Viksit Bharat–Guarantee for Rozgar and Ajeevika Mission (Gramin) Bill, 2025 (VB-G RaM G)
Kartavya Desk Staff
Source: BS
Subject: Governance Schemes & Economy
Context: The Union government plans to table the Viksit Bharat–Guarantee for Rozgar and Ajeevika Mission (Gramin) Bill, 2025, proposing to replace the 20-year-old MGNREGA framework.
About Viksit Bharat–Guarantee for Rozgar and Ajeevika Mission (Gramin) Bill, 2025 (VB-G RaM G):
What it is?
• The VB-G RaM G Bill is a proposed legislation to replace MGNREGA, 2005, guaranteeing 125 days of wage employment per rural household while aligning public works with long-term rural infrastructure, livelihoods, and climate resilience under the Viksit Bharat @2047 vision.
Key features of the Bill:
• Enhanced employment guarantee: Raises assured workdays from 100 to 125 days, increasing income security for rural households (≈25% higher earning potential).
• Four focused asset priorities: Public works are limited to water security, core rural infrastructure, livelihood infrastructure, and climate-resilience works, ensuring durable assets rather than fragmented works.
• Normative funding framework: State-wise allocations are pre-decided using objective parameters, improving predictability in budgeting while retaining unemployment allowance if work is denied.
• Revised cost-sharing pattern: 60:40 Centre–State for most states, 90:10 for NE/Himalayan states, and 100% Centre for UTs without legislatures—enhancing state accountability.
• Digital governance and transparency: Mandatory biometric attendance, Aadhaar-linked payments, GPS/geotagging, AI-based fraud detection, and real-time MIS dashboards to reduce leakages (e-payments already ~99.9%).
• Agricultural season safeguards: Allows up to 60 days’ pause during peak sowing/harvest to ensure labour availability for farms and prevent wage inflation.
• Stronger local planning: Works planned through Viksit Gram Panchayat Plans and mapped to a National Rural Infrastructure Stack for coordinated development.
Need for the VB-G RaM G Bill:
• Changed rural socio-economic context: Rural poverty fell from 25.7% (2011-12) to ~4.9% (2023-24), necessitating a shift from distress relief to productivity-linked employment.
• Asset quality concerns under MGNREGA: Monitoring reports flagged sub-standard works and misuse (₹193.67 crore misappropriation in 2024-25), calling for tighter focus and oversight.
• Climate vulnerability of rural India: Frequent floods, droughts, and heat stress demand climate-adaptive assets like water harvesting and soil conservation.
• Fiscal predictability: Demand-driven budgeting caused volatility; normative funding enables better Centre-State planning while retaining social protection.
How VB-G RaM G differs from MGNREGA?
Aspect | MGNREGA (2005) | VB-G RaM G Bill (2025)
Nature | Demand-driven legal right | Normative, budget-linked guarantee
Workdays | 100 days | 125 days
Funding | ~90:10 Centre–State | 60:40 (most states)
Work scope | Broad, fragmented | 4 focused priority sectors
Technology | Supportive | Mandatory & codified
Implementation | Universal rural | Rural areas notified by Centre
Challenges associated with the Bill:
• Dilution of demand-driven right: Capped allocations may restrict employment if demand exceeds budgets, weakening the original rights-based ethos.
• Higher state fiscal burden: Poorer states may struggle to mobilise the 40% share, risking uneven implementation.
• Centralisation concerns: Greater Centre control over notified areas and allocations may reduce state and Gram Sabha autonomy (73rd Amendment spirit).
• Technology exclusion risks: Biometric and app-based systems can fail in remote areas, affecting women, elderly, and tribal workers.
• Seasonal pause impact: The 60-day no-work window may affect landless and tribal households dependent on wage employment during lean periods.
Way ahead:
• Hybrid funding safeguard: Retain a contingency, demand-responsive window during distress years (pandemics, droughts) to protect the right to work.
• Stronger state capacity support: Provide fiscal handholding and flexibility for poorer states to meet cost-sharing requirements.
• Technology with human fallback: Ensure offline/manual alternatives where digital tools fail to avoid worker exclusion.
• Deepened social audits: Empower Gram Sabhas with binding audit outcomes and time-bound grievance redressal.
• Phased rollout with review: Pilot the scheme, assess impacts on employment days and asset quality, and course-correct before nationwide scaling.
Conclusion:
The VB-G RaM G Bill represents a significant shift from distress-centric wage relief to asset-led rural transformation. While higher guaranteed days and focused infrastructure are positives, concerns over rights dilution and state capacity remain. Balancing fiscal discipline with constitutional social protection will determine whether the reform strengthens or weakens rural livelihoods.
Q. Adequate funding is crucial for the success of Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (MGNREGA), 2005, and any reduction in budgetary allocations may affect the program’s impact. Analyse. (250 words)