Minister of Rural Affairs Urmas Kruuse (Reform) believes that the spring drama of farmers being cut off from foreign labor will not be repeated this year.
Urmas Kruuse: You cannot bribe people to move to the countryside
When you accepted the rural affairs portfolio, outgoing minister Arvo Aller (EKRE) gifted you a manure fork. How much manure needs to be shoveled at the ministry?
The fork is a symbol of all the things the minister needs to deal with in a broader sense. It is also symbolic that a dung fork is hardly new to me as I could often be seen working with one years ago.
You were very critical of the work of Mart Järvik (EKRE) when he served as rural affairs minister. You said the Helmes made a mistake by appointing Järvik.
I was among quite a few people who did not find Mart Järvik’s conduct sensible that eventually culminated in him leaving the government. Then Prime Minister Jüri Ratas also lost confidence in Järvik. One of the things in which he was involved was the listeria scandal where Järvik politically meddled in the work of agencies to an insensible degree as concerned supervision efforts.
You were last rural affairs minister five years ago when we had the swine fever epidemic and the price of milk dropped catastrophically. You left office to the tune of farmers’ curses. Are you looking at a lighter term this time around?
The period during which I had the honor of serving as rural affairs minister in 2015-2016 saw the simultaneous realization of all crises in agriculture. The milk crisis followed the EU abolishing relevant quotas. There was overproduction and prices crashed. The African swine fever reached Estonia and necessitated the creation of trade zones. It was impossible to maintain export volumes and companies experienced difficulties. However, I would recall that we pursued very close cooperation with the European Commission – the crisis package we negotiated for Estonian farmers amounted to €32 million in the end. Looking back, my predecessor was also severely criticized for how the state handled the foreign labor shortage in summer.
You have said that you are in favor of foreign labor. We are moving closer to spring, while the coronavirus epidemic is showing no signs of abatement. Could last year’s problem of Ukrainian laborers being cut off from Estonia be repeated?
In a situation where our neighbors and partners managed to find ways to bring in foreign labor in a controlled manner at the height of the Covid crisis, I believe Estonia is capable of the same thing. We discussed the matter with Minister of the Interior Kristian Jaani last week. In terms of how to involve the Health Board and handle it sensibly and intelligently. To avoid a situation where it is suddenly said that labor cannot enter the country, which is what happened last year. There were government level attempts to claim that Estonians would pick up the slack so to speak. It turned out they will not.
How necessary and invaluable is foreign labor when it comes to rural work? Are there any professions we could man by retraining Estonians or should such efforts be avoided?
We have tried to find additional opportunities in horticulture and seasonal work. People can take so-called bites out of work and help out on the side, but it is not enough. One thing we are trying to do is make the sector more attractive to future generations.
It has been said that miners in Ida-Viru County need a new line of work. Could they work in agriculture at least in part?
Ida-Viru is definitely relevant in terms of what will become of energy production and oil shale. Not all new jobs to compensate for losses in the oil shale sector need to be in energy. People will be able to find jobs in rural economy sectors in the future.
You said in your 2019 Riigikogu elections campaign video that the countryside will become a good place to live again if the Reform Party wins the elections. You had years in which to turn living in the countryside into a picnic. Why didn’t you?
We cannot hope for a single minister to be able to turn any place into the land of milk and honey in a matter of just a few years. Looking at global and local studies, we can see movement in both directions. Recent studies also suggest that coronavirus restrictions have caused some people to want to move to the country. However, we must admit that certain undertakings – especially in agriculture – are physically and mentally demanding and might not be a good fit for everyone. Small business has been a growing niche in rural areas, with people finding interesting solutions for complementing their income.
Has the state provided enough support for young families who want to move to the countryside or have some things gone undone for years?
The state can create premise and conditions. Looking at the so-called young farmer instrument, it is far more generous that most others of its kind (up to €40,000 – ed.).
Trends suggest that people are aiming for at least suburban areas where population density is lower, while we can be certain that urbanites will not all be moving to the country.
Do you have a picture of what kind of people want to live in the country and what they would need in terms of support? How well do you know people living in rural areas?
What I know is that people who desperately want to live in the country have already moved there or are in the process of doing so. Those considering moving there want to know about the surrounding environment, including possibilities for finding work and giving their children a good education and access to hobby activities. You cannot simply bribe people to move to the countryside.
Data from Statistics Estonia suggests we have lost around 4,000 small farms in the last decade, which is something that cannot be blamed on the previous government. Why are you allowing domestic small producers to go extinct so to speak?
We need to put these figures into context. There have been great debates inside the EU common agricultural policy in terms of which companies to support. I’m sure a certain shift toward small business will happen for the upcoming budget period (2021-2027 – ed.).
The “Pealtnägija” [investigative journalism program] recently covered how Estonia is paying so-called dead cow support based on data from 14 years ago. This instrument was not available the last time you were in office. Will you put an end to it this time around?
What we are talking about is the possibility of making additional domestic support available to producers of countries who came later to the EU to help them catch up to the European average.
We opted for direct crisis support instead in Taavi Rõivas’ government. We have included in the current coalition agreement first paying out crisis aid (the previous government’s €12 million crisis package – ed.) and additional transitional support if possible.
You said in your Riigikogu elections campaign video that the primary task of Estonian farmers is to ensure food security. Why do Estonian farmers feel they are not competitive in Europe and that the Estonian state is not supporting them?
Estonian farmers have also said they would rather compete without support. However, in a situation where small countries are competing with large ones, the latter can afford to give their entrepreneurs additional support, also in agriculture.
Sheep and goat farmers have also been critical of the government. Postimees recently ran a story on how sheep farmers have no choice but to slaughter their animals themselves and have the meat turned into sausage in underground kitchens because doing everything by the book would mean a kilogram of sausage costing €17. Why cannot we allow farmers to slaughter their own sheep for sale?
A lot more cooperation is needed for the creation of manufacturer organizations that would monitor the entire production chain and lay down quality criteria for a better price.
Thinking about the average Estonian consumer, this level of price is probably unsustainable. Chicken has clearly taken the lead here, followed by pork and beef. A campaign to get people to ear more fish has just been launched.