Background and Policy Context
- The VB–G RAM G Act has attracted widespread criticism, with limited support from government-linked commentators.
- Union Rural Development Minister Shivraj Singh Chouhan defended the Act through national media articles.
- The government claims VB–G RAM G extends the work guarantee to 125 days per household annually.
Guarantee Structure and Legal Concerns
- Section 5(1) allows the Centre to notify rural areas where the guarantee applies.
- This discretionary clause undermines the universality of an employment guarantee.
- Extending workdays to 125 could have been achieved under MGNREGA without legislative replacement.
- Several States already provide 125 days under existing MGNREGA provisions.
Disentitlement Provisions Debate
- MGNREGA included a clause penalising refusal of work offers by suspending unemployment allowance eligibility.
- This safeguard aimed to deter frivolous work applications.
- The clause has never been used in two decades of implementation.
- VB–G RAM G omits this provision, though its practical impact remains negligible.
Shift to Normative Funding
- The Act promotes normative funding instead of MGNREGA’s demand-driven approach.
- Normative allocations are expected to become de facto budget caps for States.
- Advocates argue caps ensure equitable interstate expenditure distribution.
- Evidence shows no correlation between poverty levels and MGNREGA employment intensity.
- Poor and better-off States both display high and low employment outcomes.
- Raising wage rates in poorer States is suggested as a better equity mechanism.
Corruption and Digital Governance Claims
- Transparency and social audit provisions largely replicate MGNREGA mechanisms.
- The Act emphasises expanded use of digital technologies.
- Past digital interventions produced technical failures and worker dissatisfaction.
- System glitches sometimes encouraged middlemen-led fund diversion.
Fiscal Scale and Broader Implications
- MGNREGA expenditure remains modest at approximately 0.25% of GDP.
- Critics argue VB–G RAM G mainly enables centralised control and political credit-claiming.
- Workers’ rights and the core employment guarantee principle are considered diluted.
Conclusion
- The Act largely repackages existing MGNREGA provisions without substantive improvement. Budget caps and discretionary coverage risk weakening rights-based rural employment protection.