EDITORIAL ⟩ The decline of the role of the parliament

Cartoon of the day. February 13, 2025. «Hi-ho, prime minister! It's me, just an ordinary MP.» – «Hi-ho, little rubber stamp! If you want to see how I pull off my tricks, just vote as instructed.» Photo: Urmas Nemvalts

• Coalition MPs did not participate in the no-confidence vote against Kristen Michal.
• Labeling supporters of the no-confidence motion as criminals and their backers is unjustified.
• The motion also served as a form of critique of the government's energy policy.

The Riigikogu made history on Wednesday. In previous attempts to remove a prime minister, the coalition—or at least some of its members—has come to parliament to support the head of government. This time, in the no-confidence vote against Kristen Michal, coalition MPs abstained entirely, leaving only 28 opposition members to vote, all in favor of the motion.

However, the motion failed, as it required the support of a parliamentary majority, that is 51 MPs. For the vote to take place at all, a majority had to be present in the room, which was not an issue, as 94 MPs registered their attendance. Yet, just before the vote, only a handful of coalition members were actually present in the hall.

One of them, Igor Taro (Estonia 200), dismissed the motion as cheap, low-quality village theatrics. He also reminded everyone that one of its key backers, the Center Party, has been convicted of a criminal offense. «Why do you want to be accomplices to a criminal organization?» Taro asked those supporting the motion, before repeatedly shouting: «Get the criminals out of parliament!»

Yes, the Center Party has been found guilty of a criminal offense in an Estonian court, but the ruling did not strip its MPs of their rights. By Taro's logic, he himself might have to leave parliament—if we recall the case of Johanna-Maria Lehtme, who remains under investigation for allegedly misusing donations intended to support Ukraine.

Regardless, Postimees does not support labeling supporters of the no-confidence motion as criminals or their backers. This is yet another step in the decline of our political culture.

In Postimees' view, turning the parliament into a mere rubber stamp, whose role is to approve backroom deals, is unacceptable.

With regard to the substantive part of the debate, the no-confidence motion also served as a form of critique of the government's energy policy—specifically, the energy agreement among the leaders of the three coalition parties. This agreement includes plans to build 2.6 billion euros' worth of offshore wind farms in Estonia. While Michal suggested during Wednesday's debate that the final decision would be made in an upcoming parliamentary discussion, it appears to be more of a formality. The European Commission has previously supported Estonia's offshore wind farm plans, and after the coalition leaders' agreement, discussions quickly shifted to organizing tenders for construction.

Michal also claimed in the parliament on Wednesday that the energy agreement followed extensive debate, including discussions in 18 Cabinet meetings. However, the public was unaware of this, as the deal announced in late January came as a major surprise. Yet, this would be one of Estonia's most expensive and long-term investments, and over the month of February, its feasibility has faced considerable criticism.

In Postimees' view, turning the parliament into a mere rubber stamp, whose role is to approve backroom deals, is unacceptable.