[Pinder Singhmanik]

I was looking here for the news that we found online from the Telegraph newspaper in the UK last week and found that noone had put it here. Excuse me for posting it but we thought it would be of use to you who are concerned with the visa for India.

http://www.telegraph...ia-visa-117.xml

Sorry I am not sure about how to do the link business, I hope it works.
Pinder

[Pinder Singhmanik]

http://www.telegraph...ia-visa-117.xml

I am trying to read it but it says it is gone. only from 18th November so it is peculiar.
the link if you are wanting to type it in is this
http://www.telegraph...ia-visa-117.xml

I am very sorry, I am not sure about this linking business :-)

Edited by john.sw, 25 November 2007 - 03:27 PM.

[WonderWomanUSA]

I think this might be the location now: http://www.telegraph...ia-visa-117.xml

Anyway, thanks for letting us know about this!

[john.sw]

I had no idea that the Indian government had decided not to issue visas by post, so it was a surprise to learn that they have reversed their decision following protests from the travel trade and tourists.

Long queues for visas at the High Commission in London, and other HCI offices in the UK, have been a huge inconvenience for years.  Even the "Visa Surgeries" they hold from time to time around the country are thronged with frustrated tourists who are forced to queue for hours for a visa.

Contrast this with countries like Thailand that issue VOA (Visa on Arrival) and you realise that India is doing herself no favours if she wants to increase tourism revenue.

India welcomed 700,000 arrivals from the UK in 2006 and growth of as much as 14 per cent a year is anticipated.

If India wants to double tourist arrivals to 10 million by 2010, when the country will stage the Commonwealth Games, something will have to be done to streamline the visa application process.

The article says that India will replace the six month visa with visas lasting five years to encourage people to make return trips.

I wonder if tourists will be able to remain in India for five years, or whether they will be limited to a stay of six months, as at present.

If tourists will be able to stay in India for five years on the new visa, I can see this causing all sorts of problems.  A tourist visa as intended for the purpose of tourism, not for the purpose of living in India, but there are always those who will go against the spirit of the legislation and take advantage of any loopholes they can find.

There are other concerns, but one is housing.  Should tourists stay in India for five years they will inevitable push up the price of property rental, making it more difficult or impossible for Indians to afford to rent in their own towns - especially if they live in or near the tourist spots.

In New Delhi, the Standing Committee on Tourism has “strongly recommended” that it should impress upon the Ministry of Home Affairs for introduction a Visa on Arrival scheme.

The committee advised that it should first start the scheme for certain friendly countries and then gradually extend it to other countries, depending upon the security scenario.

“This will not only position India as a global brand but also boost the foreign tourist arrivals in the country,” the committee said in its report.

But the Ministry of Home Affairs has its reservations regarding the scheme due to security reasons.