It’ll work only if it’s fine tuned

The national rural employment guarantee law has been the subject of animated discussion in the media for the last several months now. Compar...

The national rural employment guarantee law has been the subject of animated discussion in the media for the last several months now. Comparisons were drawn between this new intervention and other employment schemes which have been implemented by the government for the last five decades. Now that the government is working to actualise it, we need to look at ways to make it as effective and productive as possible.

It is true that several schemes of rural and partial urban employment have been implemented by the government. But the major difference between this initiative and the earlier schemes of employment is the statutory entitlement to work that is now legally provided. What you are promised in the present act is employment to one person from each family residing in rural India for a period of one hundred days in a year. This will translate into one person in each of the 14 crore rural families in the country getting work for 100 days. Which means means additional employment for 14 crore people in India.

However, there is a lot of scepticism that has has surrounded the implementation of this act. To begin with there are those who say that the investment into the scheme is something that the country just cannot afford. I do not agree with this. From our experience in Maharashtra, we know that even if the scheme is funded through deficit financing, it will not lead to inflationary pressure. This is because the gestation period in the public works in rural areas is the shortest.

Because the moment you put this money in works like soil and water conservation, into watershed, and afforestation, you see its productive impact in the next two to three years, when the benefits begin to flow. Once you save soil, the productivity of land increases; if you protect water more productive irrigation will be available; if you increase the biomass, you will give food, fodder and fuel security, which plays a key role in removing under-nutrition and poverty.

The other argument is that schemes like this one are prone to inefficiency and corruption. As a member of the review committee of the Maharashtra Employment Guarantee Scheme, I had suggested three ways to curtail corruption. The first measure was that all payments should be made through banks. The next is that identity cards should be issued to all workers. The third measure that I would advocate is to ensure that the names of the beneficiaries be noted on a gram panchayat board.

A committee of workers should be formed, and payment should be made in the presence of a member of this committee. The members of this should then be selected (or elected) by the beneficiaries themselves. A public reading of progress report of work is also advisable. Such measures — which provide important checks and balances — would contribute to making the entire process more transparent and accountable.

The need of Rural India today is employment and water and the National Rural Employment Guarantee legislation is geared towards providing both. It is designed to create rural infrastructure in terms of watershed projects, soil and water conservation, afforestation, and so on, all of which will improve and enhance agricultural productivity. Therefore, the basic objective of the scheme is to create durable social assets.

Story continues below this ad

However, to make this scheme a reality we should be able to take everyone along with us. This can be done by ensuring transparency in the implementation of the scheme. Along with the Right to Work, we should also speak about the Right to Information. If we combine these two approaches successfully, we would be able to tackle large scale corruption to a great extent.

The writer is a noted economist and member of the Maharashtra State Planning Board. He headed the Eight Plan Study Group on ‘Agriculture, Horticulture, and Cooperation’