The Communist Party of India (Marxist) (CPI(M)) appears to be extending an olive branch to its coalition partner, the Communist Party of India (CPI), after internal disagreements arose regarding the Left Democratic Front (LDF) government’s contentious decision. At the heart of the matter is the state’s pursuit of funds from the Prime Minister’s Schools for Raising India (PM-SHRI) scheme, a move prompted by the “cash-strapped” general education sector in Kerala. However, these funds are explicitly linked to adhering to the National Education Policy (NEP).
Both the CPI and CPI(M), alongside other non-BJP-governed states, have voiced strong opposition to the NEP. Their collective stance views the policy as a central government tactic to infringe upon the autonomy of state governments and an underhanded attempt to impose a uniform, centralized educational model across the nation, effectively sidelining India’s rich linguistic, cultural, and ethnic diversity.
CPI’s Deep-Seated Concerns
Binoy Viswam, the State Secretary of the CPI, has expressed significant worry that accepting PM-SHRI funds could undermine the Left’s well-articulated national opposition to the NEP.
He further pointed out the impracticality of seeking benefits from a scheme launched in 2022 when its tenure is set to conclude in 2026-27, arguing that Kerala would receive minimal advantages as PM-SHRI offers no retrospective effect. Viswam labeled the proposed move as “a bad fiscal and political bargain.”
In response, CPI(M) General Secretary M.A. Baby, speaking to reporters in New Delhi, conceded that the CPI’s concerns were indeed valid. He reaffirmed the LDF’s categorical rejection of the NEP. However, he clarified that the state intends to secure PM-SHRI funds without compromising its principled stand against the National Education Policy.
Baby emphasized that the LDF would work towards achieving a consensus among all its allies before making a definitive, “principled call” on the matter.
He criticized the Central government’s strategy of linking educational funding to compliance with state policies, likening it to a regressive step reminiscent of the Emergency era.
“During the Indira Gandhi government, the autonomy of states was eroded when education was moved from the State list to the Concurrent list. This allows both Parliament and provincial assemblies to legislate on the subject. Yet, in cases of conflict, the Central law takes precedence over State laws. Therefore, the LDF must navigate a delicate political and legal path to sustain the progress and development of its education sector,” Baby explained.
Baby also highlighted that several Congress-led state governments have already opted into the PM-SHRI scheme. He specifically noted that Tamil Nadu, while not explicitly rejecting PM-SHRI, has resisted endorsing the NEP, fearing it would threaten the linguistic diversity of its states and dismantle its existing two-language policy.
Meanwhile, General Education Minister V. Sivankutty has stated that the PM-SHRI scheme promises to inject ₹1,446 crores into the state’s treasury, earmarked for modernizing government schools, funding educational research, and covering the salaries of approximately 7,000 teachers.
A source within the CPI indicated that the party’s State secretariat, executive, and council are slated to hold discussions on this critical issue.