Senior Congress leader and Wayanad MP Priyanka Gandhi Vadra on Tuesday led a protest in Parliament against the Centre’s move to replace the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (MGNREGA) with the proposed Viksit Bharat Rozgar and Ajeevika Mission (Gramin) Bill, 2025, popularly referred to as the G Ram G Bill.
Holding up photographs of Mahatma Gandhi on the Parliament premises, Congress MPs objected to the introduction of the Bill, alleging that it weakens a landmark welfare law that has supported rural livelihoods for two decades.
Priyanka Gandhi opposes Bill in Lok Sabha
During proceedings in the Lok Sabha, Union Agriculture Minister Shivraj Singh Chouhan sought permission to introduce the new Bill, which aims to replace MGNREGA. Priyanka Gandhi opposed the move under Rule 72(1) of the Rules of Procedure and Conduct of Business, registering what she described as a “strong objection”.
She said MGNREGA had been a revolutionary law since its introduction in 2005 by the UPA government and had enjoyed support across party lines. According to her, the scheme guarantees 100 days of employment annually to the poorest sections in rural India and has played a key role in strengthening the rural economy.
Concerns over funding model and role of Gram Sabhas
Priyanka Gandhi flagged concerns over changes proposed in the new Bill, particularly the shift from a demand-based funding model to a system where allocations are decided in advance by the Centre. She argued that MGNREGA works on demand from the ground, with Gram Sabhas empowered to assess local employment needs.
“The right to employment is being weakened, and this goes against the Constitution,” she said, adding that the proposed law reduces the role of Gram Sabhas and dilutes the core principle of guaranteed work.
She also pointed out that the Centre’s funding share for the scheme has come down to 60 per cent for most states, warning that this could strain state finances at a time when several states are already awaiting GST dues.
Objection to renaming and passage without discussion
The Congress leader questioned what she described as a “craze” to rename existing schemes, noting that such changes involve additional costs. She urged the government not to rush the legislation and to withdraw the Bill for wider discussion in the House.
When members from the treasury benches made a remark referring to her family, Priyanka Gandhi responded by saying that Mahatma Gandhi may not belong to her family but is regarded as family by the entire nation.
Wider opposition, government defence
Several opposition leaders echoed these concerns. Congress MP Shashi Tharoor opposed the Bill, calling it immoral to remove Mahatma Gandhi’s name from the scheme. Other विपक्ष members raised issues over normative funding and the reduced central contribution.
Government sources, however, defended the Bill, saying it aligns with the Viksit Bharat 2047 vision. They argued that normative funding allows predictable and rational budgeting, unlike a demand-based model that can lead to uncertainty, while still ensuring employment or unemployment allowance for eligible workers.
BJP leader and former Minority Affairs Minister Mukhtar Abbas Naqvi dismissed the opposition’s protest, alleging that the objection stemmed from the inclusion of Lord Ram’s name in the scheme.