Modification in MPLAD funds involving SC/ST clause raise controversy

As per the new guidelines the 'mandatory' condition has been converted in the latest 2023 guidelines as an 'advisory' clause so that it is no longer mandatory for MPs to allocate funds from MPLADs for the SC and ST population.

New Delhi: A modification in the guidelines for the use of MPLAD (Member of Parliament Local Area Development Fund) funds in the SC/ST area has raised a major controversy with CPI(M) MP John Brittas terming it as a "partisan politics."

The new guidelines will come into force from April 1. As per the 2016 guidelines, it was mandatory for all MPs to allocate 15 per cent and 7.5 per cent of the annual funds of Rs 5 crore under MPLAD for various development activities in the areas predominantly inhabited by Scheduled Caste (ST) and Scheduled Tribe (ST) population.

Interestingly, this 'mandatory' condition has been converted in the latest 2023 guidelines as an 'advisory' clause so that it is no longer mandatory for MPs to allocate funds from MPLADs for the SC and ST population.

"This guileful dilution of the scheme would be convenient to elude from the responsibility of allocation of funds to SC/ST population," said Brittas. The Rajya Sabha MP said that the guidelines, rolled out by the Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation, are detrimental to the interests of the SC/ST community.

He said that currently, the MPLAD scheme has been instrumental in the development of SC/ST inhabited areas by undertaking various kinds of works like drinking water facilities, construction of roads and street lights, etc.

Out of the Rs 25 crore for an MP for five years under MPLADs, a mandatory allocation of 15 per cent for the SC population would come to Rs 3.75 crore. Likewise, 7.5 per cent for the ST population would come to Rs 1.87 crores over five years time.

Terming it "partisan politics", Brittas urged the central government to withdraw the modification and retain the extant provision as such. He also criticised the Centre for excluding the government-aided institutions from the ambit of MPLADs.

"This regressive decision will have far-reaching consequences for sectors like education where government-aided schools play a crucial role," said Brittas adding "This retrograde step is taken even while private trusts can be considered for disbursement of funds under MPLADs."