Shashi Tharoor slams VB-G RAM G Bill as ‘retrograde step’

Congress MP Shashi Tharoor led the opposition charge, terming the bill a "deeply regrettable and retrograde step" that undermines the welfare of India's most vulnerable rural citizens.

He strongly objected to the removal of Mahatma Gandhi's name, describing it not as a mere administrative change but an assault on the program's philosophical core.

Tharoor invoked Gandhi's vision of Ram Rajya and Gram Swaraj, emphasising village empowerment and prioritising the "last person first."

The original 2005 Act, he argued, drew moral legitimacy from Gandhi's ideals of grassroots upliftment through guaranteed employment.

Stripping his name, Tharoor said, erodes this historical and ethical foundation.

A major contention was the proposed financial restructuring, shifting to a 60:40 funding ratio with states bearing 40 per cent of costs - up significantly from the Centre's near-total coverage of unskilled wages under MGNREGA.

Tharoor warned that this imposes an unsustainable burden on poorer states, risking delayed wage payments, fewer workdays, and eventual collapse of the scheme.

He called it a violation of fiscal federalism, questioning the Centre's legislative competence for such a shift.

Additionally, making the program contingent on executive notifications was criticised for altering its demand-driven, rights-based character, giving the Union discretionary power over implementation.

The bill promises 125 days of employment (up from 100), digital transparency, and alignment with Viksit Bharat goals, but opposition members, including Priyanka Gandhi Vadra, disrupted proceedings, demanding referral to a standing committee.

Introduced by Rural Development Minister Shivraj Singh Chouhan, the legislation seeks to modernise the two-decade-old scheme that has provided livelihoods to millions amid rural distress.

The heated debate highlights deep divisions over federal finances, Gandhian heritage, and rural welfare commitments, with opposition parties uniting against what they see as a dilution of a flagship pro-poor program. The session was marked by slogans and walkouts as protests intensified.