Kallas: I never peddled myself

Photo: Mihkel Maripuu / Postimees

Siim Kallas (65), Estonia’s prime minister in 2002–2003, admits he’d indeed be willing to lead the government again. Even so, prior decision by Reformers is needed: is this a good idea – or is it not.

In your letter to party comrades, you want Reform Party to have the most convincing views and ideas, that the party be trusted. This can also be read in reverse – that, currently, Reform Party’s views are not too convincing and the party isn’t trusted. Am I getting it right?

Definitely, there’s an aura of distrust around the Reform Party. This is universal in politics: doers aren’t trusted. This is a constant battle, a kind of a chronic disease. On the one hand, you are constantly distrusted; on the other hand, you must constantly prove you’re the best.

In that sense, this is an everlasting task. Trust is total if journalist doesn’t exist. If somebody is constantly asking questions, doubts come with it. I think the version with the doubts is better.

In what sense would the second government of Kallas be better than the current government of Ansip?

At the moment, nothing has yet happened, has it? The prime minister hasn’t gone anywhere, no coalition talks are underway. First we will get together with comrades at the party, to discuss what we might do, what the programme might be. It’s quite early to talk about that.

Reform Party has won two elections, Reform Party chairman has sat as prime minister for eight years. These are political facts, one can’t get around that. So: the party has been very successful.

This doesn’t mean that we [me and Mr Ansip – edit] are alike. I am totally different, I’m bringing some other ideas and another kind of thinking. And that’s also absolutely natural.

But I cannot start making any programme speech now, seeing I haven’t even had a decent discussion with the members of my party. And elections of party chairman aren’t on the agenda at all.

I had a talk with a Reform Party politician Andrei Korobeinik; he thinks that, while you were at the helm, Reform Party was more liberal. Is that the direction you want to move towards, or, rather, back to?

I’m still a convinced liberal. When I read what I have written about that, long ago, people will say of course that these are such old principles etc, but I do believe in them.

And, really, there aren’t any recipes in Europe, broadly, how to ensure greater competitiveness with outside competitors. It is often said that liberalism has done this and that wrong – the truth is, rather: these things haven’t been completed, nor has the entire potential available been utilised.

In the fourth quarter, Estonian economic growth was zero. Stagnation?

A man of the economy, I have also, for my entire life, mystified economic growth. Of old times, this is considered the most important indicator. Meanwhile, in the USA the most important indicator – one constantly analysed – is whether the people have jobs or not.

Stagnation, in Estonia, is being talked about in wider terms still. Anvar Samost, for instance, thinks that there are stagnation guys at Reform Party.  

That’s his assessment; it would be funny to start to comment all that has been said by the media. Beholding all the many young and active people, in Reform Party, there’s the potential to say: no stagnation whatsoever.

Why, then, is none of these young ones now standing as prime ministerial candidate – and we are talking about your comeback, after ten years abroad?

That, you must first of all ask of Mr Ansip and of the other people in the party. I never peddled myself anywhere. This was a proposal by Mr Ansip. One that I, initially, took a long time to think over: is that a good plan really.

As it felt like the ambition was there, then I have said I’m available. Now, it is for the party comrades to decide it it’s a good plan or not.

I have nothing against another candidate to surface, with whom I will be compared, and then the choice made. I would not take it as a catastrophe; that would be a natural process. In the end, the faction will vote over it, anyway.

Are you returning to parry the so-called left turn, the possibility of which has been detected in the party popularity polls?

That has obviously been mythologized. What, exactly, would left turn mean?

That, after the 2015 elections, right wing parties will be in opposition.

Against that I will do all that I can. That’s for sure.

How do you look at the idea spreading in Estonia, that party power as such should be reduces, replacing it with a constant input received from the voluntary sector (the vabakond) and civil society in current issues?

Actually, parties or political trends do always exist. Recently, I had the honour to participate at a summit with Chinese leaders. At the other side of the table, there sat the President of China – indisputably among the most influential politicians of the world, at the moment. Many are discussing if he is a conservative, a liberal etc.

Even with one party only, or no parties at all, some kind of division still exists. Party system is always the clearest – people with similar views gather together and form a kind of an organisation.

How satisfied are you with the four-party-system currently crystallised shaped in Estonia?

Very difficult to answer to this. As a rule, it is said an odd number would be better. But Estonia does have a certain system; I think the current one is better, as compared to Estonia’s experience from the 1920ies. Read, if you will, feuilletons by Oskar Luts, on elections back then.

Mr Luts had a party there... a failed-party-founders-party.

Exactly. Look at Israel, for instance. Over there, every eminent politician creates his own party, and at the next elections all is different again. Then, it is indescribably difficult to form a coalition; and very small groups have very good chances to derail the government. 

Estonia currently has four parliamentary parties; should there be more, however, that would be quite okay also. Should there be less – I don’t know if that would be good.

Edgar Savisaar thinks that you have now been working where graduated income tax is in force – and have developed views closer to those of Centre Party.

I do not believe in graduated income tax. This, for me, is a fundamental issue; I cannot see how graduated income tax would be fairer. I do not understand it and I will never support graduated income tax.

That those who are wealthier bear heavier load, that’s logical. They do, anyway. But, for that, other variants exist altogether.

Mayer Amschel Rothschild, the founder of the Rothschild banking house, always donated ten per cent of his income to charity. That could be a good custom.

Your main stands have been declared in the citizens’ state manifesto, of 1994. Therein, paid health care, private schools, paid higher education has been emphasised. Let’s look, however, at the current situation: IRL, Reform Party’s coalition partner, had free higher education as its main election promise, as also stated in the coalition agreement. This is the situation, as compared to your views.

I still do believe in these principles. Some things may be outdated, but just recently I looked it over – a goddamn good text.

Basically, free stuff gets expensive – or is really bad. Anybody happening to visit Cambridge University might think how it is being maintained, and how many Nobel laureates it has birthed.

In the three-party-government, administrative reform was on the agenda. It died down. Now, IRL again demands administrative change. Again, Reform Party is not too excited. History keeps repeating itself ...

I have always doubted if, leaving people without the option to decide and cutting local governments thin, that this would be our happiness. We do have one local government, covering half of Estonia almost. Is it problem-free? Let’s make another one then, for the rest of Estonia. That all?

Elsewhere, there is not too much hurry to do away with local governments. There needs to be some kind of a system, dealing with local issues. For me, it is a bit half-baked to comment this, at the moment; but I do not think this would be of top importance for the Estonian people, to have less local governments.

Some say you want to come back to Estonia to carry out Rail Baltica, with your own hands. According to frequently presented assessments, this will be a loss-making metal monster, splitting Estonia into two, nobody getting to ride to Berlin on it. Surely you’ve read all that.

I have. This is not my personal project; even so, I have done all to make it possible. Today, it is possible. As I have said earlier: Estonia is indeed an island. Both by energy, railway and highway connections, we are rather a part of Russia. Do we want to change that, someway?

While everybody is calculating, whether it’ll pay or not – this is something that’ll start functioning in 15 years. There was an excellent article, saying that it was exactly the same talk in czarist times; railway made no sense and was totally absurd, they thought. Today, hardly will anyone doubt its usefulness, in the Russian direction.

Large infrastructure projects will start living a life of their own, producing economic growth to all. But if Rail Baltica isn’t wanted, it’ll not come. If the people do not want it, the project will not happen and that’s it. Only, all of Europe is convinced it is one of the best and most needed things.

I can imagine how, at IRL headquarters, trembling hearts read from your letter how you will keep all coalition options open, for quite a while.

If prime minister steps down, the entire government steps down. Whoever will be negotiating and forming a new government, must have the chance to consider all. This is absolutely normal. It would be strange indeed to start discussing all of that now while the whole thing is in embryonic stage.