The outgoing summer brought two changes to Estonian politics. We got a new prime minister in Krisen Michal, which also amounted to a new government or at least an updated political course. We also got a new party in the Estonian Nationalists and Conservatives (ERK).

The new premier is taking his first steps as head of government, while the new party was official registered a few days ago. Therefore, it is too soon to draw any far-reaching conclusions in terms of how they'll do. What is clear, however, is that they constitute polar opposites when it comes to political priorities.

Regarding the government, while we got a new prime minister and a few others, the coalition is still made up of the same parties. And even though there are new political priorities, we are rather dealing with a facelifted version of the same cabinet, as opposed to a whole new government. This means that the potential for change is limited.

Consistency is also reflected in voter preferences. Little has changed about the government's approval rating, with roughly two-thirds of voters still feeling it is doing a poor job. But the jury is still out in terms of what the people think of the new prime minister.

The first survey results from this [last] week showed that more than half of voters could not say whether they approve or disapprove of Michal's actions. Which is the honest answer and makes sense. It takes time to form an opinion.

So far, what people think of the government and the prime minister has moved in step, with the relevant question being which has the power to move the other. In a situation where attitudes toward the government are negative from the outset, it is unlikely the premier will manage to make much of a difference. Rather, we will see dissatisfaction with the government – should it hold – transfer to affect the prime minister as well.

The new prime minister also brought a new coalition agreement, which stands out mainly in terms of its vagueness. While it includes a great many promises of "we'll improve this and that," the document holds considerably less in terms of tangible things. New tax hikes aimed at patching holes in the state budget, which we've heard so much about already and which are more than unpopular with voters, might be exceptions.

This hardly bodes well for the government's popularity. Voters know that some of these hikes are necessary to allow the Reform Party to make good on its election promise of abolishing the so-called tax hump. (Estonia's gradual basic exemption reduction scheme where people who make over €2,100 monthly are not eligible for the tax-free minimum and which the Reform Party wants to replace with a universal €700 tax exemption – ed.) What the voter sees is that while reaching into the wallets of the less fortunate, the government seems unable to carry out meaningful austerity on its part or take steps to improve Estonia's business environment or competitiveness.

Therefore, Estonia is rather becoming a more difficult and expensive place to live for both citizens and companies. There may soon be nothing left of the dynamic and rapidly developing state that Estonia once was, which means that feelings of dissatisfaction will rather persist and continue to mount.

In other words, it is not a bad time to establish a new political party. Dissatisfaction is a valuable political resource. It is another question how much room is left on the political landscape. The Estonian Nationalists and Conservatives (ERK) party was rather born out of infighting at the Conservative People's Party (EKRE) and is made up of politicians who left or were evicted from the latter. Because they likely took with them a part of EKRE voters, the new party might be off to an easier start than what Eesti 200 or Parempoolsed experienced.

It is likely that initial support for ERK will be somewhat higher than it was for other recent new parties, and I wouldn't be surprised to seem them enter the race quite close to the election threshold [of 5 percent].

Looking at ERK's program and the new government's coalition agreement makes for interesting contrast. They seem to come from two completely different worlds. While the coalition agreement virtually fails to mention national culture, identity and the population crisis, these take center stage and constitute priority problems for ERK.

It is furthermore telling that in the conditions of historically low birth rate and considerable immigration pressure, the ruling parties' priorities include no relevant topics. However, it is similarly unsure to what extent ERK will manage to capitalize on these issues, as they are important also for EKRE and Isamaa.

At minimum, ERK might succeed in articulating these problems better than EKRE or Isamaa have done in their programs. One interesting concept they've introduced is national integrity, emphasizing that being Estonian needs to be the cornerstone of Estonian identity through which we all belong, irrespective of our ideological or political preferences. That is a welcome idea in the general air of growing polarization.

ERK paints itself as a more open, democratic and civilized party compared to EKRE, and one that more clearly contrasts to the ruling forces compared to Isamaa. While matters that impact incomes are more clearly felt by voters, looking at where Western societies, including Estonia, are headed, it is quite probable issues of nationality and identity will become more important as time goes by.

It is interesting that during a time these topics are completely absent at the level of the government's political priorities, a new party is born for which they constitute the most acute problems.

--

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