With the >India Meteorological Department’s forecast putting the average seasonal rain for this year at 88 per cent of the annual long period average for the last 50 years, India is looking at consecutive drought-like years for the first time since 1987. It is in this context that the NDA government’s proposal to extend the number of work entitlement days under the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme from 100 to 150 in drought-hit districts must be seen. The decision to extend the number by 50 clearly stems from the concern that there would be >greater demand for wage-related work in drought-affected districts . Considering that the government has been less keen than its predecessor in the implementation of the scheme, this move constitutes a change of heart. After all, the Prime Minister only recently said in Parliament that his government would continue the scheme as a symbol of the failure of the Congress-led rule in tackling poverty, and reports recently suggested that the Ministry of Rural Development was keen to reduce the scope of the scheme to select blocks. This newspaper had recently pointed to the >curtailment in demand and lack of regularity in work allocation under the scheme over the past year, leading to a trend of fewer person-days being available to households (‘ >Sunday Anchor ’, May 31). Ground reports suggested this was mostly due to delayed payments and lower outlays by the government, in a sign of lack of enthusiasm for the scheme.
MGNREGS could bring relief to farm workers and labourers affected by the laying waste of cropland for the rabi cycle due to both unseasonal rain and deficient monsoon. This fact was acknowledged in a recent observation by the World Bank on MGNREGS as an effective substitute for lack of crop and weather insurance in India. The government’s decision to extend the days of entitlement at this expedient hour must therefore be welcomed. That said, it is imperative that the government realised the importance of the scheme as a crucial intervention to spur the rural economy and alleviate poverty, and not just as a short-term or stopgap arrangement to alleviate distress — which in any case it does. The record of success of MGNREGS since its launch in 2006 as a welfare initiative that empowers distressed rural households has been well-documented. Its weaknesses, in terms of the quality of assets created and leakages in implementation, are also well-known. The government has taken note of these and has promised better monitoring and setting of quality standards for work outcomes. While this is welcome, there needs to be a better focus on timely wage payments and demand for work under the scheme.
