Parliament Winter Session | Contentious 'VB-G RAM G Bill 2025' tabled in Lok Sabha amidst Opposition protest

New Delhi: The contentious ‘VB-G RAM G Bill, 2025’ that replaces MGNREGA was introduced in Lok Sabha on Tuesday, amid strong objections from the Opposition over the government's decision to “remove” the name of Mahatma Gandhi from the rural job guarantee law, changing it from a demand-driven to supply-driven scheme and “squeezing” states by putting 40 per cent of expenditure on them.

Introducing the Bill, Rural Development Minister Shivraj Singh Chouhan rejected charges insisting that the Modi government has done more for rural development than any previous government.

He also said the government has not weakened the scheme as it has increased the work days from 100 to 125 days.

“Mahatma Gandhi resides in our hearts…Congress has brought MGNREGA and spent Rs 2.13 lakh crore but under the Modi government, we have spent over Rs 8 lakh crore for the poor’s welfare…Congress has changed the name of Jawahar Rozgar Yojana. Does it mean insult to Nehru?...Lord Ram is in our every breath. Why are they troubled by ‘G RAM G’? Mahatma Gandhi dreamt of Ram Rajya and through the poor’s welfare, we are achieving that,” he said.

Opposition MPs Priyanka Gandhi Vadra, TR Baalu, KC Venugopal, Dharmendra Yadav, Shashi Tharoor, N K Premachandran and Saugata Ray raised objection at the introduction stage itself citing a variety of reasons. Outside, the Opposition MPs held a march to Gandhi Statue in Parliament House complex after 'The Viksit Bharat Guarantee for Rozgar and Ajeevika Mission (Gramin) (VB-G RAM G) Bill, 2025' was introduced in the Lower House.

Opposition MPs demanded that the Bill be sent to a Standing Committee for further Parliamentary scrutiny.

Recalling the bipartisan support for MGNREGA attracted in Parliament, Priyanka claimed that the new Bill weakens the rural job guarantee scheme, which was demand-driven, while the new draft makes it supply-driven, impacting the rural economy.

She also referred to the change in the funding pattern with states now being proposed to bear the burden of 40% expenditure. Objecting to the change in name and removal of mention of Mahatma Gandhi, she said, she does not understand the obsession with changing names of schemes.

“The bill should not be passed in haste…Mahatma Gandhi was not from my family, but he was like a member of my family. This is the emotion of the entire nation. This bill should be sent to the Standing Committee for further deliberations. No bill should be tabled and passed because of someone's obsession and prejudice,” she said.

Senior Congress MP KC Venugopal warned Chouhan that he would be remembered as the Minister who removed the name of Mahatma Gandhi from the Bill.

Calling the removal of the Mahatma's name a “deeply regrettable and retrograde step” for the nation and for its commitment to the welfare of its most vulnerable citizens, Tharoor said this was “not merely an administrative tweak but an assault on the very spirit and philosophical foundation of this crucial programme”.

He said Mahatma Gandhi’s vision of Ram Rajya was "never a purely political project" as it was a "socio-economic blueprint rooted in the empowerment of villages" and his unwavering faith in Gram Swaraj was central to that vision.

"We must also seriously question the financial restructuring proposed in the bill. The proposal to impose 40% of the financial burden directly on state governments is not merely fiscally irresponsible and it is a measure that threatens to make the entire programme unviable," he said.

RSP's Premachandran said that the 2005 Act provides statutory right to work, but the tweaked Bill does not provide such a guarantee. He also questioned the drafting of Schedule in the Bill. He also claimed that there would be loss of jobs.