Jawaab Do: On Internet Shutdowns, AI Bias in Welfare, And More
The second instalment of our series Jawaab Do, where we put Parliament questions and answers under the scanner
Repeated adjournments, breathless debates, bills passed in haste, and an impasse. The Monsoon session, up until August 11, roared with calls for accountability, for the Home Minister and Prime Minister to grace the Parliament. Less than 20 minutes (in Lok Sabha) and two hours (in Rajya Sabha) were spent on questions.
From the digital annals of the Sansad, we examined thousands of questions raised between August 3 and August 10. What ensues is a familiar story of silences, data omissions, and schemes poorly implemented. Funds, for children’s nutrition, women’s hostels, or women’s safety, adhere to a weary arc of being underutilised. Granular evidence – on farmer and student suicides, manual scavenging deaths, mandatory creches, POSH implementation in universities – is missing or withheld, even though such data collected by independent organisations exists in public record. Policy loopholes that have deepened inequities received deliberate silences. Do heat protections under the labour laws apply to platform workers, do gender budgeting cells recognise caste and class intersections? The accountability question is raised, redirected, reframed, and in the end, stashed away.
The responses to each question are designated under five categories:
Answered: The response directly addresses the question and includes specifics with relevant supporting data and evidence.
Partial: It addresses only some elements of a multi-query question, or addresses the question but omits key details e.g. data given without context or vice versa.
Misleading: The question is addressed but the response distorts or contradicts available facts. This includes cherry-picked data, unsupported claims, or inaccurate framing.
Data not available: The requested information has not been collected, compiled, or made public (if the information exists but has not been shared, it is marked ‘misleading’ or ‘unanswered’).
Unanswered: The response fails to engage with the question – non-responses, deflections, or facts that do not address the query.
1. There are no special central funds allocated for ASHA activities.
Unstarred Question No. 1853 (Rajya Sabha) and No. 3439 (Lok Sabha): Does the government plan to provide timely payments, social security benefits to ASHA workers and facilitators?
Sender: Mallikarjun Kharge, INC, Rajya Sabha and Vishaldada Prakashbapu Patil, IND, Lok Sabha (Sangli, Maharashtra)
Receiver: Ministry of Health and Family Welfare
Answered: August 4 and 7, 2026
Why this matters: Sustained resistance from ASHA workers has revealed the strain and cracks under which millions of women provide care everyday. They are overworked, navigate extreme weathers and hazardous geographies to provide care, they need adequate training to operate stacks and portals, all while the demand for official recognition as ‘workers’ eludes them. Among the most well-documented grievances, as old as their cadre’s constitution, is that of payment – often delayed and always inadequate.
Only last month ASHA workers in Haryana protested over pending dues; Karnataka ASHA workers went on indefinite strike in January 2025 over honorarium payments overdue by two to three months in some cases, eight years in others. Kerala’s ASHA workers held a historic siege of the state secretariat over fair wages and unpaid retirement benefits.
Is there a state-wise record of these delays, why they happen, and how frequently? The question posed in the Parliament didn’t earn a response. The Ministry of Health & Family Welfare offered no data on payment irregularities. The Centre, however, cited the funding mechanism as a feeble reason: “...funds are released to States/Union Territories under flexible pools on a lump sum basis to provide greater flexibility to States to utilise the funds as per their felt need and priorities”, and as such, no funds are released separately for ASHA activities.
‘Health’ is a state subject, so the primary responsibility, the Ministry said, lies with the state/UT governments. But ASHA workers come under the National Rural Health Mission, a central programme, which has the final say on their duties, training, safety, payments, and official recognition. The nature of ASHA work has also shifted over the last decade, with women noting their time is spent doing surveys, electoral work, Census duties, and online data entry work more than state health duties.
As for remedial measures, the government said it introduced the SNA-SPARSH “just in time” fund release mechanism, but offered no evidence of reducing delays for ASHA workers separately.
A separate question addressed the roots of this precarious work. As ‘volunteers’, ASHA workers are outside the protection of minimum wages and standard labour protections. Has the government received any requests to offer ASHA facilitators (those who supervise ASHA workers) regular honorarium, social security, retirement benefits, or which such benefits be given to them in the future? The Ministry offered no response.
Verdict: Unanswered
2. No disaggregated data on tribal families affected by the Ken-Betwa Link Project in Madhya Pradesh.
Unstarred Question No. 3052: How many facilities have received compensation? Why were they evicted without securing forest permits? Are Gram Sabha records publicly available?
Sender: Rahul Gandhi, INC (Rai Bareily, UP), Lok Sabha, and Ajendra Singh Lodhi, Samajwadi Party (Hamirpur, UP), Lok Sabha
Receiver: Ministry of Tribal Affairs
Answered: August 6, 2026
Why this matters: Social activist Amit Bhatnagar led a hunger strike in Bundelkhand last month, a climactic part of his six-year-long campaign against the Ken-Betwa river linking project. Demands were such: over 6,600 Gond and Kol Adivasi households face displacement from the Daudhan dam that will transfer water from Ken river to the water-deficit Betwa river. Gram Sabha consent to take over land and forests was obtained through opaque and fabricated processes. Compensation has been delayed or inadequate, in some cases going to people who are not residents of the affected villages. Felling of trees inside the Panna Forest Reserve is being done without adequate forest clearances.
The anger congealed into a flash of protests. In April, women in Dhondhan village staged a “Chita Andolan”, a funeral pyre protest, and later, a “chulha bandh” protest. Amit Bhatnagar was on a hunger strike for 14 days before the police took him to a local hospital.
The Opposition MPs probed the number of families, across villages, displaced due to the project and the compensation received so far. The Ministry answer cites the original 2016 project proposal figure – 1,913 families, out of which 648 belong to Scheduled Tribes.
The Revenue Minister Karan Singh Verma in July presented starkly contradicting figures in the Madhya Pradesh Assembly: in Panna, 1,321 families from seven villages are displaced, and in Chhatarpur, the figure rises to about 3,718 families – a total of 5,039 families at least.
The question also asked for details about Gram Sabha’s functioning – who participated, signatures obtained, grievances raised. The Ministry came up short: there are no central records of Gram Sabha meetings, they said, since the State Governments are responsible for the implementation of the Forest Rights Act.
And will the government consider enhancing compensation or acting on protestors’ complaints? The response deflected responsibility, even though the Ministry of Tribal Affairs sits on the project’s Steering and Monitoring committee.
Verdict: Unanswered
3. Do gender budgets recognise caste and intersectionality? The government skirts questioning.
Unstarred Questions No. 3351: What is the status of gender budgeting cells across India? Do they collect gender- disaggregated and intersectional data for effective policymaking?
Sender: S Jothimani, INC, Lok Sabha (Karur, Tamil Nadu)
Receiver: Ministry of Women & Child Development
Answered: August 7, 2026
Why this matters: Gender budgeting entered India’s policy landscape in 2005, and in turn emerged gender budgeting cells (GBCs), units across ministries that ensured resources flowed towards gender justice programmes. The government, when asked about the functioning of these cells, said they are functioning within 62 Central ministries and departments, and operate across 35 states and union territories.
But on two questions it kept its silence. Have GBCs influenced outcomes for women, are they audited? The Ministry of Women and Child Development said ministries self-report their own progress, which is not the same as an independent audit. This lack of oversight threatens the effective implementation of a scheme that suffers from bureaucratic lethargy and lack of political wall, as we reported earlier.
The other key omission has to do with the idea of ‘women’ in the gender budgeting process. The gender budget sees women as a homogenous category, not differentiating between an upper caste woman’s care from a Dalit woman’s – it misses asking which women are concentrated in unpaid care, how caste segments labour into low-paying, unsafe work, and how migration status and job precarities shape this work. “Thinking of care policy only through the lens of gender blurs, obscures – does not recognise – hierarchies within gender,” scholar Srujana Boddu told BehanBox in February.
The Ministry cites tracking “gender-related indicators” in national surveys like the PLFS and National Family Health Survey (NFHS), statistics that are known to undercount and misclassify informal and unpaid work in which a majority of caste-marginalised women are concentrated. Disaggregated data along caste, migration, income lines, say activists, will visibilise the hierarchies within gender.
Verdict: Partial
4. No data on accidents, unclear heat-safety provisions for outdoor workers.
Unstarred Question No. 2181: How many outdoor workers have fallen ill or died due to heat exposure? Do heat-related labour laws apply to platform workers?
Sender: Surendra Singh Nagar, BJP, Rajya Sabha (Gautam Buddh Nagar, UP)
Receiver: Ministry of Labour and Employment
Answered: August 6, 2026
Why this matters: A majority of India’s largely informal workforce is forced to labour under hazardous heat conditions – at construction sites, on the streets, milling about docks, working on farms, inside and outside houses as part of domestic work. They are at the discretion of employers and platforms, operating without institutional buffers such as paid leaves or health insurance, often going hours without drinking water or taking breaks that are necessary to cope from heat. Health and productivity, life and livelihood, are at risk.
A question was raised in the Parliament about heat-related illnesses and deaths, to which the Ministry of Labour and Employment responded with circuitous figures. It produced NCRB’s Accidental Deaths and Suicides in India data — 804 (2023) and 1,832 (2024) heat/sunstroke deaths – which count heat deaths in the general population, not workplace or occupational deaths. They also included zero illness data.
The NCRB data also frames heat as a natural disaster, but heat exposure is political and an outcome of workplace laws, social identities, economic contexts.
Independent data, however, offers a clearer picture. A joint survey by the Telangana Gig and Platform Workers Union (TGPWU) and HeatWatch in 2024 found that 51.81% of participants had experienced heat exhaustion on the job, 18.07% had experienced sunburn or other skin issues, and 27% reported experiencing symptoms of dehydration. BehanBox also conducted a survey among 48 outdoor workers and found most worked without access to shade and water, and were compelled to work during peak hours. Both studies found there was no platform support, and they weren’t aware of any government schemes.
Worker unions have said India’s new labour codes do not have enforceable mandates around working in extreme heat. The Occupational Safety, Health and Working Conditions Code, 2020, was implemented in November 2025 (and its rules were notified in May this year). The OSH code combines 13 labour laws covering entitlements for factory, construction, mining, dock, contract workers, but they do not include gig workers who are covered by the Social Security code. The Ministry here again confined its response to protections for construction workers, which means the legal right to breaks or protective gear is not explicitly laid out for gig workers.
The guidelines are also riddled with vague mandates that give the Centre outsized power, leading to “more worker injury, accident, and deaths if not clarified, enforced, and regulated at both the Central and State government level with appropriate consultation with workers and unions”, the Amazon Workers’ Union said in a statement.
While the government’s heat advisories acknowledge outdoor workers, they are without teeth and often go unimplemented, unions have said. The Ministry of Home Affairs on August 4 officially recognised heatwaves as a national disaster, unlocking key funding that would bolster Heat Action Plans – a move unions called a “big win” for climate justice for outdoor workers.
Verdict: Misleading, Data not available
5. Internet shutdowns come with economic costs. The government has no idea how much.
Unstarred Question No. 2103: How many internet shutdowns were imposed in the country in the last three years? What is the economic impact?
Sender: Menaka Guruswamy, TMC, Rajya Sabha (West Bengal)
Receiver: Ministry of Communications, Department of Telecommunications
Answered: August 6, 2026
Why this matters: Indians are expected to conduct their lives online, over digital platforms, to access food, travel, healthcare; to recharge phones, refill LPGs or enrol in voter lists; to seek information and be informed. What happens to life and livelihood when the state shuts down the internet?
When asked about the costs and a cumulative accounting of such shutdowns, the government maintained silence. It has not assessed the economic impact, and since police and public order are State subjects, the Ministry of Communication keeps no central data of shutdown order.
There are, however, independent trackers and audits. India recorded the highest number of internet shutdowns among global democracies in 2025, a rank it has held consistently over the last 10 years. Jammu and Kashmir alone experienced 324 shutdowns since Article 370 was abrogated in 2019, the highest of any state or Union Territory.
Last year, shutdowns affected at least 52.5 million people in India, and cost the economy $179.8 million, according to a Top10VPN report. Across the world, the global economy took a hit of $19.7 billion.
In the 2020 Anuradha Bhasin v. Union of India judgment, the Supreme Court held that internet access is constitutionally protected, and any suspension must satisfy requirements: it should be necessary and proportional, be publicly recorded and reasoned, published so it can be legally challenged. In practice, orders are frequently withheld from the public domain or published after the fact. The justifications are swathed in the language of law and order — to prevent unrest in conflict regions or for public safety during exams or protests — but activists note the shutdowns disrupt governance, free speech, and economic activity.
During the July student protests at Jantar Mantar, mobile internet was suspended across parts of Central Delhi with no publicly recorded order. Shops were asked to shutter early, and platforms like Uber and Zomato were advised to cease operations, to prevent “unpleasant situations”. The Internet Freedom Foundation condemned these arbitrary disruptions, noting: “When the network goes dark…a street vendor on the surrounding roads cannot accept a UPI payment. A gig worker loses a day’s earnings…These costs fall hardest on daily wage earners and small traders who can least absorb them.”
Verdict: Data not available
6. Are women without land ownership recognised as ‘farmers’? Unclear.
Unstarred Question No. 2250: How many women are engaged in agriculture, how many of them own land? Are they eligible for government schemes, compensation, and more?
Sender: Renuka Chowdhury, INC, Rajya Sabha (Telangana)
Receiver: Ministry of Agriculture and Farmers Welfare
Answered: August 6, 2026
Why this matters: In 2025, women constituted about 59.81% of the total workforce engaged in agricultural activities, per the Periodic Labour Force Survey. Still, their labour is characterised as ‘unpaid work’ and women are not given the formal ‘farmer’ status and shut out of government schemes, credit, crop insurance, and benefits.
One reason is the lack of land ownership among women who sow, till, and harvest. Women may contribute more than men to agriculture but only about 13.96% have operational landholdings, the government said in its response in Rajya Sabha. This data, more than a decade old, is from the Agriculture Census conducted in 2016. The 11th Agriculture Census (2021-22) was launched in July 2022 and, as of early 2026, its national results still haven’t been published.
When asked if the government recognises women engaged in agriculture but not holding land titles, the Government listed schemes that support farmers, “including women”. It did not definitely acknowledge women’s labour.
As for the question of what the government is doing to rectify this, the Centre cited a Ministry of Rural Development initiative that requires State Governments to introduce a column to document gender in the Record of Rights. It also listed the schemes and subsidies that women can avail. However, researchers note this does little to correct economic disparities. In the absence of land, women lose out on schemes such as the PM Kisan scheme which includes an annual payout of Rs 6,000 as also crop insurance and benefits including fertiliser subsidies.
It is worth noting the official statistics and policy framework contradict the definition of farmer as established under the National Policy for Farmers in 2007. A woman farmer, it says, is someone who is “involved in agriculture, regardless of land ownership or marital status, including those in rural, urban, and tribal areas, involved in production, allied activities, or collecting forest produce”.
The Maharashtra Assembly in July this year passed a historic bill that recognises landless women – in agriculture, fisheries, poultry, and other allied sectors – and challenges economic exclusion by unlocking access to institutional credit, subsidies, and more — effectively redefining the idea of a ‘woman farmer’.
Verdict: Partial
7. The government isn’t tracking how marginalised communities navigate, and are left behind, by AI welfare systems.
Unstarred Question No. 2959: Are there any guidelines to prevent discrimination and exclusion? Are AI systems used in minority welfare programmes audited?
Sender: Yaduveer Wadiyar, BJP, Lok Sabha (Mysuru-Kodagu, Karnataka)
Receiver: Ministry of Minority Affairs
Answered: August 5, 2026
Why this matters: India’s decade-old schemes are increasingly using digital IDs and algorithms to determine who gets food, cooking gas, healthcare, cash transfers. This means an entire apparatus of welfare is at the mercy of opaque systems – multilingual chatbots, facial recognition tools – that are known to encode bias against communities, and jeopardise the rights of citizens.
When asked about the safeguards in place, for data protection and preventing bias, the Minister of Minority Affairs Kiren Rijiju responded with protections under the Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023, and “other applicable legal provisions” and “appropriate safeguards”.
The DPDP Act lets the state process personal data for welfare without consent where a person has previously consented, or where the data already exists in public records, but Section 17 exempts government agencies from consent requirements altogether on national security and public order grounds. Nowhere does the Act address algorithmic discrimination or require impact assessments.
The other details about seven pillars under IndiaAI Mission are a boilerplate response that do not have specific provisions for minority well being.
Another part of the question probed the audit mechanisms that impact minority welfare schemes. An Al Jazeera investigation in 2024 found Telangana’s Samagra Vedika algorithm, which was found to surveil millions of people unlawfully, deprived thousands of poor people of their rightful subsidised food for years. AI-based facial recognition tech at Anganwadi centres are denying pregnant women and new mothers food, reported Decode.
In other countries too, the use of AI in the welfare system has declared people dead, denied them food and entitlements. In the Netherlands, a childcare-benefits algorithm was found to racially discriminate against ethnic communities, a scandal that resulted in the Dutch cabinet resigning in 2021. “Governments around the world are rushing to automate the delivery of public services, but it is the most marginalized in society that are paying the highest price,” an Amnesty report said.
But the government is not tracking these exclusions centrally. “Information with specific reference to AI Vision Centres for Minorities, including applications, approvals, fund allocation, beneficiaries and outcome assessment, is not maintained separately,” it said. This is the first public acknowledgement that such a programme exists ‘AI Vision Centres for Minorities’, but the government hasn’t detailed what it covers or its outcomes.
Verdict: Data not available, Unanswered
Have you joined Feminist Election Newsroom yet? FEN is BehanBox’s initiative to build a collective feminist practice of democratic engagement—tracking, interrogating, and holding power accountable, during elections and beyond.