Addressing the issue, Pilot said the proposal was introduced without meaningful consultation with opposition parties or the state governments responsible for implementing the scheme on the ground. He argued that bypassing such consultations reflected a disregard for established parliamentary conventions and cooperative federalism, particularly in the case of a programme that directly affects millions of rural households.
Pilot emphasised that MGNREGA is not merely an administrative scheme but a critical social security measure that guarantees employment and livelihood support to rural citizens. Any attempt to alter its structure, identity, or functioning, he said, must follow a transparent process involving all stakeholders, including states, lawmakers, and the public.
He further cautioned that changes introduced without broad consensus could erode public trust and weaken the intent of the legislation. According to him, parliamentary scrutiny and inter-governmental dialogue are essential safeguards when dealing with welfare schemes of national importance.
The Congress leader’s intervention has added to the political debate surrounding the future of MGNREGA and the proposed renaming, placing the spotlight on questions of process, accountability, and federal consultation. As the issue continues to draw attention in Parliament, it underscores the broader challenge of balancing policy reform with democratic procedure in the governance of major welfare programmes.
About The Author
Comment List