Writing in yesterday’s Postimees on «Tallinn-Tartu highway as a symbol», columnist Mihkel Mutt dropped a bombshell. Only now, some people noticed that the full-length four-line road is a beautiful dream not covered (for the time being, at least) by definite construction plans. Surely, economy minister Juhan Parts has waged political battles for each section of the road in pipeline. Thus, he is adamant in denying the government has given up the «four-liner».
What we have, here, are differing assessments of the same facts. Justifiably, the minister views as a success the dozens of kilometres of road construction underway, with plans laid down till 2016. On the other hand, it is also true that lots of sections are not covered by concrete plans, with experts sceptical about four lines from Mäo to Tartu.
At the beginning of August, Postimees presented a detailed overview on the state of the highway, based mostly on Road Administration and Ministry of Economic Affairs data (Mikk Salu «Viimane suur ehitus enne pikka vaikust», PM 03.08). As an attentive reader surely noticed, Road Administration project manager referred to dozens of kilometres in Järva, Jõgeva and Tartu Counties as something we can talk about starting 2040.
Those, who during various electoral campaigns have gotten the idea that four lines between Tallinn and Tartu is a matter of a couple of years, are disappointed. In the coalition agreement of the ruling parties, we read words more cautious: «...we will continue construction of Tallinn and Tartu roundabouts, the Tallinn-Tartu highway into four lines». We will have to honestly acknowledge: the latter has indeed been done. Building and planning has continued in spite of the recession and the various disputes (including public procurements contested in court).
Current traffic load data clearly states that it is (economically) questionable whether the entire Tallinn-Tartu highway ought to have four lines. Nevertheless, we as citizens may decide we need the four. That we as tax payers are ready to pay up for construction and maintenance thereof, agreeing to give up other public benefits in the name of that road – this would be a true political decision.
The opportune time for these debates and decisions arrives in a year and a half – with the next parliamentary elections. Even so, decisions can only be made if we know, at least approximately, the costs we would face, the strengths and weaknesses involved, and the various levels of alternatives. Should we then conclude that the strategic benefit of full-length-four-lines overrides the technical counter-arguments and need for belt-tightening in other areas, the governments to come will need to complete the thing.