The opposition has raised concerns over the pay disparity for self-help groups (SHGs) in Meghalaya and questioned why comparatively few exist in urban areas compared to rural parts.
During question hour in the Assembly yesterday, Voice of the People (VPP) MLA Adelbert Nongrum (North Shillong) sought clarity on the issue, highlighting that while 510 SHGs have been formed in urban areas under the Deendayal Antyodaya Yojana – National Urban Livelihood Mission (DAY-NULM) since 2014, 41 of them are currently non-functional despite the ongoing unemployment crisis.
Urban Affairs Minister Sniawbhalang Dhar responded, stating that the inactivity of these SHGs was due to their own lack of engagement rather than government failure. He assured that efforts were being made to reactivate them. However, Nongrum further questioned whether the financial assistance provided to urban SHGs was on par with that given to rural SHGs. Dhar admitted that the amounts were different, revealing that while urban SHGs receive Rs 10,000 as a start-up fund, rural SHGs get only Rs 2,500, though he was uncertain about the exact figures.
Expressing dissatisfaction, Nongrum demanded a clarification on this disparity. In response, Dhar acknowledged that Rs 10,000 was insufficient but informed the House that the government had proposed an increase to Rs 25,000. However, Nongrum cast doubt on this commitment, questioning whether the enhancement was merely verbal or officially recorded.
Chief Minister Conrad K Sangma intervened, clarifying that both the DAY-NULM and the National Rural Livelihood Mission (NRLM) are centrally sponsored schemes, and the financial allocations are determined by the central government. He stated that the Meghalaya government had written to the Centre requesting an increase in funding and had received a favorable response. The expected enhancement to Rs 25,000, however, was still pending official sanction.
Nongrum remained sceptical, citing the government’s broader goal of empowering women to become “Lakhpati Didis” earning at least Rs 1 lakh annually. He questioned whether a mere Rs 10,000 would be sufficient to achieve this target. Sangma defended the scheme, stating that thousands of “Lakhpati Didis” had already been created in rural areas through sustained government efforts, and similar progress was expected in urban areas.
Addressing the challenges faced by urban SHGs, the CM noted that organising SHGs in urban areas was more difficult than in rural areas due to differing lifestyles and responsibilities. He acknowledged that the financial support for urban SHGs was inadequate but assured that the state government was supplementing these groups through additional schemes such as PRIME and the CM Elevate programme.
VPP MLA Heaving Stone Kharpran raised concerns over the lack of a monitoring mechanism to track SHG performance. Dhar admitted that monitoring was self-regulated but assured that the government was actively encouraging SHGs to participate.
Leader of the opposition Dr Mukul Sangma criticised the government’s efforts, stating that the formation of only 510 SHGs in urban areas since 2014 was inadequate.
Dhar responded that awareness programmes were being conducted to encourage the formation of more SHGs. The CM supplemented this by highlighting the growth of rural SHGs from 5,000 to over 51,000, attributing this success to the community-based environment in rural areas.
Dr Mukul urged the government to rethink its strategy, suggesting that the failure to scale up urban SHGs indicated a flawed approach rather than an insurmountable challenge. He called for a brainstorming session to devise a more effective plan.
The discussion concluded with Dr Mukul seeking a breakdown of urban SHG distribution across the state. Dhar provided the figures, stating that Tura had the highest number at 198, followed by Shillong with 115, Williamnagar with 73, Baghmara with 70, Resubelpara with 35 and Jowai with 19.
