CPI(M) state secretary M.V. Govindan said the Kerala government had signed the PM SHRI scheme without completing discussions either within the Left Democratic Front (LDF) or in the cabinet.
On October 23, 2025, K. Vasuki, Secretary of the General Education Department, signed the MoU on behalf of the state government. The LDF has long opposed the National Education Policy (NEP), calling it centralising, exclusionary, and a threat to state autonomy. It has described PM SHRI as a “backdoor entry” for the NEP and had resisted signing the scheme until then. However, the government decided to proceed after Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan met Prime Minister Narendra Modi on October 10.
The MoU was prepared in Delhi on October 16. When media reports about it surfaced, CPI raised questions at the cabinet meeting on October 22. Neither the CM nor Education Minister V. Sivankutty informed the cabinet that the MoU had already been finalised. The government signed the agreement the very next day. CPI leaders, other LDF allies, and even sections of the CPI(M) leadership learnt about it through media reports.
On October 27, the CPI(M) state secretariat reportedly discussed the issue and concluded that withdrawing from PM SHRI was no longer feasible. Instead, it decided to explain to the CPI the circumstances under which the agreement was signed. While the chief minister attempted reconciliation, the CPI remained firm in demanding accountability. CPI ministers submitted a protest letter to Vijayan, saying they felt misled as a major cabinet decision had been withheld from them. They also threatened to boycott cabinet meetings.
Also read
Eventually, the CPI(M) and the chief minister stepped back, and the cabinet decided to form a subcommittee to examine the feasibility of withdrawing from the scheme. Following this, CPI ministers agreed to attend cabinet meetings again.
Govindan has now stated that the party’s self-criticism is that the issue was not properly discussed within the party, the LDF, or the government at the time. However, no action has been taken against either the chief minister or the education minister for bypassing party processes.
He said the PM SHRI issue did not figure prominently when the party later analysed its poor performance in the recent local body polls. “When the PM SHRI issue arose, the party made its position clear at that very moment,” Govindan told THE WEEK.
On the broader question of the government signing PM SHRI, Govindan reiterated that the party and the government are not the same. “The party does not believe that every position it takes can automatically be implemented by the government. Many criticisms arise from the misconception that all Left positions must necessarily translate into government action,” he said.
When asked whether a Left government is not meant to implement Left policies, Govindan said governance operates within structural limits. “This is not something new. EMS said this as early as 1957. The executive, judiciary, legislature, and the media together shape governance. Having a legislative majority does not mean everything the Left proposes can be implemented. The CPI(M) has never been under that illusion,” he said.
At the same time, Govindan acknowledged that PM SHRI was a sensitive issue and should have been discussed collectively before signing. “That did not happen. That is what led to this situation. That is why a cabinet subcommittee was formed,” he said. The committee is yet to submit its report.
After the subcommittee was constituted, the Kerala government formally asked the Union government to put the implementation of PM SHRI in the state on hold.
The signing of PM SHRI is closely linked to the Centre blocking Samagra Shiksha funds. Although PM SHRI was launched in 2022 and Kerala initially refused to sign it, the state continued to receive funds until the first half of the 2023–24 financial year. When Kerala sought the third instalment, it was denied on the grounds that the state had not joined PM SHRI. In March 2024, the state assured the Centre it would sign the MoU before the 2024–25 academic year to receive 37.5 per cent of the sanctioned funds. When this assurance was not fulfilled, funds remained blocked. The Centre released a portion of pending arrears (for the ongoing financial year) only after Kerala signed the PM SHRI agreement.
Asked whether the CPI(M) or the Left has alternatives to such “coercive” measures by the Centre, Govindan said the only option was to mobilise public opinion against what he called the Centre’s wrong policies and clearly explain the issues to the people. |
