It would make for a decent quiz show question, in which prime minister's government did the current Principal of the Kohtla-Järve High School Hendrik Agur serve as minister? The answer would be Priit Alamäe's cabinet where Agur served as minister of the network of schools. Of course, I'm talking about the shadow cabinet of Eesti 200 in 2018, when the party was only just taking shape. Several members of that shadow cabinet hold real portfolios today, such as Margus Tsahkna and Kristina Kallas.

Alamäe promised at the time that the shadow cabinet would meet weekly to come up with alternative proposals to what the Jüri Ratas administration, made up of the Center Party, SDE and Isamaa, was doing.

The Eesti 200 shadow cabinet ran out of steam around six months later when Eesti 200 became an official political party, making the Riigikogu and government in its fifth year. Since then, it has become the parliamentary party with the lowest support rating by far.

The next shadow cabinet was formed before the 2023 Riigikogu elections, following the initiative of daily Eesti Päevaleht, made up of the Center Party and Eesti 200. It was even more short-lived as one of its members joined the government after the elections, while the other moved to the opposition.

Why think back to these shadow cabinets, which hardly left an impression on people, now? Because the need for a shadow government is greater today than it was back then. In many democratic countries, shadow cabinets are a common occurrence as a way for the opposition to present its ideas and alternatives in a clearer and more systemic way.

Criticizing the recent government of Kaja Kallas and Kristen Michal's incumbent one does not take a genius. Obvious discrepancies between election promises and first steps in office created fertile soil. Add to that long-term recession and price advance, which new tax hikes keep accelerating, or the Estonian Institute of Economic Research's recent realization that Estonia is on track to become one of the five most expensive countries in Europe.

Riigikogu night sessions and other tricks used to stall unpopular decisions by a few days or a week do nothing to make life easier for people, as the coalition has a sufficient majority in the parliament to see them passed one way or another.

Resorting to sarcasm and verbal abuse in the parliament or on social media is no more help. It will only work to amplify one side's waspishness and the other's arrogance and infect the rest of society.

Rather, it could be of use if the opposition came out with a thorough activity plan. This should be more than slogans promising to abolish the vehicle tax and all planned tax hikes and take the money the state budget needs from commercial banks.

Getting bogged down in debates over which parties have contributed the most to emptying the state treasury would be equally useless, similarly to empty calls to just cancel the green transition.

Instead, we could analyze what could be gained or lost from postponing some green reform targets by three, five or ten years to avoid socioeconomic setbacks during what are already difficult times. In a situation where it is apparently possible to give teachers with insufficient language proficiency more time to learn Estonian or continue offering aggressor states' citizens in Estonia the chance to participate in local elections, extending a few green transition deadlines should not be the end of the world.

What cannot be postponed are munitions and weapons procurements. The reason for this is our rather mean neighbor, the citizens of which in Estonia the Social Democrats are bending over backwards to please.

If the opposition says that the current coalition lacks a serious and realistic plan, how would it solve the complicated task of fixing public finances in a situation where it is necessary to boost defense spending and return the economy to growth?

Putting together such a plan on paper would be just an interesting assignment. But Riigikogu opposition delegates are professional politicians. Their voters are paying them for more than keeping the powers that be on their toes, even though that is also a necessary and important task. They are also expected to propose a comprehensive plan, one that is both better and more feasible that what the Michal administration has.

Isamaa should take the lead in drawing up such a plan, with its support almost equaling the combined ratings of the three ruling parties. Urmas Reinsalu would do well to assemble a shadow cabinet and show whether he is capable of putting together an activities plan with more substance than air, so that voters and experts could assess its workability, while the coalition might even be willing to "buy" the better ideas therein. All of Estonia would gain more from that than continued attacks against everything the government does.

Close to 18 months of mudslinging has done nothing to improve life in Estonia, while it is hard to see another two and a half years of the status quo not resulting in new tax hikes and even worse tensions.

--

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