While the NREGS assures statutory minimum wages and has helped rural households in a number of significant ways, the scheme does not help poor families climb out of the poverty trap; it only ensures their bare survival.

This point was forcefully made by several community representatives at a regional NREGS workshop held under the aegis of the PACS Programme, in Aurangabad, Maharashtra, on October 17, 2008.

The workshop marked the third stage of NREGS Campaign 2008 run by the Management Consultants of the PACS Programme in the interim period between closure of the first phase of the PACS Programme and the launch of 'PACS Plus'.

In the first stage of the NREGS Campaign, launched in June 2008, village-level awareness drives were held across 94 PACS Programme districts.

In the second stage, village meetings were conducted to gather testimonials of good and bad practices.

In the third stage, regional advocacy workshops and meetings were organised, in October 2008, to address issues that evolved from the village meetings. Select case studies that emerged from the first and second stages were presented before panellists, including the officials concerned, by community representatives and CSOs.

At the Aurangabad workshop, the panellists included water and soil conservation expert Dr Mukund Ghare, deputy commissioner (EGS) Gawli of Aurangabad division, PACS Programme director Kiran Sharma, Dr Eknath Awadh of the Rural Development Centre, Beed, and Vishwanath Todkar of Paryay, Osmanabad.

Speaking at the workshop, Devidas Mhaske, a labourer from Pardhi village in Loha taluka, Nanded district, said that the NREGS had helped him in a number of ways.

Before the scheme was launched, he recalled, he and his wife used to regularly migrate after Diwali to Hyderabad to work in brick kilns, leaving behind their two sons, one daughter and Devidas's elderly mother. The brick kiln owner would give him an advance of Rs 2,000, which he would give to his son to manage the house. There would also be some jowar earned as wages during the agricultural season.

The couple earned around Rs 100-150 a day at the brick kiln and managed to save around Rs 500 a month. They would send money home whenever it was required. If more money was required, they would take another advance from the brick kiln owner. They would return to their village at the start of the agriculture season, around June, usually after taking an advance from the brick kiln owner, which bound them to return to the kiln around Diwali.

Since the launch of the NREGS, which has been vigorously implemented in Nanded with the help of several CSOs associated with the Dushkal Hatawu Manus Jagawu drought forum launched under the PACS Programme ( see related story here), the Mhaskes have been able to break this cycle of debt and separation from the family.

Devidas Mhaske revealed that in the summer of 2007 and 2008 he and his wife were able to get enough work in the village itself, under the NREGS. They managed to earn between Rs 10,000 and Rs 15,000 during the lean agricultural season through the employment scheme and other work in the village, and so there was no reason for them to migrate to Hyderabad.

Staying at home, Mhaske was able to pay attention to his children's education -- he fervently hopes that they will not end up being agricultural labourers when they grow up. He is particularly proud that his daughter has been able to finish her schooling and has joined college.

But education comes at a price. Mhaske explained that the monthly expenses on education amounted to Rs 1,300 a month.

In this context, he pointed out, the minimum wage paid under the NREGS (Rs 64-68 a day in Maharashtra) was just too little. "It keeps our stomachs happy. It does not help us dream of a better life."

Even if a family does manage to save something, illness can derail all their plans. This is what happened to the Mhaskes. Whilst working at an NREGS site this year, Devidas's wife, Arunabai, saw a snake and went into severe mental shock. She has still not recovered from the trauma. Devidas spent around Rs 8,000 from the family's savings on medical treatment, but to no avail.

Having used up most of his savings, he had to borrow money to enrol his daughter in college. He is indebted to the tune of around Rs 17,000. By doing NREGS work, and other work in the village, he hopes to repay his debts. But, as he pointed out, he will still only reach a position of status quo.

"If poor people have to get a better life through the NREGS, the minimum wage per person per day should be Rs 100-150," he said. If a couple can earn Rs 200-300 per day regularly, they can realistically plan for a better life.

The demand for a higher daily wage was not unreasonable, he pointed out. "If government servants, who do very little work compared to labourers, can have a Sixth Pay Commission, shouldn't there be a pay commission for us too?"

Mhaske's argument was supported by income and expenditure data on labourer families collected by the PACS Programme CSO Paryay from Jiktan village near Aurangabad.

Presenting the case of Ramnath Shinde and his wife Hirabai, Rajkumar Togadia of Paryay pointed out that a rural labourer family, with four or five members, needed a minimum of Rs 100 per day to meet the basic requirements of a healthy, decent life.

The major daily expenditure heads for the Shinde family are food (1.5 kg of jowar, required every day, costs Rs 27) and firewood (eight kilos of firewood cost Rs 32).

The daily expenditure chart includes consumption of tea with milk, vegetables, pulses, cooking oil and the use of soap for bathing and washing clothes. It excludes the occasional consumption of non-vegetarian food, expenditure on liquor or tobacco, consumption of sweets and special dishes on festival days, expenditure on attending marriages, and medical bills.

To buy a new set of clothes every year, the Shinde family requires around Rs 4,500. If their kutcha hut has to be reconstructed after damage caused by rains, they would have to spend around Rs 8,000.

Therefore, to ensure a decent living, albeit without significant savings, the Shindes need to earn at least Rs 50,000 a year, or around Rs 4,200 a month, which is what the NREGS would provide if both husband and wife got work for 30 days a month. But because of the 100-day-per-household limit they can hope to get NREGS work together for only 50 days a year. The rest of the year they will have to do other work, which generally pays less.

And so the Shindes are in no position to secure themselves against shocks like an illness; for major expenses like a marriage they would have to take a loan. Even if they did get maximum benefits from the NREGS (100 days of work), they would not be able to climb out of the poverty trap, despite this being the scheme's primary objective.