Congress Hunger Strike in Mangalore Against VB-G RAM G Act, MGNREGA
Congress Hunger Strike in Mangalore Against VB-G RAM G Act, MGNREGA
Protestors demand withdrawal of the VB-G RAM G Act and restoration of MGNREGA guarantees as a 100-km padayatra is planned to highlight its impact on livelihoods.
In Mangalore, Congress workers staged a hunger strike in front of Mahatma Gandhi’s statue at Kudmul Ranga Rao Town Hall, part of the MGNREGA Bachao Sangram. They are demanding the withdrawal of the VB-G RAM G Act for Rozgar and Ajeevika Mission (Gramin) and the restoration of MGNREGA guarantees. The protest is accompanied by a planned 100-kilometer padayatra from Sullia to Mulki between February 9 and 12 to inform people how the new law could affect daily livelihoods.
K. Harish Kumar, president of the Dakshina Kannada Congress Committee and a former MLC, warns that the VB-G RAM G Act will increase the financial burden on state governments and erode the reach of social security programs. He noted that the new act shifts decision-making on village works to the Centre, potentially removing a local, legally guaranteed employment framework.
Former minister B. Ramanath Rai recalled the UPA era as pro-people, emphasizing that MGNREGA provided guaranteed employment and local gram panchayats held sway over the works. MLC Ivan D’Souza argued that renaming MGNREGA and replacing it with VB–G RAM G amounts to a direct attack on poor workers and on the ideals that underpinned the original scheme. He stressed that under MGNREGA workers had a legal entitlement of at least 100 days of work annually and that communities could decide on the nature of works.
Further, D’Souza accused the BJP-led central government of lacking social commitment and pursuing divisive politics while dismantling pro-people programmes. He pointed out that several states have publicly stated they cannot meet the 40% funding requirement for the new scheme, raising concerns about financial sustainability and local accountability.
Protest organisers also spoke of protecting workers’ rights and argued the move would erode safeguards built into the rural employment guarantee. The issue—seen by supporters as a fight for the poor—has sparked a broader debate about the role of the Centre in local employment schemes and the future of pro-poor development policies in Karnataka.
