A relook of schemes like Griha Aadhar is must to check if objectives have been met
Around 1.80 lakh women in Goa currently benefit under the Griha Adhar Scheme, with each beneficiary receiving Rs 18,000 annually as financial assistance, Chief Minister Pramod Sawant said at a function in Ponda earlier this week.
By any standard, for a small state like Goa, the number of beneficiaries is huge. It stands at around 4,500 beneficiaries per Assembly constituency. Politically speaking, this cluster of women can make a big difference to candidates in any election, and more so in the 2027 Assembly polls. If every woman beneficiary is able to get one or two more votes along with hers, then it can change the ballgame in the electoral battle. If the Department of Women & Child — the implementing authority — has been able to provide proper service, then the ruling party has a major advantage.
The scheme was initially started by then Chief Minister Manohar Parrikar with the objective of addressing “the problem of spiralling prices and to provide support to housewives/homemakers from middle, lower-middle and poor section of the society, to maintain a reasonable standard of living for their families.” The applicant — a married woman — has to be a resident of Goa for the past fifteen years, and the gross income of the husband and wife, taken together, should not exceed Rs 3 lakh per annum, as per the government website. The term ‘married woman’ includes a widow and a divorcee.
While on the face of it, the scheme provides some solace to a married woman, analysis can provide a different perspective. It may be framed as social welfare to combat inflation, but in general terms, it may not be wrong to term the scheme a dole.
A common criticism is that “doles” provide short-term relief and do not address deep-rooted issues. Viewed from a gender perspectivebeing a recipient of state welfare might carry a stigma or be used as a way to further control women’s choices within conservative communities. Goa may be a party destination for the rest of the country, but it is still a conservative-minded society. Such schemes, however well-intentioned, could make beneficiaries feel financially dependent. Their vulnerability is palpable in the villages. What is necessary in the present era is to make them independent economic agents who can stand on their own feet. They also suffer from low payment in gender-categorised jobs. There should be no economic subordination or discrimination.
When the buzzword is “inclusive living”, there is a need to take a fresh look at the situation vis-à-vis the scheme. Socio-economic analysts will be in a better position to give their views on whether there is a need to review the scheme and, if yes, to what extent. The scheme was meant to beat inflation and provide financial support to poor and lower middle-class women. The question is: when we are tom-tomming our economic growth, how can we still keep 1.8 lakh women in the same status? We do not miss an opportunity to say how wonderful our ‘Swamyampurna Goem’ concept has grown and how it has helped people, including women, to stand on their own feet. If that is the case, then why are more and more beneficiaries being enlisted? Even if more are added, thousands should face deletion from the list of beneficiaries if the government’s claim of poverty alleviation is correct. Women should not be made dependent on doles. They should be able to develop resilience. Doles can be a temporary mechanism. Only the deserving should continue to be beneficiaries.
