100 Days of TVK: Vijay Promised New Politics. Has He Delivered?

The first 100 days are a test of political conduct, not just performance. On that test, TVK's record is mixed.

Vijay came to power promising more than a change of government.

(Photo: Kamran Akhter/The Quint)

Thalapathy Vijay’s first 100 days as Chief Minister should not be judged by whether he has transformed Tamil Nadu overnight. No government can do that. The more important question is whether the Tamilaga Vettri Kazhagam (TVK) government has begun to change the way political power is exercised.

Vijay came to power promising more than a change of government. He criticised the Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK) and All India Anna Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (AIADMK) for family control, corruption, and intolerance of dissent, and presented TVK as an alternative political culture. The first 100 days are therefore a test of political conduct, not just performance. On that test, the record is mixed.

TN Budget: New Initiatives but More of the Same

TVK's maiden budget, presented on 5 August, provides an early indication of the government’s approach. It announced new welfare measures, including free gold coins and silk sarees for brides under the Annan Seer Thittam at a cost of Rs 812 crore, a goat-rearing livelihood scheme for widows and destitute women with an allocation of Rs 110 crore, and an expansion of the breakfast scheme to Classes 6–8. However, several major campaign promises, including Rs 2,500 a month for women heads of households, six free LPG cylinders, and wider free bus travel for women, received no allocation.

Several other announcements pertain to schemes implemented by earlier governments. The free milch-cow distribution scheme revives a welfare programme associated with Jayalalithaa’s AIADMK government.

The Rs 2,000 crore Vettri Laptop Scheme continues Tamil Nadu’s long-running free-laptop scheme, now with an emphasis on AI readiness.

The free-bicycle scheme for Class XI students is similarly a continuation of a scheme implemented by successive AIADMK and DMK governments. Of course, there is nothing wrong with continuity. A government should retain programmes that work.

However, TVK campaigned on a departure from the established political model. If much of its welfare architecture is inherited, it has to show what is substantively different about its approach. Renaming existing schemes cannot by itself amount to policy innovation.

The Fiscal Picture

The government’s fiscal position provides a more complicated picture. The revised estimates for 2026–27 put the fiscal deficit at Rs 1,21,819 crore, broadly in line with the Rs 1.22 lakh crore projected in the previous government’s Interim Budget. The revenue deficit is estimated at Rs 55,775 crore, compared with Rs 48,696 crore in the Interim Budget. Outstanding liabilities remain close to 27 percent of GSDP.

The TVK government has proposed additional revenue mobilisation of about Rs 16,000 crore, including a new liquor production cess, and announced a Revenue Enhancement Committee. Its June White Paper had projected a much higher fiscal deficit of about Rs 1.64 lakh crore. The revised budget, therefore, represents a significant improvement over that earlier estimate.

It is too early to conclude that fiscal prudence has failed. But it is also too early to say that it has produced structural change. Some expensive campaign promises have been deferred to a later full-year Budget. That may be reasonable in the first year.

The government will have to show whether this restraint is part of a longer fiscal strategy or simply postpones difficult expenditure decisions.

On the economic front, the recent investment conclave and its MoUs show the government’s effort to attract investment. But their significance will depend on how many translate into actual projects and jobs; until then, they remain commitments on paper.

Symbolic Assertion and Institutional Change

During the Assembly session, the government passed resolutions on NEET, the Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Amendment Bill, delimitation, and Tamil Thaai Vaazhthu. The FCRA resolution was passed on August 11, and the delimitation resolution on August 12.

These resolutions are politically significant, particularly on federalism, delimitation, and the relationship between the state and the Centre.

But they should not all be presented as new initiatives. The Assembly had already adopted resolutions opposing NEET under the previous government.

Tamil Thaai Vaazhthu was also already governed by an order requiring it to be sung at the beginning of official functions. The new resolution, therefore, reinforces an existing position rather than creating a new policy. The other resolutions are legitimate exercises of political authority, but their immediate policy effect is limited. They demonstrate the government’s political positions more than a new model of governance.

Great Power, Greater Respobsibility

Vijay had criticised the previous government over custodial deaths and police excesses. Questions about custodial deaths and police conduct during protests have continued under TVK. The murder of 19-year-old Coimbatore engineering student K Amudhan has also raised questions about the government’s handling of law and order. The government has described the incident as a clash, while the student’s family and others have challenged that account.

These cases do not by themselves establish that policing has worsened under TVK. Tamil Nadu has faced similar questions under successive governments. But a government that campaigned on changing political conduct has to demonstrate a different institutional response.

The Udhayanidhi Stalin case provides a more direct test. Udhayanidhi was arrested on August 4 over remarks made during a Cauvery protest speech that were widely interpreted as an innuendo about an actor. He was released the same day on station bail after questioning, following the Madras High Court’s direction that he be released and cooperate with the investigation.

Although the state did not seek prolonged custody, and judicial oversight was exercised immediately, the more relevant question is whether the same standards will apply when controversial remarks are made by people closer to the ruling establishment.

That question has arisen regarding Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) state president Nainar Nagendran. His remarks about Vijay’s mother on Independence Day prompted a complaint, and the police have said the matter is under investigation. The absence of an arrest cannot by itself establish unequal treatment. But the comparison is worth watching. Udhayanidhi was arrested very quickly after the complaint against him. Nagendran has so far faced an investigation without detention. The issue is not that every case must result in an arrest. It is whether the state applies the same standards and urgency when political speech involves the ruling party, the opposition, or its political allies.

Free Press, Freedom from Corruption

Corruption presents a wider test. The government has publicised its anti-corruption measures, but complaints about corruption at lower administrative levels persist. No government can realistically eliminate corruption completely. The more meaningful question is whether it can reduce opportunities for petty corruption, make public services less dependent on personal influence, and ensure that complaints are investigated regardless of who is involved.

That would represent a change in political culture. Beyond corruption, there is also some disillusionment among sections of voters over rising prices, higher electricity bills despite unannounced power cuts, and increased property taxes. These issues do not necessarily indicate policy failure, since wider economic and fiscal pressures shape tariffs, taxes, and prices. But they matter politically. A government promising a different form of politics will eventually be judged by how its decisions affect ordinary households.

Also, transparency requires openness in decision-making and direct accountability. TVK repeatedly promised both in opposition. Yet some appointments have emerged first through reports and leaks rather than through clear official announcements.

Vijay has also not made regular press interaction a feature of his tenure, limiting opportunities to question him directly on important decisions. A government that promised a different political culture must be more open about how it governs and more accessible to those who question it.

There is a similar concern about the treatment of journalists. Senior television journalist Vijayan was detained and questioned in July in connection with an investigation into an alleged attempt to poach TVK MLAs. His phone was seized for forensic examination. He was questioned late into the night and asked to return for further questioning.

Questioning a journalist in an investigation is not automatically improper. But the manner in which it is done matters. A government that promised greater tolerance of scrutiny has to show that journalists are not subjected to unnecessary pressure because of their professional work or contacts.

Original Ideas Paramount

The first 100 days show a government that has changed who holds power in Tamil Nadu and has taken some new policy initiatives. However, the larger test remains unresolved.

Is the welfare model substantively different, or largely inherited and renamed? Is fiscal prudence a long-term strategy or a temporary postponement of expensive promises? Will the police, administration and legal process operate according to the same standards regardless of political affiliation? And can the government turn its anti-corruption claims into more transparent everyday administration?

These questions cannot be answered conclusively in 100 days. But they are already the right questions to ask.

Electoral change has happened. TVK has replaced the DMK government. However, political change requires something more: a demonstrable difference in how public power is exercised.

The first 100 days have not yet established that difference. TVK has changed the government of Tamil Nadu. It has not yet shown that it has changed how Tamil Nadu is governed.

(P John J Kennedy is an educator and political analyst. This is an opinion piece and the views expressed are the author's own. The Quint does not endorse or is responsible for them.)