NewKerala.com

Stalin Slams EPS: Why His 'Soft Stand' on MGNREGS Change Raises Alarms

Tamil Nadu Chief Minister M.K. Stalin has launched a sharp attack on AIADMK leader Edappadi K. Palaniswami. He accuses EPS of adopting a muted and ambiguous stance on significant changes to the MGNREGS scheme from the Centre. Stalin argues this soft approach is to avoid antagonising Delhi, not to defend Tamil Nadu's rural poor. He further criticises a proposed restructuring of the scheme, warning it would shift the financial burden to states.

Key Points: Stalin Criticises EPS Muted Stance on MGNREGS Changes

  • Stalin alleges EPS softened criticism of Centre to stay in its good books
  • Claims MGNREGS work increase exists only on paper, not in reality
  • Accuses Centre of penalising Tamil Nadu for its poverty reduction success
  • Warns proposed VBGRAMG shift would burden states, undermine scheme's core guarantee
3 min read

'Avoiding confrontation with Centre': Stalin slams EPS for 'soft stand' on MGNREGS change

Tamil Nadu CM Stalin accuses AIADMK's EPS of a soft stance on MGNREGS changes to avoid confrontation with the Centre, alleging harm to rural poor.

"The Opposition’s tone was deliberately softened to avoid antagonising Delhi. - M.K. Stalin"

Chennai, Dec 18

Tamil Nadu Chief Minister M.K. Stalin on Thursday levelled a strong criticism at AIADMK leader Edappadi K. Palaniswami (EPS), accusing him of adopting a muted and ambiguous stance on the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme (MGNREGS), which faces significant policy changes from the Centre.

In a statement, Stalin said the AIADMK leader’s recent comments on MGNREGS lacked conviction and clarity, suggesting that EPS was more focused on staying in the good books of the Union government than defending the interests of Tamil Nadu’s rural poor.

He alleged that the Opposition’s tone was deliberately softened to avoid antagonising Delhi.

Stalin said that EPS had claimed that the MGNREGS person-days had been increased from 100 to 125, but countered that the supposed increase exists "only on paper" and does not reflect the ground reality.

The Chief Minister argued that the actual allocation of work had instead been reduced, which has affected thousands of beneficiaries in the state, as he questioned whether EPS was turning a blind eye to the challenges being faced by rural labourers who depend on the scheme.

According to the Chief Minister, Tamil Nadu is being unfairly "penalised for its achievements", including its relatively better record in poverty reduction and population control.

He drew parallels to the reported discussions on reducing parliamentary constituencies in states with successful population management, suggesting that the Centre’s approach was both counterproductive and discriminatory.

Stalin further accused the AIADMK leader of silence on the Union government’s proposed transformation of MGNREGS into VBGRAMG — the Viksit Bharat Guarantee for Rozgar and Ajeevika Mission – Gramin — alleging that the restructuring is aimed at dismantling the core guarantees of the rural employment scheme.

He criticised what he described as a move to shift the financial burden of employment guarantees from the Centre to the state governments. Such a shift, he argued, would undermine the foundational principle of MGNREGS, which is meant to ensure a central safety net for rural labourers.

Stalin questioned why EPS had not publicly opposed this shift when the implications for Tamil Nadu could be severe. Issuing a pointed challenge, Stalin asked whether Palaniswami would openly defend and endorse the Centre’s plan if he believed it to be right, stating that the AIADMK leader appeared reluctant to voice criticism due to his political alignment with the BJP.

The Chief Minister’s remarks mark yet another flashpoint between the ruling DMK and the AIADMK, with MGNREGS now emerging as a key battleground in their ongoing exchanges on federal rights, welfare schemes, and Centre–state relations.

- IANS

Share this article:

Reader Comments

R
Rohit P
Typical political blame game before elections. Both DMK and AIADMK have their own agendas. The real question is, who will ensure the workers get their 100 days of work? That's what matters, not this war of words.
A
Arjun K
Stalin makes a valid point about being penalized for success. It's unfair if states that control population and reduce poverty get fewer funds. This "Viksit Bharat" rename sounds like a way to dilute the scheme's guarantee. Centre needs to clarify.
S
Sarah B
While I respect the need for strong opposition, some of the language feels overly confrontational. A more collaborative approach between state and centre might yield better results for the rural poor than constant accusations. Just a thought.
K
Karthik V
The financial burden shifting to states is a disaster waiting to happen. Many states are already cash-strapped. MGNREGS is a central law for a reason - it's a national commitment. This VBGRAMG sounds like a backdoor way to weaken it. EPS's silence is indeed telling.
M
Meera T
As someone from a rural background, I've seen MGNREGS help during lean seasons. "Increase only on paper" is the real story. We need leaders who fight for the scheme's spirit, not just use it for politics. Hope both sides remember the people they serve.

We welcome thoughtful discussions from our readers. Please keep comments respectful and on-topic.

Leave a Comment

Minimum 50 characters 0/50