The think tank's website states that the mission of the Chamber of Principle (Põhimõtte Koda) is to shape and promote policies based on Estonia's historical, linguistic and cultural integrity. How and by whom did the idea to establish the Chamber of Principle come about?

It was a collective idea. We discussed the fact that there really isn't anything that brings experts together in this way. It is also somewhat related to the broader Estonian political landscape and thinking as a whole being somewhat technocratic. That is essentially the background.

What exactly is it and why is it needed?

It is essentially an open platform. The idea is to generate new knowledge ahead of the parliamentary elections. We are an open platform — if any political parties want to draw on ideas from it, that is not a problem at all.

You are a nonprofit organization. Nonprofits can eventually take a step further and become political parties. Have you had any such thoughts?

No, that is certainly not the goal. At present, we are supported by the Jaan Tõnisson Foundation, which is affiliated with Postimees. However, as a think tank we definitely want to expand our line of activity and securing additional funding is on the agenda. But no political party will emerge from this.

The main funder of the Jaan Tõnisson Foundation is [Isamaa member and donor] Margus Linnamäe, correct?

Exactly.

Currently, Ott Lumi, Leif Kalev and Veiko Lukmann are named as the driving forces behind the Chamber of Principle. You have a background in Res Publica and also IRL and Veiko Lukmann likewise has a background in Isamaa. Have you considered that this creates the impression that the think tank is influenced by Isamaa?

That is a matter of interpretation. Undoubtedly, if we look at our potential rapporteurs and experts whom we have involved, the axis is somewhat conservative. It is certainly not super-liberal, but again, that is open to interpretation.

You already began explaining your ideological outlook. What exactly might that outlook be?

That is not a question of primary importance for us. It is not a fundamental category on the basis of which we seek out experts.

What other people can be expected to join your group?

The rapporteurs mostly have academic backgrounds; some come from more practical backgrounds. That's the case.

In an opinion piece published in Postimees, it was written that the Chamber of Principle does not write party platforms, but that its ambition is to have an impact on real life. What does that mean?

It means that we are not affiliated with any political party. Based on input from various experts, we aim to offer new thoughts and ideas to Estonia's somewhat calcified political sphere. That is our ambition.

You said earlier that funding currently comes from the Jaan Tõnisson Foundation and, through it, from Margus Linnamäe. But who else is among your funders, or whom are you seeking?

At the moment, no one else. That is how we are starting out, but very soon we will seek to involve additional funders.

What are your plans for cooperation with political parties? You said the platform is open and they may draw ideas from it, but how exactly do you envision that cooperation?

To be honest, we have not yet fully discussed or conceptualized that. The fact is that this is a platform from which all political parties can gather ideas.

Which organization do you feel you have the most in common with? Various visions have appeared in public life, including the Estonian Cooperation Assembly and the Ice Cellar process, the Foundation for the Protection of Family and Tradition (SAPTK) and the Liberal Citizen Foundation (SALK).

We do not directly resemble those organizations. SALK is more of a campaign organization, the Cooperation Assembly was more of a quasi-state body. Our experts may not be as technocratic as those at some other current think tanks.

Do you plan to measure your success in any way? Your stated goal is to bring change to governance culture and to key areas that carry Estonia's national and cultural identity. How do you define success?

I think the measure of success is how many of our ideas political parties adopt. That is the criterion for success — I cannot define it any other way at this point.

Let me return to another point from the opinion piece: it referred to a political dimension reflected in the current governing coalition's lack of legitimacy. How do you see this lack of legitimacy?

It is clear that the governing coalition does not exactly shine in terms of legitimacy. We see this daily in the media and through other channels. There is certainly an expectation in society for a new approach to politics. That is quite clear.

Are you referring to approval ratings?

That as well. But I think approval ratings may not be the most important factor. If we look at various sectors — from healthcare to what I would call a somewhat formulaic approach to the green transition — we believe it is possible to shape policy in a way that better serves Estonia's interests.

In that context, you have said your aim is to move away from a technocratic style of governance and to firmly reassert the principles of political leadership and accountability. It could be argued that the government itself is also working to reduce bureaucracy, having established a corresponding task force.

Task forces are one thing, but real life is another. I am not criticizing the prime minister's task force — it is a very positive and commendable initiative — but at the moment it is only a drop in the ocean. Public demand for changes across different policy areas is much broader in scale.

What are your short-term goals?

Our operating model is report-based. We have mapped quite a number of areas where changes are clearly needed. A separate question is whether we will be able to cover them all with sufficient quality, but we will at least make the effort.

--

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