Listen to the article
In a sharp rebuttal to Congress allegations, the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) has dismissed opposition claims about the newly introduced rural employment scheme as “baseless” and part of a “sponsored propaganda” campaign designed to mislead the public.
Speaking in New Delhi on Saturday, BJP national spokesperson Sudhanshu Trivedi defended the Viksit Bharat Guarantee for Rozgar and Ajeevika Mission (Gramin) Act, commonly known as VB-G RAM G, which has replaced the longstanding Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (MGNREGA).
“It has become routine for Rahul Gandhi to skip discussions during Parliament Session for his monthly foreign visits and attack the government policy after returning to the country,” said Trivedi, a Rajya Sabha MP. “I want to tell very clearly that the sponsored and misleading campaign which is being run by the Congress is baseless.”
The BJP spokesperson highlighted several enhancements in the new legislation, emphasizing that VB-G RAM G expands the guaranteed workdays from 100 to 125 days annually. Additionally, the scheme has been integrated with other government initiatives focused on water conservation, infrastructure development, climate change mitigation, and livelihood promotion.
“Gram panchayats will take decisions,” Trivedi explained, pointing to a decentralized approach that empowers local governance. “It has been linked to big programmes like PM Gati Shakti so that people in villages know about the development activities happening around their village.”
A key feature of the new act is its weekly monitoring mechanism designed to ensure timely payments for completed work. This comes in response to concerns about fraudulent claims under the previous program. Trivedi cited examples from 19 districts where payments were allegedly “collected” for work that was never performed under MGNREGA.
“The VB-G RAM G Act will be much more beneficial to laborers as it will bring transparency and honesty in implementation,” Trivedi asserted, suggesting that the new framework addresses systemic weaknesses in the former scheme.
The rural employment guarantee program remains a critical social security measure in India, where a significant portion of the population depends on rural employment. The original MGNREGA, launched during the Congress-led UPA government in 2006, had been a flagship welfare initiative guaranteeing 100 days of wage employment annually to rural households whose adult members volunteer for unskilled manual labor.
The BJP’s replacement of this long-standing program marks a significant shift in India’s rural development approach, emphasizing what the government describes as improved efficiency and integration with broader development goals.
In a pointed political attack, Trivedi claimed that opposition to the new law stems partly from the acronym itself, specifically the “RAM” component. “This shows that if even an indirect reference to any symbol associated with Indian culture and Hinduism is seen, the Congress can not accept it,” he charged, adding that the Congress had transformed MGNREGA into a “system for corruption.”
The clash over rural employment policies highlights ongoing ideological and political tensions between India’s two major parties, with welfare schemes often becoming battlegrounds for competing visions of development. The BJP government has consistently pushed for reforms in various social welfare programs, emphasizing digitalization, direct benefit transfers, and integration with other development initiatives.
As implementation of the VB-G RAM G Act begins, its effectiveness in addressing rural unemployment and poverty alleviation will be closely watched by policymakers, economists, and political observers alike, particularly as rural distress continues to be a significant concern across many parts of the country.
Fact Checker
Verify the accuracy of this article using The Disinformation Commission analysis and real-time sources.
14 Comments
This seems like a classic case of political rhetoric vs. on-the-ground realities. I’ll reserve judgment until we see independent assessments of how the new rural employment scheme is actually impacting the lives of workers and their families.
Well said. Objective, evidence-based analysis will be key to moving beyond the partisan positioning and understanding the true merits and shortcomings of the policy changes.
The BJP’s assertions about the new rural employment scheme seem plausible, but I’d caution against taking their word as gospel. Past policy changes don’t always live up to the hype, so I’ll be watching closely to see how this plays out.
Good point. Scrutiny and fact-checking from multiple angles will be important to evaluate the real-world impacts, beyond just the political rhetoric.
It’s good to see the BJP highlighting specific enhancements to the rural employment program. However, the skepticism from the opposition is also warranted, given the importance of these social safety net initiatives.
Absolutely. Thoughtful, fact-based debate and scrutiny from all sides is crucial to ensure these programs are effective and responsive to the needs of rural communities.
The political back-and-forth over this rural employment scheme is par for the course. What matters most is whether the changes genuinely improve access to livelihood opportunities and economic security for the intended beneficiaries.
Well said. At the end of the day, the on-the-ground impact for rural workers should be the primary measure of success, beyond the political posturing.
The BJP’s response to Congress allegations seems to raise some valid points about the expanded rural employment guarantees under the new scheme. However, I’m curious to learn more about how the changes are being implemented and whether they truly benefit rural workers.
Agreed, the details around implementation and impact on the ground will be important to evaluate. Transparency and accountability should be key priorities.
Expanding guaranteed workdays from 100 to 125 per year could be a meaningful improvement, if implemented effectively. But I’m curious to learn more about how the integration with other initiatives is intended to benefit rural communities.
Agreed, the details around program integration and coordination will be key. Potential synergies could be valuable, but the execution will determine the true impact.
This is a complex political issue with arguments on both sides. I appreciate the BJP highlighting specific enhancements to the rural employment program, but I’d want to see more independent analysis before drawing conclusions.
Absolutely, unbiased assessments from credible sources will be crucial to understanding the full picture here.