Just five years ago, would you have believed you'd become the honorary chair of a party that clearly leans toward populism? Does it make you feel uneasy?

I don't like it, but basically, yes. I can't say whether I would have believed it, but I doubt I ever even thought about it. The idea was always to preserve the image of right-wing liberalism.

Scrapping the income tax hike was, in fact, blatant populism — a last-minute attempt to win over voters. But it failed and ended up costing more than €200 million.

Yes, I wouldn't have done that. That's exactly the thing — if you've already introduced a tax, then you should stand by it to the end. Nobody likes taxes and they're imposed because certain expenses need to be funded. So, if you want to finance those expenses, you have to introduce taxes and stick to them.

For me, the sign that the Reform Party had changed came when both the finance minister and the prime minister said they had no intention of leaving any financial reserves for Isamaa when it takes office in 2027. There was a tone of bitterness in both men's voices. Do you see that as a sign that the party is no longer what it used to be?

I can't really comment on that, because to be honest, I didn't notice that particular statement. For me, the turning point — and I've said this many times — was when the current coalition reinstated corporate income tax, something we had spent seven years working to eliminate. That alone could be the subject of a long article — how that reform (abolishing corporate income tax – ed.) was finally implemented in 2000. Giving it up felt like abandoning one of our signature achievements — that was the moment for me.

But in reality, you can't look at this as some kind of dramatic break. The Reform Party started changing even earlier, when the goal shifted... I've been told many times that during my time, it was a niche party, but the ambition became to turn it into a broad-based party. And well, change it did. After that, the number of Riigikogu seats started consistently exceeding 30 and that required expanding the base and taking some socially liberal steps. I don't really condemn that — after all, being a pure niche representative and achieving nothing isn't exactly much fun either. It's all a balancing act, but the key question is: where is the line?

Where is the line when it comes to compromise? Even Adam Smith — everyone knows his name, but very few have actually read what he wrote — says toward the end of his book that of course the state must help those in need and take care of healthcare and other such things. But again, it's a question of how much and how far. That's where the difference lies — in the level of state involvement. State-owned companies, government regulation — right-wing liberalism is critical of government regulation and the need for state ownership of enterprises. Social liberalism, on the other hand, has embraced both quite strongly.

Why is the current Reform Party leader, Kristen Michal, doing an "Isamaa Lite"? Let's be honest — the Reform Party has, in recent months, behaved like a small copy of Isamaa, trying to do the same things and more or less repeating the same talking points.

I can't really comment on that, because I haven't looked at it from that perspective. I honestly can't say. That's your observation, and maybe it's true, but I can't really comment on it. In my view, the Reform Party isn't deliberately trying to imitate Isamaa, but who knows. In local governments, the picture tends to vary from place to place anyway.

If voters no longer find the party's leaders credible, then without a change in the team, the 2027 election will be a disaster. If they go into the election basically copying what the opposition has been offering all along, then voters aren't being given a real alternative. What they'll see are parties with more or less identical platforms and the Reform Party will no longer stand out in any meaningful way.

That's true. It's a serious problem because standing out is essential for winning votes. The Reform Party needs, in some sense, to rediscover its profile and the core principles that have long set it apart. And it needs to keep differentiating itself through those.

Right now, we're still in a phase of reflection — thinking about what the way forward should be. As far as I can tell from the people I've spoken with, no ready-made solutions exist yet. I'm not directly involved behind the scenes, after all.

From the outside looking in, it seems to me that no one is even trying to steer the Reform Party back to its core values.

Don't rush to conclusions.

What are you hinting at? Are we going to see new initiatives soon?

It's too early to say that no one is working on it. In time, you'll be able to say whether or not anything was actually done, but the discussion is definitely ongoing. We haven't had any major public events, but within the party, there's active debate about those core values and potential strategies.

The group that values clarity when it comes to the state's finances — making sure too much money isn't spent, that enough is coming in and that things are balanced — is that a defined faction within the party or is it something broader?

The idea itself is sound — we really are looking for that point of balance. A balanced budget is a fundamental indicator of sound public finances. That applies to individuals, but especially to the state.

But I'd say it's broader than just a single group — I couldn't define a specific faction pushing for it. There are people who have always held and supported that position. Of course, anyone who firmly backs that idea also has to be clear on how to actually achieve it. Because suddenly reversing course and cutting €3 billion — that's a nearly impossible task.

This also requires a spokesperson. Could that spokesperson be the current party leader, Kristen Michal?

The party leader has to carry out the will of the party — what the party line is. If the party largely decides that the course needs to change, then I don't think the party leader would have any issue moving forward in that direction.

Do you consider him capable enough to adapt when necessary? In fact, we've already seen that he can.

Look, I see where you're trying to take this — you want someone to say that the party leader should be removed. But let me tell you: right now, there is no such demand or attitude within the party that a course correction must begin with replacing the party leader. Because, you see, changing the party leader is a major, painful and complicated process. That would bring down the government, require forming a new coalition and all sorts of things that need to be carefully considered in advance.

I'll just say this: the issue is being discussed within the party — people are talking. But what can be said with certainty is that, as of today, there is no readiness to start replacing the party leader.

So Kristen Michal doesn't need to worry about anyone plotting behind his back?

There's no conspiracy.

Still, looking at the post-election period from the outside, it seems to me that the Reform Party has moved in a direction where publicly criticizing the party leader isn't exactly encouraged. No one has dared to come out and say, "Listen, man, you haven't delivered — step aside."

Yes, that's the kind of statement where, if it's meant to be taken seriously, then saying A also means you have to say B, C, D and F. I'll say it again: that's probably why no one's saying it. If someone from within the party or its leadership comes out and says the party leader needs to be replaced, then they also need to have a plan. And right now, that plan doesn't exist.

There are still plenty of people in your party who care about sound public finances — Maris Lauri and Aivar Sõerd, for example. I believe Finance Minister Jürgen Ligi is also genuinely concerned and is simply being forced to put up with it at the government table right now.

You'll have to ask them what they think. I can't speak on their behalf.

So what is the hope when we think about the next elections? Where should the change come from? Still only from within your own party?

That's right, and on that point, I agree with you. The question is whether we're capable of putting our own ranks in order, rearming ourselves and modernizing our views in line with the times — so that we can credibly aspire to a larger share of the vote. That now depends heavily on everyone in leadership positions within the party. And the parliamentary group plays a major role. We're still quite strong. We have a [parliamentary] group of nearly 39 members and it's the faction that has to vote on all draft legislation, including the budget. I can't speak to what position the faction will take — I'm no longer part of it.

And of course, it also depends on the party's executive board and the regional chapters. Representatives from those regions come together at the party council and bring with them the mood and sentiment on the ground. If you look at where our candidates won — that tells one story. But if you look at where we had a large number of candidates, like in Valga County, then the opinions of those people also carry significant weight.

How much time is there for this internal reflection, considering the upcoming elections and the future? Are we talking about a few months, next summer, fall? The elections are actually coming up quite fast.

There are several ways to answer that. In history, the Reform Party was founded in November 1994 in order to influence the elections and entered the race just a few months later, in March 1995. Andres Tarand also became prime minister under similar circumstances, about five months before the election.

But of course, logically, things need to be clear by spring at the latest. Kaja [Kallas] also became party leader in the spring of 2018 and by then the picture was clear, because by fall, the election campaign is already in full swing.

I think that internally, things should really be settled by the beginning of the year at the latest. Christmas is coming, there's still election fatigue and people need time to reflect and analyze what happened and what's next. But by the start of the new year, the tracks need to be laid.

When we think back to those elections 30 years ago, in 1995, the Reform Party came in from the sidelines and its success hinged on the fact that there were people who feared Estonia's reforms would be rolled back — Mart Laar's reforms. Isamaa's support was very low at the time and voters were offered a clear alternative. This time, if nothing is done and the party continues down the same path — offering populist bills and promises of more money — then there will be no distinction whatsoever from Urmas Reinsalu.

You're right. I completely agree. It is exactly as you said. We saw a bloc rising on the scene, known then as the KMÜ — the Coalition Party and Country People's Union — and they ended up winning 40 seats. At that time, many people were afraid. I myself almost joined Isamaa, but there were internal conflicts within the party, which undermined it. So we were all worried that things really would be rolled back and we formed a new force that offered a clear alternative.

You're absolutely right. If we project that forward to 2027 and Estonia ends up being governed by Isamaa and the Center Party, then honestly — I would be somewhat concerned.

Just looking from the outside at how a party seems to be fading away... I'm absolutely convinced that sooner or later — if the current course continues — Prime Minister Kristen Michal will come to the press next summer, maybe even in spring, and say: "Look, state revenues are improving steadily and the car tax was an unfortunate initiative that received so much criticism, so let's just take it off the table" — meaning, scrap the car tax.

You'll find in me someone who holds a completely different view. Here's how I see the car tax: there is no better means of transport for an individual than a car. You can get from point A to point B whenever and however you want. No form of public transport can replace that — but it comes at a cost. Because cars are a major burden on society: roads have to be built and maintained, congestion has to be managed, environmental protection has to be ensured. Who should pay for that? Those who use the benefit — car owners and drivers.

Drivers pay fuel excise duties, car owners pay for parking spaces. And just look at the urban planning challenge: where to put all the cars? That has to be paid for. Which is why it's fair that car owners cover those costs.

I am firmly in favor of the car tax. And if you divide up all the amounts involved — as some construction experts said in a recent interview — it's actually manageable. And once such a system is up and running, we could finally have highways like they do in France, which are like something out of a fairy tale. You just drive and drive, with high average speeds all the way.

Coming back to the Reform Party's internal affairs: if the turnaround you're hoping for doesn't happen, are we going to see some kind of exodus? Put yourself for a moment in the shoes, suit or any other piece of clothing of a Reform Party MP working up on Toompea. They have to be thinking: what happens to me after 2027? Because the number of seats could drop by half, if not more. So if this doesn't work out, will some people leave the Reform Party?

I'm not that close to things anymore. I'm in Viimsi and no longer attend faction meetings or leadership board meetings. But as far as I know, and from the conversations I've had with people — even over the phone — I haven't seen any signs of that. I don't see any indication that people are looking for ways to leave the Reform Party.

On the contrary, everyone seems to be expecting that for the 2027 elections, we'll set our sights high. And most people believe that this ambition should be rooted in the consistent defense of the Reform Party's core values and positions. Of course, we could all be wrong — that's always a risk — but I don't see any other path forward.

Will you personally stay in the party if nothing changes and we just see more of the same going forward?

Are you suggesting I should be like Taras Bulba, who says, "I gave life to my son and I shall take it away"? No. In short — if this party falls apart, I'll be the last one to turn out the lights. I'm not going anywhere from the party I helped create.

--

Follow ERR News on Facebook and X and never miss an update!