You could say in a sense that the European Union Affairs Committee (ELAK) is even a little upper chamber of our parliament, since the committee has the authority to issue binding directives to the government regarding Estonia's positions in the EU without a vote in the [Session Hall]. Do you feel strong and confident enough in these matters?

I feel fairly confident, although there's still so much to learn concerning legal procedure and the committee's work. But EU affairs are very important to me and to all of Estonia. I'm in Scotland right now. The Scots are very concerned about how their business with Europe is going, because it's been hindered since Brexit. That is, people, goods and services aren't moving freely within the EU.

Even German government officials admit that it's very difficult to keep track of every step taken by the central EU authority, with its tens of thousands of officials, to make sure you don't miss anything. Speak nothing of Estonia, then. To better understand things, should at least each parliamentary group have its own adviser in ELAK, if there isn't enough money to hire an adviser for every member?

Of course they should. MPs and the Riigikogu should have more advisers in general to do the technical work as well as keep an eye on EU affairs.

Thank you for this idea that ELAK is just like an upper chamber of parliament – we do indeed need to understand what Estonia's positions are at negotiations concerning various issues.

As well as what the European Commission's proposals are regarding directives and regulations. And the question isn't how to implement them, but rather whether to implement them at all. Should Estonia seek certain exemptions? I certainly don't think it's right that we should be more pious than the Pope and the ecumenical patriarch of Constantinople combined. We need to ensure that things go well for our people, our businesses and our country. We don't have to enact the EU's every last whim at all costs and, worse yet, kick them up a notch ourselves. That is the last thing we should do.

How does this kicking it up a notch sometimes end up happening, who is behind it? Is it officials or politicians that these things just suit ideologically?

As a politician, I definitely want to say that it's the officials behind it, who on one hand want to make their own lives easier and establish some new regulations. It's very easy to come up to a politician who may not have enough advisers and assistants and say, "You know, this is an EU requirement, and it needs to be adopted immediately." And then hope that the politician is cursory, is unable to delve into the matter and doesn't figure out what the heart of the matter is.

I've even heard regulatory proposals that read like jokes, along the lines of all bus passengers must be registered. That was a regulation that was actually aimed at air and sea passengers. But Estonian ministry officials had kicked it up a notch, and then the only justification given to ELAK was that "it seemed like a good idea to us."

And see, the trouble with bureaucracy is that it self-replicates and balloons uncontrollably. And it's politicians' job to step in and say, "Enough."

Why did I get into politics and join Eesti 200 to begin with? Because after my time in the foreign service in Riga, I didn't recognize the Estonian state anymore. The Estonian state had become overbureaucratized. Regulations had emerged stating why things can't be done. New regulations kept on coming, and they were incomprehensible to the average person – which is what I am too.

For example, the construction register – which no one can make heads or tails of. Bureaucracy self-replicates, leading to a sort of frenetic running in place 'til you're soaked through with sweat, but no new cars come off the assembly line, figuratively speaking. We need to make things easier and more logical.

One thing is concrete proposals that officially hit ELAK's desk. But a lot of things are discussed informally. Should info about unofficial topics also reach ELAK early on? And interpretation is a crucial issue. Confusion arose in Germany this week over the banning of certain types of diesel vehicles in plans that should be implemented in 2025 already. Should we react sooner to prevent such things from happening?

Absolutely. Those bridges and cooperation need to be built. The point of ELAK is precisely to discuss things as early as possible and reach a consensus. And as for those diesel cars, it's a matter of interpreting an earlier directive. Such an interpretation is disastrous, and is absolutely unsuitable for the people of Estonia. There's a war going on in Europe, and we're dealing with things like this at the same time.

The new European Commission will start work somewhere toward the end of this year, but we, of course, have to say that this doesn't suit us. Why are we making our lives extremely difficult with some premature and unnecessary regulations?

ELAK is also a unique committee in the sense that it may also include MPs who are simultaneously also members of another standing committee. Members of the Board of the Riigikogu can also belong to ELAK. But there doesn't seem to be any huge interest in joining. Are the topics too complicated, or do people not want to participate in committee work on Fridays? Friday would otherwise be a day off.

[grinning] People have to diligently meet with their voters on Fridays. I know that many of my colleagues also do so, and the Foreign Affairs Committee has also held meetings on Fridays.

But the committee has 18 members; it's the biggest committee in the Riigikogu. I believe that the role of the European Union Affairs Committee will become more important if MPs discuss it among themselves.

Should ELAK meetings always be able to be watched online?

They should, yes, and in September I'm going to start working on that right away, so that as many sessions as possible are publicly viewable. The committee's previous chair, Liisa Pakosta, is the one who started all this, and I will definitely be continuing from there. All debate in the Riigikogu must be as public and accessible as possible to all Estonian citizens.

And the committee has already started working over the summer. We assessed the trading of seal products and whether to allow seal products on the EU market. Until now, seals have been protected; they've been viewed from a very conservationist perspective. But the situation has changed for the Nordic countries and for Estonia as well. We have around 6,500 gray seals, but considering our fish stocks and the lifestyle of our inshore fishers, there should be 3,000 fewer.

But no one really wants to hunt them, since there's nothing to do with seal meat and sealskins because trading them isn't entirely legal. We initiated a review of the directive to allow seal products on the European market. The people of Kihnu said that it would be better to sell seal preserves and sealskins within the EU. So work this season has already begun. But this is just the beginning – like a little expression of opinion for public consultation; no decision has been made yet. That requires that our politicians and officials in Brussels and Strasbourg negotiate this.

--

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