Postimees Digest, Friday, August 30

Photo: Toomas Huik

Ministries perceive higher office expenses.

While State Real Estate Ltd. (RKAS) claims the planned ministries' building on Suur-Ameerika street will help its four future tenants to save on office expenses, calculations by ministries themselves point elsewhere. Chairman of the board of RKAS Jaak Saarniit told Postimees that the total office expenses of the social, justice, finance and economy ministries would amount to 5.4 million euros by 2016 were they to remain where they are while costs would come down to 4.4 million in the new building. The justice ministry's forecast, however, suggest it will spend 730,414 euros on office expenses once the new building is completed, instead of the current 370,049 euros. The finance ministry's costs are estimated to go up from 840,000 euros to 1.4 million euros. The total office space of the four ministries is set to fall from the current 20,735 square meters to 11,402. Procurement documents made available in the public procurements register now suggest RKAS will enter into a superficies contract with the building's developer obligating the latter to finish construction within 22 months, after which it will rent the building from the superficiary for a period of ten years and make it available to the ministries as sublessees. The state originally planned to construct the building itself. «Constructing the new building through RKAS proved to be impossible as the state lacks reserves for such an investment,» said Kristina Haavala, chief specialist of the finance ministry's press department.

State to constrain strike options.

The Ministry of Social Affairs is working on a bill to specify and in some areas limit strike rights. Minister Taavi Rõivas is set to meet with head of the Estonian Trade Unions Confederation Peep Peterson and head of the Estonian Employers Confederation Toomas Tamsar again today. «For us the most important subject is strikes that have nothing to do with the employer,» said Tamsar. «If the entrepreneur has entered into an agreement and has not violated its terms, it should not be so easy for workers to go on strike,» he added. Minister Taavi Rõivas said the aim of the amendment is to ban political strikes. The bill does not make use of such concrete language, however, and tries to rule out political strikes by specifying the notion of labor dispute. Strikes to demonstrate support and solidarity will be allowed while unions will be obligated to give five days notice instead of the current three days. The bill would also introduce the notion of total obligation to refrain from striking, allowing corresponding collective agreements to be signed. Head of the unions Peep Peterson said that while he does not plan to contest the five day period of notice, things are a little more complicated when it comes to political strikes in that they are difficult to define. He goes on to say that while protesting against the person of PM Andrus Ansip would clearly be a political action, the unions do not see going on strike on account of an unfavorable piece of labor legislation as political, since it would clearly be a lever with which to regulate labor relations. Tamsar counters by saying that a company cannot be held accountable in legislative disputes and should not stand to make a loss as a result. Another issue the bill aims to address is current legislation that makes it possible for very small unions to represent an entire sector basically without the latter's participation. Minister Taavi Rõivas hopes the bill will be passed early next year to take effect from January 1, 2015.

Analysis: Bank of Estonia and government served own interests.

Docent of the University of Tartu Lasse Lehis has completed his analysis of the consistency between decisions made by the central bank and the government in 1993 and contemporary legislation as concerns the VEB Fund dispute, and found that the state failed to serve the interests of its citizens and companies. «If we proceed from the idea that the decision to create the VEB Fund was made to save the banks, everything was fine - the banks were saved,» Lehis writes. «However if we proceed from the principle that next clients would need to be delivered from harm, it is something the government did not do.» The docent adds that evidence suggests such course of action was deliberate as the state and the central bank traded in certificates for financial gain in a situation where the actions of the government caused funds to be frozen in the Russian Foreign Economy Bank in the first place. Lehis concludes that proceeds from sale of securities should have reached all the fund's creditors. Chairman of the Riigikogu VEB Fund investigative committee Rainer Vakra said the committee will get an overview of the analysis on Wednesday and it is therefore too early to talk about possible recommendations it might make.