A recent decision by the Narendra Modi government to rename the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (MGNREGA) as ‘VB-G Ram G’ has brought this contrast into sharp focus. Critics see the move as part of a broader pattern in which long-standing welfare schemes are rebranded, often accompanied by the Prime Minister’s photograph and party symbolism. The timing of this change, coming just days ahead of Manmohan Singh’s first death anniversary, has further intensified the debate over governance philosophy and political legacy.
During Singh’s decade-long tenure as Prime Minister from 2004 to 2014, major social and economic programmes were rolled out with a strong emphasis on institutional continuity rather than individual recognition. One such initiative was the Bharatiya Janaushadhi Yojana, launched in 2008 under the Ministry of Chemicals and Fertilizers to provide affordable generic medicines to citizens. Janaushadhi centres were established across the country to improve access to essential drugs, particularly for lower-income groups.
After the change of government in 2014, the scheme underwent a significant transformation. It was renamed the ‘Pradhan Mantri Bharatiya Janaushadhi Pariyojana’, and the revised branding mandated the display of Prime Minister Modi’s photograph at centres. The programme also adopted a new saffron-coloured logo and the acronym ‘BJP’, changes that supporters defended as part of renewed outreach but which critics argue shifted the focus from public health delivery to political image-building.
This approach has not been limited to a single programme. Over the past 11 years, several welfare schemes originally introduced during the United Progressive Alliance (UPA) era have been renamed or rebranded under the current administration. According to available records, the names of more than two dozen schemes initiated under Manmohan Singh have since been altered. In contrast, there are virtually no examples from the UPA period of welfare programmes carrying the ‘Prime Minister’ prefix or overt personal branding.
The evolution of these schemes has been accompanied by extensive promotional campaigns, including laudatory articles in newspapers, features on websites, and dedicated YouTube content highlighting the Prime Minister’s role. Observers note that such visibility-driven strategies stand in marked contrast to Singh’s leadership style, which prioritised policy outcomes and institutional processes over personal spectacle.
As India reflects on Manmohan Singh’s contribution to public life, the discussion extends beyond nostalgia to a deeper examination of governance norms. His legacy, many argue, lies in demonstrating that transformative policy and national leadership need not rely on constant self-promotion. In an era increasingly shaped by optics and branding, the reassessment of Singh’s approach underscores enduring questions about how power is exercised, credited, and remembered in the world’s largest democracy.
About The Author
Comment List