THE Viksit Bharat-Guarantee for Rozgar and Ajeevika Mission (Gramin) — VB-G RAM G — finds itself mired in discord ahead of its July 1 rollout. The transition from a fully Centrally funded wage guarantee to a 60:40 Centre-state cost-sharing model has triggered unease across states, exposing the fiscal and federal fault lines. The shift in financial responsibility is a key feature of the scheme, which is the substitute for the now-repealed Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (MGNREGA) that was enacted by the Congress-led UPA government in 2005. Even BJP-ruled Bihar and Madhya Pradesh have flagged the increased wage burden under the new framework. For states with constrained fiscal space, the obligation to shoulder 40% of the wage expenditure can sideline other welfare priorities, especially in rural development.
The scheme has caused divisions not only within the BJP but also in the Opposition camp. The Congress has accused the Centre of pushing the reform without adequate consultation and weakening the rights-based character of rural employment. The party’s government in Telangana is planning to move the Supreme Court against VB-G RAM G. Ironically, the AAP government in Punjab has notified the scheme, barely six months after the state Assembly unanimously passed a resolution slamming the BJP-led Centre for scrapping MGNREGA.
The Centre has defended VB-G RAM G by laying stress on a higher number of days (125) of statutory wage employment. However, the prospect of increased centralisation and conditional funding could dilute the demand-driven essence of rural job guarantee. Ultimately, the debate is less about the intent of the reform and more about its design. Any durable rural employment initiative must balance fiscal realism with the constitutional commitment to livelihood security. The onus is on the Centre to address states’ concerns and review the scheme, failing which cooperative federalism — or whatever is left of it — will hit a new low.
