New Delhi: Minutes after Parliamentary proceedings in the Lok Sabha were disrupted on Thursday after Opposition members, including MPs from the Congress and the INDIA Bloc, created a ruckus during the discussion on the Viksit Bharat–G RAM G Bill, 2025, which proposes to replace the existing MGNREGA framework, Union Agriculture Minister Shivraj Singh Chouhan strongly condemned the conduct of the Opposition and blamed them for reducing the democracy to “mob rule” and “hooliganism”.
Addressing a press conference at the BJP headquarters in New Delhi, the Union Minister accused Opposition MPs of undermining parliamentary decorum and democratic values.
He expressed anguish over the tearing of bill copies inside the House, calling it an insult to Mahatma Gandhi’s principles. “Is this how discussion, the lifeblood of democracy, is conducted?” he asked.
The Minister said the government had initiated discussions on the bill with seriousness and respect, listening to the viewpoints of all members. However, the behaviour displayed by Opposition MPs, including tearing and throwing papers, derailed meaningful debate. “I strongly condemn this disgraceful act,” he said.
Defending the proposed legislation, Chouhan said the Bill reflects the BJP-led government’s commitment to Garib Kalyan and inclusive development under the leadership of Prime Minister Narendra Modi. He highlighted that more than 25 crore people have moved out of poverty due to sustained welfare interventions and development-focused governance.
A key feature of the proposed framework is the enhancement of guaranteed employment days from 100 to 125, aimed at strengthening rural livelihoods. To support this expansion, the government has proposed an allocation of Rs 1,51,282 crore, with the Centre contributing over Rs 95,000 crore.
Chouhan also outlined a comprehensive roadmap for “developed villages,” covering infrastructure development, schools, health centres, water conservation projects, anganwadi buildings, roads and livelihood activities.
He questioned the Opposition’s resistance to technological integration and transparency measures in welfare schemes, asking whether public funds should be “sacrificed to corruption.”
(IANS)
