For Singapore, India is another dimension that could be critical for its sustained economic growth and prosperity. India is viewed not as a lumbering elephant but possessing elements of dynamism scattered sufficiently in certain regions, some certainly more attractive for the foreign investors than others.

Singapore High Commissioner to India Wong Kwok Pun is firm in his conviction that India will emerge as a hot investment destination in the future. However, the powers-that-be must make efforts to prepare the ground for the foreign investment spurt. "If you want the benefits of globalisation, you must be prepared to accept its risks," Pun told The Financial Express in an interview. Excerpts:

What initiatives have Singapore and India taken to deepen and broaden the level of economic cooperation? Are you satisfied with these initiatives? In your opinion, what more is required to raise the level of economic cooperation between the two countries?
In 1993, in a somewhat similar effort as India's economic reform of July, 1991, Singapore consciously initiated a policy of regionalisation aimed at developing an external dimension for the economy. We are constrained by geographical size and a small market. Our companies find it difficult to grow. They need an external dimension. We identified India as a potential economic partner. We have management expertise and financial resources aplenty. Joint ventures and investments are a distinct possibility. Our prime ministers have exchanged visits. India was recognised as a tiger let free. Today, we are looking at a greater people-to-people contact. When a tourism package is retailed, price is a major consideration. Owing to a downtrend in South East Asia, the number of tourists from Thailand and Korea noticeably went up because they were cheaper destinations. We can develop hotels but hotel is only one component of tourism. We need more air links to make travel to India easier and bring down the cost of travel.Infrastructure must improve. I would like to see more education in India which is like a catalyst that spurs you on.

What is your strategy for the Indian market?
We want to build up a win-win situation. We have amazing synergy. Singaporeans have experience in the global market. India has the advantage of low worker cost, core of competent engineers and executives who are very mobile, cosmopolitan and definitely cheaper than Americans and Europeans. It is very attractive to work with these people. Indian companies can definitely leverage by splitting operations and capitalising on comparative advantages in India.

How do you assess the Indian investment climate? Can you identify the negative and positive factors that in your perception will discourage or encourage Singaporean companies from choosing India as an investment and trading destination? Do you think that the Singaporean companies are finding the entry problems in India insurmountable?
If I were an investor, I would look at putting my money not necessarily at a place that gives easy entry but a good chance of profitability, less risk and more benefits, short and long term. Idia is not just Mumbai or Delhi. Viewed from the investment angle, it has vast locational diversities with its pros and cons. An investor should not look at India as one whole but put it on a regional map where different locations and different States offer their own advantages. Japanese and the Koreans look at the South. Mumbai is the most attractive though increasingly, Tamil Nadu, Andhra and Karnataka are giving Maharashtra a run for the money. Delhi is attractive to business only when markets are linked to the government.

How do you regard India as an investment destination compared to India's Asian competitors for foreign investment? What has been the experience of Singaporean companies in the Indian market? Will the abandoned Tata-Singapore Airlines venture deter other Singaporean companies?
It is true those who do not know India would be deterred by the Tata-Singapore Airlines case. It has not deterred those who know India well. We have seen several new start-ups. With $1.2 billion of investment, excluding portfolio, cumulatively Singapore is the 12th largest investor in India. I would put economic crisis in the South-East Asian region as affecting interest in India in the negative way more than the Tata-Singapore Airlines venture. It was a learning experience. In the hindsight, it was a bit over-ambitious. There is still uncertainty whether it would have benefited India in the long run. However, there is broad-based recognition that the project would have been good for India and I see it as a positive rather than a negative development. Eventually, India has a lot of advantages and more investors will surely come. Pace will depend on how quickly reforms are made.

If you are requested to spell out India's agenda for attracting foreign investment, what would be your suggestions?
India is not being correctly marketed. There is an imbalance in reporting. Reports coming out of India have been mostly negative. All these problems are not new. They are well-known. Potential investors must be assured on consistency of policy. There must be a coherent and comprehensive plan on how to improve infrastructure. It must clearly spell out the role of foreign investors. Today, India gives a mixed picture. Feed-back from investors should be a key input in policy decision-making. Every government has its own concerns and priorities but it must balance out all forces- political, social and economic. You can't have one representative picture of India. When you do that, you run into the danger of over-simplifying and tend to give one simplistic picture of India. That is just not possible. For example, when a Kargil hots up, people don't want to come to India. Only those who know India think differently.

What special policies has Singapore been adopting to overcome economic crisis that brought most of the economies of the South-East Asia to the brink of ruin?
We were the least effected by the economic crisis. It is simply a question of putting certain rules and guidelines in place. If you want the benefits of globalisation, you must be prepared for the risks. We have taken the benefits and protected ourselves against the risks. We have been very open and since independence, have been allowing foreign-owned companies to establish themselves. Over the last three years, we have been restructuring the government-linked companies, where more competition has been allowed. Government monopoly has gone. We have free market. We do not control inflow and outflow of funds. After the crisis, we felt we may have become less competitive so we embarked on a further liberalisation of the financial sector. Foreign banks have been given more freedom. Privileges of local banks have been removed. We are cutting business costs. Salaries have been reduced by 50 per cent. The choice is, lose job or work at half pay. We have made very quick recovery. Export-driven manufacturing growthtogether with the improved performance of the stock market and an upturn in domestic demand purred a strong economic rebound in the second quarter. July's manufacturing figures indicate that this trend is sustained. The latest data show that the manufacturing output expanded by 17.4 per cent year -on -year in July, after growing 14.1 per cent in the second quarter.