This is being done in the interests of cutting bureaucracy, proponents say.

According to Minister of Justice Liisa Pakosta (Eesti 200), the change could address a current imbalance where, for instance, last year the number of legislative proposals expanding restrictions outstripped eightfold those cutting down on them.

The Reform-SDE-Eesti 200 coalition agreement signed last summer and so well ahead of any of the Department of Government Efficiency recently set up in the U.S., stipulates that the government will implement the above rule in-with-the-new, out-with-at-least-one-of-the-old principle.

As of now, Minister Pakosta has, in essence, completed the draft bill and submitted it to the cabinet for approval.

Pakosta said: "Our goal, which we refer to by the acronym BVP (short for bürokraatiale vitsad peale, English: 'Cutting down on bureaucracy') has now gone through all its coordination rounds."

"Not in an official sense, but through various meetings and correspondence, and it is now waiting in line for the government cabinet session," Pakosta went on.

According to the minister, the change would introduce an obligation to assess the impact of draft bills not only on the state budget but also on businesses and individuals.

Assessments of this kind are not currently mandatory.

"Figuratively speaking, at best, the impact on the national broadcaster is written out, but the impact on, say, [ERR journalist who was speaking to Pakosta] Huko Aaspõllu, whatever roles he plays, be it as a father or otherwise, is systematically left unaddressed," the minister went on.

In cases where the impact spells anything getting more difficult or complicated for anyone, or if additional obligations should arise, Pakosta said that corresponding obligations should be removed elsewhere—either in the same law or in another one, regardless of its area.

This would, in turn, mean that no single draft bill has to address only one issue.

"This is to prevent situations where one bill passes as smoothly as a knife through butter, while another one is completely dropped. The addition and removal must be handled together," Pakosta said.

This obligation would also apply to the transposition of EU directives.

"I have reminded people in my own ministry several times that this is indeed viable. When you place the directive text and our draft bill text alongside each other, time and again, it turns out that we have gone too far," Pakosta said.

However, this does not mean that the cull of obligations must be of the same "weight" or that anyone would measure this in any case. Ironically, doing so could lead to a rise in administrative burdens too.

"That would indeed mean creating additional new positions, and we do not want to do that," Pakosta added.

Nevertheless, the Ministry of Justice and the Ministry of Digital Affairs do expect a certain level of parity, she continued. "Figuratively speaking, if you impose 10 new burdens, you should also remove 10. It is not enough just to repeal some outdated regulation."

According to Pakosta, that this change needs to be codified into law is due to the fact that no voluntary initiative to reduce restrictions has yielded results.

Pakosta could not specify when the government would discuss the plan, but she hopes to have the law passed at the Riigikogu by the end of this year.

An internal split in the coalition was this week identified on the issue of bureaucratic red tape, with the Reform Party and Eesti 200 on one side, and the Social Democrats (SDE) on the other.

Specifically at stake is a regional ministry regulation that arguably increases the amount of documentation required when donating loose-packaged foodstuffs, such as salads and pastries obtained at supermarket food counters, to food banks.

--

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