BJP slams Sonia Gandhi’s claims on VB-G RAM G Act

The BJP on Monday termed Congress leader Sonia Gandhi’s claims about the VB-G RAM G Act a “flight of political fancy” and alleged that her arguments against the law rest on “mischaracterisations, selective memory and outright falsehoods”.

The Viksit Bharat Guarantee for Rozgar and Ajeevika Mission (Gramin) (VB-G RAM G) Bill, which replaces the MGNREGA, became an Act with President Droupadi Murmu’s assent on Sunday.

Parliament passed the bill during its just-concluded Winter Session last week, amid vociferous protests by the opposition in both Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha.

Criticising the law, Gandhi said the “demolition” of the historic Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (MGNREGA) will have catastrophic consequences for crores of people across rural India and called upon all to unite and safeguard the rights that protect everyone.

In an editorial in The Hindu titled “The bulldozed demolition of MGNREGA,” the Congress parliamentary party chairperson also said the “death” of MGNREGA is a collective failure.

Hitting back, BJP IT department head Amit Malviya said on social media, “Sonia Gandhi’s recent article on MGNREGA reads less like a serious engagement with law or data and more like a flight of political fancy.”

“It is evident that she has not read the VB-G RAM G Act, because her arguments rest on mischaracterisations, selective memory, and outright falsehoods,” he charged. In a point-by-point rebuttal, the BJP leader alleged that Gandhi in her article “romanticised” the origins of MGNREGA, claiming that it emerged from widespread consultation, but it’s “far from the truth.”

“MGNREGA was conceived and driven by the National Advisory Council — an unelected executive body that functioned, in effect, as a super-cabinet. So dominant was its role that (then) Prime Minister Manmohan Singh was frequently derided as a ‘super cabinet secretary’ under Sonia Gandhi’s NAC,” he alleged.

It’s “historical revisionism” with Gandhi presenting this process now as participatory democracy, he charged.

Dismissing herclaims that demand-based employment is being dismantled, thereby destroying the employment guarantee itself, Malviya asserted that the legal right to employment remains untouched under the VB G RAM G Act.

“What has changed is the budgeting framework -- from an open-ended, reactive model to a norm-based system, which is how virtually all government schemes function,” he said.

“Far from weakening the guarantee, employment has been strengthened from 100 days to 125 days. In FY 2024-25, planned allocations closely tracked actual demand, demonstrating that disciplined planning works,” he said.

The BJP leader said Soina Gandhi’s argument that MGNREGA remains the central pillar of rural survival and that the new law will suppress rural wage growth ignores how rural India has changed. While MGNREGA did play a role in alleviating distress, it has not kept pace with today’s rural realities, he claimed.

“NABARD and MPCE data show that 80 per cent of rural households report higher consumption, 42.2 per cent report higher incomes and 58.3 per cent now rely exclusively on formal credit,” Malviya said.

“MGNREGA today functions as a fallback safety net, not as the defining feature of rural livelihoods,” he said, and termed as “equally misleading” Gandhi’s claim that the poorest will be abandoned if the old framework changes. “Rural poverty has fallen sharply from 25.7 per cent to 4.86 per cent. MSME credit has tripled since 2014, enabling self-employment and non-farm livelihoods.

“Public policy cannot be frozen in the conditions of 2005 when India has demonstrably moved forward,” he added.

The BJP leader also dismissed as “false” the allegation that the Centre is shifting the financial burden to states, moving from a supposed 90:10 model to 60:40 under the VB-G RAM G Act.

“MGNREGA was never funded at 90 per cent by the Centre in practice. States already bore 25 per cent of material costs, major administrative expenses, and 100 per cent of unemployment allowance, often without predictability or transparency,” he said.

The new model simply formalises and rationalises funding, making states “equal partners” rather than “passive implementers of top-down mandates,” the BJP leader said. Noting that Gandhi objected to the 60-day work restriction, portraying it as an assault on year-round employment, Malviya said that, in reality, this period is “aggregated, flexible, and state-notified -- not a blanket ban.”

It protects agricultural operations during sowing and harvest, prevents labour shortages, allows workers to earn higher seasonal farm wages, and still expands the overall employment guarantee to 125 days under the VG-G RAM G Act, he said.

Malviya said Gandhi’s concern that Panchayats and Gram Sabhas are being weakened is “similarly misplaced.”

Under the VB-G RAM G Act, all works originate from Viksit Gram Panchayat Plans approved by Gram Sabhas, he said, adding, “What is being dismantled is fragmentation and opacity, not decentralisation.”

“The bottom line is clear. This is not demolition, it is overdue repair. The real choice is not between compassion and reform, but between paper guarantees that under-deliver and a modern framework that actually works,” he said.

Malviya accused Gandhi of ignoring systemic failures that plagued MGNREGA for years.

“Rs 193.67 crore misappropriated in 2024-25 alone, with recovery of barely 5.32 per cent; fake works existing only on paper; machinery replacing labour; and digital attendance systems bypassed across 23 states.” These were not “minor lapses” but “deep structural flaws,” he said.

Despite these challenges, Malviya said, the reforms under the Modi government have delivered “measurable gains.”

“Between FY 2013-14 and FY 2025-26, women’s participation rose from 48 per cent to 56.74 per cent; Aadhaar-seeded active workers increased from 76 lakh to 12.11 crore; workers on APBS (Aadhaar Payment Bridge System) grew from zero to 11.93 crore; geo-tagged assets expanded from none to over 6.44 crore; and e-payments surged from 37 per cent to 99.99 per cent,” he added.

It is evident that she has not read the VB-G RAM G Act, because her arguments rest on mischaracterisations, selective memory, and outright falsehoods

 Amit Malviya, BJP IT department head