The first meeting of the newly-reconstituted Central Employment Guarantee Council last week, meant to oversee the National Rural Employment Guarantee Programme, saw two prominent members, Jean Drèze and Aruna Roy, object to various new ideas of the government, beginning with the one of using it to build Bharat Nirman Rajiv Gandhi Seva Kendras, meant to serve as offices for panchayats.
They also opposed a proposal for large-scale deployment of non-government organisations (NGOs) for implementation of NREGS. In a formal letter to Union rural development minister C P Joshi, who chaired the meeting, the duo also expressed “strong reservations” about some of the proposed new works sought to be taken up under the NREGA.
“For example, we feel that the construction of Bharat Nirman Rajiv Gandhi Sewa Kendra, if desirable at all, should be done separately from NREGS. Similarly, we feel that engaging “barefoot engineers”, crèche workers, etc should not be done in the form of casual employment under NREGS,’’ they said in the letter.
Speaking to Bsuiness Standard, Roy said using workers from NREGP to build these centres would mean taking funds for the material component of the buildings. In big projects, the share of workers can shrink to 20 per cent and it wouldmean a huge drain on NREGP funds, she said.
All the projects sought to be included under NREGP should be within the list of permissible works under the scheme and all transparency and safeguards must apply, said the duo.
They also demanded that the government abide by its own promise to guarantee a wage rate of at least Rs 100 a day in real terms (ie indexed to the price level).
They also objected to the “confidentiality’’ clause in the proposed appointment of ombudsmen for NREGS. Under this clause, information submitted to the ombudsman is not to be disclosed. The ombudsman also does not have power to impose penalties and the states have powers to remove the ombudsmen, thus, making them weak.
The members have also objected to the suggestion that only “permanent staff should be deployed for NREGA”, saying this would create the risk of posts remaining vacant. They said while programme officers could be permanent, gram rozgar sevaks need not be.
The council also discussed the concept of ‘Lok Sevaks’, involving NGOs on a large scale in the implementation of NREGS. In their note to the government, Roy and Drèze said the “conceptual framework” for lok sevaks circulated with the agenda today was “very weak and problematic”. “This proposal needs a great deal of further thought and discussion, within and outside the council,” the two members said.
As for sub-contracting NREGP work to NGOs or finan cing them to run the Lok Sevak service, Roy said there was “no way to ensure accountability in such a thing”.
Drèze and she also appealed for urgent measures to revamp the scheme in the context of the drought situation, in order to ensure a guaranteed Rs 100 daily wage, lifting the cap on 100 days of work per year and taking measures to ensure prompt payment of wages and compensation for delays.
