Source The Hindu
The Union government’s reported move to replace the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (MGNREGA) with a new rural employment programme has sparked political debate and raised questions about the future of one of India’s most ambitious social welfare schemes.
What is MGNREGA?
Enacted in 2005, MGNREGA guarantees 100 days of wage employment per year to rural households willing to do unskilled manual work. The law was designed as a demand-driven programme to provide livelihood security, reduce distress migration, and create durable rural assets such as ponds, roads, and irrigation facilities. Over the years, it has emerged as a crucial safety net, especially during economic slowdowns and crises like the COVID-19 pandemic.
Why does the government want a replacement?
According to government sources, the Centre believes MGNREGA has outlived parts of its original design and needs a fundamental overhaul rather than incremental reforms. Officials argue that the scheme has become largely consumption-oriented, focused on short-term wage support, and has not sufficiently contributed to long-term rural productivity or skill development.
The proposed replacement, tentatively referred to as a new “Viksit Bharat” rural employment scheme, is expected to place greater emphasis on asset creation, infrastructure development, and convergence with other government programmes. The aim, the government says, is to shift from “relief-based employment” to “growth-oriented livelihoods.”
Concerns over inefficiencies and costs
Another key reason cited is the rising fiscal burden. MGNREGA allocations often exceed initial budget estimates due to high demand, leading to delayed wage payments and accumulation of pending dues. The government has also flagged issues such as alleged leakages, inflated muster rolls, and uneven implementation across states.
Officials maintain that a redesigned scheme could improve efficiency, use technology more effectively, and better align spending with national development priorities.
What critics say
Opposition parties and civil society groups have strongly opposed any move to scrap MGNREGA. They argue that the scheme remains vital in a country where rural underemployment is widespread and agricultural incomes are uncertain. Critics warn that replacing a legal guarantee with an executive programme could dilute workers’ rights and make employment support more vulnerable to budget cuts.
They also point out that MGNREGA’s value lies precisely in its role as a fallback option during economic distress, something that productivity-focused schemes may not adequately address.
What lies ahead
While the government has not yet formally introduced legislation to repeal MGNREGA, the debate signals a possible shift in India’s rural employment policy. The key question is whether a new scheme can balance long-term development goals with the immediate livelihood security that MGNREGA has provided for nearly two decades.
Until clarity emerges, MGNREGA continues to operate, even as its future becomes a central issue in the broader discussion on rural welfare and economic reform.
