Mega scandals outshone mega projects

The main question in Kerala this time was whether the state would follow the revolving-door pattern of electing the Congress-led UDF and the CPI(M)-led LDF every five years, or whether the NDA’s advent would mark a paradigm shift. The results proved Kerala remains within its own ideological divide, giving no attention to the blitzkrieg by Prime Minister Narendra Modi and his strategists to alter the scenario. Most of the BJP’s efforts to influence Kerala’s voters were counter-productive, whether it was institutionalised caste politics as in the north, the over-exposure of the PM and little-known Central ministers, money power, Hindutva or the Somalia reference. While the BJP may have positioned itself for future by getting a higher percentage of votes, it didn’t alter the political landscape.

The BJP opened its account in the Kerala Assembly after contesting since 1982. But the “lotus blossom” win of O. Rajagopal, a widely-respected leader known for his contribution to Kerala during his tenure at the Centre, was a foregone conclusion even before the new BJP strategy was unveiled.

Without the anticipated paradigm shift, Kerala voted true to form and elected the LDF to rule for the next five years. The UDF thought it would create history by remaining in power on the strength of the success of mega-projects like Vizhinjam Port, Smart City, Kochi Metro, Kannur airport and others, which they helped to initiate or advance. But the mega-scandals, though unproved, outshone the mega-projects and the UDF was sent to Opposition. The LDF strategy to play up the corruption issue, pledging to set things right on coming to power, worked well. But ironically, all the tainted ministers were not defeated. Voters thus adopted the time-tested policy of trying out each coalition by turn. The alliances are compelled to perform as the possibility of another change will constantly loom large.

Development and secularism are part of the common agenda of both the UDF and LDF, but they are divergent in their definitions of both. A consensus on these concepts eludes Kerala due to the ideological divide. The UDF believes in both the public and private sectors for development, but the LDF emphasises its distance from the private sector. But even the LDF is not averse to cooperation with big business, as it has indicated in the case of mega-projects. The accepted concept of a mixed economy should be acceptable to both sides. The divergence is highlighted during polls, but in practice, there will be no great difference in their approach to the economy. Based on the UN sustainable development goals, it should not be difficult to reach a consensus on development, so that changes in approach don’t lead to the reversal of policies every five years.

Secularism is basically a slogan in Kerala, as Keralites often vote on the basis of caste, instead of casting their vote. Both fronts have had partnerships with the Muslim League, that positioned itself as a secular party in Kerala against the more radical Islamic groups. The BJP united the two fronts against its Hindutva agenda, but both of them accused the other of secretly being in league with the BJP. The minorities’ concerns about the Narendra Modi government is a major factor that influences both the fronts.

One issue that came into focus this time was the UDF’s liquor policy, that saw the closure of low-cost bars, but didn’t lead to any significant fall in alcohol consumption. The UDF would like to move to prohibition, but the LDF prefers to attain the same objective through a process of abstinence. Both policies will have no effect as long as the public remains unaware of the dangers of drinking. Like in the case of Mikhail Gorbachev in the erstwhile Soviet Union, the popular sentiment may undermine the promoters of reduction in consumption of hard liquor. No progress should be expected in this area under either of the two fronts.

In health and education policies, the differences between the two fronts have been highlighted for political reasons. Private investment in health is welcome to both, but the LDF voiced its opposition to private universities and autonomous colleges. The UDF government did not approve of private universities, but suggested measures to enliven higher education. These were demonised by interested parties, but their merits would be recognised if the measures were examined dispassionately. West Bengal permitted private universities during the Marxist government. If the new government studies the blueprint for a new education system without an ideological prism, there could be a consensus on health and education. A change in the government should be seen as an opportunity in a democracy. The acrimony of the campaign, the sweetness of victory and the bitterness of defeat shouldn’t linger too long, and a common agenda should be formulated even with the ideological divide for the common good.

The writer, a former diplomat who also served in the IAEA, is director-general of Kerala International Centre