proposal.

"The idea that parliament should be suspended in October ... at a crucial point in this country's history, that parliament should not be able to sit, should not be able to express its opinion and its will, I think would be outrageous," Justice Secretary David Gauke told BBC Radio.

Asked if he would vote for the proposal, something that would require him to resign, he said: "I will have to see what the precise amendments are ... I'm not in a position to necessarily say."

The result is likely to be very close: an earlier ballot on a less far-reaching version of the proposal last week passed by just one vote.

That narrow vote was in favour of a change to a piece of legislation to add a requirement that ministers make fortnightly reports on progress towards re-establishing Northern Ireland's collapsed executive.

Those hoping to stop a no-deal Brexit believe this could require parliament to be in session throughout the run-up to Brexit day, complicating any bid by Britain's new prime minister to "prorogue", or suspend, the legislature.

On Thursday, lawmakers will be asked to give final approval to the measure, which has since been strengthened by parliament's upper chamber, the House of Lords.

The Lords added a requirement that the government's report on its progress in Northern Ireland would need to be approved by lawmakers, giving them a possible route to try to stop a no-deal such as attaching a vote to request a delay to Brexit.

A further, more far-reaching, clause which would require parliament to sit for several days even if it has been prorogued could also be voted on.

The votes are expected in the early afternoon.

British lawmakers will vote on Thursday on a beefed-up proposal aimed at making it harder for the next prime minister to try to force through a no-deal Brexit by suspending parliament.

British lawmakers will vote on Thursday on a beefed-up proposal aimed at making it harder for the next prime minister to try to force through a no-deal Brexit by suspending parliament. Boris Johnson, the frontrunner to succeed Prime Minister Theresa May next week, has said Britain must leave the European Union on October 31, with or without a deal, and has refused to rule out suspending parliament to prevent lawmakers from trying to block his exit plan. The measure being voted on does not go as far as an outright block on parliament being suspended but lawmakers have put forward a further proposal which could require parliament to sit for several days even if it has been suspended. The BBC reported some senior ministers, some of whom are likely facing the sack for their opposition to a no deal if Johnson wins, were considering resigning to support the proposal. "The idea that parliament should be suspended in October ... at a crucial point in this country's history, that parliament should not be able to sit, should not be able to express its opinion and its will, I think would be outrageous," Justice Secretary David Gauke told BBC Radio. Asked if he would vote for the proposal, something that would require him to resign, he said: "I will have to see what the precise amendments are ... I'm not in a position to necessarily say." The result is likely to be very close: an earlier ballot on a less far-reaching version of the proposal last week passed by just one vote. That narrow vote was in favour of a change to a piece of legislation to add a requirement that ministers make fortnightly reports on progress towards re-establishing Northern Ireland's collapsed executive. Those hoping to stop a no-deal Brexit believe this could require parliament to be in session throughout the run-up to Brexit day, complicating any bid by Britain's new prime minister to "prorogue", or suspend, the legislature. On Thursday, lawmakers will be asked to give final approval to the measure, which has since been strengthened by parliament's upper chamber, the House of Lords. The Lords added a requirement that the government's report on its progress in Northern Ireland would need to be approved by lawmakers, giving them a possible route to try to stop a no-deal such as attaching a vote to request a delay to Brexit. A further, more far-reaching, clause which would require parliament to sit for several days even if it has been prorogued could also be voted on. The votes are expected in the early afternoon.

UK lawmakers to vote on latest bid to try to prevent a no-deal Brexit

Iran’s supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, said on Tuesday Iran would respond to Britain’s “piracy” over the seizure of an Iranian oil tanker in Gibraltar.

Iran says UK's seizure of oil tanker will not go unanswered

By Simon Usherwood

We’re talking a lot about Brexit in Britain. Whether it’s our hopes or – more likely – our frustrations, it’s the subject that we never quite seem to escape from.

But take a step back and think what those conversations focus on: outcomes. I’m guessing many people have a pretty good idea of what their family, friends and colleagues would like the end point of this process to be. It’s no coincidence that more people identify as Leavers or Remainers than as members of political parties.

Probably much less clear is how the potential outcomes – leaving the EU without a deal, leaving with a deal or remaining – are going to come about. The referendum was an exercise in ends, not means.

The two campaigns fought for votes with sweeping promises, but no fixed single plan. The vote wasn’t like a general election, where the winners have to take office and make good on their manifesto. Instead, the incentive was for campaigners to say whatever would get people to send votes their way, and if they won then they’d decide what that meant.

That’s why most of the second half of 2016 was spent with politicians arguing that they knew what the people wanted from Brexit.

Making It Up As We Go

The referendum also failed to produce any consensus about what happened next: it was a decision that lacked a rationale and a roadmap. It’s one thing to say we want to take back control, but quite another to translate that into a practical course of action. And so we’ve had to make it up as we go along.

Of course, all politics is like this. The vagaries of life mean we’re never quite confronted with what we expected. But usually that happens within a fairly well-defined range of parameters, with a political system that can make improvised decisions on the basis of generally-agreed principles.

Brexit hasn’t fitted into that mould, for three reasons.

First, its scope is so broad that its implications touch on every area of our political, economic and social lives. Second, its novelty means that we lack useful benchmarks to judge our actions: in legal terms it might simply be leaving an international organisation, but it clearly goes far beyond that.

And third, the division that the referendum exposed and reinforced between different sections of British society have made it very hard to find common ground.

The upshot has been a growing willingness, from all sides, to do whatever it takes to secure the outcome they want. The UK has gone from being one of the more sedate political systems of the world to one where ever more creative takes on the constitutional and parliamentary procedure are being suggested.

Conservative leadership contender Boris Johnson has not ruled out proroguing, or shutting down, parliament in order to push through a no-deal Brexit. Meanwhile, the Conservative MP Dominic Grieve managed to get parliament to approve an amendment to a piece of legislation regarding Northern Ireland, which could make shutting down parliament more difficult. And the former prime minister, John Major, suggested he may take a future Johnson government to court to prevent parliament being shut down.

The Means Matter 
 
Brexit matters. The choice we eventually make will have profound implications for decades to come, both for the UK and for its place in the world. But that is precisely why it’s essential that the manner of taking that decision matters as much as the decision itself.

Already we see how distrust of the people and processes that have got us this far has poisoned our ability to progress. Whether you think campaigners broke the rules in the referendum or you think judges are enemies of the state or you feel the media is a cheerleader rather than a reporter of what’s happening, if we don’t trust the way we make the decisions, then we risk also losing trust in the decisions themselves.

All of which brings us to one of the bigger questions of politics: do the ends always justify the means?

History shows us that part of what makes a democracy work, and work in a sustainable way, is a consensus about rules. Constitutions embody and embed that consensus in a way that is different from other rules for precisely that reason.

But extraordinary exceptions have a habit of becoming the norm, as with the emergency powers given to governments post 9/11; the revolution justifies the counter-revolution. We can disagree on what to do, but we need to agree on how we make a decision between the choices facing us – leaving with a deal, leaving with no deal or remaining – otherwise we risk damaging everything that follows.

Usually, this is the point where the author offers a solution, but you’ll not get that here. It’s not for me to tell you what to do, beyond sitting down together and working together to see where our common ground lies. And if we find that our existing political processes won’t work to resolve this – for example, a general election – then we need to agree on new ones that do.

So as politicians and the public alike work on their plans this summer, they might want to reflect on not the “what” of Brexit, but also the “how”. Maybe that might make some of those Brexit conversations a bit more productive and enlightening.

(Simon Usherwood is Reader in Politics, University of Surrey)

(This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/brexit-its-not-just-where-britains-going-that-matters-but-how-it-gets-there-120127">original article</a>)

(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL.)&nbsp; 
&nbsp;

By Simon Usherwood We’re talking a lot about Brexit in Britain. Whether it’s our hopes or – more likely – our frustrations, it’s the subject that we never quite seem to escape from.

By Simon Usherwood We’re talking a lot about Brexit in Britain. Whether it’s our hopes or – more likely – our frustrations, it’s the subject that we never quite seem to escape from. But take a step back and think what those conversations focus on: outcomes. I’m guessing many people have a pretty good idea of what their family, friends and colleagues would like the end point of this process to be. It’s no coincidence that more people identify as Leavers or Remainers than as members of political parties. Probably much less clear is how the potential outcomes – leaving the EU without a deal, leaving with a deal or remaining – are going to come about. The referendum was an exercise in ends, not means. The two campaigns fought for votes with sweeping promises, but no fixed single plan. The vote wasn’t like a general election, where the winners have to take office and make good on their manifesto. Instead, the incentive was for campaigners to say whatever would get people to send votes their way, and if they won then they’d decide what that meant. That’s why most of the second half of 2016 was spent with politicians arguing that they knew what the people wanted from Brexit. Making It Up As We Go The referendum also failed to produce any consensus about what happened next: it was a decision that lacked a rationale and a roadmap. It’s one thing to say we want to take back control, but quite another to translate that into a practical course of action. And so we’ve had to make it up as we go along. Of course, all politics is like this. The vagaries of life mean we’re never quite confronted with what we expected. But usually that happens within a fairly well-defined range of parameters, with a political system that can make improvised decisions on the basis of generally-agreed principles. Brexit hasn’t fitted into that mould, for three reasons. First, its scope is so broad that its implications touch on every area of our political, economic and social lives. Second, its novelty means that we lack useful benchmarks to judge our actions: in legal terms it might simply be leaving an international organisation, but it clearly goes far beyond that. And third, the division that the referendum exposed and reinforced between different sections of British society have made it very hard to find common ground. The upshot has been a growing willingness, from all sides, to do whatever it takes to secure the outcome they want. The UK has gone from being one of the more sedate political systems of the world to one where ever more creative takes on the constitutional and parliamentary procedure are being suggested. Conservative leadership contender Boris Johnson has not ruled out proroguing, or shutting down, parliament in order to push through a no-deal Brexit. Meanwhile, the Conservative MP Dominic Grieve managed to get parliament to approve an amendment to a piece of legislation regarding Northern Ireland, which could make shutting down parliament more difficult. And the former prime minister, John Major, suggested he may take a future Johnson government to court to prevent parliament being shut down. The Means Matter Brexit matters. The choice we eventually make will have profound implications for decades to come, both for the UK and for its place in the world. But that is precisely why it’s essential that the manner of taking that decision matters as much as the decision itself. Already we see how distrust of the people and processes that have got us this far has poisoned our ability to progress. Whether you think campaigners broke the rules in the referendum or you think judges are enemies of the state or you feel the media is a cheerleader rather than a reporter of what’s happening, if we don’t trust the way we make the decisions, then we risk also losing trust in the decisions themselves. All of which brings us to one of the bigger questions of politics: do the ends always justify the means? History shows us that part of what makes a democracy work, and work in a sustainable way, is a consensus about rules. Constitutions embody and embed that consensus in a way that is different from other rules for precisely that reason. But extraordinary exceptions have a habit of becoming the norm, as with the emergency powers given to governments post 9/11; the revolution justifies the counter-revolution. We can disagree on what to do, but we need to agree on how we make a decision between the choices facing us – leaving with a deal, leaving with no deal or remaining – otherwise we risk damaging everything that follows. Usually, this is the point where the author offers a solution, but you’ll not get that here. It’s not for me to tell you what to do, beyond sitting down together and working together to see where our common ground lies. And if we find that our existing political processes won’t work to resolve this – for example, a general election – then we need to agree on new ones that do. So as politicians and the public alike work on their plans this summer, they might want to reflect on not the “what” of Brexit, but also the “how”. Maybe that might make some of those Brexit conversations a bit more productive and enlightening. (Simon Usherwood is Reader in Politics, University of Surrey) (This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article) (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL.)

Brexit: It’s not just where Britain’s going that matters, but how it gets there

British Foreign Minister Jeremy Hunt told his Iranian counterpart on Saturday (July 13) that Britain would facilitate the release of the detained Grace 1 oil tanker if Tehran gave guarantees it would not go to Syria.

UK to facilitate release of Iranian tanker if it gets Syria guarantees: Hunt

The U.S. State Department condemned Iran over its alleged harassment of a British oil tanker in the Strait of Hormuz as tensions rose in the Persian Gulf region, and U.N. Secretary-General Antonio Guterres called for "maximum restraint."

US State Dept. condemns harassment of UK vessel

Iranian boats attempted to seize British tanker. Royal Navy fends off Iranian seizure of oil tanker. UK claimed 3 Iranian boats tried to stop their tanker. Watch this video to know more.

Gibraltar: 2 Indian Officials Arrested

Britain is not seeking to escalate the situation with Iran, foreign minister Jeremy Hunt said on Friday, as tensions continue between London and Tehran over a seized Iranian tanker and the passage of vessels through the Strait of Hormuz.

Relations between Iran and the West have been increasingly strained after Britain seized an Iranian tanker in Gibraltar and London said the British Heritage, operated by oil company BP, had been approached by Iranian vessels in the strait between Iran and the Arabian peninsula.

"We are reacting to what is happening in a measured and careful way and we are being clear to Iran that we are not seeking to escalate this situation," Jeremy Hunt told Sky News.

Britain is not seeking to escalate the situation with Iran, foreign minister Jeremy Hunt said on Friday, as tensions continue between London and Tehran over a seized Iranian tanker and the passage of vessels through the Strait of Hormuz.

Britain is not seeking to escalate the situation with Iran, foreign minister Jeremy Hunt said on Friday, as tensions continue between London and Tehran over a seized Iranian tanker and the passage of vessels through the Strait of Hormuz. Relations between Iran and the West have been increasingly strained after Britain seized an Iranian tanker in Gibraltar and London said the British Heritage, operated by oil company BP, had been approached by Iranian vessels in the strait between Iran and the Arabian peninsula. "We are reacting to what is happening in a measured and careful way and we are being clear to Iran that we are not seeking to escalate this situation," Jeremy Hunt told Sky News.

UK says it does not want to increase tension with Iran

Iranian boats tried to impede a British oil tanker near the Gulf - before being driven off by a Royal Navy ship, the Ministry of Defence has said.

Iranian boats tried to intercept British tanker

UK's parliament voted on July 6 in favour of a plan that would compel the government to legalise same-sex marriage and extend abortion rights in Northern Ireland, if the province is unable to re-establish its own devolved government. Watch this video to know more.

Northern Ireland: UK lawmakers approve bid to legalise same sex marriage

Britain's ambassador to the United States, Kim Darroch, has resigned

UK ambassador to US resigns in Trump leaks row

Opposition Labour Party leader Jeremy Corbyn on Tuesday said Britain's next prime minister must put their Brexit plan to a second referendum on <a href="https://www.google.com/url?client=internal-uds-cse&amp;cx=006054055338965708568:09spwrlibei&amp;q=https://www.wionews.com/world/uk-brexit-minister-urges-european-union-to-reopen-withdrawal-deal-talks-234121&amp;sa=U&amp;ved=2ahUKEwjWts6X9qfjAhUn7HMBHSu2BDEQFjAIegQIBBAC&amp;usg=AOvVaw2cisH69I1RUe1Hp_6dpaoc">European Union </a>membership, saying his party would campaign to remain.

In an email to members, Corbyn said Labour would campaign to stay in the EU to stop a new Conservative Party leader, who will be chosen later this month, taking Britain out of the bloc without a divorce deal or to stop what he called a "damaging" <a href="https://www.google.com/url?client=internal-uds-cse&amp;cx=006054055338965708568:09spwrlibei&amp;q=https://www.wionews.com/world/united-kingdom-economy-shrinks-as-brexit-global-worries-mount-purchasing-managers-index-232725&amp;sa=U&amp;ved=2ahUKEwi_n5nQ9qfjAhWT6XMBHYFuC5sQFjABegQIEBAC&amp;usg=AOvVaw0SBY8A6E_YzS2LYTww-ZvV">Brexit</a>.

The move by Corbyn inches the opposition party closer to heeding demands from many Labour members and some lawmakers to unequivocally embrace a second referendum to break the impasse in parliament over how to leave the EU.

But it might not be enough to satisfy all in his party, falling short of campaigning for a second referendum in any circumstance - a position some wanted to adapt to counter a challenge from the pro-EU, smaller Liberal Democrats.

Brexit has brought down Prime Minister Theresa May, who failed three times to get the divorce deal she agreed with the EU ratified by parliament.

Former foreign minister and London mayor Boris Johnson is battling current foreign minister Jeremy Hunt to replace her as party leader and prime minister. Johnson, who says he will take Britain out of the EU with or without a deal, is favorite.

"Whoever becomes the new prime minister should have the confidence to put their deal, or no deal, back to the people in a public vote," Corbyn said.

"In those circumstances, I want to make it clear that Labour would campaign to Remain against either no deal or a Tory (Conservative) deal that does not protect the economy and jobs."

What he did not say in his mail was what his party would campaign for in a parliamentary election - something the veteran socialist renewed his call for by saying:&nbsp;

"We need a Labour government to end austerity and rebuild our country for the many, not the few".

More than three years since voting 52% to 48% to leave the EU, Britain`s two main parties, its parliament and cities and towns across the country are still deeply divided over Brexit, opening the way for smaller parties to grab some share of the vote.

With Labour struggling in some opinion polls, some in the party want it to adopt a clearer message to tackle the twin challenges from the pro-EU Liberal Democrats and the Brexit Party, led by veteran eurosceptic Nigel Farage.

Corbyn, an instinctive critic of the EU, has so far resisted calls to make his party a wholesale supporter of a second referendum, keen to keep on board Labour Brexit supporters.

Chuka Umunna, a former Labour lawmaker who has joined the Liberal Democrats, said on Twitter: "Yet another fudge, where the Labour leadership keeps open the door to standing on a pro-Brexit platform in a general election or supporting it in government."&nbsp;

Opposition Labour Party leader Jeremy Corbyn on Tuesday said Britain's next prime minister must put their Brexit plan to a second referendum on European Union membership, saying his party would campaign to remain.

Opposition Labour Party leader Jeremy Corbyn on Tuesday said Britain's next prime minister must put their Brexit plan to a second referendum on European Union membership, saying his party would campaign to remain. In an email to members, Corbyn said Labour would campaign to stay in the EU to stop a new Conservative Party leader, who will be chosen later this month, taking Britain out of the bloc without a divorce deal or to stop what he called a "damaging" Brexit. The move by Corbyn inches the opposition party closer to heeding demands from many Labour members and some lawmakers to unequivocally embrace a second referendum to break the impasse in parliament over how to leave the EU. But it might not be enough to satisfy all in his party, falling short of campaigning for a second referendum in any circumstance - a position some wanted to adapt to counter a challenge from the pro-EU, smaller Liberal Democrats. Brexit has brought down Prime Minister Theresa May, who failed three times to get the divorce deal she agreed with the EU ratified by parliament. Former foreign minister and London mayor Boris Johnson is battling current foreign minister Jeremy Hunt to replace her as party leader and prime minister. Johnson, who says he will take Britain out of the EU with or without a deal, is favorite. "Whoever becomes the new prime minister should have the confidence to put their deal, or no deal, back to the people in a public vote," Corbyn said. "In those circumstances, I want to make it clear that Labour would campaign to Remain against either no deal or a Tory (Conservative) deal that does not protect the economy and jobs." What he did not say in his mail was what his party would campaign for in a parliamentary election - something the veteran socialist renewed his call for by saying: "We need a Labour government to end austerity and rebuild our country for the many, not the few". More than three years since voting 52% to 48% to leave the EU, Britain`s two main parties, its parliament and cities and towns across the country are still deeply divided over Brexit, opening the way for smaller parties to grab some share of the vote. With Labour struggling in some opinion polls, some in the party want it to adopt a clearer message to tackle the twin challenges from the pro-EU Liberal Democrats and the Brexit Party, led by veteran eurosceptic Nigel Farage. Corbyn, an instinctive critic of the EU, has so far resisted calls to make his party a wholesale supporter of a second referendum, keen to keep on board Labour Brexit supporters. Chuka Umunna, a former Labour lawmaker who has joined the Liberal Democrats, said on Twitter: "Yet another fudge, where the Labour leadership keeps open the door to standing on a pro-Brexit platform in a general election or supporting it in government."

New United Kingdom Prime Minister must put Brexit plan to second referendum: Labour's Jeremy Corbyn

British Royal Marines detained the supertanker on suspicion of carrying crude oil to Syria. Watch this video to know more.

UK detains Iranian oil tanker headed to Syria

Hong Kong protesters used innovative skills in their battle with the authorities. Protesters used shields, hand signals, umbrellas in the battle with the authorities. Watch this video to know more.

Hong Kong protests: Protesters used their innovative skills

China told UK to keep its hands off Hong Kong on July 3, this comes after Britain's foreign secretary Jeremy Hunt tweeted. Watch this video to know more.

Hong Kong protests: China tells UK not to interfere

UK court allows Mallya to appeal against extradition. To know more watch the video

Mandy Clark on Mallya Granted permission to appeal against extradition

Britain warned China on Tuesday that there would be serious consequences if the <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/investigate-criminal-responsibility-of-violent-offenders-china-to-hong-kong-authorities-232227">Sino-British declaration on Hong Kong </a>was not honoured, saying Britain stood behind the people in the former <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/hong-kong-leader-carrie-lam-condemns-extremely-violent-protests-232173">British colony</a>.

China has condemned violent demonstrations in Hong Kong as an "undisguised challenge" to the 'one country, two systems' formula under which the city is ruled which allows freedoms not enjoyed in mainland China, including the freedom to protest.

"The UK signed an internationally binding legal agreement in 1984 that enshrines the 'one country, two systems rule', enshrines the basic freedoms of the people of Hong Kong and we stand four square behind that agreement, four square behind the people of Hong Kong," British foreign minister Jeremy Hunt said.

"There will be serious consequences if that internationally binding legal agreement were not to be honoured," he told BBC TV. 
 
Watch: Hong Kong police evacuate protesters from the legislative chamber

<div class="videoWrapper trancodeVideo"><iframe allowfullscreen="" autoplay="1" class="includeVideo" frameborder="0" height="350" src="https://www.wionews.com/videos/hong-kong-police-evacuate-protesters-from-chamber-232300/embed" style="width:100%;max-width:560px;" width="560"></iframe></div>

Protesters, angry about proposed legislation allowing extraditions to mainland China, smashed their way into Hong Kong's legislature on Monday, with police using tear gas to disperse them.

Hunt urged the Hong Kong authorities that any repression would exacerbate people's concerns.

"We in the UK condemn violence on all sides, and many people who strongly support the pro-democracy demonstrators in Hong Kong will have been deeply dismayed by the scenes they saw on TV last night," Hunt said.

"But, we urge the authorities not to use what happened as a pretext for repression, but rather to understand the root causes of what happened which is a deep-seated concern by people in Hong Kong that their basic freedoms are under attack."

Britain warned China on Tuesday that there would be serious consequences if the Sino-British declaration on Hong Kong was not honoured, saying Britain stood behind the people in the former British colony.

Britain warned China on Tuesday that there would be serious consequences if the Sino-British declaration on Hong Kong was not honoured, saying Britain stood behind the people in the former British colony. China has condemned violent demonstrations in Hong Kong as an "undisguised challenge" to the 'one country, two systems' formula under which the city is ruled which allows freedoms not enjoyed in mainland China, including the freedom to protest. "The UK signed an internationally binding legal agreement in 1984 that enshrines the 'one country, two systems rule', enshrines the basic freedoms of the people of Hong Kong and we stand four square behind that agreement, four square behind the people of Hong Kong," British foreign minister Jeremy Hunt said. "There will be serious consequences if that internationally binding legal agreement were not to be honoured," he told BBC TV. Watch: Hong Kong police evacuate protesters from the legislative chamber Protesters, angry about proposed legislation allowing extraditions to mainland China, smashed their way into Hong Kong's legislature on Monday, with police using tear gas to disperse them. Hunt urged the Hong Kong authorities that any repression would exacerbate people's concerns. "We in the UK condemn violence on all sides, and many people who strongly support the pro-democracy demonstrators in Hong Kong will have been deeply dismayed by the scenes they saw on TV last night," Hunt said. "But, we urge the authorities not to use what happened as a pretext for repression, but rather to understand the root causes of what happened which is a deep-seated concern by people in Hong Kong that their basic freedoms are under attack."

UK warns China of serious consequences if Hong Kong rights not honoured

India has moved down one place to 74th rank in terms of <a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/indians-money-in-swiss-banks-falls-hits-second-lowest-level-in-two-decades-230943">money parked by its citizens and enterprises with Swiss banks</a>, while the UK has retained its top position, as per data released by the central banking authority of the Alpine nation.

India was ranked 73rd last year, after jumping 15 places from its 88th position a year ago.

An analysis of the latest annual banking statistics released by the Swiss National Bank (SNB) shows that India remains ranked very low when it comes to money parked by Indian individuals and enterprises in Swiss banks, including through their India-based branches, while accounting for just about 0.07 per cent of the aggregate funds parked by all foreign clients of Switzerland-based banks.

In comparison, the top-ranked UK accounted for more than 26 per cent of the total foreign funds parked with Swiss banks at the end of 2018.

Among the top-ranked jurisdictions, the UK is followed by the US, West Indies, France and Hong Kong in the top five.

The top-five countries alone account for more than 50 per cent of the aggregate foreign funds parked with the Swiss banks, while the top-10 account for nearly two-thirds. The top-15 countries account for nearly 75 per cent of all foreign money in Swiss banks, while the contribution of the top-30 is almost 90 per cent.

The top-10 countries also include Bahamas, Germany, Luxembourg, Cayman Islands and Singapore.

Among the five-nation BRICS bloc of emerging economies, India is ranked the lowest while Russia is ranked the highest at 20th place, followed by China at 22nd, South Africa at 60th and Brazil at 65th place in terms of the amount of money parked by their residents and enterprises at the end of 2018.

The countries ranked higher than India also include Mauritius (71st), New Zealand (59th), the Philippines (54th), Venezuela (53rd), Seychelles (52nd), Thailand (39th), Canada (36th), Turkey (30th), Israel (28th), Saudi Arabia (21st), Panama (18th), Japan (16th), Italy (15th), Australia (13th), UAE (12th) and Guernsey (11th).

However, several of India's neighbouring nations are ranked lower, with Pakistan ranking 82nd, Bangladesh 89th, Nepal 109th, Sri Lanka 141st, Myanmar 187th and Bhutan 193rd.

This is the first time in the last four years that the funds linked to Pakistan in Swiss banks have slipped below that of Indians.

A number of other major countries also saw their funds falling in Swiss banks amid a global clampdown against the erstwhile banking secrecy walls in the Alpine nation. The funds, described by SNB as 'liabilities' of Swiss banks or 'amounts due to' their clients, are official figures disclosed by Swiss authorities and do not indicate the exact quantum of the much-debated alleged black money held in famed safe havens of Switzerland. The official figures, disclosed annually by Switzerland's central bank, also do not include the money that Indians, NRIs or others might have in Swiss banks in the names of entities from different countries. It has been often alleged that Indians and other nationals seeking to stash their illicit wealth abroad use multiple layers of various jurisdictions, including tax havens, to shift the money to Swiss banks.

Also, with Switzerland putting in place an automatic information exchange framework with India and various other countries, the famed secrecy walls of Swiss banks are said to have crumbled. India will start getting this automatic data from this year, while it has already been getting information on accounts where proof of illicit funds can be furnished.

The funds officially held by Indians with banks in Switzerland now accounts for only 0.07 per cent of the total funds kept by all foreign clients in the Swiss banking system, almost same as the level seen at 2017-end after a modest increase from 0.04 per cent a year before that, as per an analysis of the latest figures compiled by the SNB (Swiss National Bank) as on 2018-end.

India was placed at 75th position in 2015 and 61st in the year before, though it used to be among the top-50 countries in terms of holdings in Swiss banks till 2007. The country was ranked highest at 37th place in the year 2004.

The total money held in Swiss banks by foreign clients from across the world fell by about 4 per cent to CHF 1.4 trillion (about Rs. 99 lakh crore) in 2018. In terms of individual countries, the UK continues to account for the largest chunk at about CHF 372 billion (down from CHF 403 billion a year ago), which remains more than 26 per cent of the total foreign money with Swiss banks.

The US remains on the second position despite a dip to about CHF 144 billion (from CHF 166 billion a year ago), accounting for nearly 10.3 per cent of all foreign funds. The share is more than 1 per cent only for 21 jurisdictions.

India was ranked in the top-50 continuously between 1996 and 2007, but its rank started declining after that -&nbsp;55th in 2008, 59th in 2009 and 2010 each, 55th again in 2011, 71st in 2012 and then to 58th in 2013.

&nbsp;

India has moved down one place to 74th rank in terms of money parked by its citizens and enterprises with Swiss banks, while the UK has retained its top position, as per data released by the central banking authority of the Alpine nation.

India has moved down one place to 74th rank in terms of money parked by its citizens and enterprises with Swiss banks, while the UK has retained its top position, as per data released by the central banking authority of the Alpine nation. India was ranked 73rd last year, after jumping 15 places from its 88th position a year ago. An analysis of the latest annual banking statistics released by the Swiss National Bank (SNB) shows that India remains ranked very low when it comes to money parked by Indian individuals and enterprises in Swiss banks, including through their India-based branches, while accounting for just about 0.07 per cent of the aggregate funds parked by all foreign clients of Switzerland-based banks. In comparison, the top-ranked UK accounted for more than 26 per cent of the total foreign funds parked with Swiss banks at the end of 2018. Among the top-ranked jurisdictions, the UK is followed by the US, West Indies, France and Hong Kong in the top five. The top-five countries alone account for more than 50 per cent of the aggregate foreign funds parked with the Swiss banks, while the top-10 account for nearly two-thirds. The top-15 countries account for nearly 75 per cent of all foreign money in Swiss banks, while the contribution of the top-30 is almost 90 per cent. The top-10 countries also include Bahamas, Germany, Luxembourg, Cayman Islands and Singapore. Among the five-nation BRICS bloc of emerging economies, India is ranked the lowest while Russia is ranked the highest at 20th place, followed by China at 22nd, South Africa at 60th and Brazil at 65th place in terms of the amount of money parked by their residents and enterprises at the end of 2018. The countries ranked higher than India also include Mauritius (71st), New Zealand (59th), the Philippines (54th), Venezuela (53rd), Seychelles (52nd), Thailand (39th), Canada (36th), Turkey (30th), Israel (28th), Saudi Arabia (21st), Panama (18th), Japan (16th), Italy (15th), Australia (13th), UAE (12th) and Guernsey (11th). However, several of India's neighbouring nations are ranked lower, with Pakistan ranking 82nd, Bangladesh 89th, Nepal 109th, Sri Lanka 141st, Myanmar 187th and Bhutan 193rd. This is the first time in the last four years that the funds linked to Pakistan in Swiss banks have slipped below that of Indians. A number of other major countries also saw their funds falling in Swiss banks amid a global clampdown against the erstwhile banking secrecy walls in the Alpine nation. The funds, described by SNB as 'liabilities' of Swiss banks or 'amounts due to' their clients, are official figures disclosed by Swiss authorities and do not indicate the exact quantum of the much-debated alleged black money held in famed safe havens of Switzerland. The official figures, disclosed annually by Switzerland's central bank, also do not include the money that Indians, NRIs or others might have in Swiss banks in the names of entities from different countries. It has been often alleged that Indians and other nationals seeking to stash their illicit wealth abroad use multiple layers of various jurisdictions, including tax havens, to shift the money to Swiss banks. Also, with Switzerland putting in place an automatic information exchange framework with India and various other countries, the famed secrecy walls of Swiss banks are said to have crumbled. India will start getting this automatic data from this year, while it has already been getting information on accounts where proof of illicit funds can be furnished. The funds officially held by Indians with banks in Switzerland now accounts for only 0.07 per cent of the total funds kept by all foreign clients in the Swiss banking system, almost same as the level seen at 2017-end after a modest increase from 0.04 per cent a year before that, as per an analysis of the latest figures compiled by the SNB (Swiss National Bank) as on 2018-end. India was placed at 75th position in 2015 and 61st in the year before, though it used to be among the top-50 countries in terms of holdings in Swiss banks till 2007. The country was ranked highest at 37th place in the year 2004. The total money held in Swiss banks by foreign clients from across the world fell by about 4 per cent to CHF 1.4 trillion (about Rs. 99 lakh crore) in 2018. In terms of individual countries, the UK continues to account for the largest chunk at about CHF 372 billion (down from CHF 403 billion a year ago), which remains more than 26 per cent of the total foreign money with Swiss banks. The US remains on the second position despite a dip to about CHF 144 billion (from CHF 166 billion a year ago), accounting for nearly 10.3 per cent of all foreign funds. The share is more than 1 per cent only for 21 jurisdictions. India was ranked in the top-50 continuously between 1996 and 2007, but its rank started declining after that - 55th in 2008, 59th in 2009 and 2010 each, 55th again in 2011, 71st in 2012 and then to 58th in 2013.

Money in Swiss banks: India slips to 74th place, UK remains on top 

May tells Putin to end 'Destabilising' acts against UK. UK said Russia must end 'irresponsible & Destabilising' acts. Watch this video to know more.

Theresa May Warns Russia Over Skripal Poisoning

Veteran British journalist Sir Mark Tully was presented with a 'Lifetime Achievement Award' here for his contributions to the UK-India relationship.

Tully, the former Bureau Chief of the BBC, New Delhi, received a standing ovation on Friday from the gathering as he said that being in India was his karma.

"I owe a great debt to India and I have been rewarded way beyond my expectations," said 83-year-old Tully, who has been previously knighted by Queen Elizabeth II in the UK and conferred with the Padma Bhushan in India.

The annual UK-India Awards, which celebrate special talents and organisations who use their worldwide influence to strengthen UK-India ties, included wins for British Telecom (BT) in the Social Impact category and Indian hospitality start-up Oyo in the Market Entrant of the Year category.

While British Indian actor Kunal Nayyar best known for his role as Rajesh Koothrappali on the US sitcom 'The Big Bang Theory' was named Global Indian Icon of the Year, Indian-origin peer and Cobra Beer founder Lord Karan Bilimoria was presented with a special Significant Contribution to UK-India Relations Award.

"The UK is a wonderful global power and if there is a special relationship, it is with India," said Bilimoria.

The start-up of the Year Award, sponsored by Indian software services major Infosys, was won by Maanch, a new platform that matches up funders and receivers to accelerate global sustainable development.

"Maanch is an impact technology and it is designed to really bring the world together for sustainability so that we can invest and give money in a way that has the highest impact.

An award like this is an important validation because technologies like these are new," said Founder &amp; CEO Darshita Gillies.&nbsp;

The awards marked the conclusion of the annual UK-India Week, which kicked off on Monday with the first-ever India Day in the Houses of Parliament in London. Some of the other winners of the night included Fund of the Year for SoftBank Investment Advisers, Law Firm of the Year for the UK's Baker McKenzie, Trade and Investment Promotion Agency of the Year for Manchester India Partnership, Deal of the Year for EverSource Capital/ Lightsource BP and Finance Organisation of the Year for AXIS Bank Limited.

The UK-India Awards, now in their third year, were selected by an all-women judging panel for the first time, including Director and Chief Counsel of Rolls-Royce plc Deborah D'Aubney and prominent Indian-origin anti-Brexit campaigner Gina Miller.

"All the winners and nominees are inspirational figures at the cutting edge of technology, innovation, business, international relations and culture, who are doing amazing work in making that UK-India partnership a truly winning one," said Manoj Ladwa, Founder &amp; CEO of India Inc. the organisation behind the awards.&nbsp;

Veteran British journalist Sir Mark Tully was presented with a 'Lifetime Achievement Award' here for his contributions to the UK-India relationship. Tully, the former Bureau Chief of the BBC, New Delhi, received a standing ovation on Friday from the gathering as he said that being in India was his karma.

Veteran British journalist Sir Mark Tully was presented with a 'Lifetime Achievement Award' here for his contributions to the UK-India relationship. Tully, the former Bureau Chief of the BBC, New Delhi, received a standing ovation on Friday from the gathering as he said that being in India was his karma. "I owe a great debt to India and I have been rewarded way beyond my expectations," said 83-year-old Tully, who has been previously knighted by Queen Elizabeth II in the UK and conferred with the Padma Bhushan in India. The annual UK-India Awards, which celebrate special talents and organisations who use their worldwide influence to strengthen UK-India ties, included wins for British Telecom (BT) in the Social Impact category and Indian hospitality start-up Oyo in the Market Entrant of the Year category. While British Indian actor Kunal Nayyar best known for his role as Rajesh Koothrappali on the US sitcom 'The Big Bang Theory' was named Global Indian Icon of the Year, Indian-origin peer and Cobra Beer founder Lord Karan Bilimoria was presented with a special Significant Contribution to UK-India Relations Award. "The UK is a wonderful global power and if there is a special relationship, it is with India," said Bilimoria. The start-up of the Year Award, sponsored by Indian software services major Infosys, was won by Maanch, a new platform that matches up funders and receivers to accelerate global sustainable development. "Maanch is an impact technology and it is designed to really bring the world together for sustainability so that we can invest and give money in a way that has the highest impact. An award like this is an important validation because technologies like these are new," said Founder & CEO Darshita Gillies. The awards marked the conclusion of the annual UK-India Week, which kicked off on Monday with the first-ever India Day in the Houses of Parliament in London. Some of the other winners of the night included Fund of the Year for SoftBank Investment Advisers, Law Firm of the Year for the UK's Baker McKenzie, Trade and Investment Promotion Agency of the Year for Manchester India Partnership, Deal of the Year for EverSource Capital/ Lightsource BP and Finance Organisation of the Year for AXIS Bank Limited. The UK-India Awards, now in their third year, were selected by an all-women judging panel for the first time, including Director and Chief Counsel of Rolls-Royce plc Deborah D'Aubney and prominent Indian-origin anti-Brexit campaigner Gina Miller. "All the winners and nominees are inspirational figures at the cutting edge of technology, innovation, business, international relations and culture, who are doing amazing work in making that UK-India partnership a truly winning one," said Manoj Ladwa, Founder & CEO of India Inc. the organisation behind the awards.

Mark Tully gets lifetime achievement award for role in UK-India ties

Uk, News on Uk, stories on Uk, articles on Uk, Uk stories at Wion, Uk news, Uk latest news