As all three fronts have unveiled their manifestos for the next five years in Kerala, the documents reflect competing visions and clear political contestation. Rather than overlapping wish lists, they present three distinct ideological blueprints. THE WEEK analyses the competing visions and ideologies in the manifestos of the UDF, LDF, and the NDA for Kerala.
The LDF, which has ruled Kerala for the past ten years, presents a manifesto that, on the one hand, assumes its development and governance model has been satisfactory and only requires continuity. Notably, a key element of the LDF’s governance model has been its confrontational relationship with the Union government. This tone continues in the manifesto, with the LDF, in fact, promising more confrontation.
At the other end, the BJP promises a shift towards a "lesser government" in the state—with reduced market intervention and greater privatisation—while placing significant reliance on the Union government and its schemes to drive Kerala’s development agenda.
The UDF manifesto, meanwhile, adopts a more confrontational stance towards the LDF and its development model, offering to correct what it describes as multiple shortcomings. However, on issues such as market intervention and support for PSUs, its position appears closer to that of the LDF.
In welfare and poverty alleviation, the LDF pushes ambitious promises for the eradication of absolute poverty in the state. It promises to identify around five lakh of the poorest families and lift them out of poverty.
The UDF also promises the identification of the poorest of the poor and pledges to update the ‘Asraya’ scheme, which they launched when they previously ruled the state, in accordance with today’s needs and relaunch its second phase. The UDF also promises to create a special action plan to eradicate and alleviate poverty among holders of yellow (Antyodaya) and pink ration cards. Meanwhile, the BJP also states in its manifesto that Kerala is not poverty-free. It promises a fresh, multi-pronged strategy to eliminate poverty through measures like expanding the Union government-backed Ayushman Bharat PM-JAY to provide health insurance to every Malayalee.
Notably, all three alliances promise a welfare pension of ₹3,000. However, the BJP restricts this to specific demographics (those over 70, widows, and poor female heads), while the LDF and UDF imply broader coverage, with the UDF promising to make it a statutory right.
In healthcare, the LDF and the UDF also promise insurance coverage as a key area. While the BJP is promising an expansion of Ayushman Bharat, the LDF is promising steps like introducing a special health insurance scheme designed for the “missing middle” category, who are not covered under schemes such as the Karunya Benevolent Fund (KBF), MEDISEP, and other insurance programmes. The LDF also promises that the 4.2 million current beneficiaries under the Karunya Health Security Scheme (KASP) will receive treatment benefits without any cap if they return to power. Meanwhile, one of the most highlighted promises of the UDF is a ₹25-lakh health insurance cover for every household under a scheme named after former Chief Minister Oommen Chandy. The UDF also promises that beds will be a right in government hospitals so no patient has to lie on the floor. It also pledges to establish JIPMER-model "no-bill" hospitals and introduce doorstep delivery of medicines for the elderly.
ASHA workers’ protests have rocked the second Pinarayi government in its final months, with the opposition backing the year-long agitation. The UDF, notably, has promised to raise ASHA workers’ daily wages to ₹700. While the BJP leadership also supported the protests in Kerala, its manifesto does not mention ASHA workers at all.
In agriculture and plantations, one can observe both striking similarities and notable differences in the positions of all three fronts. There is particular attention to rubber farmers across all three, even though their approaches diverge. Both the UDF and the LDF promise to make the minimum support price ₹300/kg for rubber. Meanwhile, the BJP promises a support price of ₹250/kg plus a 5% annual increment. The LDF promises to promote modern fruit cultivation; meanwhile, the BJP goes a step further and proposes a similar "Tropical Fruit Mission" to incentivise a phased transition away from rubber farming and amending laws to allow multi-cropping in plantations. Meanwhile, the UDF’s approach is more towards supporting rubber farming; the UDF proposes the creation of a rubber company based on the Cochin International Airport Limited (CIAL) model for this purpose. The BJP’s unique proposal to phase out rubber farming in favour of tropical fruits thus contrasts sharply with the UDF's CIAL-model rubber company. The UDF also promises to implement the Swaminathan Commission recommendations on fixing minimum support prices based on production cost, land rent, and input costs.
Kerala faces high graduate unemployment. The CPI(M), through the LDF, promises campus placements for all students completing their studies in the state. It also proposes a “Connect to Work” scholarship for students undergoing skill training, along with a volunteer network of mentors.
The UDF, meanwhile, proposes more structural changes to the higher education system. It promises to constitute a panel of experts to set up a “Job Watch Tower” to track changes in the international job market and introduce timely reforms in higher education. The UDF also proposes a law named after Rohith Vemula to address caste-based discrimination in educational institutions, along with bridge programmes to help graduates secure jobs more quickly.
The NDA, on the other hand, proposes a ₹1 lakh soft loan per job created to boost employment. It also plans to establish new industrial estates and introduce a state-level Production-Linked Incentive (PLI) scheme to attract investment in sunrise sectors such as technology and innovation. The LDF, meanwhile, promises a massive ₹2 lakh crore investment drive and aims to expand the public sector to achieve a turnover of ₹10,000 crore by 2031.
On infrastructure, SilverLine—a proposed high-speed rail corridor connecting south and north Kerala—was a flagship project that the LDF attempted but could not advance during its second term. The LDF manifesto, however, reiterates its commitment to a high-speed north–south rail corridor. It also promises metro systems in Thiruvananthapuram and Kozhikode, along with the completion of the Angamaly–Erumeli Sabarimala railway line.
The BJP similarly promises expedited implementation of the Sabari Rail project and a high-speed rail network connecting Thiruvananthapuram to Kannur. In contrast, Opposition Leader V. D. Satheesan stated, while releasing the UDF manifesto, that the front would scrap the SilverLine project and denotify the land already acquired for it.
Human–wildlife conflict remains a pressing issue in Kerala, and all three fronts acknowledge the crisis. However, their approaches differ in emphasis and scope. The NDA focuses on preventive measures such as improving water and fodder availability inside forests, strengthening physical barriers, and deploying early warning systems. Notably, while both the UDF and the LDF argue that amendments to existing laws are necessary—with an implicit expectation of action from the Centre—the BJP does not propose any legal changes.
The LDF underscores the need for legislative amendments to address human–wildlife conflict but stops short of outlining concrete steps in that direction. The UDF, meanwhile, proposes a more interventionist approach. It prioritises preventing wild animals from entering human settlements and assigns full responsibility for this to the Forest Department. It also proposes granting landowners the authority to deal with wild animals that stray onto their property.
Additionally, the UDF proposes setting up a tribunal, on the lines of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (MACT), to provide compensation for deaths and injuries caused by wildlife attacks. It also commits to pursuing amendments to the Wildlife (Protection) Act 1972, after consultations with farmers’ and tribal organisations.
The Sabarimala gold theft controversy is another key issue in Kerala. Notably, the LDF, which is on the defensive in this controversy, remains silent on temple management or gold theft, though it promises the completion of the Sabarimala master plan in the next five years. Meanwhile, the BJP takes a confrontational stance and promises a time-bound CBI enquiry into the Sabarimala gold theft to ensure a thorough investigation and prosecution of all those involved. It also promises a complete revamp of Devaswom Boards to ensure increased participation of devotees in temple management across Kerala.
It also promises the constitution of a Special Commission to examine temple audit reports from the past 30 years, inspect temple assets, and prosecute instances of abuse of power. The UDF, meanwhile, promises justice in the Sabarimala gold theft case and greater transparency in the functioning of Devaswom Boards, while also pledging to protect their autonomy. Both the BJP and the UDF promise to safeguard Sabarimala traditions.
All three alliances are also actively courting the Christian demographic in the state. The BJP’s key promise is to grant micro-minority status to Christians. The LDF promises educational benefits for converted Christians on par with Scheduled Castes, doubling the budget of the Converted Christian Development Corporation, and implementing the J. B. Koshy Commission report. The UDF, for its part, pledges to establish a “Ministry of Tolerance”, permanently resolve church disputes, and implement the J. B. Koshy Commission report.
Kerala has experienced varying degrees of fiscal stress since the 1980s, with the structure of public expenditure and shortcomings in resource mobilisation remaining long-standing concerns. In its manifesto, the LDF promises a continuation of its current financial strategy, which seeks to increase capital investment alongside rising social welfare expenditure. It blames both the BJP-led Centre and the opposition for resisting its fiscal approach, arguing that the UDF’s stance aids the Centre in undermining the state’s financial strategy by amplifying debt-related concerns. The LDF asserts that it will counter central financial restrictions through legal means, strategic adjustments, and public mobilisation. It also expresses confidence in increasing revenue from GST and other taxes to fund its commitments.
The UDF, meanwhile, outlines a more granular approach to resource mobilisation. It promises a comprehensive restructuring of the GST department, measures to improve inter-state GST (IGST) collection, the use of AI to expand the GST base, and greater efficiency in GST intelligence and audit wings. It also proposes the creation of a Non-Resident Keralite Investment Fund. While the UDF promises special economic and fiscal policy programmes to accelerate growth, it offers fewer details on their implementation.
The NDA also proposes improving GST and tax collection through technology. However, its approach to resource mobilisation is more aggressive, including the monetisation of public assets and the introduction of user fees for underutilised facilities. It also promises expenditure rationalisation, including the removal of ghost beneficiaries through social audits and the elimination of redundant or non-value-adding expenditure. Additionally, it proposes strategic financial revival packages for key public sector units such as KSRTC, KWA, and KSEB, coupled with strict restructuring measures to improve efficiency and ensure long-term viability.