SHRI PRIYARANJAN DASMUNSI (CONTD.): If this becomes the situation, we will have to rethink what kind of a Bill we can bring forward from the Cabinet, because I cannot insult the House and the Standing Committee's collective observation and the majority's recommendations because the Standing Committee rules say that it is not mandatory; the Government can accept as much as possible. And if the hon. Minister accepts a few of the changes, it is very reasonable and gracious of him. But I do not know of any Government which accepts even the semicolons, full stops of every amendment. Sir, it is very unfortunate and embarrassing for us. I concede that we will take it back to the Cabinet and if we feel it proper, we will come back to the House. Otherwise, let the people of Pondicherry decide what should be the fate of this institution.


DR. K. MALAISAMY (TAMIL NADU): Mr. Vice-Chairman, Sir, at the outset, I hasten to appreciate the opening batsman, Mr. Narayanasamy, who has been very forthright in culling out the various lapses in the implementation of the scheme. In fact, he has been pointing out in great details the various lapses which are taking place in various States. My only grievance against him is that he is able to find out only a few States like Orissa, Madhya Pradesh which are not UPA ruled States. In other States also, including Tamil Nadu, whatever may be the lapses, he has been calling a spade a spade. Sir, as far as Tamil Nadu is concerned, I have got a fair knowledge about Tamil Nadu and I could see that there is a lot of misuse of funds and diversion of funds. Secondly, there is abuse of power. Thirdly, there is maladministration leading to large-scale corruption. Sir, the entire House knows that in a set up like ours, the political executives are on one side and the bureaucracy on the other. They put their heads together to run the administration. The political executives want to know what to do. They can say that much. How to do is the function of the bureaucracy. So, what to do, how to do should be brought together to do all these things. This is how we look at it. Sir, to be honest with you, in Tamil Nadu, I have got practical experience as to what is going on under a scheme. I mean they have given a lot of money. As Mr. Narayanasamy has rightly mentioned, the Government of India has pumped in a lot of money into the States. But it is totally being misused. Sir, I have got concrete cases. Now, this is basically a scheme meant for employment; this is an employment guarantee scheme, under which they have to provide employment to the eligible people. How do they select the beneficiaries? They select the beneficiaries, particularly belonging to the... (Interruptions) No interruptions, please.

THE VICE-CHAIRMAN (PROF. P.J. KURIEN): I will give you the time. (Interruptions) No, no. I will give you the time later. Are you yielding, Dr. Malaisamy?

DR. K. MALAISAMY: No, Sir. (Interruptions)

THE VICE-CHAIRMAN: He is not yielding. (Interruptions) Don't do it now. I will give you the time, if you want. Sit down. (Interruptions) Let him say. You can reply. (Interruptions) Mr. Siva, sit down please. (Interruptions) What do you want? Sit down please. He will defend himself. (Interruptions)

SHRI V. NARAYANASAMY: Sir, about Chhattisgarh and Orissa, I cited records. Let him come with the documents and then ..(Interruptions)..

THE VICE-CHAIRMAN (PROF. P.J. KURIEN): You may reply...(Interruptions).. You can reply in the same manner. Please sit down.

DR. K. MALAISAMY: I am saying what Mr. Narayanasamy has culled out. ...(Interruptions)...

THE VICE-CHAIRMAN: Mr. Narayanasamy, please.

DR. K. MALAISAMY: Whether it happens in Puducherry, in Tamil Nadu, in Orissa, in Uttar Pradesh, it is happening.

THE VICE-CHAIRMAN: Mr. Malaisamy, you may please address the Chair.

DR. K. MALAISAMY: Sir, I am sorry to say that the selection of beneficiaries has been restricted to only those belonging to the Ruling Party. Secondly, this is basically a scheme meant for employment guarantee. Those who need employment must be provided employment. Unfortunately, as rightly said by Mr. Narayanasamy, they hire big machines for earthwork such as desilting of channels, desilting of tanks and construction of channels. All this is being done, not by manual labour, but through machines. Thus, the whole spirit of this scheme has been defeated. (Contd. by 3z/hk)


DR. K. MALAISAMY (TAMIL NADU): Sir, the records are manipulated. Fourthly, Sir, as a Member of the Public Accounts Committee, I got the practical knowledge. There is an Audit Report from Comptroller and Auditor General. They have specifically pointed out how this Scheme has been badly mismanaged. Audit paras are there. It has come to the notice of the Public Accounts Committee. What I am trying to say is, Sir, that there is mal-administration, misuse of funds, diversion of funds, corruption, etc. Now they have given an answer today that this Scheme is being extended from April onwards through the length and breadth of the country. What I am trying to say is that this is the Government money and it is the taxpayers' money. The money should be used for the larger interests of the public. In such a situation, what to do? According to Shri Narayanasamy and others, they are doing Government functions and diverting the funds. Sir, I am bringing it to the notice of the Chair that for conducting Government's functions, the Opposition Party MLAs and MPs are not invited at all. Their names never find any place in invitations. In spite of the fact that there is specific instruction ..(Interruptions)..

THE VICE-CHAIRMAN (PROF. P.J. KURIEN): Mr. Narayanasamy, please sit down. ..(Interruptions).. Mr. Narayanasamy, please, don't interfere like this. ..(Interruptions)..

DR. K. MALAISAMY: Sir, the Government of India's instructions are very clear; State Governments' instructions are very clear, irrespective of the fact whether they belong to the ruling party or not, concerned MPs and MLAs should be invited. But they are never allowed to participate. What I am trying to say is ..(Interruptions)..

SHRI TIRUCHI SIVA: No, Sir. It is not relevant. ..(Interruptions).. It is not relevant. ..(Interruptions)..

THE VICE-CHAIRMAN (PROF. P.J. KURIEN): I will decide that. I am in the Chair. You please sit down. ..(Interruptions)..

SHRI TIRUCHI SIVA: He cannot ..(Interruptions)..

THE VICE-CHAIRMAN: That is my job to decide. ..(Interruptions).. Please sit down. ..(Interruptions).. Please sit down. ..(Interruptions).. I will decide. ..(Interruptions).. Are you sitting in the Chair? ..(Interruptions).. Sit down. ..(Interruptions).. I will decide. ..(Interruptions)..

SHRI TIRUCHI SIVA: I have a point of order. ..(Interruptions).. I have a point of order. ..(Interruptions)..

THE VICE-CHAIRMAN (PROF. P.J. KURIEN): There is no point of order. ..(Interruptions).. I will give you a chance, then you can reply. ..(Interruptions).. Don't interrupt like this. ..(Interruptions)..

SHRI TIRUCHI SIVA: Why no point of order? ..(Interruptions)..

THE VICE-CHAIRMAN: Under what rule? Quote the rule.

SHRI TIRUCHI SIVA: Under Rule 238.

DR. K. MALAISAMY: We will see that Mr. Siva is not able to speak hereafter at all. When I am ..(Interruptions)..

SHRI TIRUCHI SIVA: Let me finish. I have a point of order.

THE VICE-CHAIRMAN: Let him speak. He has a point of order.

SHRI TIRUCHI SIVA: My point is: It is not relevant to the discussion that is going on now.

THE VICE-CHAIRMAN: Who is to decide whether it is relevant or not? ..(Interruptions)..

SHRI TIRUCHI SIVA: I am submitting it to you, Sir. ..(Interruptions).. I am submitting it to you, Sir. ..(Interruptions)..

THE VICE-CHAIRMAN: You should say point of order, if there is any violation of rule. Is there any violation of rule?

SHRI TIRUCHI SIVA: There is 'irrelevance'.

THE VICE-CHAIRMAN: No. Irrelevance is something else. Is there violation of rule?

SHRI TIRUCHI SIVA: Irrelevance. ..(Interruptions)..

THE VICE-CHAIRMAN: That is for me to decide whether it is relevant or not. ..(Interruptions).. Sit down, please. ..(Interruptions)..

SHRI TIRUCHI SIVA: I don't have any grudges what he is saying. But that is not related with this discussion.

THE VICE-CHAIRMAN (PROF. P.J. KURIEN): Now, you have made your point of order. Now, please sit down. ..(Interruptions).. He is only saying that in these functions opposition parties are not invited. That is his opinion or that is his experience. Why shouldn't he say that? ..(Interruptions).. That is all. ..(Interruptions)..

DR. K. MALAISAMY: Sir, the point is ..(Interruptions)..

THE VICE-CHAIRMAN: Your time is getting over, so please conclude. ..(Interruptions).. Come to point. ..(Interruptions)..

DR. K. MALAISAMY: Sir, you will be very considerate and you are very ..(Interruptions)..

THE VICE-CHAIRMAN: That is relevant.

DR. K. MALAISAMY: Sir, why the opposition party functionaries or opposition party MLAs are not invited, it has got a ..(Interruptions)..

THE VICE-CHAIRMAN: Come to the next point. You are repeating.

DR. K. MALAISAMY: Because in a matter like this, if we happen to be present in that function, we will certainly point out dereliction and it will be embarrassing for them. (Contd. by 4a/KSK)


DR. K. MALAISAMY (CONTD): It will be embarrassing for them. That is why, they deliberately avoid the presence of the Opposition MLA's and MPs. This is despite the fact that there is specific instruction from the Government of Tamil Nadu.

THE VICE-CHAIRMAN: Now, you have to conclude. You can take only one more minute. Your time is six minutes and you have taken nine minutes.

DR. K. MALAISAMY: Sir, the Tamil Nadu Government's Public Secretary has conveyed the copy of the G.O., in which it is stated as to how the MP's and MLA's should be invited. They are consciously violating the instructions.

THE VICE-CHAIRMAN (PROF. P.J. KURIEN): Now, please, conclude.


THE VICE-CHAIRMAN: No, you have taken nine minutes instead of six.

DR. K. MALAISAMY: As far the Minister is concerned, I have got great respect for him because when we were in Lok Sabha, we used to sit together. So, I know him so well and I cannot afford to be critical about him. By virtue of his word power and vocabulary, he can talk nicely, but the point is when he introduces a scheme, he should inform as to what is the scheme, how it is going to be implemented, what are the systems, who are the persons responsible, etc. They have not talked of what is transparency, what is the accountability...

THE VICE-CHAIRMAN: Now, please, conclude.

DR. K. MALAISAMY: Whether transparency is ensured, or accountability is ensured.

THE VICE-CHAIRMAN: Please, conclude.

DR. K. MALAISAMY: Now, Sir, I am coming to the real point.

THE VICE-CHAIRMAN: No. Your Party's time is six minutes. You have taken eleven minutes.

DR. K. MALAISAMY: Sir, my time has been taken away unnecessarily. I am making a valuable suggestion to the Government. I would like to ask a specific question from hon. Minister whether there is a system failure or human failure, who are in charge of this scheme.

THE VICE-CHAIRMAN: Now, that is enough.

DR. K. MALAISAMY: Number two, are they willing to involve Opposition M.P.'s and MLA's and local party functionaries and NGOs while monitoring the scheme? Thirdly, Sir, they should have a monitoring system at the State level, at the Chief Minister level. At the national level, either at the concerned Minister level or at the Prime Minister level, this should be monitored. A high-level monitoring system should be evolved. (Ends)

֮ ֻ ӛ (ײָ) : ֳ֬ , ֮֮ߵ ֤õ ֯ ׾ֵ ָ ֮ ׾ָ֓ ֌ ߲-߲ ֳ ֮֮ߵ ֤õ ֮֮ߵ ӡ ֮־֤ פ ֮־֤ ׻֋ ֣ 韾 ֮֯ ָ ׬ָ ׾֮֬ ׻ ׬ָ ״ֻ ֋ ׻֋ ֛ ӑ ֛ ϵ օ ִ֕־֤ Ӥ֮ , ֮֯ , ӿ ֤ ֮֯ ֺ פ ֤֕ ָ פ ָ ״ֻ և ֤֕ ֤ ß֮ ֛ ֻײ , ֛ ָ ߾ִ ׬׮ִֵ , ֮ , ֵ ܵ ו֮ ֕ ֤֕ ֵֻ֮ , ֤֕ ֵֻ֮ ֋ ֣ ָ ָ ִ פ ֋օ ֵֻ֮ , ֮ ֟ , ãן ָָ ֤ þֵ ָ פ 2006-2007 ָָ ׸ߕ , ֲֻ ֵ , 1273 55 57 ָ ֵ ֓ 882 33 ֵօ ָ 325 20 ֵ ֓ օ ֓ ָָ Ͽ ָ þֵ ֟ þָ , ֲ ָָ ֤ ӕֵ ֈ , ֤

(4B ָ ֿ:)


GS-SK/YSR/5.15 & 5.20/4B & 4C

֮ ֻ ӛ (֟) : ӕֵ ֈ Ͽ ָ ָָ ֛כ , ™ ֋ ֵ֮ ֵ ִ , 13 ֕ 80 ִֻ ׿ֵ֟ ֯ ִֻ , ָָ þָ ױ 2007-08 , ִ ײָ ֟ ָ ׻֋ ֓ , ֕ ָ , ן׮׬ ו֮ ָָ , ֕ ָ ָָ ֤ , ׮׬ ֲֻ , ֮ֆ ֵԮֵ֮ , ֕ ָָ Ù ׻Ù Ù Ӿ׮ þֵ֟֟ , ֵָ ß ָָ וֻ ׿ֵ֟ ֵ֮߅ ִ ֮֮ߵ ֤ ֵօ ׮ֵָ ָ , ӡ ִ -߮ ߕ ֲ ֤ - ֕ ֲ ֮֮ߵ ӡ ֟ , ֲ ֲ ײָ ָ ֟ օ ָ ֕ ӟپָ ִ֮ ֋ וֻ ßָ ָ ׮֙ظ , ׮֙ظ , ׾̮֕, ֮, ׬׮ִֵ , ִ 17(2) -, ׾̮֕ ӛ ßָ ָ כ օ 17(2) ֵ The Gram Sabha shall conduct regular social audit of all the projects under the scheme taken up within the Gram Panchayat, ׾̮֕ ֛ ֮֟ , ִ ӓֵ֟ , ִ ӓֵ֟ , Ϥ , ֵ ׬ָ ִ ӓֵ֟ ׬׮ִֵ , ֵ ִ ֳ ߓ ִָ ָָ ԓָ , ָָ ԓָ ֣ ֟ߕ כ , וÙ ֮ ׾̮֕ ֵ ӛ ßָ ָ ֮, ִָ ֮ ִֻ ױָ ߓ ßָ ֤׬׸ יև ֵ, ִ ֤׬׸ יև ֵ, ֻܵ ײָ יև ֵ ֟ߕ ֛ ֮֟ , י֮ ֛ , ܾß ֛ , ִ ӓֵ֟ ӓֵ֟ , ִ , ܾß , ֵ ܾß , ֲ ָָ ן׮׬ ӓֵ֟ , - , וÙ ֙ , ו -־ , , ֛ ֮օ ֲ ֛ ֟ , ִ ֵ ׻֋ ָ ֮֋ ֮, ֤ ײ֛ ֤ ײ֛ ײ֓׻ֵ , ײ֓׻ֵ 1985 ִ ֛ ׌ֻֿ ֵ ֤֟ ֋ ևԆָ߯ þ ֵӟ ִ ָ ֮ , ֤ ֮ֆ ֮ , ֮ , ײ֓׻ֵ , ߓ ßָ ӓֵ֟ ֤׬ָ ӛ ßָ ֤׬ָ , ֣ ־֮֬ ָ ָ ׬׮ִֵ ֵ , ׻֋ ֬և ֈә ֈә ִ ו֮ ִ ֛ ֛ ֮, ָ ָ , ֛ ֮֟ ֛ ֮֟ , ֻ ֮֟ ִ ָ ֟ ִ֮ և ו ׌ ִ ָ , ִ ֛ ֮, ֻ, , ֛ ֮ ֤ ִ ֛ ֮, ִ ֈә , ֈә , ߛ ָ פ ֵ, ִ - ֈә ֈә ִ ׮ֻ ә ֟ , ִ ߿֮ ֙ ֟ ִ ־ã և ָ , פ-ָ ִ , ֻ ֵ ֤֕ ׮ֻօ

, ָָ þֵ þָ -߮ ߕ ֮֮ ָָ ֲ 80 ׿ֵ֟ ״ֻ ...(ִֵ ә)... ׬׮ִֵ ָ 17 (2) , ֮֮ ײָ ִֻ ָָ ֵ֟ ײָ ֮ ׿ֵ֟ ״ֻ ? ӓֵ֟ ßָ ָ ֛ ִֻ , ִ ִֻ , ֮ ִֻ , , ֮֮ ? ײָ ִֻ ִָ , ֮ ӛ וֻ ßָ ָ ?

, ָ ֟ ׾ֿ ײָ ִֻ 2006-07 ָָ 1191 17 81 ָ ֵ פ ֓ 712 76 ֵ ֡, 478 ֵ .. ...(ִֵ ә)... ױ ֻ ײָ 733 ֵ ָָ ֮֕ ִ , ֮ 2006-07 478 ֵ ײָ ָָ ֓ 2007-08 , 30 ־ִָ, 2007 ָָ ֲ , ִ 733 ֵ ָָ ֮֕ ִ ײָ , ָָ ֮ ֬׸ ֵ , ָָ כӛ ֬׸ ֵ ֕ ָָ , ָָ פ ֚ ןֿ֟ ֕ ָָ ֓ , ֵ , ֮֮ߵ ӡ ׾ֿ ֮֮ , ֮֮ߵ ӡ ָ ӡ , ײָ ֟ , ָ , ֮֮ߵ ֤õ ׳֮ ֕ ֵ , ײָ ֮ ָ 23 וֻ ֵ ײָ ָָ וֻ , ִ ֕ ָָ ֮ ߅ ֕ ָָ ו֮ וֻ , ָ ָָ ֮֮ ײָ ֮ ֟ , ו , ו ֮ ™ , ӟ ׻֋ ׮֙ظ , ׮ֵӡ , - ׬׮ִֵ ־ã ֵ , ׸ֻ֮, ֻ֮ וֻ ßָ ָ ֟ ״ן ..

ֳ֬ (... ׸֮) : ֯ ִ֯ ו֋

֮ ֻ ӛ : ӛ ֮֋ ֟ , ײָ ׿ֿ ָָ ֮ , ֕ ָָ ׾ֱ֟ ָ , ׻֋ ӛ ßָ ֤׬ָ , ߛ߆ ֵ ֟ ָ ֮֮ߵ ӡ ֤ ֮ ָ , ָ֬ ׮֤ , ֤ ֕ ָָ ָ ־ , ׬׮ִֵ ӟԟ ֟ ֮֮ߵ ӡ ֮֮ ָ ִ ־ã , ָ ӿ֮ , , ־ã ֳ וֻ , ָ ֟ ״ן , ׾֕߻ , ׮֙ظ ؙ , ִ ßָ ָ ִָ ־ã , ӓֵ֟ ߛ ֮ וֻ כ ֵ ֵ ֵ ֵ , -, - ӓֵ֟ וÙ ֙ , ׮־ֵ וֻ ßָ ׮֙ظ ָ ֮֮ ָָ ߅ ...(ִֵ ә)... ײָ context ֟ , ָ ..(־֮֬)...

ֳ֬ (... ׸֮): ֯ ֟ ו֋ ֯ ֟ ו֋

֮ ֻ ӛ : ֮ ֯ ™ָ֓ , ™ָ֓ ׻֋ ׬׮ִֵ ֵԯ ־ã , ֲӬ ׸ֻ֮ , ָ ָָ ֮ - ֮־֤ (ִ֯)

(4 ָ )


SHRIMATI N.P. DURGA (ANDHRA PRADESH): Thank you, Sir, for allowing me to take part in the discussion on the National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme. As we all know, the Scheme was first introduced in 200 districts with a lot of fanfare, later extended to 137 more districts and, now, it has been extended to the whole of India. It has started, initially, in 19 districts ill my State of Andhra Pradesh. The NREG Act, 2005 provides enhancement of livelihood security by giving, at least, 100 days of guaranteed wage employment in every year to every household, whose adult members volunteer to do unskilled manual work. Panchayats at districts, intermediate and village-levels will be the principal authorities for planning and implementation of the scheme. Up to here, everything sounds well. But, the problem starts thereafter. Sir, NREGS is a Central Scheme. But, unfortunately, many States are canvassing and implementing the Scheme as the State Scheme. And, it is not out of place to mention that my State is in the forefront in this. It has notified this Scheme as a State Scheme with the name AP Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme and issued the notification the very day the GOI issued the notification, that is, on February 2, making it as a Stale Scheme, not the Central Scheme. The misuse of the Scheme has started right from the day one. So, the first point l wish to make is that there has to be a directive from the Government of India and propagate the same extensively by saying that this Scheme is being implemented by the GOI, not the States. They are only the implementing agencies. The other point is, one of the guidelines of the Scheme says that men and women should get equal pay. This provision, openly, hit for a six by every State and discriminate against women. Women are not getting the same amount as that of men. So I demand that equal pay should be ensured to women as well.

Sir, the second point I wish to make is that many people in villages are not aware of this programme. There is lack of awareness among the poor people that the Government is doing something for them and they can reap the benefit of it. But, due to lack of awareness about this wage-employment programme, the purpose of the Scheme is defeated. This becomes clear if you look at the utilization of the scheme. So far, under the NREGS, only 50 per cent of the funds have been utilised. So, there is a need to generate awareness through radio, local cultural resources, inter-personal communication, door-to-door contact campaigns, TV, etc. It is only then the Scheme percolate to the beneficiary. Otherwise, the contractors create duplicate pay-rolls and grab the money as is being done in almost all the districts where this scheme is being implemented. So, I suggest that to maintain the quality work, 60:40 ratio should be maintained for wages and material.

Sir, the next point I wish to touch upon and is also today's main point of the discussion is misuse of funds. For this, I would say that there needs to be transparency in selection and designing of works undertaken under the NREGS. To maintain the transparency, I would suggest for consideration of the hon. Minister that technical estimates to be displayed at all worksides in simple local language. A progress report has to be given by an independent authority to local vigilance committee. Then all the public works sanctioned or undertaken should be in the public domain with physical, technical and financial details through notice boards, websites, etc.

Then the idea of this entire programme is to create physical assets. But, there is a problem in this. What the people are doing is that they are taking up the work and completing and again they are showing in the registers the same work by manipulation and getting money from the Government. Or, sometimes, there will be duplication. So, to remove this problem, I suggest for consideration of the hon. Minister to maintain an asset register with a unique number to each work to prevent duplication. At the same time, there should also be maps of the physical assets so created so that there would not be any duplication and we can also avoid sanctioning money for the same work.

The other problem in the NREGS is that, there is a cash component and foodgrain component. There is a problem that many people are demanding for giving cash instead of cash and foodgrains. There is a problem in providing foodgrains as they sometime do not reach in time and, as we all know, the quality of foodgrains is also very bad. So, I suggest that entire wage payment be made in cash and do not couple it with foodgrains. This will solve a major problem of delay and inadequate remuneration.Finally, we also know that the States are deviating funds given by GOI under NREGS.

(Contd. by tmv/4e)


SHRIMATI N. P. DURGA (CONTD.): I suggest for consideration of the hon. Minister that wherever it is found that the States have diverted funds either through vigilance reports or otherwise, those States should be penalised in their grants and the States which are implementing the programme well should be rewarded by giving more funds.


SHRIMATI N. P. DURGA (CONTD.): With these few observations, I request the hon. Minister to seriously ponder over the suggestions made by me and see to it that they are implemented in their true spirit for the success of UPA's flagship programme, the NREGS. Thank you.


THE VICE-CHAIRMAN: Shri Arjun Kumar Sengupta. Please, one minute.

SHRI S. S. AHLUWALIA: Sir, I have a small submission. Yesterday night also we have had to stay here up to quarter to twelve. Today, again there was no lunch hour. For the last four days, without lunch hour, we have been sitting late. Yesterday, it was up to midnight. (Interruptions)...


SHRI S.S. AHLUWALIA: The issue is very important. But simultaneously you see the Press gallery. That is also vacant. Nobody is there. (Interruptions)... What to discuss and where to send a message... (Interruptions)...

THE VICE-CHAIRMAN: What is your suggestion?

SHRI S.S. AHLUWALIA: Sir, I have a suggestion. We can take it up tomorrow. The rest of the business can be taken up tomorrow.

SHRI V. NARAYANASAMY: Sir, whenever I raise issue, Mr. Ahluwalia used to oppose it. This is very unfortunate. (Interruptions)...

THE VICE-CHAIRMAN (SHRI P. J. KURIEN): We will do one thing. Let us sit up to 5.45 P.M. (Interruptions)...

SHRI S. S. AHLUWALIA: It is already 5.30 P.M.

SHRI V. NARAYANASAMY: This is a very important discussion. (Interruptions)...

SHRI SURENDRA LATH: We have cooperated. (Interruptions)...

SHRI S. S. AHLUWALIA: Sir, we have broken our record. In one day we have passed five Bills. This is a very important discussion. One should discuss it. So, my humble submission is, please adjourn the House. Take it up tomorrow after the Question Hour. (Interruptions)...

THE VICE-CHAIRMAN: No. Anyway, I called Mr. Arjun Sengupta. Let him speak. After that we will take the sense of the House. (Interruptions)...

SHRI S. S. AHLUWALIA: Do you want to speak now or tomorrow? (Interruptions)...

SHRI ARJUN KUMAR SENGUPTA (WEST BENGAL): I am at the disposal of the House. (Interruptions)...

SHRI EKANATH K. THAKUR: Sir, I have a suggestion. It is an important economic issue. We can take it up tomorrow afternoon. (Interruptions)...

THE VICE-CHAIRMAN: No. I have called him. Let him speak. After that, we will see. (Interruptions)...

SHRI S. S. AHLUWALIA: Sir, it is a very important economic issue. The Press will also get some information from him. (Interruptions)... He knows that. (Interruptions)...

THE VICE-CHAIRMAN (SHRI P. J. KURIEN): He is not speaking for the Press. Mr. Arjun Sengupta, don't take more than ten minutes.

SHRI ARJUN KUMAR SENGUPTA: Thank you very much, Sir. I am particularly thankful to Ahluwaliaji. (Interruptions)... It is not the Press; I want all of us...

THE VICE-CHAIRMAN: Mr. Arjun Sengupta, don't take more than ten minutes.

SHRI ARJUN KUMAR SENGUPTA: No. I won't take that much time. I rise only to point out that some of us have been familiar with the creation of NREGA from the beginning, what kind of problems we faced, what kind of opposition that was there, how this whole exercise was initiated by the Congress President, how it was opposed and, finally, how, through a unanimous Bill, it came into being. Now, this is also an example of an effort where, if there is a determined Minister, you can get very good results. Sir, I want to make this point because we have been hearing....

SHRI TAPAN KUMAR SEN: Dr. Sengupta, kindly mention how this concept was... (Interruptions)... by the Deputy Chairman of the Planning Commission. (Interruptions)... You mention that also. (Interruptions)...

THE VICE-CHAIRMAN: Mr. Sen, please don't interrupt.

SHRI ARJUN KUMAR SENGUPTA: I am only taking pride in the fact that this particular programme, which is a flagship programme of the UPA, is becoming more and more an example of what a social programme should be. We have heard in this House several times--I would not again mention names--the Minister saying that he did not know whether the money that was allotted was being spent or delivered. This is an example of ensuring a mechanism of delivery and that example should be emulated in all other social programmes. In this programme, there is transparency; there is social audit; there are all kinds of muster rolls. There are variations. I have got reports from Jean Dreze one of the eminent economists, who has visited different places, and he has shown how it has worked extremely well in Rajasthan. But it did not work in Orissa. Somewhere in Andhra Pradesh it is working very well. In some particular districts of Tamil Nadu there are problems. That is exactly life. It can't be working everywhere. But this is an example. I must give all credit to Raghuvansh Prasadji. This is something that he is doing. If he is successful, it will be a perfect example of how to deliver a social programme. (Contd. by VK/4F)


SHRI ARJUN KUMAR SENGUPTA (CONTD): No doubt, social programmes are delivered. A lot of money is wasted. There is the Food-for-Work Programme. We have got experiences. But all these experiences have told us how to deliver them; how to involve the grassroots organisations; how to involve the mechanism of transparency; how to involve the mechanism of jansunwai. These things have actually worked. Once it works, you will see how a social programme is developed. That is the only reason I got up. I have got quite a lot of numbers. But that is not necessary to mention. But we must realise that if we are determined, if we are committed, then, social programmes can be delivered. We do not have to hear, again and again, that so much money is being given, but there is no certainty whether the money is being spent. It is the responsibility of the Government. Government's responsibility is to govern. Governance is Government's responsibility. It gives me tremendous pain and sadness because this is my Government, which says that we do not know, we are giving money, but it is not being spent. Look at Shri Raghuvansh Prasadji. He is not a member of our Party. But he has shown how it can be done. This can be repeated. This can be taken as an example in all other social programmes. Thank you. (Ends)

THE VICE-CHAIRMAN (PROF. P.J. KURIEN): Dr. M.S. Gill, would you like to speak today or tomorrow?

DR. M.S. GILL: Sir, it is up to you.

THE VICE-CHAIRMAN: You can speak tomorrow because already the Chief Whip of the Opposition has suggested that we should adjourn the House. We can accept his suggestion. This will be taken up tomorrow. Dr. M.S. Gill will speak tomorrow. So, the House stands adjourned to meet tomorrow at 11.00 a.m.


The House then adjourned at thirty-seven minutes

past five of the clock till eleven of the clock

on Thursday, the 6th December, 2007.