There was a debate for about 14 hours on the Viksit Bharat-G RAM G (Gramin Rozgar and Ajeevika Mission) Amendment Bill in the Lok Sabha yesterday on Wednesday. During the debate, the opposition demanded that the proposed bill be sent to a standing committee, while the ruling BJP supported the bill and called it an important step towards achieving the vision of a developed India by 2047. He also targeted Congress fiercely.
98 MPs took part in the debate held in the Lok Sabha yesterday regarding the bill. Agriculture and Rural Development Minister Shivraj Singh Chauhan will respond to the debate on Thursday. At the same time, the opposition has become aggressive regarding changing the name of MNREGA. Many constituent parties of the India Alliance will protest against this bill in the Parliament complex on Thursday morning.
Sources say that these MPs will protest near the statue of Mahatma Gandhi in the Parliament complex at 10.15 am. Regarding the protest, a meeting of opposition parties was called in the chamber of Parliament House of Leader of Opposition in Rajya Sabha Mallikarjun Kharge. Trinamool Congress did not attend this meeting.
This is where the downfall of Modi government begins: Premchandran
Taking part in the debate, Azad Samaj Party (Kanshi Ram) leader and MP Chandrashekhar said that if the government had to change the name of Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (MNREGA), then why was it not named after Babasaheb Ambedkar. Its name could also have been Jai Bhim Bill. He also warned that the public will hold accountable those who play with the honor of great men.
Criticizing the name change, RSP leader NK Premachandran claimed that this bill is the beginning of the downfall of the Modi government at the Centre. No one will accept that Mahatma Gandhi’s name should be removed from any scheme.
This is an insult to Mahatma Gandhi: MP Rajkumar Rot
Taking part in the debate, Independent MP from Jammu and Kashmir Abdul Rashid Sheikh accused the Bharatiya Janata Party leaders of being false devotees of Lord Ram and said that those who want to break Jammu and Kashmir cannot be true Ram devotees. Similarly, Congress leader Imran Masood criticized the BJP government and said that Lord Ram had honored the poor by eating false berries of Sabri, but this government is insulting the poor by changing MNREGA.
Talking about the insult to the Father of the Nation, Bharatiya Adivasi Party MP Rajkumar Roat alleged that with the abolition of MNREGA, the government is insulting Mahatma Gandhi.
On the other hand, BJP MPs Anurag Thakur and Nishikant Dubey supported the bill, considering it a major step towards a developed India, and launched a scathing attack on the Congress over the implementation of MGNREGA and alleged corruption.
Modi government focuses on delivery: Thakur
Praising the reforms of the new bill, Anurag Thakur said, “This proposed law reflects the long-standing commitment of PM Narendra Modi’s government towards the economically and socially marginalized people, including farmers, labourers, women and socially deprived communities.” Attacking the Congress, he said the opposition focuses on naming while the Modi government focuses on delivery.
Supporting the bill through debate, BJP MP Nishikant Dubey called it “very important” and said the presence of senior leaders shows the seriousness of the government. He also accused Congress of misleading the public by taking the name of the Constitution and Mahatma Gandhi.
Referring to Articles 49 and 51(A) of the Constitution, Dubey argued that national personalities like the President, Vice President and Father of the Nation should not be used for political purposes. “Have you ever seen any scheme in the name of the President or the Vice President? How can there be a scheme in the name of the Father of the Nation?” he asked. He alleged that Congress is worried because strict mechanisms will be put in place under the new bill to curb corruption. “Congress is also nervous because it will not be able to earn money in the name of Mahatma Gandhi.”
Bill should be sent to Standing Committee: MP Suresh
He said, “The new bill is an important step towards accountability, transparency and dignity of labor in rural India. There is a saying, a thief should go by theft, not by Tumba ferry, and on the contrary, the thief should scold the Kotwal. Congress only promotes corruption. We will end all theft through this law.”
Demanding that the bill be sent to the Standing Committee, Congress MP K Suresh said, “The long debate and seriousness itself underlines the importance of this law. This is an important bill, that is why the House discussed it for so long. More than 98 MPs from both sides took part in this debate. The opposition party is strongly opposing it. The INDIA alliance of opposition parties has demanded that this bill be sent to the Standing Committee.”
So PM Modi should bring back Nirav Modi: Aujla
Another Congress MP Vamsi Krishna Gaddam said that the government’s intentions were becoming clear through its “unnecessary decisions”. We all in the country love Mahatma Gandhi, except BJP. We feel sad that Mahatma Gandhi’s name is being removed from this scheme. Congress MP Praniti Shinde accused the Modi government of passing the law in a hurry.
Read this also – What is wrong in this? Union Minister Giriraj defended CM Nitish after pulling his hijab, gave this reason
Criticizing the inclusion of states in the new bill, Congress MP Gurjit Singh Aujla said that this bill not only changes the name of the scheme but also puts financial burden on the state governments. He also said that he is trying to tell the country that Modi has brought back Ram. If PM Modi is so capable, then he should bring back Nirav Modi.”
Bill not to please the opposition: Bommai
Meanwhile, BJP MP Jagdambika Pal supported and said that this bill turns PM Modi’s vision of developed India into reality. The proposed law goes much further than the existing MNREGA, as it also guarantees 125 days of employment, compared to 100 days under the current scheme.
BJP MP Basavaraj S. Bommai said that this law has not been made to please the opposition, but to meet the changing needs of rural India. This is for the development of rural people. Circumstances have changed, and now people’s needs have also changed. After several complaints of misuse of funds, we are reviewing the entire process.
Leave a Reply