Panel criticises govt response to recommendations on schemes like MGNREGS

Hindustan Times

2 days ago

The Parliamentary Standing Committee on Rural Development and Panchayati Raj has criticised the government's response to its recommendations on flagship schemes, particularly the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme (MGNREGS), calling the replies 'stereotypical, routine and generic.' It expressed disapproval over the sidelining of its recommendation on wage and material pendency under MGNREGS. The House panel reiterated concerns over the build-up of unspent funds. (ANI)
The panel drew attention to the scheme's persistent financial issues. 'The response furnished ...is lacking in any concrete measure that has been taken...it is silent particularly upon the existing pendencies under material components. Simply, it has again demonstrated the same old stereotypical approach by stating that 'funds are released to the States/UTs is a continuous and demand-driven process'.'
The panel called it unfathomable how a panel's specific query can be sidelined and the government remain silent and evasive on an important matter. It reiterated concerns over the build-up of unspent funds under schemes, stagnation of allocation and workdays under MGNREGS, inadequate wage rates, and the mandatory Aadhaar-based payment system. The panel restated its earlier advice to the government to re look into these matters.
The panel criticised the action-taken reply as lacking substance. 'The committee finds the reply stereotypical in nature, delineating only the provisions of the scheme without addressing the core issue with the seriousness it warrants.'
The panel said 27.26% of MGNREGS's budget will go toward clearing previous years' dues, effectively reducing the operational budget from ₹86,000 crore to ₹62,553.73 crore. Data showed that ₹12,219.18 crore was pending in wages, while ₹11,227.09 crore was unpaid against the material component. 'The Committee strongly reiterates the recommendation for the eradication of pending liabilities under MGNREGA through robust measures of financial prudence at the earliest.'
The panel urged addressing the challenges faced by beneficiaries, especially insufficient assistance and project completion delays. It said allocations under the National Social Assistance Programme remained unchanged for the three financial years, suggesting an 'upward revision of fund allocation' before the Cabinet.