Current Estonian Minister of Finance Mart Võrklaev (Reform) said a negative supplementary budget of €175 million would be adopted before Christmas. You were one of the instigators the big budget cuts in 2008-2009. How realistic is it to cut €175 million from the budget?

It is a minor point compared to what we did in 2008, when it became clear in the same way that spring that the money was not coming in. Of course, the situation was different then, we had an active coalition and there was also a clear ambition to meet the euro criterion.

However, in 2008, the "crocodile commission" made cuts of around four to five percent of GDP, through which the budget was improved. These were not all reductions, but also cuts in spending growth.

In 2009, the cut made was as much as nine percent of GDP, compared to the previous plan, and now we are looking at 0.4 percent. And now the overall deficit is four to five percent, depending on which forecast we look at. Back then we cut twice as much. And at the moment, we are not trying to eliminate the entire deficit.

The reality of a cut depends very much on the circumstances: how active the coalition is, how understanding society is. There's a lot of stigma here. We are often told about the dogmas of the Reform Party. But in fact we are breaking the budgetary rules that are currently in place.

Budgetary balance cannot be the dogma of one party, it is simply a question of responsibility and a question of how much the government promises itself. The spirit is now different: the budgetary rules we set at that time have been reversed. Even the temporary rules that have been relaxed cannot be satisfied. All of this is also hampering agreements.

I am not a member of the government, but it seems to me that it is being pulled in different directions. There is a lack of a sense that this is our common cause, that cuts must be made.

You said there was a coalition at the time. So you don't consider the current coalition government to be active? In fact, it seems to me that society is changing its attitude toward cuts. People understand that the situation is bad, however, there are no concrete proposals from the government.

Yes, people understand a bit more now. But so long as no decisions have been taken, I don't think it's worth expecting the government to just talk about the budget. That just makes people even more nervous.

However, when it comes to the coalition, there is still a lot of inexperience and very little of the "us" feeling. They do not speak on behalf of the government, but start sentences by naming their party. The SDE are no longer the moderates who used to look at things from a national perspective. Now they are more inclined to look at their own area and show their own parties' face.

I don't really know whether at some point there will be more messages from the government, which consider Estonia as a country, and not just about their own parties.

In fact, a good example is the leader of the Social Democratic Party and Minister of the Interior, Lauri Läänemets, who said in an interview with ERR on Tuesday that the ambition for cuts has to be raised. However, a few sentences later, he started to say that cuts under the administrative area of the Ministry of the Interior would mean that construction work on the eastern border would stop, and that rescue capabilities would fall – in other words, what he said after was the exact opposite of what he had said before.

I didn't hear the interview, but it sounds promising that at least he is prepared to talk about cuts.

It is always the Social Democratic Party who have the greatest desire to spend, but when I listen to the Eesti 200, leader Margus Tsahkna, talking about brutal cuts again, it makes my heart sink. It is a long time since he has given a logical speech. I just listened to an entire interview. There were only rhetorical flourishes, the rest was full of logical inconsistencies.

It does not give me any confidence, but I am keeping my fingers crossed that maybe they will get it right in government.

It's complicated. Many people's basic income, such as pensions or parental benefits, cannot be treated in the same way as others'. They are indexed backwards when times are worse. However, there are many things that only index upwards or are screwed up by promises.

Speaking abstractly, if I could, I would make recommendations to the government. But from the outside, I can't see into people's eyes and I can't tell how sincere someone is or how willing they are to actually make cuts. 

All the Reform Party ministers usually go to the parliamentary group in the Riigikogu on Monday mornings to talk about their work. Do you see a sparkle and determination to make cuts, in the eyes of Minister of Finance Mart Võrklaev (Reform)?

I do think he has the will, but he is a bit of a mess, in human terms. Rather, he wants to prove that he can carry out his duties with honor.

I do think he has the will, but he is a bit of a mess, in human terms. Rather, he wants to prove that he can carry out his duties with honor.

When it comes to increasing expenditure, he is on his own with the other Reform Party ministers and, for the moment, he is still more of a leader in terms of practical steps.

Mind you, I do not agree with everything they have proposed. In some places, I have also told them that they are looking in the wrong place.

What do you think are the right and wrong places?

I won't say who said it, but there has been talk of reducing pensions, for example, or adjusting the parental benefits. These are the wrong choices, they are themselves dependent on other costs, and they are people's basic income.

But you cannot cut universal benefits for some reason, it is not possible. I think it is very possible: it should not be the same for everyone. That's nonsense, it is unfair, it is dishonest and it is just lazy.

Which subsidies are you referring to?

I was talking about family policy, the need for support for people who are definitely working is much less. Ideally, a working-age person should not really receive financial support in the form of cash, the state of the country being as it is.

But there, willingness, I fear, is in short supply. However, we will fight on. I may have convinced some people of a few things.

How much of this talk about cuts seems to relate to the European election campaign? The coalition parties have now got a fig leaf in place against these attacks win which they are accused of neglecting the budget. Does Margus Tsahkna's talk of brutal cuts show voters that he is taking responsibility?

I'm not sure about that, but I wouldn't bet on the election being blameless either. Tsahkna has a problem because there is a high probability that they will not exceed the electoral threshold. And it's at the threshold that the panic attacks still occur. You have to fully understand them.

As a financier, I am very concerned about the dismantling of the government. All these dissolutions and reconvening have ended up with some very expensive sausage-selling, blackmail and grandstanding, but not with national decision making.

The rest of the government is probably not directly affected by the elections. In fact, the activities of the government and the members of the Riigikogu are not so affected by their participation in the European Parliament  elections. Although one may indeed sometimes face requests to keep one's mouth shut more at some point.

Last week, former Prime Minister Andrus Ansip (Reform) said that a new government was actually needed in order for proper cuts to be made. And the current prime minister might go to Brussels to take a role in the European Commission. All these difficult and very tough choices are much easier to make with new people. Would you agree with that statement?

Certainly not. It is not easier with new people, it is extremely difficult to get used to them.

And at the moment, it's all about avoiding the worst. From where are we supposed to find the people who will settle in smoothly and get things done?

For example, your party colleague Aivar Sõerd, who is one of the foremost finance experts in politics?

ague Aivar Sõerd, who is one of the foremost finance experts in politics?

Aivar hasn't put together crisis budgets, he's made budgets when money was tight. I wouldn't bet on a blast from the past in this context. We have a lot of ex-finance ministers, but it is not about the finance minister. It's still about the readiness of the team. If the team were ready, it wouldn't matter who the minister was.

But would the readiness of the team perhaps be improved by replacing a few members? In 2009, the then Social Democratic Party also walked out of the government, with the minority government then seeking support from the opposition. Now could that be repeated, whereby you continue with an Eesti 200 majority government and seek support from the opposition?

I don't see the opposition doing any better either. At the time it worked, but now it is instead the size of the parliamentary majority that is very important. So I am not speculating on a change of government.

 A change of government is actually a huge trauma for the finances, everyone always turns away and goes back to doing their own thing. It is very tragic, I have seen it.

--

Follow ERR News on Facebook and Twitter and never miss an update!