late

As I write this in 2025, I find myself increasingly concerned about India’s manufacturing trajectory. While India celebrates digital prowess and service sector dominance, a stark reality confronts my country: our manufacturing exports as a percentage of global trade have remained stubbornly stagnant at around 1.7%, even as China commands over 15% and Vietnam has surged to capture significant market share in textiles, electronics, and manufacturing.

The time for incremental reforms has passed.

India needs a comprehensive overhaul of its export and entrepreneurship policies, strategically aligned with foreign policy objectives, to prevent what I believe could be a permanent relegation to service sector dependency while manufacturing opportunities slip away to more agile competitors.

The Manufacturing Imperative

The numbers paint a sobering picture. China’s manufacturing value-added reached $4.9 trillion in 2023, accounting for roughly 30% of global manufacturing output.

Vietnam, with a population less than 7% of India’s, achieved manufacturing exports of $370 billion in 2023, compared to India’s $450 billion total merchandise exports across all sectors.

More critically, India’s share in global manufacturing exports has declined from 1.8% in 2019 to 1.7% in 2024, while Vietnam’s share grew from 2.1% to 3.4% in the same period.

This isn’t just about absolute numbers; it’s about momentum and trajectory.

Countries like Bangladesh, Mexico, and Turkey are all gaining ground in manufacturing exports while India debates policy frameworks.

The demographic dividend we often celebrate is actually a ticking time bomb. With 12 million Indians entering the workforce annually, service sector jobs alone cannot provide sufficient employment. Manufacturing historically creates 3-4 jobs for every direct job, compared to 1.5-2 jobs in services. Without a manufacturing renaissance, we risk social instability and economic stagnation.

The Export-Foreign Policy Nexus: Learning from Successful Models

My analysis of successful export economies reveals a crucial insight: export policies cannot operate in isolation from foreign policy. China’s Belt and Road Initiative isn’t just infrastructure investment; it’s export market creation. Vietnam’s export success stems partly from its strategic positioning between US-China tensions, attracting supply chain diversification.

India needs to reimagine its foreign policy through an export lens. Our current approach treats trade and diplomacy as separate domains, resulting in missed opportunities. For instance, our Act East Policy has yielded modest results in manufacturing exports to ASEAN, partly because we haven’t aligned trade facilitation with diplomatic priorities.

Consider this data point: India’s bilateral trade with Africa was $98 billion in 2023, but only 25% consisted of manufactured goods exports. China’s Africa trade was $282 billion, with 45% being manufactured exports. This disparity isn’t just about market access; it reflects China’s systematic alignment of diplomatic engagement with export promotion.

The Compliance Raj: Quantifying the Regulatory Stranglehold

Our current export promotion architecture suffers from what I call “scheme fatigue,” but the deeper malady is what recent analysis terms the “Compliance Raj”—a” systematic regulatory stranglehold that makes Vietnam and China look like libertarian paradises by comparison.

The numbers are staggering: India experienced 9,420 compliance updates in 2024 alone, averaging 36 daily regulatory changes. To put this in perspective, Vietnamese manufacturers face approximately 12 major regulatory updates annually, while Chinese exporters operate under relatively stable regulatory frameworks with predictable annual changes.

The India Business Corruption Survey 2024 reveals that 66% of businesses admitted to paying bribes, with 54% coerced for permits, licenses, or approvals. This isn’t just about corruption; it’s about competitive disadvantage. While Indian exporters navigate bribery demands and regulatory uncertainty, Vietnamese competitors focus on production efficiency and market expansion.

The Production Linked Incentive (PLI) scheme, while well-intentioned, allocated $26 billion across 14 sectors over five years. China spends more than this amount annually on manufacturing subsidies and export promotion. Vietnam’s foreign direct investment in manufacturing reached $22 billion in 2023 alone, compared to India’s $15 billion across all sectors.

The bureaucratic maze compounds these challenges beyond previous estimates. Businesses are required to manage 23 different identity numbers, including PAN, GSTIN, and CIN, resulting in excessive paperwork and frequent renewals.

A recent study by the Confederation of Indian Industry found that compliance costs for Indian exporters are 23% higher than Chinese competitors and 31% higher than Vietnamese exporters. But when we factor in time lost to regulatory uncertainty and bribery, the real competitive disadvantage reaches 45-50%.

Our export infrastructure remains fragmented. While China has 34 ports handling over 10 million TEU annually, India has only 12 major ports with combined capacity struggling to match Shanghai alone. Logistics costs consume 13-14% of GDP compared to 8-9% in developed economies, directly impacting export competitiveness.

The Libertarian Imperative

The evidence is overwhelming: countries that have embraced more libertarian approaches to business regulation consistently outperform India in manufacturing exports. This isn’t ideological positioning; it’s empirical reality backed by hard data.

Singapore, despite its small size, achieved $470 billion in total trade in 2023 with minimal regulatory complexity. Businesses can be registered in 15 minutes online, with most permits issued within 2-3 days. The regulatory framework is predictable, with major changes announced annually and implemented systematically.

Vietnam’s success partly stems from its increasingly libertarian approach to export manufacturing. Export processing zones operate under simplified regulations, with businesses facing minimal compliance burden once established. The contrast with India is stark: Vietnamese exporters spend 2-3% of their time on compliance activities, compared to 15-18% for Indian counterparts.

Even within India, states that have adopted more libertarian approaches show superior performance. Gujarat’s single-window clearance system, operational since 2009, has attracted significantly higher manufacturing FDI per capita compared to states with complex approval processes. Tamil Nadu’s simplified labor regulations for export industries have made it a preferred destination for automotive and textile manufacturing.

The Jan Vishwas Act 2023 decriminalized 180 provisions, reducing imprisonment risks for minor business violations. While this represents progress, it barely scratches the surface. With 20,000 imprisonment clauses still in place and the proposed Jan Vishwas 2.0 targeting only 100 additional provisions, we’re implementing incremental reforms when radical deregulation is required.

Consider the regulatory approach differences: A smartphone manufacturer in India faces 67 different approvals across 14 agencies, compared to 23 approvals across 6 agencies in Vietnam and just 12 approvals across 4 agencies in Singapore. This isn’t about maintaining standards; it’s about regulatory rent-seeking that destroys competitiveness.

The libertarian solution isn’t about abandoning all regulations; it’s about smart regulation focused on outcomes rather than processes. Export-oriented manufacturing should operate under presumptive compliance—businesses assume compliance unless proven otherwise, rather than seeking pre-approvals for every activity.

The Vietnam Model: Libertarian Agility Over Bureaucratic Scale

Vietnam’s transformation offers crucial lessons in libertarian reform applied to export manufacturing. Between 2010 and 2023, Vietnam increased its manufacturing exports from $72 billion to $370 billion, a 414% growth compared to India’s 185% growth from $178 billion to $450 billion in total merchandise exports.

Vietnam’s success stems from three key libertarian principles that India must embrace:

Regulatory Minimalism: Vietnam’s export sector operates under what economists call “libertarian” zones”—areas where businesses face minimal regulatory interference once basic standards are met. While India debates comprehensive labor law reforms, Vietnam implemented sector-specific deregulation for export manufacturing, allowing 24/7 operations, flexible hiring, and performance-based compensation without bureaucratic approvals.

Strategic FDI Targeting with Minimal Barriers: Vietnam attracted $108 billion in manufacturing FDI between 2015 and 2023, focusing on electronics, textiles, and automotive components with streamlined approval processes. India received $67 billion in manufacturing FDI in the same period, spread across too many sectors with complex approval requirements. Vietnamese authorities can approve major manufacturing investments within 45 days; Indian approvals take 8-12 months on average.

Export Processing Zone Efficiency: Vietnam operates 16 EPZs contributing 40% of total exports, with average clearance times of 8 hours and minimal compliance requirements once operational. India’s 265 SEZs contribute only 25% of exports with average clearance times of 72 hours and continuous compliance monitoring that disrupts operations.

Trade Agreement Leverage: Vietnam has 16 operational FTAs covering 58 countries, compared to India’s 13 FTAs covering 32 countries. More importantly, Vietnam utilizes these agreements effectively—67% of Vietnamese exports benefit from preferential access compared to 31% for Indian exports. The difference lies in implementation: Vietnam’s streamlined customs procedures make FTA utilization cost-effective, while India’s complex procedures often make preferential rates economically unviable.

The China Challenge

China’s manufacturing dominance isn’t accidental; it’s systematically built through what I observe as a four-pronged strategy: technology acquisition, market creation, supply chain control, and financial leverage.

China’s outbound FDI in manufacturing reached $145 billion in 2023, often creating captive markets for Chinese exports. India’s outbound manufacturing investment was $8.2 billion, focused primarily on resource extraction rather than market creation.

The technology dimension is particularly concerning. China spent $444 billion on R&D in 2023, with 78% focused on manufacturing and industrial applications. India’s R&D expenditure was $66 billion, with only 34% targeting manufacturing. This gap isn’t just about current competitiveness; it’s about future technological leadership.

Supply chain control represents another strategic advantage. Chinese companies control critical nodes in global supply chains—from rare earth processing to semiconductor assembly. India’s supply chain participation remains largely peripheral, missing opportunities for value addition and strategic positioning.

A Comprehensive Reform Blueprint

Based on my analysis of successful models and India’s unique advantages, I propose a five-pillar transformation strategy:

Pillar 1: Export-Foreign Policy Integration

Every diplomatic mission should function as an export promotion hub. Our embassies in 47 countries with bilateral trade exceeding $1 billion should have dedicated commercial sections with annual export targets. Currently, only 12 missions have adequate commercial infrastructure.

Trade facilitation must become a diplomatic priority. India should negotiate dedicated export corridors with key trading partners, similar to China’s economic corridors. The proposed India-Middle East-Europe Economic Corridor should prioritize manufacturing export facilitation over general connectivity.

Strategic economic partnerships need restructuring around export complementarity. Our partnership with Japan, for instance, should focus on technology transfer for export-oriented manufacturing rather than domestic market access.

Pillar 2: Manufacturing Infrastructure Revolution

India needs 20 world-class manufacturing clusters in the next five years, each with integrated port connectivity, power supply, and digital infrastructure. Current industrial parks lack this integration, forcing manufacturers to create their own infrastructure at prohibitive costs.

Port modernization requires a $45 billion investment to match Chinese efficiency standards. This isn’t just about capacity; it’s about turnaround time, digital integration, and multimodal connectivity. Current port-to-factory connectivity adds 2-3 days to export timelines compared to Vietnamese competitors.

Digital infrastructure for manufacturing must move beyond basic connectivity to Industry 4.0 readiness. Only 12% of Indian manufacturers use advanced automation compared to 34% in China and 28% in Vietnam.

Pillar 3: Financial Architecture Redesign

Export financing needs fundamental restructuring. Current institutional lending covers only 23% of export credit needs, compared to 67% in China. We need specialized export development banks with $100 billion capitalization over five years.

Currency hedging mechanisms must evolve beyond current limited options. Vietnamese exporters access hedging products at 40% lower costs than Indian counterparts, directly impacting pricing competitiveness.

Investment promotion requires sector-specific targeting. Instead of generic FDI promotion, India needs dedicated agencies for electronics, textiles, automotive, and pharmaceuticals—sectors where we can realistically compete with China and Vietnam.

Pillar 4: Libertarian Regulatory Revolution

The current regulatory complexity creates what economists call “death by a thousand cuts,” but the solution requires embracing libertarian principles that prioritize business freedom over bureaucratic control. A smartphone manufacturer faces 67 different approvals across 14 agencies to start production, compared to 23 approvals across 6 agencies in Vietnam and just 12 in Singapore.

Presumptive Compliance Framework: Instead of seeking pre-approvals, export-oriented businesses should operate under presumptive compliance—assume businesses are compliant unless proven otherwise. This single change could reduce regulatory compliance time by 70% and eliminate opportunities for corruption in the approval process.

Single-Window Reality, Not Fiction: Real single-window systems require complete backend integration across agencies, not just common application forms. This technological integration needs a $2.8 billion investment but would save exporters $15 billion annually in compliance costs. More importantly, it should operate on risk-based assessment—low-risk activities get automatic clearance, medium-risk activities get fast-track approval, and only high-risk activities require detailed scrutiny.

Export Zone Libertarianism: Export-oriented manufacturing should operate under completely separate regulatory frameworks from domestic manufacturing. Singapore’s model demonstrates this: export manufacturers face minimal regulations, simplified labor laws, and tax incentives, while domestic manufacturers operate under standard frameworks. This isn’t about creating inequality; it’s about recognizing that export businesses face global competition and need regulatory advantages to remain viable.

Sunset Clauses for All Regulations: Every regulation affecting export businesses should have automatic sunset clauses requiring renewal every 3-5 years. This forces regulators to justify continued existence and prevents regulatory accumulation. Currently, regulations only get added, never removed, creating the 9,420 annual compliance updates that paralyze businesses.

One Nation, One Business Identity: The proposed consolidation of 23 different business identifiers into a single system represents a libertarian approach to reducing government interference. But it should go further—this single identity should provide access to all government services, eliminate renewal requirements, and operate on blockchain technology to prevent tampering and corruption.

Pillar 5: Technology and Skill Development

Manufacturing technology acquisition needs strategic focus. Current technology transfer agreements lack systematic knowledge absorption mechanisms. India should establish technology digestion centers in key manufacturing sectors, similar to China’s approach in the 1990s.

Skill development must align with export requirements rather than domestic needs. Current ITI and polytechnic curricula prepare students for local manufacturing, not global export standards. We need 500 export-oriented skill centers in the next three years.

Research and development for export competitiveness requires dedicated funding. The proposed National Manufacturing R&D Foundation should receive 1% of manufacturing exports annually—currently about $4.5 billion—to fund applied research for export enhancement.

Why Delay Is Dangerous

Global supply chains are undergoing fundamental restructuring. Companies are diversifying away from China-centric sourcing, creating a once-in-a-generation opportunity for countries like India. However, this window is narrowing rapidly.

Vietnam has already captured significant market share in textiles, electronics assembly, and furniture. Mexico is benefiting from nearshoring trends in North American markets. Bangladesh continues dominating low-cost textile manufacturing. Each day of policy delay allows competitors to strengthen their positions.

The demographic dividend argument also has a time limit. Current working-age population advantages will peak around 2035-2040. If we don’t create manufacturing jobs now, the demographic dividend becomes a demographic burden.

Technological evolution adds another urgency dimension. Manufacturing is becoming increasingly automated, potentially reducing labor cost advantages. Countries that establish manufacturing ecosystems now will benefit from technological upgrades, while late entrants may find fewer opportunities for labor-intensive manufacturing.

The Manufacturing Renaissance Imperative

India stands at a critical juncture. We can continue celebrating our digital achievements while manufacturing opportunities migrate to more decisive competitors, or we can undertake the comprehensive transformation our export potential demands.

The data is clear: manufacturing exports growth has stagnated while competitors surge ahead. The policy framework is fragmented while global supply chains seek reliable, efficient partners. The window of opportunity is narrowing while we debate incremental reforms.

This isn’t about choosing between services and manufacturing; it’s about leveraging our service sector strengths to build manufacturing competitiveness.

Our IT capabilities should power smart manufacturing, our financial sector should enable export growth, and our diplomatic networks should create market access.

The transformation I’ve outlined requires political will, financial commitment, and execution excellence.

But the cost of inaction—permanent manufacturing marginalization, employment crisis, and geopolitical irrelevance in global supply chains—far exceeds the investment required for transformation.

India’s manufacturing renaissance isn’t just an economic necessity; it’s a strategic imperative for sustained growth, employment generation, and global relevance. The question isn’t whether we can afford this transformation—it’s whether we can afford not to undertake it immediately.

The time for incremental reform has passed. India needs its manufacturing revolution now, before it’s too late to compete in the global economy of tomorrow.

The billionaire’s Mars mission claim comes despite SpaceX experiencing several failed test launches over recent months.

Elon Musk has said that he believes there is a 50 percent chance that his Mars spacecraft will make its first uncrewed voyage to the red planet at the end of 2026, just two days after the latest test-flight setback for his SpaceX firm.

Musk presented a detailed Starship development timeline in a video posted online by his Los Angeles area-based rocket company on Thursday.

The South African-born billionaire and SpaceX owner said his latest timeline for reaching Mars depended on whether the craft can complete several challenging technical feats during testing, specifically a post-launch refuelling manoeuvre in Earth’s orbit.

In a video on social media platform X, which he also owns, Musk said his Starbase industrial complex and rocket launch facility in Texas was the “gateway to Mars”.

“It is where we are going to develop the technology necessary to take humanity and civilisation and life as we know it to another planet for the first time in the four and a half billion year history of Earth,” he said.

The end of 2026 is when a slim window opens offering the closest trip between Earth and Mars, as the planets align around the sun once every two years. This shorter distance would take seven to nine months to transit by spacecraft.

The first flight to Mars would carry a simulated crew consisting of Tesla-built humanoid Optimus robots. Human crews would then follow in the second or third landings.

In the video, Musk said he believed there was a 50-50 chance SpaceX would meet the 2026 deadline for the first mission. He added that if Starship was not ready by that time, SpaceX would wait another two years before trying again.

Musk’s announcement comes just a day after he confirmed his departure from the administration of United States President Donald Trump, following a tumultuous few months in which his various businesses – including SpaceX and electric car maker Tesla – have come under growing strain.

Musk’s unofficial role leading Trump’s Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) has placed him in the crosshairs, as he has faced intense criticism for overseeing what has been decried as haphazard cuts to government programmes.

Faced with plunging stock prices and shareholder concern – most notably at Tesla – Musk said this week he would scale back his government role to focus on his private ventures.

Missed deadlines

In 2016, Musk said he wanted to send an uncrewed SpaceX vehicle to Mars as early as 2018, while he was targeting 2024 to launch the first crewed mission there.

But the mercurial entrepreneur’s ambitions for interplanetary exploration have been beset by repeated setbacks over recent years.

Most recently, on Tuesday, Musk was due to deliver a live webcast from the company’s Starbase in Texas following a ninth test flight of Starship that evening.

But the speech was cancelled without notice after Starship spun out of control and disintegrated about 30 minutes after launch, roughly halfway through its flight path, failing to achieve some of its most important test goals.

The mega-rocket re-entered the Earth’s atmosphere earlier than planned on Wednesday after a fuel leak triggered uncontrollable spinning in space, according to the Reuters news agency.

Posting on X after the failed flight, Musk said the test produced a lot of “good data to review” as he promised a faster launch “cadence” for the next several attempts.

There was also a failed launch in January – when the craft blew up moments after liftoff, raining debris over parts of the Caribbean and forcing commercial jetliners to change course – as well as in March.

Musk, who has spent billions of dollars on Starship’s development, says the initiative is part of SpaceX’s plan to colonise Mars.

The firm is also working with US government agency NASA to return humans to the Moon in 2027 onboard Starship, more than half a century since astronauts last walked on the lunar surface in 1972.

These efforts are a stepping stone towards launching NASA astronauts to Mars sometime in the 2030s.

Although not an official rivalry steeped in tradition just yet, the competitiveness between California’s two WNBA teams suggests the start of one.

With the Sparks and Golden State Valkyries trying to jump start new eras for their respective franchises, the meeting marked the third clash between the teams in as many weeks — and it left the Sparks emotionally and physically bruised.

On their first road trip to Southern California on Friday, the expansion Valkyries exacted revenge on one of the WNBA’s charter members, holding off a late Sparks comeback in an 82-73 win.

The Sparks’ frustration was evident after the game. Coach Lynne Roberts looked displeased. Beside her, rookie Sarah Ashlee Barker sat stone-faced, a fresh shiner darkening the area beneath her right eye. Dearica Hamby rested her head in her hands, her responses to questions from the media brief and subdued.

“They beat us tonight,” Roberts said. “They were more connected. They played harder. They played with more intensity.”

What began as a back-and-forth battle quickly underscored how evenly matched the two teams are despite being at different stages. The final score suggested a close game, but for much of the night, it looked like it would be a Valkyries rout.

The Sparks surged to an early 20-9 lead behind strong play from Odyssey Sims, Kelsey Plum and Dearica Hamby. Sims hit three early three-pointers and Plum added six points fueled by defensive pressure and steals. Hamby anchored the interior with physical play.

But much like their previous two matchups, inconsistency quickly crept in for the Sparks (1-3). The Sparks’ struggles emerged after halftime in their last two games. This time, the unraveling came earlier.

“We stopped following the game plan,” Roberts said. “It’s bad — we’ve got to fix it. We need to put together a full 40 minutes. We haven’t done that yet.”

A second-quarter collapse — marked by defensive breakdowns and offensive stagnation — put L.A. in a hole too big to overcome. Entering the period with a two-point lead, Golden State went on an 18-0 run to take a 45-26 lead.

Golden State (2-1) shot 10 for 18 (55.6%) from the field in the second quarter, looking every bit like a team determined to avenge its two earlier losses — one in the preseason and the other in their season opener.

Meanwhile, the Sparks appeared far removed from the cohesion and toughness they showed in a loss to the Phoenix Mercury on Wednesday — the kind of progress coach Lynne Roberts pointed to as a sign of early-season growth. The Sparks didn’t register a field goal in the second quarter until the 2:36 mark.

L.A. trailed 49-35 at halftime after shooting just 2 for 16 from the field and scoring nine points in the second quarter.

From the start, the Valkyries’ game plan centered on containing Kelsey Plum, who erupted for 37 points against them on May 16. Golden State’s defense swarmed Plum with traps and forced the ball out of her hands, limiting her to 16 points on six-of-18 shooting, including two for 10 from beyond the arc. She also had four steals.

Golden State’s lead hovered around 15 points for much of the third quarter. The Sparks only began to chip away at the deficit in the fourth quarter.

A three-pointer from Plum cut the Valkyries’ lead to 73-63 with just under six minutes remaining. Moments later, Hamby powered to the rim through heavy contact, converting a tough layup and drawing the foul. Her successful free throw made it an eight-point game.

Hamby continued to take charge, shooting a three-pointer with 2:32 left to make it a five-point game.

“We definitely picked up the defensive energy,” Hamby said of the fourth-quarter effort. “We got some good hustle plays and tried to build momentum — but I want to win, so I’m willing to do whatever it takes.”

But that was as close as the Sparks would get after Hamby fouled Kayla Thornton on a three-point attempt. Thornton made all three of her free-throw attempts.

Robert liked what she saw from the Sparks in the fourth quarter, but she wants to see that urgency deployed earlier and throughout the game.

“We can’t wait,” Roberts said. “We did show toughness — we didn’t fold. They kept competing, and we made it a game. … But why does it take us 30 minutes to play like that?”

Hamby scored 10 of her 25 points in the fourth quarter. She also had six rebounds and three blocks. Sims finished with 13 points as the Sparks suffered their third consecutive loss. Carla Leite led Golden State with 19 points.

Golden State’s win marked a special homecoming for Anaheim native and Valkyries coach Natalie Nakase, who said she felt a wave of emotion as the team flew into L.A. Seeing familiar landmarks from the window of the plane — including her childhood homes — stirred memories of her father and the path that led her to becoming a WNBA coach. Nasake served as an assistant coach under Clippers coach Doc Rivers.

“It’s like seeing the ushers — a lot of them I’ve known for a long time, and they’re just saying congratulations and what an accomplishment,” said Nakase of the surreal feeling of winning at Crypto.com Arena. “It’s nice to see a lot of familiar faces.”

May 18 (UPI) — The House Budget Committee advanced President Donald Trump‘s “One Big Beautiful Bill Act” in a rare Sunday night vote.

They met at 10 p.m. to consider the bill that extends Trump’s tax cuts, increases border funding priorities and requires Medicaid recipients to work.

The measure passed 17-16 along party lines, with four Republicans who rejected the bill the first time on Friday voting present Sunday: Ralph Norman of Oklagoa, Chip Roy of Texas, Andrew Clyde of Georgia and Josh Brecheen of Oklahoma. They voted against the bill Friday, preventing it from advancing then.

Roy said he voted present “out of respect for the Republican Conference and the president,” but doesn’t support the bill as it stands.

He posted on X: “The bill does not yet meet the moment — leaving almost half of the green new scam subsidies continuing. More, it fails to end the Medicaid money laundering scam and perverse funding structure that provides seven times more federal dollars for each dollar of state spending for the able-bodied relative to the vulnerable. This all ultimately increases the likelihood of continuing deficits and non-Obamacare-expansion states like Texas expanding in the future. We can and must do better before we pass the final product.”

He is looking forward to getting the bill way he wants it. “It gives us the opportunity to work together this week to get the job done in light of the fact our bond rating was dropped yet again due to historic fiscal mismanagement by both parties,” he wrote. “This bill is a strong step forward.”

Speaker Mike Johnson, R-Ky., said he was pleased the bill advances.

“There’s a lot more work to do, we’ve always acknowledged that towards the end there will be more details to iron out, we have several more to take care of,” Johnson said. “But I’m looking forward to very thoughtful discussions, very productive discussions over the next few days, and I am absolutely convinced we’re going to get this in final form and pass it in accordance with our original deadline, and that was to do it before Memorial Day.

“So this will be a victory out of committee tonight, everybody will make a vote that allows us to proceed and that was my big request tonight.”

The bill for fiscal year 2026, which begins Oct. 1, is 1,116 pages and is worth roughly $7 trillion. The last time Congress passed all 12 regular appropriations bills on time, before the start of a new fiscal year, was in 1996. Since then, Congress has relied heavily on continuing resolutions and omnibus appropriations bills to fund the government.

In fiscal year 2024, the federal government spent $6.8 trillion.

Before the meeting, Johnson said on Fox News Sunday he was optimistic the bill will past the House by the end of this week. Some Republican hardliners and moderates have opposed the bill along with all Democrats.

“We’re on track, working around the clock to deliver this nation-shaping legislation for the American people as soon as possible,” Johnson said. “All 11 of our committees have wrapped up their work, and they spent less and saved more than even we’ve projected initially. This really is a once-in-a-generation opportunity that we have here.”

The bill next gets put before the Rules Committee with a 9-4 Republican majority including Norman and Roy. In the full House, Republicans have just a 220-213 advantage with two vacancies after two Democrats died.

“It’s very important for people to understand why we’re being so aggressive on the timetable and why this really is so important,” Johnson said earlier Sunday. “This is the vehicle through which we will deliver on the mandate the American people gave us during the last election. You’re going to have historic savings for the American people, historic tax relief for American workers, historic investments in border security.

“At the same time, we’re restoring American energy dominance, and we’re rebuilding the defense industrial base, and we’re ensuring that programs like Medicaid and SNAP are strengthened for U.S. citizens who need and deserve them and not being squandered away by illegal aliens and persons who are ineligible to receive them and are cheating the system.”

On Friday, Budget Committee hard-liners blocked the package from moving forward — mainly over when Medicaid work requirements will commence. Under the current legislation, Medicaid requirements will kick in during 2029. Some conservatives want it to start as soon as 2027.

Norman, who voted against advancing the bill, earlier told CNN on Saturday that the earlier date was necessary for his vote.

The Center on Budget and Policies Priorities estimates 36 million Medicaid enrollees could be at risk of losing coverage because of potential work requirements and other factors.

In December, there were 78,532,341 on Medicaid and the Children’s Health Insurance Program, or CHIP, according to the agency. That includes 71,275,237 enrolled in Medicaid and 7,257,104 in CHIPS.

“Some of the states have — it takes them some time,” Johnson said. “We’ve learned in this process to change their systems and to make sure that these stringent requirements that we will put on that to eliminate fraud, waste and abuse, can actually be implemented. So, we’re working with them [hardliners] to make sure what the earliest possible date is to put into law something that will actually be useful. I think we’ve got to compromise on that. I think we’ll work it out,” Johnson claimed.”

If the House passes a bill, it goes to the Senate. Johnson said he hopes the Senate won’t alter the bill, which means it goes back to the House.

“The package that we send over there will be one that was very carefully negotiated and delicately balanced, and we hope that they [Senate] don’t make many modifications to it, because that will ensure its passage quickly,” he said.

Holdouts also want to accelerate the phasing out of tax credits for green energy projects under the Inflation Reduction Act.

The bill also includes a big increase for the Defense Department and to national security. There are cuts to federal health and nutrition programs and energy programs.

It’s a balancing act for Johnson because some changes may anger House moderates. They are phasing out the tax credits and cuts to Medicaid benefits. Trump has vowed not to cut Medicaid.

Some swing-district House Republicans want to raise the tax rate on top earners to offset the cost of lifting the cap on how much their constituents can deduct in their state and local taxes, known as SALT.

“Allowing the top tax rate to expire and returning from 37% to 39.6% for individuals earning $609,350 or more and married couples earning $731,200 or more breathes $300 billion of new life into the One Big, Beautiful Bill,” Rep. Nick LaLota of New York told CNN on Saturday.

May 18 (UPI) — The House Budget Committee has scheduled a rare Sunday night session in an attempt to advance President Donald Trump‘s “One Big Beautiful Bill Act.”

The panel of 21 Republicans and 16 Democrats plans to convene at 10 p.m. Committee passage of the bill is necessary to put it on the floor for a vote later this week and before Memorial Day. Congress needs to pass the budget bill by July, mainly because of a deadline in mid-July to address the debt limit and avoid a default.

The bill for fiscal year 2026, which begins Oct. 1, is 1,116 pages and roughly $7 trillion. The last time Congress passed all 12 regular appropriations bills on time, before the start of a new fiscal year, was in 1996. Since then, Congress has relied heavily on continuing resolutions and omnibus appropriations bills to fund the government.

In fiscal year 2024, the federal government spent $6.8 trillion.

House Speaker Mike Johnson said on Fox News Sunday that Republicans still are “on track” to pass the bill by the end of this week. Some Republican hardliners and moderates have opposed to the bill along with all Democrats.

“We’re on track, working around the clock to deliver this nation-shaping legislation for the American people as soon as possible,” Johnson said. “All 11 of our committees have wrapped up their work, and they spent less and saved more than even we’ve projected initially. This really is a once-in-a-generation opportunity that we have here.”

If the Budget Committee passes the bill, it goes before the Rules Committee. In the House, Republicans have a 220-213 majority with two vacancies after two Democrats died.

“It’s very important for people to understand why we’re being so aggressive on the timetable and why this really is so important,” Johnson said. “This is the vehicle through which we will deliver on the mandate the American people gave us during the last election. You’re going to have historic savings for the American people, historic tax relief for American workers, historic investments in border security.

“At the same time, we’re restoring American energy dominance, and we’re rebuilding the defense industrial base, and we’re ensuring that programs like Medicaid and SNAP are strengthened for U.S. citizens who need and deserve them and not being squandered away by illegal aliens and persons who are ineligible to receive them and are cheating the system.”

On Friday, Budget Committee hard-liners blocked the package from moving forward — mainly over when Medicaid work requirements will commence. Under the current legislation, Medicaid requirements will kick in during 2029. Some conservatives want it to start as soon as 2027.

South Carolina Rep. Ralph Norman, who voted against advancing the bill, told CNN on Saturday that the earlier date was necessary for his vote. Another key budget holdouts are Chip Roy of Texas, Josh Brecheen of Oklahoma and Andrew Clyde of Georgia.

The Center on Budget and Policies Priorities estimates 36 million Medicaid enrollees could be at risk of losing coverage because of potential work requirements and other factors.

In December, there were 78,532,341 on Medicaid and the Children’s Health Insurance Program, or CHIP, according to the agency. That includes 71,275,237 enrolled in Medicaid and 7,257,104 in CHIPS.

“Some of the states have — it takes them some time,” Johnson said. “We’ve learned in this process to change their systems and to make sure that these stringent requirements that we will put on that to eliminate fraud, waste and abuse, can actually be implemented. So, we’re working with them [hardliners] to make sure what the earliest possible date is to put into law something that will actually be useful. I think we’ve got to compromise on that. I think we’ll work it out,” Johnson claimed.”

If the House passes a bill, it goes to the Senate. Johnson said he hopes the Senate won’t alter the bill, which means it goes back to the House.

“The package that we send over there will be one that was very carefully negotiated and delicately balanced, and we hope that they [Senate] don’t make many modifications to it, because that will ensure its passage quickly,” he said.

Holdouts also want to accelerate the phasing out of tax credits for green energy projects under the Inflation Reduction Act.

The bill also includes a big increase for the Defense Department and to national security. There are cuts to federal health and nutrition programs and energy programs.

It’s a balancing act for Johnson because some changes may anger House moderates. They are phasing out the tax credits and cuts to Medicaid benefits. Trump has vowed not to cut Medicaid.

Someswing-district House Republicans want to raise the tax rate on top earners to offset the cost of lifting the cap on how much their constituents can deduct in their state and local taxes, known as SALT.

“Allowing the top tax rate to expire and returning from 37% to 39.6% for individuals earning $609,350 or more and married couples earning $731,200 or more breathes $300 billion of new life into the One Big, Beautiful Bill,” Rep. Nick LaLota of New York told CNN on Saturday.

Northampton: Ramm; Freeman, Dingwall (capt), Hutchinson, Litchfield; Smith, Mitchell; Iyogun, Langdon, Davison, Mayanavanua, Lockett, Coles, Kemeny, Pollock.

Replacements: Wright, Haffar, Millar Mills, Prowse, Scott-Young, Weimann, Garside, Seabrook

Saracens: Goode; Elliott, Daly, Tompkins, Segun; Burke, van Zyl; Mawi, George, Riccioni, Itoje (capt), Isiekwe, Gonzalez, Earl, Willis.

Replacements: Dan, Brantingham, Clarey, Tizard, McFarland, Onyeama-Christie, Bracken, Hall.

Yellow card: Onyeama-Christie (72)

Referee: Luke Pearce

A BRIT teen held in Georgia accused of smuggling 30lb of marijuana is the great-granddaughter of a Labour MP who was caught up in the parliamentary expenses scandal.

Bella May Culley faces life in prison in a brutal ex-Soviet slammer after she was arrested at Tbilisi airport on suspicion of drug smuggling.

6

6

6

6

The 18-year-old appeared in court earlier this week, where she said was pregnant before stating she would reserve the right to remain silent.

But the nursing student from County Durham is the great-granddaughter of ex-Stockton North Labour MP Frank Cook, who passed away in 2012, the MailOnline has reported.

Culley is reported to regularly post pictures with her “special lady” grandmother – who is the late MP’s daughter.

In one post wishing her happy birthday, she says she loves her “unconditionally” before calling her “one of the most important ladies in my life”.

Cook, who represented Stockton North for 27 years, was among the MPs implicated in the 2009 expenses row that rocked Westminster to its core.

It transpired he had claimed for £153,902, which included a £5 donation made by an aide representing him at a memorial service. 

However, he would later explain this donation was an IOU from the member of staff who went to the service on his behalf – and that he expensed it by mistake.

“It was a genuine mistake and I stress again: I would never deliberately make a claim of this kind,” he said.

He would later lose a libel case against The Sunday Telegraph following the revelations.

Cook stood as an independent candidate in his constituency at the 2010 general election after being deselected by Labour, but he failed to retain the seat.

He died in 2012 at the age of 76 – a year after being diagnosed with lung cancer. 

Culley was arrested after she was allegedly caught trying to sneak 34 bags of marijuana in her luggage through the Georgian capital’s main airport.

She had been reported missing in Thailand – where she had been travelling – before she was arrested 4,000 miles away.

Her family had raised the alarm after she failed to contact anyone since Saturday – despite usually being a prolific texter.

Her dad Neil Culley, who lives in Vietnam, has reportedly flown to the Eastern European nation to be by his daughter’s side.

A loved-one said: “She is just a student – she doesn’t really go out or do anything like that. She just wanted a break so took herself to Thailand.

“She must have become mixed up with someone. She must have met someone who has taken advantage of her.”

Authorities in Georgia claim she tried to stash 34 bags of cannabis in her luggage which was detected at the airport.

Georgia’s Interior Ministry says she could face 20 years or even a life sentence in an overcrowded Women’s Penitentiary No. 5 in Rustavi

The country has been blasted for its treatment of its prisoners by rights groups.

Culley’s paternal grandfather said: “I’m terrified that she’s in for a long sentence. I might never see her again – I’m 80 years old.

“She’s got sucked into something, somehow. She’s not an international drug trafficker.

“It’s all just very strange and at the moment we just don’t have any answers. We don’t know what to think.”

Bella’s lawyer said after her court appearance: “My client is currently exercising the right to remain silent, so we will provide detailed information later, once they decide how to proceed.”

6

6

ITV viewers were completely stunned as a late soap legend was spotted on TV, eight months after she passed away.

The actress sadly died in her sleep at the age of 72 last year in her home city of Melbourne, Australia.

6

6

Janet Andrewartha was best known for her role as Lyn Scully in the hit soap, Neighbours.

She first made her debut on the former Channel 5 serial drama back in 1999.

She had a number of on and off stints on Ramsay Street, before departing for the final time in 2019.

But less than three months after she received a cancer diagnosis, the star passed away in July of last year.

At the time, her friend – and Neighbours co-star – Jackie Woodburne paid a heartfelt tribute to her pal.

She said: “[Janet] was one of the finest actors of a generation. I will miss her every day.”

However, viewers were shocked to see her appear on-screen once again in the ITV drama, Fake.

The show focuses on a smart magazine writer named Birdie (Asher Keddie) who seems to have found her ideal match.

On a dating app, she meets a successful farmer, but she later discovers that all is not as it seems.

Viewers were pleasantly surprised to see that Janet popped up on screen in scenes that were filmed before her death.

She starred in the gritty series as, Kath Tovey, which is a supporting role.

Her Neighbours co-star Anne Charleston, 82, is known for playing the beloved Madge Bishop on the soap for decades from 1986.

She also appears in Fake in a supporting role as the character, Shirley Burt alongside Janet.

Anne recently made her return to Neighbours in a new role as part of Harold’s departure storyline.

This was after Ian Smith revealed that he was diagnosed with “a very aggressive non-fixable cancer.”

6

6

6

6

Many people remember the late Jim Fagan as the rugged voice that proudly informed 1990s and early-2000s basketball fans that they were watching the NBA on NBC.

The distinct sound of Fagan’s voiceovers, with John Tesh’s rousing “Roundball Rock” playing in the background, will be forever linked to the era when Michael Jordan dominated the sport and players like Kobe Bryant, Shaquille O’Neal and Tim Duncan were just starting to build their legacies.

Fagan died in 2017 at age 72 after battling Parkinson’s disease. His voice, however, will soon be more than just a fond memory for basketball fans.

NBC Sports announced Tuesday that through the use of AI voice synthesis technology — and through a partnership with Fagan’s family — the announcer’s voice will be heard on “select title sequences, show opens, and promos” when the NBA returns to the network this fall after more than two decades. Fagan’s voice will be used to “supplement traditional voiceover work by other artists hired by NBC Sports,” the network said in a news release.

That announcement came days after NBC Sports revealed that it was bringing back “Roundball Rock” as its NBA anthem. On Tuesday, the network dropped a promo video featuring both the classic song and Fagan’s AI-generated voice. Any nostalgic vibes felt by old-school NBA fans definitely were not coincidental.

“For many basketball fans, Jim’s unique and recognizable voice immediately conjures a deep sense of nostalgia for a special time in NBA history,” NBC Sports president Rick Cordella said in the news release. “His voice perfectly captured the magnitude of the heavyweight matchups and stars that he was introducing. It’s been a joy to work with Jim’s family to recreate his voice and honor his legacy. I’m excited we’re able to introduce his voice to a whole new generation of fans.”

Four hours after the promo video was posted on YouTube, it had received 25 comments, most of which criticized the decision to use AI to generate the voice of someone who is no longer alive. But Fagan’s daughters, Jana Silvia Joyce and Risa Silvia-Koonin, said in NBC’s news release that their father would have been “thrilled.”

“We’re deeply grateful that NBC Sports had the vision to honor our father’s legacy in such a meaningful way,” Silvia Joyce and Silvia-Koonin stated. “He took great pride in his work with NBC Sports, especially in helping set the stage for some of the most memorable moments in NBA history. Knowing that his voice will once again be part of the game he loved — and that a new generation of fans will get to experience it — is incredibly special for our family. He would be so thrilled and proud to be a part of this.”