Hussar also said the recent expulsion of MP Züleyxa Izmailova, who has since joined the Social Democrats, was justified due to ongoing conflict.

Hussar gave an interview to ERR which follows.

What is your assessment of the current state of the Eesti 200 party?

As someone who is no longer a member of the party's board, I may indeed now get the opportunity to assess things from afar. I believe that the party has stood up for itself and, as a result, has been able to get some clarity. Both the Riigikogu faction and the party board have clearly expressed their positions.

On the one hand, the Riigikogu faction has clearly articulated the need to move forward as one, considering it is currently the second-largest faction at the Riigikogu (following the recent wave of defections from EKRE – ed.).

On the other, the party's board has taken up responsibility and has decided to call an extraordinary general meeting to elect new leaders and to finesse the party's statutes, the bedrock of its activities. These are two very significant decisions, which will undoubtedly provide a clear roadmap for Eesti 200 through the summer.

Do you plan to re-run for party chair at the end of the summer?

I haven't thought about that. I have been party chairman already, and led the party to its best election results. I am well aware of how difficult and demanding the position is. I also held this position during one of the most challenging periods in the history of the Riigikogu, thanks to obstruction by the opposition.

Being both the Riigikogu speaker and the party's leader became too much for me all at once. This was the clear reason why I chose to continue as the Speaker of the Riigikogu, aiming primarily to restore the Riigikogu's functionality. As of now, we can say that the Riigikogu's functionality has clearly been restored, and it has returned to its normal work pace, thanks for the most part to successive decisions by the Riigikogu board.

Under your tenure, the party achieved a record election result (at the 2023 Riigikogu elections – ed). However, the recent European Parliament election results were not so successful (the party failed to win a seat – ed.). Do you have a vision for how to rectify the situation within the party, even if you yourself are not running as chair? What direction should the party take?

I have spoken with several of my European colleagues who lead newer reform-minded liberal parties, and none of them performed very well at the European Parliament polls, likely because the long-term messages are harder to convey in the current climate. People are looking for clear, black-and-white solutions, and often make choices based on opposition.

I believe that a party like Eesti 200 is clearly needed in Estonia. Eesti 200 has positioned itself as a leader on several issues, and if we examine the current government coalition, a significant portion of the government's reform packages have been initiated by or led by Eesti 200. These are important steps, and Eesti 200 has a clear vision for bettering the Estonian state.

Nowadays, we have mainly been talking about the state's finances and the need to improve them. Eesti 200 firmly believes in taking significant steps, including reviewing the entire state budget through a zero-based budgeting approach.

Eesti 200 has clear messages, and conveying these messages is crucial. I believe that voters have not forgotten these clear messages, and can see the activities as well.

As for the party itself, it is essential to state clearly that internal conflicts and derogatory behavior towards each other should not be allowed. Freedom of speech is one thing, but disrespectful behavior towards people with whom we share ideological views is unacceptable.

This was the factor behind the recent expulsion of a board member (Züleyxa Izmailova – ed.). The party's statutes do not permit derogatory behavior, but this had become a prevalent pattern over a long period.

At some point, the party had to respond. The question may remain as to whether the timing was right, but a situation of that kind cannot be tolerated for long. Even in a family, with constant conflict going on, we do seriously consider whether a reconciliation process is possible.

Once reconciliation efforts have failed, it is sometimes wiser for parties to part ways. I believe and indeed hope that party members have enough wisdom and mutual respect to move forward united, and stronger.

This has the effect of fostering trust among people. The way we treat each other generates trust, just as respectful debate at the Riigikogu inspires public trust. This is a goal we must continuously strive for.

Kristina Kallas has said that while Izmailova's statements were damaging to the party's reputation, expelling her was an extreme step. Presumably you disagree?

Unfortunately, this was a pattern. So I cannot agree that the board made the wrong decision. The question might remain about the timing of the decision, but the pattern was already evident. If there is no willingness to work together and so much disrespect going on, things become impossible.

Many people were expelled from EKRE recently too, while some have left of their own accord. Can you see any scope for these politicians to join Eesti 200? Do you see any common ground with any of these politicians? (EKRE is a populist, far-right party while Eesti 200 takes a socially liberal, internationalist and economically free-market stance – ed.).

Right now everyone in the corridors of the Riigikogu is talking to everyone else, but the most important thing is that the ideological views are in alignment. Based on the past statements and positions of those politicians who have EKRE, our views likely diverge. I cannot predict where the former EKRE members will go to.

This situation certainly creates additional work for the Riigikogu board, which must determine where to sit these members in the Riigikogu hall (in the latter days of the XIII Riigikogu, non-partisan MPs sat by the so-called window seats, but they were fewer in number than the current 17 unaffiliated MPs at the XV Riigikogu – ed.). We already have a significant number of non-affiliated MPs. There aren't enough "window seats" for everyone, so we will have to discuss the seating arrangement in the hall (beyond that the Riigikogu seating plan is alphabetical by surname – ed.).

Historically speaking, we still have a way to go to reach the record number of non-affiliated MPs. at the VII and VIII Riigikogu compositions (in the 1990s – ed.), there were significantly more non-affiliated MPs, at over 20.

Just this week, controversy erupted over the €1.6 billion defense funding requirement. With the state's finances already under great strain, how do you perceive this need? Is it justified, in your opinion?

The first concern I would highlight is that emotions should be set aside when discussing defense procurement. The debate has become overly emotional, and has damaged the reputation of Estonian national defense. Emotions should be significantly tempered, and we should think rationally about how to best advance defense planning.

Estonia has been very strong in defense planning thus far. We cannot deny that we have some significant competence here, but we must use it wisely. Sharp and opposing views do not contribute at all to this discussion.

Several different solutions for addressing defense budget issues have been proposed, including a national defense tax and a defense loan. All these options are on the table, and both the government and Riigikogu committees will have to work diligently over the summer, in order to find solutions for the best and wisest defense planning.

--

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