Lok Sabha Debates
Further Discussion On The Reported Dilution Of Mahatma Gandhi National Rural ... on 15 December, 2014
Sixteenth Loksabha an> Title: Further discussion on the Reported dilution of Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme (Discussion not concluded).
HON. DEPUTY-SPEAKER: The House will now take up further discussion on the reported dilution of Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme.
… (Interruptions)
HON. DEPUTY-SPEAKER:Shri Elumalai.
SHRI V. ELUMALAI (ARANI): Hon. Deputy-Speaker, Sir, thank you for giving me this opportunity to speak on this discussion.
MNREGA is supposed to give people their fundamental right to live with dignity.
HON. DEPUTY-SPEAKER: Hon. Members, order please in the House.
… (Interruptions)
SHRI V. ELUMALAI : I would like to urge upon the Government that the number of workplaces should be increased to 200 with a minimum of assured 100 days. The wages should be increased to Rs. 300. The effective level of awareness is very crucial in ensuring the implementation of this scheme. The Government should make every effort in this direction to make it successful so that the rural poor are given their fundamental right to work.
Thank you.
SHRI ABHISHEK BANERJEE (DIAMOND HARBOUR): Hon. Deputy-Speaker, Sir, I rise here today to deliver my maiden speech on an issue which is very close to my heart. I salute the martyrs and the brave soldiers of this country who have sacrificed their lives for India, our motherland. I thank the Ma, Mati, Manush of West Bengal for electing me to this august House. I would also like to thank the hon. Chief Minister of West Bengal, Ms. Mamata Banerjee for giving a young person like me the opportunity to represent the people of Diamond Harbour constituency. I offer my respect, regards, Saalam and pronam to all my respected colleagues in this august House and seek their cooperation, blessings and support.
Sir, today, I will speak on MGNREGA. What does this mean? NREGA stands for National Rural Employment Guarantee Act and the MG here refers to the great Mahatma Gandhi. The Scheme ensures 100 days work to the rural population of India and rural household of this country and is dedicated to the Father of the Nation.
“The soul of India lives in its villages.”, declared Mahatma Gandhi at the beginning of the 20th century. According to the 2011 census, 69 per cent of Indians lives in more than six lakhs forty thousand different villages. Gandhi Ji dedicated his whole life to the service of the people. Even at the stroke of the midnight hour when India gained Independence on 14th August, 1947, when India awoke to freedom, Gandhiji was at Noakhali fasting against communal violence.
Mahatma Gandhi stood for communal harmony. Mahatma Gandhi stood for non-violence. Mahatma Gandhi stood for rural development. Mahatma Gandhi stood for peace. Mahatma Gandhi stood for secularism. Mahatma Gandhi stood for truth. Mahatma Gandhi stood for simplicity. Mahatma Gandhi stood for woman empowerment. Mahatma Gandhi stood for equality and unity. That was the era of Mahatma Gandhi.
Sadly, times have changed now and we as individuals live in a time of a ruthless and divisive MG. We live in the times of an MG that makes promises and does not keep them, an MG that spends billions of dollars on advertising campaigns, an MG that goes on eight foreign trips in six months, an MG that puts its wardrobe before welfare, an MG that supports crony capitalism. This MG is the Modi Government. This Government has used the rims of the great Mahatma Gandhi’s spectacles as the logo of one of their campaigns but sadly and unfortunately, this Government has failed to live up to the values and ideals championed by our Father of the Nation.
Sir, MGNREGA was initially implemented in 200 of the most backward districts and subsequently, 476 other districts were included. I ask the Government to make a statement on the floor of the House that they will withdraw the circular that seeks to reduce the number of districts under MGNREGA from 676 to 200 which has a partial difference.
Dilution of this Scheme is going to hit States like Karnataka, West Bengal, Bihar and Uttar Pradesh badly. These States have a huge rural population and vast areas of Rajasthan are also going to be affected. Why is the Government restricting this Scheme to only 2500 blocks? I would like to know it as a Member of this House. What will happen to the livelihood of the people in other blocks?
Let me give you some facts and figures keeping Bengal’s achievement in mind. In 2012-13, West Bengal was the top performing State with a total man days of 20 crores which is 109 per cent higher than the national average and in 2013-14, the State again exceeded the target even though the allocation was subsequently decreased.
Sir, Bengal stands first in 100 days work scheme; Bengal stands first in skill development; Bengal stands first in power sector; Bengal stands first in MSME sector; Bengal stands first in woman empowerment and our Kanyashree scheme started by the hon. Chief Minister has been recognised globally; Bengal stands first in culture. Our tableaux got the first prize at the Republic Day parade last year.
All these were achieved in spite of the State Government paying more than Rs. 1 lakh crore to the Centre as debt repayment and interest burden. This was an inheritance from 34 years of Left Front Government’s rule which has left the entire State debt ridden and debt trapped.
This was achieved in spite of the fact that the State has not received more than Rs. 3,000 crore as part of the Pradhan Mantri Gram Sadak Yojana. This was achieved despite the fact that the State still being owed more than Rs. 1,000 crore as part of 100 days work under MGNREGA Scheme.
In this context, let me also say that the funds allocated by the Centre to the respective States should reach the States at the right time without an iota of hesitation. My understanding is that the funds that are allotted by the Centre reach some States on time, and they also get an array of other financial aids and services on time, but other States suffer. This affects the livelihoods of the poorest of the poor miserably.
Despite this obnoxious discrimination and financial deprivation by the Centre, West Bengal is moving on the course and surge of development. Now, crores of people will lose their livelihoods because of the Centre’s decision to dilute the MNREGA Scheme.
According to the Ministry of Rural Development, over 10 crore households have applied for the work under the MNREGA Scheme. However, work has been given only to approximately eight crore households, leaving more than three crore households jobless and without work. During the last eight years, Rs. 1,80,000 crore was paid as wages to the workers according to the Ministry of Rural Development. What is the figure for the last six months? I would like to know that from this new Government. Why are the allotted funds being slashed deliberately? I would like to know this from the Central Government, the NDA Government. How much money has been paid by the new Government to the workers as part of the wages?
We should remove the word ‘guarantee’ from this Scheme because after this Government came to power, not a single day’s wage was paid to the workers. Promises are made, but not delivered. The Budget provision for MNREGA was Rs. 33,000 crore in the year 2013-14. This year it is Rs. 34,000 crore. If we take into account the inflation, the allocation is much lower compared to last year. Is the Government serious about this Scheme? Do they want to work for the poor and the downtrodden of the country, of a united India? Or are they here to serve the interests of only a chosen few and crony capitalists?
My colleague, Shri Sankar Prasad Datta, initiated this discussion. He mentioned that West Bengal has received 75 per cent of the funds. I would urge him and his party Members to get their facts right before they speak. In the year 2013-14, West Bengal received Rs. 2,214 crore and this year West Bengal has just got Rs. 1,072 crore which is not even fifty per cent. Still we are number one.
That day Shri Hukmdeo Narayan Yadav spoke. हुक्मदेव नारायण जी ने कहा कि यह देवता का रूप थोड़े न है, देवी का रूप थोड़े न है जो बदला नहीं जा सकता है। मैं उनका सम्मान करता हूं, आदर करता हूं, कद्र करता हूं लेकिन मैं यह भी कहना चाहता हूं कि हम सबने रामायण पढ़ी है। हम सब धर्मों की इज्ज़त करते हैं। रामायण में रावण ऋषि-मुनि, संत के रूप में सीता जी के पास भीख मांगने गए थे, वह सीता जी की सेवा नहीं करने गए थे बल्कि उनका अपहरण करके लंका लेकर गए थे। उसी तरह यह सरकार इसका रूप बदलकर आम आदमी का भला नहीं कर रही है बल्कि पेट पर लात मार रही है।
On the one hand the Government is slashing the allocation for the MNREGA Scheme, which benefits the poor and the downtrodden of this country. On the other hand, what we see? The State Bank of India is giving away the tax payers’ money to the crony capitalist in the form of loans. I would not like to name him. I would just like to state that the State Bank of India has sanctioned a loan of Rs. 6,000 crore for a coal mine in Australia to a company, which five multi-national banks have refused to approve. This proves what times we are living in.
Sir, I want to raise another important issue – the proposed change in the labour to material ratio. The Government is proposing a reduction of material to labour ratio from 60:40 to 51:49. This change will dilute the employment objective of the scheme without increasing the productivity. This move will have detrimental effects and must be reconsidered. Instead, Sir, what we suggest is that the Government should provide technical assistance and seek expert help in implementing this Scheme at the Gram Panchayat levels as every Government, according to the people of India, according to our democracy, should be Government of the people, Government for the people and Government by the people.
Sir, I would like to end by referring to a tribal-dominated district where the MGNREGA Scheme has failed to take off. It is the Aravalli district in Gujarat form where the Prime Minister of the country hails. I have just a direct question to this Government like I asked before: Are they here to work for the welfare of the poor, welfare of the farmers, welfare of the downtrodden, welfare of the country-men of India or are they here to serve the interests of a chosen few?
Sir, six months after the misleading and false promises of Achchey Din, after 28 eminent economists wrote to the Prime Minister of the country expressing their concern over the proposed permutation and dilution, all I can say is that it is falling on the ears of a narcissistic tyrannical Government which is heartless, actionless and visionless. I stand here at this temple of democracy which is the highest forum of democracy in this country, which is the Temple, Church, Masjid of the democracy in country India, in the winter of 2014 at this august House of the People with a new meaning of the acronym NREGA. Indisputably, NREGA now stand for Nasty Ruthless Endeavour Going Anti-People. Thank you.
SHRI KALIKESH N. SINGH DEO (BOLANGIR): Sir, I thank you for calling me to speak on this subject.
We have received reports of the dilution of the MGNREGS. There are rumours that a circular has gone to the States which seeks to limit the Scheme up to 200 districts and change the labour-material ratio. I have seen some news reports about the statements made by the Minister where he claims to have denied this. What the Minister’s position will obviously be apparent when he answers the Discussion under Rule 193. However, I speak of the mood of the BJP that I have seen.
Our young friend just now spoke about Shri Hukmdeo Narayan Yadav’s comments as also the comments of some other hon. Members who are aligned with the NDA. The comments tend to lean towards criticizing the NREGS saying that there is corruption which exists in the NREGS. Shri Hukmdeo Narayan Yadav also said the rise in the minimum wages to agriculture labour is thereby impacting agriculture adversely. All of these, while holding true, cannot be a reason to dilute the Scheme for the simple reason that if there is corruption in the Scheme, should we be removing corruption or should we be stopping the Scheme?
There was corruption in 2G and 3G. Were telephones banned? Or, was corruption removed? There was corruption in coal. Were coal mines banned? Or was the process improved? Similarly, if there is a rise in agricultural wage, is that a good thing or a bad thing? The hon. Prime Minister himself made a statement about Jan Dhan yojana saying so many people have been included in the financial sector. Now, they say that if there is an increase in agricultural wages, it is bad somewhere. If agriculture is suffering, it is not because of increase in agricultural wages.
It is suffering because of consecutive poor and faulty policies of the Government of India. The problem with agriculture is very different. We all know that they are all small holdings; they do not have access to finance; they do not get access to markets; they get no access to real time information. Solve those problems. Do not deny the poor agricultural labour, who does not have any other option of putting food on his plate, by diluting MGNREGA.
One of the good things the previous Government did was to have a rights-based approach. Previously, Governments have been functioning on a mai-baap sarkar. If you want something from the Government, you have to either touch the feet of the MP, or the MLA, or the Collector. It is a politics of patronage. The good previous UPA Government did was to enact many guarantee schemes – food guarantee, employment guarantee. It is a rights-based approach. The people have the right to demand 100 days work and the Government has to provide it or give them money. That brings to account the performance of this Government or any Government for that matter. If the Government does not perform, they become financially liable, and maybe even at some point of time politically liable. So, if you are going to limit them to 200 districts, it does not make sense because where there are lesser poor people, the demand will be less but yet those poor people have a right. This rights-based approach should not be taken away.
I have seen replication of mai-baap sarkar coming in after the new Government has taken over. I certainly hope that there are some people amongst the Ministers, amongst the Cabinet who recognise that India has evolved to becoming a developing nation, and part of the development should be to provide the people of the country, the citizens of this nation, certain rights, rather than have the policy of patronage.
There are many advantages which have come out of this scheme. It has increased social and economic security, specially that of women because women directly work and get the money in their bank accounts; it does not go into the bank accounts of their husbands or male members of the family. Hukmdeo ji was saying that it affects agriculture adversely. He should know, the Minister should state that about 80 per cent of the work is done for agricultural purposes, that it is regeneration of natural resources, soil, providing small farm ponds. The MoRD had commissioned a study to evaluate the performance and impact of MGNREGA in Chhattisgarh, Odisha, Jharkhand and Andhra Pradesh. This particular study revealed that there has been an increase in the household income and agriculture wages, there has been reduction in distress migration, which is very pertinent to my constituency, the KBK area.
Sir, 70 per cent of the work takes place in non-agriculture season. Only 30 per cent takes place in agriculture season. So, in realty, what it has done is to give the poor farmers, the poor labourers, an option of getting another 100 days of work. Yes, it has raised the wages in rural areas, which in my belief is a good thing. The hon. Urban Development Minister was just stating that there was a lot of pressure of urbanisation in Delhi and other States. If we remove the MGNREGA, will the pressure increase or reduce? Would more people come to Delhi seeking jobs? Should we not be providing them jobs back in their own villages as we were?
The hon. Finance Minister in a statement a few days ago in his reply to the Budget discussion made some very detailed comments on MGNREGA. Obviously, he has also felt the criticism of proposal for dilution of MGNREGA. He says that he has released somewhere around Rs.25,000 crore. At the Budget, it was around Rs.34,000 crore. My friend very correctly put it, that with seven or eight per cent inflation; the Budget becomes Rs.32,000 or Rs.32,500 crore. It is in fact a reduction. I can understand the Finance Minister’s problem. He wants to control fiscal deficit which is a good thing. But reducing the MGNREGA is not the answer. MGNREGA represents a mere 0.3 per cent of the entire GDP.
I have information that a study being undertaken reveals that more than nine per cent is given as direct and indirect subsidies or non-merit subsidies. That means, it goes to the rich which gets wasted and it goes to the people who do not deserve it. You should cut those out. Why should you cut a genuine scheme which provides employment to the people in rural areas?
The Finance Minister stated that he has given Rs. 25,000 crore. My information is that till 30th September, 2014, the first six months period of the financial year, only Rs. 13,000 crore was released to States. However, I do not wish to say that he is wrong. Maybe he has released some more money to some States beyond that. Last year, Rs. 24,000 crore was released by the previous Government in the same period. Now Rs. 13,000 crore was released by this Government. Let us assume that even after that he sends some money.
I would like to quote to you from the information I have received from the Government of Odisha which has asked for Rs. 1,834.36 crore as the total budget for MGNREGS in Odisha. However, they have, so far, received just Rs. 1,035.30 crore. The problem is, when money comes sparingly, in spread-out allocations, the work cannot happen in spite of allocations. It is a demand based scheme. There is a lot of paraphernalia around it, you have to get labourers to apply for the scheme, you have to make a list of them and there is a proper process which is followed to remove leakages in the system. This is a continuous process. For the first two months they will give some money and they stop it for the next four months. The work has happened and the labourers are screaming for money there. The work comes to a halt. In Odisha, right now we have no money, I repeat, no money in SEGF and EFMS accounts since 15th October, 2014. A mere Rs. 81 crore was received in the last week of November.
The Government may not be revising the budget to cut down the expenditure in MGNREGS. But, in fact, you are squeezing the entire scheme by not releasing timely money. It is one and the same thing. While on paper you are saying that you are giving Rs. 34,000 crore, but by not giving money correctly, by not giving money in time, you are, in fact, reducing the actual expenditure on MGNREGS because you know that you need 100 days for labourers to work and you need time to prepare the entire list of projects. That will not be able to happen because money is not released in time by the Central Government. At the end, the Government of India will say that they were ready to give money. However, if money is not released in time, most of the States will not be able to spend money.
There are many issues with MGNREGS. Some of my friends might say that they are political issues. They might say that Odisha is not getting money because the BJD is in opposition to the Central Government. But I have, with me, letters written by the Government of Bihar which was once their ally. I have a letter written by the Government of Chhattisgarh which has a BJP Chief Minister and even he says he is not getting sufficient money. I do not understand why the Government wants to cut down expenditure on MGNREGS. … (Interruptions) शायद आपके पास पैसा न हो, शायद आपके पास इच्छा न हो।
The demand is there. However, we find that there is a lack of political will by the NDA Government in fulfilling the demands of the poor and the downtrodden of rural India. They work very well in promoting the relationship with other countries, ensuring that big ticket investments come in, infrastructure comes in and big business grows. But the fact of the matter is, there are poor people in this country and for them MGNREGS is like God. हुक्मदेव जी बोल रहे थे कि यह भगवान है या क्या है, लेकिन जिसको दो वक्त की रोटी नहीं मिलती है, उसके लिए तो यह स्कीम भगवान ही है। उनके भगवान को आप उनसे छीनने जा रहे हैं। मैं आपके माध्यम से गुज़ारिश करूंगा कि मंत्री जी not only explicitly states that he would carry on with the scheme but also that he would not change the material and component ratio, the labour ratio and that he would tell us today that he would give timely and time-bound payment and sufficient payment to meet the demands of various States in India. Thank you.
SHRI JAYADEV GALLA (GUNTUR): Hon. Deputy Speaker, when the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act was passed, I was also very happy, very excited that such an Act was becoming a law. But having seen the experience over the last several years, definitely it requires to be looked into again and some modifications definitely are required at this stage to ensure that it achieves all of the objectives that it was set out to achieve.
Definitely, there are some positives. Many of our Members have talked about how it provides strength to the labour class to improve their wages. It gives additional income to rural families. It also reduces migration. But there are some specific negatives that I want to also talk about which I feel need to be taken into account when looking at this Act on how to improve the delivery of this Act.
The first thing which has been talked about quite a bit is that it does not seem to be creating any durable assets. The material and labour ratio is such that the amount of material that can go to any project is quite limited. I think, one of the reasons for that has been – what I have read at least – to avoid corruption they did not want to put too much of material procurement into the material-labour ratio. But I think corruption is a different issue and unemployment is a different issue. Creating durable assets definitely is something we need to be looking at.
In addition to that, I think, more flexibility to the local bodies, local Governments to be able to select the type of works that they take up is also crucial. It is a one-size-fits-all scheme. Right from North to South, East to West, we are expected to have the same issues, the same problems. That is not the case. I think some flexibility should be there to decide on what type of projects needs to be done as well as an improved system to control material.
Secondly, it is definitely depleting the labour force both from agriculture as well as from organized industry. I think, we have statistics to show that. In 2005, 26 crore people were employed in agriculture workforce. By 2010, it has come down to 24.5 crore; and by 2014 it has come down to 23.6 crore. So, there is definitely a reduction in the number of people in the agriculture work force. While this is not necessarily a negative trend, definitely with the number of people that India has in the agriculture workforce, it does have to be a declining number. It has to be moving people from agriculture workforce into both industrial service sector and self-employment. But, at the same time, I think, we should see how the agriculture sector is going to survive. This reduction in workforce is something that needs to be looked at and planned, may be not by this Department but certainly by the Agriculture Department on how we are going to ensure faster pace of mechanization in the agriculture sector or any other steps that need to be taken. As agriculture becomes more expensive and less available, agriculture should not be made unviable, it has to be made viable. We need food for this country, as also does the world. So, how do we keep the agriculture sector viable while still providing this type of employment guarantee is something that needs to be looked at.
In industry also, I had given the example on another occasion about my own company. We had actually done walk-in interviews in Tirupati. For 2000 workman jobs, we received only 200 people walking in for those jobs. But for 200 engineering jobs, we received 2000 applications and 2000 people coming in. I believe, definitely the MGNREGA scheme also had an impact on that where people did not prefer to move into organized workforce in spite of giving minimum wages and all other facilities that are meant to be given to the workforce. They preferred not to go into that area because they had other options.
The third thing I would like to point out is this. If we look at the scheme, it is supposed to be an employment guarantee Act. But it is actually propagating unemployment and under-employment, if you ask me. You had 5.18 crore households participating in this scheme last year. Rs. 1.8 lakh crore has been spent since the beginning of this scheme. In any given year, between four crore and eight crore households are benefiting from this scheme. But, all the people who participate, are they being made employable? I do not think so.
If you look at the requirement for skilled workforce, by 2022 we need 3.3 crore people in the building and construction industry. We need 3.5 crore people in the auto and components industry. We need 10.3 crore people in the infrastructure industry. We need 1.3 crore people in healthcare and 1.8 crore people in transport and logistics. Just these industries alone amount to 20 crore skilled workforce that is required by 2020, which is not that far away. But this 4 to 8 crore households that are getting this benefit every year, how many of them are being trained to take up these jobs or have the opportunity of being skilled? I think that is a very low number if any at all. We need to see as to how we do actually start spending this money to skill people, not just employing them but making them employable in future. It is not just for Government work that may or may not be of any use to society but into the private sector, into the public sector or into various other sectors where they have skills and they will be employed to build value and wealth for the nation.
I think, the focus should be shifted. Rather than giving money for unemployment, which is what this Scheme is currently doing, it should be a bridge on how to move people from being unemployable to employable. The money should be diverted into skill development to ensure that this happen. A friend of mine talked about rights but I would also like to remind this House that along with rights every citizen also has responsibilities and being employable is definitely one of those responsibilities.
Thank you.
SHRI MEKAPATI RAJA MOHAN REDDY (NELLORE): Thank you, hon. Deputy Speaker, Sir, for giving me an opportunity to speak on this important flagship programme, the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act.
The MGNREGA, 2005 was notified on 7th September, 2005 and is operative in all districts of the country since 2008-09. The mandate of this Act is to provide 100 days of guaranteed wage employment in a financial year to every rural household whose adult members volunteer to do unskilled manual work. Now, the MGNREGA covers the entire country with the exception of districts that have hundred per cent urban population.
This flagship Programme was started with a good intention to prevent migration of unskilled labourers going elsewhere in search of their livelihood. It started giving good results.
I can say very confidently that in Andhra Pradesh, when the late Dr. Y. S. Rajashekar Reddy was alive, the poverty percentage in Andhra Pradesh had been reduced. The poverty percentage has been reduced from 29.5 per cent in 2004 to 9.5 per cent in 2014 because of MGNREGA and other welfare schemes started by the late Dr. Rajashekar Reddy such as providing rice at Rs. 2 a kilogram, fee reimbursement, housing, free power, etc. That is why, it is a good programme. This programme should not be diluted.
There is a demand from many State Governments to cover agriculture and allied works under this programme. I would like to request the Government of India to consider this demand of these States and include agriculture and allied works under this programme.
I would like to draw the attention of the Central Government to a very urgent and necessary suggestion to be incorporated in the permissible works. Many States like Andhra Pradesh, Odisha are prone to heavy floods, cyclones and drought conditions every now and then. Such natural calamities cause heavy losses to life, property, standing crops, roads, bridges and other infrastructure. I would appeal to the Government to bring re-building works, especially, in villages under the MGNREGA and the Government of India should bear hundred per cent cost in this regard. During the last eight years, around Rs. 1,80,000 crore have been paid as wages to the workers. The Budget provision under the MGNREGA in the current financial year 2014-15 is Rs. 34,000 crore.
As per reports, 54 per cent MGNREGA workers are women and close to 40 per cent are SCs and STs. Also, 90 per cent of the beneficiaries are either casual labourers or small and marginal farmers.
Actually, many developmental works and some permanent assets also have been created in Andhra Pradesh.
Considerable dry lands of the poor people have been brought under cultivation.
Horticulture plantations were implemented in CJF lands of SC, ST families, working in their own lands and planting horticulture plants by getting wage payments under MGNREGA, and thereby creating assets. As a result, the agricultural labourers have become farmers.
Almost in all upland areas, migration has been curtailed to a considerable level. The bargaining capacity of wage seeker has increased to the optimum level by providing maximum equal wage and thereby getting sustainable livelihood. The field channel and feeder channel works taken up under MGNREGA are providing support to the farmers with an enhanced yield of crops. The ground water table is enhanced by taking up of water harvesting structures such as percolation tanks, mini percolation tanks, check dams, irrigation tanks, dugout ponds, de-silting of percolation tanks, etc. Rural connectivity is a major development in every nook and corner of the village with the work taken up under MGNREGA such as earthen roads and gravel roads. The works under MGNREGA relating to levelling of low lying areas prevent the water stagnation and thereby providing healthy atmosphere to the rural people. By constructing IHHL, the sanitation and hygienic conditions of the rural poor have been increased. Digging of dumping yards under MGNREGA is also a major achievement to improve the sanitation measures in the rural areas.
In view of the above, MGNREGA Scheme is very much essential for providing job securities and thus food security to the rural poor. MGNREGA provides minimum livelihood to the poorest of the poor and also to curtail migration in rural areas.
There is an apprehension among the rural people that this Programme may be diluted. I would urge upon the Government to clear this doubt. The Government should continue this Programme and monitor well to create permanent assets in the villages. There are also reports that MGNREGA funds are being diverted to other purposes and also misused by unsocial elements in connivance with the implementing agencies by misusing the genuine cardholders. The Government should ensure to check all such irregularities for smooth functioning of this Scheme.
Thank you very much.
श्री प्रहलादसिंह पटेल (दमोह) : उपाध्यक्ष महोदय, जो चर्चा सदन में शुरू हुई है, अच्छा होता कि इस चर्चा में यह तय होता कि मनरेगा होना चाहिए या नहीं होना चाहिए तो शायद ज्यादा स्वतंत्र, निष्पक्ष और सार्थक बहस होती। मैं अखबारों की कटिंग देख रहा था कि नवंबर में दो बार खुद भारत सरकार के मंत्री ने कहा है कि मनरेगा पर ऐसा कोई संकट नहीं है तो यह बहस किस दिशा में जा रही है, इस पर मुझे आश्चर्य होता है। 5 सितंबर, 2005, मैं जानबूझकर यह आंकड़ा बोल रहा हूँ, इस दिन मनरेगा की घोषणा हुई थी। 2 फरवरी 2006 में दो सौ जिलों से यह योजना प्रारंभ हुई। 1 अप्रैल 2007 को फिर से इसमें 113 जिलों को जोड़ा गया। 15 मई 2007 को फिर 17 जिलों में विस्तार हुआ। 1 अप्रैल 2008 में सभी जिले और 646 ब्लॉक्स में यह योजना शुरू हो गई। आठ वर्षों में भारत सरकार ने 1 लाख 63 हजार 675 करोड़ रूपया टोटल खर्च किया है। 1657 करोड़ इसमें श्रम दिवस बने। पांच करोड़ परिवार इसमें शामिल हुए। एससी, एसटी मज़दूरों की जो हिस्सेदारी है वह 48 प्रतिशत है। जो महिलाओं की हिस्सेदारी है, उस पर भी किसी को कोई आश्चर्य नहीं है। मैं मध्य प्रदेश से आता हूँ। नियम था कि 33 फीसदी महिलाओं को काम मिलना चाहिए, मध्य प्रदेश में 43 फीसदी को मिला, जो कि 10 प्रतिशत ज्यादा है। जहां तक एससी मज़दूरों का सवाल है, 14 प्रतिशत राष्ट्रीय औसत है, मध्य प्रदेश में 28 प्रतिशत को काम मिला है। ऐसे ही जॉब कार्ड के बारे में भी हो सकता है। आंकड़ों को बताया जा सकता है, इसमें कोई दो मत नहीं है। लेकिन जरूरी यह है कि वास्तव में मनरेगा को चलना चाहिए या नहीं चलना चाहिए। सरकार पर आरोप लग रहा है, लेकिन सरकार ने तो अपनी बात कह दी है। इस देश में 13 करोड़ 19 लाख जॉब कार्ड हैं। लेकिन कुल मिला कर जो आंकड़ा सरकार का है, जो रिपोर्ट आई है, उसमें 6 करोड़ 58 लाख कुल जॉब कार्ड ही सक्रिय रहे हैं, यानि यह संख्या आधे से भी कम है। मुझे लगता है कि जिनके पास भी यह पैसा गया है, जिन राज्य सरकारों के पास पैसा गया है, क्या उसका मूल्याँकन नहीं होना चाहिए?
देश में जितनी भी रिपोर्ट्स आई हैं, उनमें यह आँकड़ा बड़ा साफ है कि मनरेगा का पैसा तो गया, लेकिन उससे रोजगार सृजित हुए या नहीं सृजित हुए। जो पैमाने रखे गए, अगर हमें सौ दिन का एक मजदूर को जॉब देना है, क्या वास्तव में किसी भी राज्य सरकार ने उस आंकड़े को प्राप्त किया है? यह सबसे अहम सवाल है। मुझे लगता है कि जो अधिसूचना भारत सरकार ने 21.07.2014 को जारी की है, उस अधिसूचना को मुद्दा बनाकर जिस प्रकार की बहस देश के सामने छेड़ने की कोशिश है, मुझे लगता है कि यह पूरी तरह से राजनीतिक बहस है। इसलिए मैंने शुरूआत इसी बात से की थी कि यह ज्यादा अच्छी बहस होती कि देश की इतनी बड़ी राशि मनरेगा के नाम पर सामने आयी। उसके क्या परिणाम निकले, क्या हमने लक्ष्य की प्राप्ति की है, तो मुझे लगता है कि यह ज्यादा सार्थक और निष्पक्ष बहस होती। लेकिन आरोप के आधार पर कहना, क्योंकि अगर भारत सरकार के मंत्री ने बयान दिया तो फिर उसके बाद बहस नहीं होनी चाहिए थी। लेकिन जो सबसे बड़ा कंपोनेंट था कि साठ प्रतिशत मजदूरों को मजदूरी जाएगी और चालीस प्रतिशत दूसरी जगह पर काम होगा, आँकड़ा कहता है, रिपोर्ट कहती है कि 77 फीसदी ऐसे अप्रशिक्षित मजदूरों को यह पैसा बाँट दिया गया, जिससे न तो कोई रोजगार सृजित हुआ, न कोई असेट तैयार हुआ, तो आखिर इस पैसे का दुरूपयोग ही तो हुआ है। अगर बाकी रिपोर्टों में हम इसमें देखें कि वास्तव में प्रति व्यक्ति औसत मजदूरी क्या है तो मेघालय में सबसे कम 153 रूपए मिलते हैं और हरियाणा में सर्वाधिक 236 रूपए मजदूरी है। लेकिन औसत मजदूरी की जो रिपोर्ट भारत सरकार की है, यह इस सरकार की रिपोर्ट नहीं है, यह पिछली रिपोर्ट है, उसमें 132 रूपए प्रति व्यक्ति से ज्यादा औसत मजदूरी नहीं है। इसके कारण बड़े साफ हैं, मैं ग्रामीण क्षेत्र से आता हूँ। क्या वास्तव में मजदूर काम करता है, क्या उसको मजदूरी महीने, दो महीने, तीन महीने में मिल जाती है? उसे समय पर मजदूरी नहीं मिलती है। यह सच्चाई है कि क्रियान्वयन का जो पक्ष है, वह राज्य सरकार का पक्ष है। अगर आप वहाँ विफल हैं, तो वकालत करते समय अपनी राज्य सरकार के तथ्य को रखिए। पश्चिम बंगाल के बंधु अभी यहाँ उपस्थित नहीं हैं। आँकड़े कहने में तो आपको बहुत सुविधा होगी, लेकिन जो जमीनी सच्चाई है, वह बिल्कुल भिन्न है। इस नाते जो औसत आँकड़ा है, वह मेघालय से भी कम है। जो सबसे कम, जो न्यूनतम मजदूरी है, उसे कम मजदूरी मनरेगा का मजदूर लेता है, यह रिपोर्ट ऐसा कह रही है।
मैं एक और बात कहना चाहता हूँ कि जब आप वर्ष 2013-14 की बात करते हैं, जो अधिसूचना सरकार लेकर आयी है। उन्होंने कहा कि जल-संरक्षण है, एस.सी., एस.टी. पर है, बाकी सिंचाई का पक्ष है, ग्रामीण सड़कें हैं, भूमि विकास के लिए काम करने की बात है। अगर सरकार यह कह रही हैं कि इस पैसे का उपयोग कृषि क्षेत्र में होना चाहिए तो इसमें बुराई क्या है? एक और आँकड़ा है, जो बहुत गंभीर आँकड़ा है, जिसका जिक्र हमारे मित्र कर रहे थे कि जो वैकल्पिक रोजगार है, इसके बाद जो मिलना चाहिए था, आठ साल में लाखों-करोड़ रूपए खर्च करने के बाद भी वैकल्पिक रोजगार मध्य प्रदेश में 2 प्रतिशत है, आध्र प्रदेश में 6 प्रतिशत है, राजस्थान में 14 प्रतिशत है। इसका मतलब है कि इतनी लम्बी मजदूरी के बावजूद भी, इतने सारे अवसर प्रदान करने के बाद भी आप कुशल मजदूर पैदा नहीं कर सके। वे वैकल्पिक रूप से दूसरी मजदूरी की तरफ प्रवृत्त नहीं हुए। क्या इस आंकड़े को नजरंदाज किया जाना चाहिए?
क्रियान्वयन की जो कमियाँ हैं, जो भारत सरकार ने अपनी रिपोर्ट में रखी हैं, जो जानकारी और जनभागीदारी की बात इस योजना के पीछे थी, जो गाँधी जी का विचार है, जो दीनदयाल जी का विचार है, जो लोहिया जी का विचार है, सरकार धन दे, लेकिन उसमें जनभागीदारी कितनी है। जितनी भी रिपोर्ट्स आयी हैं, चाहे वह राज्य की रिपोर्ट हो, चाहे केन्द्र की रिपोर्ट हो, वह रिपोर्ट आपके रहते आई है। उसमें साफ है कि एक तो जानकारी का बेहद अभाव है और जनभागीदारी की भीषण कमी है।
दूसरी बात, इसमें कार्यकर्ता, जो काम करने वाले लोग हैं, मजदूरों के अलावा जिनको यह काम कराना है, उन कर्मियों की इतनी कमी थी, जिसके मूल्याँकन को कभी किया नहीं जा सकता। तीसरी बात थी कि परिसंपत्तियों का निर्माण होगा, उसकी गुणवत्ता, उसका टिकाऊपन, उसकी उपयोगिता, उसके बारे में कहीं पर भी कुछ नहीं है। मैं जो आँकड़ा देखा रहा था, उसमें अधूरे काम दस लाख से ज्यादा हैं। कुल सोलह लाख उसमें पूरे हुए हैं और दस लाख अभी हुए नहीं हैं, वे ऑनगोइंग के नाम पर हैं। जो काम चल रहे हैं, उनकी संख्या मैं नहीं बता रहा हूँ। मुझे लगता है कि यह जो परिस्थिति है, इसके जिम्मेदार कौन हैं? मजदूरी के विलम्ब के बारे में मैंने पहले भी कहा था। यह विलम्ब अगर हुआ है तो आज भी सात-सात महीने से गाँव में मजदूरों को मजदूरी नहीं मिली है। अब आप कहेंगे कि क्या यह भारत सरकार का गुनाह है, पैसा तो पहले से आपके पास है, आपके पास एक्सेस मनी रही है, लेकिन अगर भुगतान नहीं हुआ है तो यह किस तत्र की कमी है? यह रिपोर्ट ने भी कहा है। जहाँ तक गलत आयोजना और निधियों की बात है, इसी बात पर सारे सदन को बहस करनी चाहिए कि जो राशि है, उसकी निधियों का हम किस प्रकार से मूल्यांकन करें, कोई प्लान हमारे पास है या नहीं है, इसकी चर्चा होनी चाहिए।
HON. DEPUTY SPEAKER: Just a minute please. The discussion will continue tomorrow.
The House stands adjourned to meet tomorrow, the 16th December, 2014 at 11 a.m. 18.00 hrs The Lok Sabha then adjourned till Eleven of the Clock on Tuesday, December 16, 2014/Agrahayana 25, 1936 (Saka).
* ग़्दृद्य् द्धड्ढहदृद्धड्डड्ढड्ड ** Lठ्ठत्ड्ड दृद ण्ड्ढ र्ठ्ठडथ्ड्ढ ठ्ठदड्ड ठ्ठद्म्दृ द्रथ्ठ्ठहड्ढड्ड त्द Lत्डद्धठ्ठद्धन्र्, च्ड्ढड्ढ ग़्दृ.Lच्र् 1230/16/14 * ग़्दृद्य् द्धड्ढहदृद्धड्डड्ढड्ड.
* Eदर्थ्त्द्म्ण् य्द्धठ्ठदथ्ठ्ठय्त्दृद दृढ ण्ड्ढ म्द्रड्ढड्ढहण् दृद्धश्र्त्दठ्ठथ्न्र् ड्डड्ढथ्त्ध्ड्ढद्धड्ढड्ड त्द ग्ठ्ठद्धठ्ठय्ण्त्.
* ग़्दृद्य् द्धड्ढहदृद्धड्डड्ढड्ड.
* र्द्धड्ढठ्ठय्ड्ढड्ड ठ्ठद्म् थ्ठ्ठत्ड्ड दृद ण्ड्ढ र्ठ्ठडथ्ड्ढ.
* ग़्दृद्य् द्धड्ढहदृद्धड्डड्ढड्ड.
* Eदर्थ्त्द्म्ण् य्द्धठ्ठदथ्ठ्ठय्त्दृद दृढ ण्ड्ढ म्द्रड्ढड्ढहण् दृद्धश्र्त्दठ्ठथ्न्र् ड्डड्ढथ्त्ध्ड्ढद्धड्ढड्ड त्द र्ड्ढथ्द्वर्द्व.