Bollywood actor Shah Rukh Khan (R) shakes hands with Sadhguru
Jaggi Vasudev, founder of Isha foundation, during a Global Business
Summit in New Delhi on February 23, 2018. (MONEY SHARMA/AFP/
Getty Images)
Bollywood actor Shah Rukh Khan (R) shakes hands with Sadhguru
Jaggi Vasudev, founder of Isha foundation, during a Global Business
Summit in New Delhi on February 23, 2018. (MONEY SHARMA/AFP/
Getty Images)
Tamil, one of the oldest living languages in the world, is a source of pride for the state’s people
A war of words has erupted between Tamil Nadu’s Chief Minister MK Stalin and the federal government over the National Education Policy (NEP) 2020, which recommends a three-language formula in schools, with two of the three being native to India. Stalin has voiced strong objections, claiming that the policy could lead to the imposition of Hindi, a northern Indian language, in non-Hindi-speaking states like Tamil Nadu. The issue has reignited old tensions between southern states and the central government over the privileging of Hindi.
Tamil Nadu has a deep-rooted history of opposing the promotion of Hindi, dating back to the 1960s. Protests broke out in the state when the federal government attempted to make Hindi the sole official language, leading to a compromise that allowed the continued use of English. Language in Tamil Nadu is not merely a means of communication but a powerful symbol of cultural identity. Tamil, one of the oldest living languages in the world, is a source of pride for the state’s people. As a result, any perceived threat to its prominence is met with strong resistance.
The NEP 2020, introduced by Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s government, aims to reform India’s education system comprehensively. One of the policy’s key recommendations is the implementation of a three-language formula. Though the policy does not specify which languages should be taught, it suggests that at least two must be indigenous to India. The federal government has repeatedly denied allegations that the policy mandates Hindi, insisting that it offers flexibility and promotes mother-tongue instruction.
However, Stalin and his party, the Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK), argue that the NEP’s real intention is to impose Hindi on non-Hindi-speaking states like Tamil Nadu. The state has traditionally followed a two-language system, teaching Tamil and English in schools, and sees no need for the introduction of a third language, particularly Hindi.
Education is a concurrent subject in India’s constitution, meaning that both state and federal governments can legislate on it. This has created a complex dynamic, with states having some autonomy over their education systems while still needing to comply with national frameworks. Tamil Nadu has long resisted the three-language formula, arguing that its two-language system is sufficient and that students benefit from learning Tamil, which connects them to their cultural heritage, and English, which opens up global opportunities.
Tamil Nadu chief minister MK StalinGetty images
Stalin has been particularly critical of the federal government’s insistence on the NEP, accusing it of trying to centralise education policy at the expense of state autonomy. He has also argued that forcing students to learn a third language would place an unnecessary burden on them.
In addition to the linguistic debate, the controversy has been further inflamed by financial tensions. Tamil Nadu has accused the federal government of withholding its share of funds for the Samagra Shiksha Abhiyan, a school education programme, due to its refusal to fully implement the NEP. The state claims that it was asked to sign a memorandum of understanding (MoU) agreeing to adopt the NEP in its entirety in order to receive the funds. However, the federal government has denied these allegations, leading to a public spat over the allocation of education resources.
In February, Stalin wrote to Prime Minister Modi, requesting the immediate release of funds amounting to 21.5 billion rupees (£191m), but the dispute remains unresolved. The financial aspect of the debate has added another layer of complexity, with Tamil Nadu positioning itself as a victim of federal overreach.
The language debate touches on deeper cultural and political issues in India. With its immense linguistic diversity, India has struggled to balance the promotion of a national language with the protection of regional languages and identities. Hindi, spoken by over 46% of the population, is the most widely spoken language in India, but it is not the mother tongue of many states, particularly in the south. Southern states like Tamil Nadu have historically been wary of attempts to impose Hindi, seeing it as a threat to their linguistic and cultural distinctiveness.
For Tamil Nadu, the NEP controversy is not just about education policy but about preserving its unique identity. Language has long been a defining issue in the state’s politics, and any perceived attempt to diminish the role of Tamil is met with fierce opposition.
The sessions, organised by the state’s Department of Non-Resident Keralites Affairs (Norka), teach participants how to identify legitimate overseas recruitment agencies and avoid fraudulent migration consultants. (Photo: X/@NorkaRoots1)
INDIAN state of Kerala is conducting training sessions to help aspiring nurses migrate legally amid increased immigration raids in the US and UK.
The sessions, organised by the state’s Department of Non-Resident Keralites Affairs (Norka), teach participants how to identify legitimate overseas recruitment agencies and avoid fraudulent migration consultants, reported The Guardian.
On 5 February, as one such session took place in Kochi, a US aircraft landed in Amritsar with 104 undocumented Indian migrants in shackles.
Two more planes carrying 229 migrants arrived on 16 and 17 February. Reports also indicated an increase in immigration raids in the UK targeting Indian nationals.
India is a major source of nurses for the global healthcare sector, with approximately 640,000 Indian nurses working abroad.
While Gulf states employ most of them, countries such as the UK, US, Canada, and Australia are also popular destinations. The World Health Organization predicts a global nursing shortage of 4.5 million by 2030.
Norka has been conducting migration training for nearly two decades. Until two years ago, it trained around 1,000 candidates annually, but in 2024, the number rose to 2,250.
Though these sessions are open to all, they primarily focus on nurses due to the high demand for overseas employment in the sector.
The training informs participants about verifying recruitment agencies through India’s Ministry of External Affairs’ protector of emigrants (POE) and checking blacklisted companies on a government portal.
Nurses can also register with Norka for free or at a minimal cost and apply for jobs through Kerala’s state recruitment agencies, The Guardian reported.
Norka, established in 1996, has recently focused more on migration governance. It has agreements with countries including Germany, the UK, Saudi Arabia, and Austria for nurse recruitment.
In 2021, it became the first Indian state agency to sign an agreement with Germany to deploy healthcare workers. More than 1,400 Kerala nurses have been recruited under this initiative.
Illegal recruitment remains a challenge. India’s Ministry of External Affairs lists over 3,000 unregistered agencies with grievances against them.
Kerala’s e-migrate platform has recorded complaints against 208 local agencies. In response, the state has formed a task force and coordinates with law enforcement to tackle fraud.
A parliamentary panel led by MP Shashi Tharoor recently recommended raising awareness about safe migration through media and local organisations.
A proposed overseas mobility bill is expected to address concerns and strengthen migration policies.
Other states, including Punjab, have announced plans to adopt Kerala’s migration governance model to combat illegal migration.
Italy and Denmark have also expressed interest in recruiting Indian nurses, with Italy planning to hire 65,000 nurses from Kerala.
Akhil Alex, a psychiatric nurse in Kerala, secured a job in Germany through Norka. He is currently learning German as part of the programme before receiving his work visa.
“Everything is provided by Norka or the recruiters, including study materials,” he told The Guardian.
Alex hopes for a better work-life balance and looks forward to attending Bundesliga matches in Germany.
FORMER Bristol MP Thangam Debbonaire has taken her seat in the House of Lords after being awarded a life peerage last month.
The 58-year-old, who represented Bristol West for Labour from 2015 until July’s general election, wore the traditional scarlet robes during her introductory ceremony. She will now be known as Baroness Debbonaire of De Beauvoir Town in the London Borough of Hackney.
Debbonaire lost her seat to Green Party co-leader Carla Denyer in the newly-created Bristol Central constituency during the 2024 election – a rare defeat for Labour amid their landslide victory.
Following her electoral loss, she suggested that Labour’s “lack of a strong narrative” over the war in Gaza had contributed to her defeat.
During her time in Parliament, Debbonaire held several shadow cabinet positions, most recently serving as shadow secretary of state for culture, media and sport from 2023 to 2024. Her previous roles included shadow housing secretary and shadow leader of the House of Commons.
She became the second Bristol politician to enter the Lords recently, following former city mayor Marvin Rees, who took his seat as Lord Rees of Easton on February 24.
POLICE corruption, caste politics, and dangerous interfaith liaisons are at the heart of Santosh, a feature by British Indian filmmaker Sandhya Suri. She turns the title on its head – Santosh, regarded more widely as a male name, is the protagonist, played by the versatile Shahana Goswami.
Santosh’s husband, a police constable in a north Indian village, is killed in the line of duty. Or so it appears.
Under a government scheme for widows of slain policemen, Santosh joins the service and quickly learns that the job is less about protecting people and more about safeguarding one’s own interests by wielding power.
Her senior colleagues target young lovers getting frisky in public spaces, with little accountability for off-the-book, disproportionate actions. Santosh gets drawn into a murder investigation when the body of a young girl from an ‘untouchable’ Dalit caste is found in a well.
Working with a senior female colleague, whom she regards as a mentor (Sunita Rajwar as Geeta Sharma), Santosh tracks down the main suspect. Her bosses are pleased, and she is promised a promotion. Yet, what unfolds next is, in parts, unsurprising and uncomfortable, though compelling.
With sharp editing and punchy dialogues, Suri paints a portrait of the shifting dynamics of power – between the police and villagers, experienced colleagues and novices, men and women, and local officials left to their own devices.
Despite the expanse of themes covered in the film – class, authority, abuse, patriarchy – the dialogue is sparse, but complemented by Goswami’s restrained performance. The film delivers a powerful synopsis of what lurks in the villages and towns of India, behind the dazzling razzmatazz of glossy headlines.
Her character’s arc, as a woman who married for love, learning on her feet, giving in to authority, standing up for herself, negotiating consequences, pushing for answers, give Santosh the credibility real-life documentaries seek to portray. There’s a note of hope in Suri’s unflinching take on the realities of rural India, though the questions raised linger on long after the film has ended.
BBC chairman Samir Shah insisted that the corporation must do much more to ensure its staff reflects the country as a whole, as it needs more 'variety and diversity'.
He added that diversity should not be limited to ethnicity, where progress has been made, but should also include diversity of thought, particularly by including more voices from the northern working class.
In an interview with The Sunday Times, Shah outlined a sweeping vision for reform of the corporation, tackling issues from staff misconduct to funding models and political bias.
The British Indian media veteran, who succeeded Richard Sharp following his resignation a year ago, revealed his determination to root out abuses of power by the corporation's stars in the wake of recent scandals.
The 73-year-old brings the perspective of a programme maker rather than a financier to the role. "I'm loving every minute of it because, unlike my predecessors, I'm a programme maker," Shah said, describing his job as "a privilege" despite it being considered by many as thankless.
He acknowledged the broadcaster faces criticism for perceived liberal bias, conceding that "the media recruits graduates from the arts, humanities, and they tend to be metropolitan and to have a point of view you could describe as liberal centre, centre left. We kind of reflect that."
While the corporation shows "a great deal of sympathy" for people arriving in Britain on small boats, Shah believes it has not "taken up as much as it should the concerns of the communities receiving all these people."
"Concerns that your child can't get into a school or see a doctor. Are there pressures on housing? We have people in various parts of the country who really object to having a whole load of migrants coming in. It is our job to hear their point of view."
Shah has personally taken over chairing the BBC's editorial guidelines and standards committee to address bias where it appears.
Following the high-profile cases involving Huw Edwards and Russell Brand, as well as allegations against Tim Westwood and Gregg Wallace, Shah expressed zero tolerance for misconduct.
Last September, a London court sentenced Edwards to six months in prison, suspended for two years, for accessing indecent images and videos of children. In January, the BBC apologised to staff who felt unable to raise concerns about Russell Brand’s behaviour due to his perceived influence. The former presenter was accused of sexual assaults, allegations he denies.
Westwood is under investigation over allegations of non-recent sexual abuse, while Wallace faces accusations of inappropriate sexual behaviour.
"The theme that keeps coming through is that junior staff are vulnerable to being preyed on by people with power. We have to stop it. I will not tolerate junior staff being scared to report what's happening or their managers looking the other way," Shah insisted.
He proposed establishing "an internal affairs unit, like in Line of Duty" to tackle bad behaviour, adding: "We need to have some way of preserving whistleblowers' anonymity, so we can throw people out and do it quickly. I'm absolutely determined. This is a cancer we need to cut out."
When asked about the BBC's decision to continue paying Edwards his £475,000 salary after his arrest, Shah defended the approach: "We now know he was a villain but back then he had not been convicted. Remember, we've seen people in the entertainment industry arrested and not charged."
Shah, who had known Edwards professionally for years, admitted his shock: "I'd known him for a long time. I had no idea. None at all. He lied about everything—and deceived us."
The chairman did not shy away from addressing recent editorial failings, particularly regarding a documentary about Gaza that had to be pulled from iPlayer after it emerged that the 13-year-old narrator was the son of a Hamas administration official—information that BBC editors had failed to disclose to viewers.
Shah said that when errors occur, "they must be acknowledged. We make mistakes in our journalism. We correct mistakes."
According to reports, it was Shah who demanded a swift public apology for the "serious, unacceptable flaws" in the programme's making.
On the issue of BBC stars supplementing their salaries through external speaking engagements, Shah was blunt: "It's a privilege to work for the BBC. You should just stick to it." He added that when the public see stars cashing in, "they think, 'What the hell are these people doing?'"
His message to presenters who feel they could earn more elsewhere was equally direct: "No one's forcing you to work for us."
With the BBC facing significant financial challenges—including a 30 per cent reduction in real-term income over the past decade due to licence fee freezes—Shah dismissed several alternative funding models.
He rejected subscription services, hybrid licence fees, advertising ("would kill ITV"), and general taxation funding, which "would leave the BBC open to influence from the government of the day."
Instead, Shah favours a progressive household levy that would see wealthier households pay more. "Why should people who are poor pay the same as people in wealthy households?" he asked, suggesting council tax or income tax bands could create a sliding scale.
"It gets rid of the enforcement issue, which is a problem," he noted. "The idea that not paying the licence fee is a criminal offence seems too harsh."
Shah also advocated for taxes on US streaming giants operating in Britain, arguing that revenue raised should be directed into "training and skills to further strengthen Britain's creative industries."
Acknowledging the "chronic" decline in viewership of traditional BBC channels, Shah urged greater risk-taking in programming, citing the Welsh comedy "Mammoth" as a successful example.
For flagship programmes like Match of the Day, he suggested a shift away from highlights to greater analysis and examination, given that many viewers now watch Premier League goals online before the show airs.
Shah also expressed ambition for the World Service, which he grew up listening to in India: "We reach just under half a billion people. We should reach a billion." This goal is particularly important, he argued, in the face of Russian and Chinese propaganda efforts.
"When we retreat, the Chinese and Russians move in with their propaganda TV and radio services. They're putting billions into this. It's not a trade war, it's a mind war."
Looking ahead to the expiry of the BBC's Royal Charter in 2027, Shah advocated for significant reform, describing the current ten-year renewal cycle as "mad."
"We're the only organisation created by Royal Charter that has a time limit on the charter," he pointed out, noting that being distracted by existential battles every few years hampers the corporation's ability to serve its audience.
Instead, he proposed "a framework that would run for 15 to 20 years and sets out some core principles for the BBC," while maintaining accountability through Ofcom and parliamentary oversight.