Underperforming governments often shift blame rather than acknowledge their own shortcomings. A similar pattern is visible in Tamil Nadu, where the DMK government is targeting the BJP-led Centre over provisions that require States to share the financial burden of a revised rural employment scheme. Projecting this funding requirement as a major issue, the DMK government has passed a resolution opposing both the renaming of the scheme and the introduction of new provisions.
After Karnataka, Tamil Nadu has also voiced opposition to the Central government’s VB G Ram G Act, flagging specific provisions, with its primary objection being the mandatory State funding that did not exist earlier.
On January 23, the Tamil Nadu Assembly adopted a resolution urging the Central government to ensure that the right to work of people in rural areas was established as per the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (MGNREGA), 2005. The resolution said continuous funding for the scheme should be ensured in accordance with the employment needs of the poor and based on State performance under the MGNREG scheme.
Chief Minister MK Stalin moved the resolution in the House. He said it should be guaranteed that the allocation for the scheme was no less than that made in previous years under the MGNREG scheme, so that the livelihood of women, persons with disabilities, and SCs and STs was continuously protected and social security was ensured.
The resolution said, “With various intentions, the name of the Father of the Nation, Mahatma Gandhi, has been removed and the scheme has been renamed as Viksit Bharat Guaranteed for Rozgar and Ajeevika Mission Gramin (VB G Ram G). The scheme should continue to be named after Mahatma Gandhi in remembrance of the principles he had shown to the nation.” It sought uninterrupted fund flow under the old scheme and demanded that the proposed discretionary, intent-based assessment mechanism be dropped, stating that it would severely hit rural livelihoods and undermine federalism.
CM Stalin said the proposed VB G Ram G would be harmful to the financial autonomy of local bodies and the State’s overall fiscal health. He said it would jeopardise the livelihood of nearly 74 lakh active workers from 65 lakh households in Tamil Nadu, 85 per cent of whom are women.
He demanded that annual allocations should not be lower than those of previous years to safeguard the livelihoods of women, SCs, STs, and persons with disabilities, while ensuring social security.
Patting himself on the back, Stalin claimed that his government has been efficiently implementing both State and Central schemes, earning repeated praise from Union ministries.
He said, “Despite this, the Union government continues its policy of betraying Tamil Nadu. It is deliberately delaying fund releases and subjecting Tamil Nadu to step-motherly treatment. The Centre is yet to release Rs 1,026 crore towards wages and Rs 1,087 crore towards material components under MGNREGA for 2025–26.”
TNLA_Resolution: #Withdraw_VBGRAMG #Restore_MGNREGA!
மக்களின் தேவையின் அடிப்படையில் அமைந்த #MGNREGA திட்டத்துக்குப் பதிலாக ஒன்றிய பா.ஜ.க. அரசு கொண்டு வந்துள்ள #VBGRAMG வேலை உறுதித் திட்டமே அல்ல, அது அழிவுத்திட்டம்! கிராமப்புற மக்களின் வாழ்வாதாரத்தை ஒழித்துக்கட்டும் சதி!
இதன்… pic.twitter.com/emgPzE4l3l
— M.K.Stalin (@mkstalin) January 23, 2026
CM Stalin said, “While the DMK government has been treating both Union and State government programmes equally, the Union government has been betraying the State. The Union government is displaying a step-motherly attitude towards Tamil Nadu by not releasing funds and is intentionally causing delays.” He asked, “Who is affected by this delay? Poor farmers and the downtrodden in the rural areas of Tamil Nadu are affected. Our MPs from Tamil Nadu voiced their opposition when the Bill came up in Parliament. All Opposition parties opposed it. But the Union government did not respect our voices.”
While the DMK and its allies supported the resolution, AIADMK Deputy Leader of the Opposition R B Udhayakumar termed it politically motivated. He said the 2005 scheme needed periodic modification, though the AIADMK opposed its renaming.
Udhayakumar said, “AIADMK leader Edappadi K Palanisamy would speak to the Prime Minister about the VB G Ram G Act when he meets him today.”
BJP MLAs were absent as they were at Prime Minister Modi’s rally in Madhuranthagam, while AIADMK members remained silent during the voice vote. Speaker M Appavu declared that the resolution was passed unanimously. It remains to be seen whether the Governor will give his nod.
In Karnataka, Governor Thaawarchand Gehlot refused to read the customary address, stating that parts of the Governor’s address to the joint session on January 21 were said to contain certain references to the Centre, which has repealed the UPA government’s MGNREGA and replaced it with the VB G Ram G Act. Due to this, Governor Gehlot refused to deliver his address. He raised reservations over 11 paragraphs in the speech drafted by the Karnataka Cabinet with regard to the NDA repealing MGNREGA.
Karnataka Lok Bhavan said that as parts of the address were against VB G Ram G, which has become an Act after the Bill was passed in Parliament, it would be unconstitutional to speak against it, and the Governor therefore preferred to skip those parts.
