What can the Reform Party realistically promise voters after being in power since January 2021? Looking at the polling numbers, you can't really promise to continue governing in the same way with the same people, can you?

The Reform Party has actually been in power even longer than that. If you also count the periods when we've been the junior coalition partner, we've consistently held clear positions. We've always supported entrepreneurship, the free market, limited government and the rule of law.

Those have always been our core principles. But of course, with the election drawing closer, we have to seriously consider how to approach it now that we're no longer in the leading position.

Historically, the Reform Party has been a fairly cohesive party — very few people have left it. But now there's Parempoolsed as an alternative. It's a party that essentially represents the same worldview the Reform Party stood for in its early years. Doesn't that bother you? And, of course, you've also lost voters to Isamaa.

You could debate that. First, though, on what you said at the beginning — that the Reform Party has remained fairly united. As far as I know, there are no real signs right now that people are about to start leaving in large numbers. Some individuals may switch parties and that's natural from time to time, but we really aren't seeing that at the moment.

We're not going into this election expecting to lose. We're going into it determined to build a strong political group that can defend its views and positions. That's really always been the case. We haven't always been the leading party — we've also served as a coalition partner — and we've still managed to implement our policies with a fair degree of unity.

But of course, times have changed and we certainly need to find the right direction within the party and develop the right platform for this election.

You said Parempoolsed are our competitors. To be honest, I don't really see them that way. They repeat many of the ideas we had back in 1995, but times have changed considerably and our party has changed as well.

In a way, that's also part of the challenge. Back then, we were looking for ways to broaden the party's profile, which we felt had become somewhat too narrow. We needed to attract broader, catch-all party support and we succeeded. We then went on to post very strong results in five consecutive elections.

The challenge today is much the same in that people within the party are searching for the right direction. To be candid, we're still looking for the right course to take into this election. The presidential election has certainly helped clarify things. This fall, we'll begin putting together our platform. What exactly it will look like and how we'll build it is something I can't really say at this point.

You say the party is searching for the right direction, but what exactly is it searching for? Your party platform already lays out clear goals. Are we really talking about the fact that several of the party's leaders simply aren't doing a good enough job as politicians? They're just too unpopular and you can't keep going like this, can you?

That's a separate issue. Politicians are always what they are — some are more popular than others. The candidate list will certainly play a major role.

Putting together candidate lists for all 12 electoral districts will be a key task. We need to find the right people and assemble a team that is suited to today's circumstances and capable of providing answers to the questions voters are asking.

If all we do is repeat the same positions we've been repeating for the past 20 years, that may no longer be enough.

Would it be better for the party if its current chairman, Kristen Michal, leads it into the election and then you see what the result is and decide what comes next? Or would it make more sense to change leaders now? This is really the last possible moment to put fresh faces at the top of the party.

You could call that a fairly provocative question and I don't have a simple answer to it. Our party leader is elected at the party congress and the next congress won't take place until after the election. Given that timetable, there are no immediate plans to replace the party leader. That's one thing.

The second question is who would replace him. I'm sure someone could be found.

The third issue is that the party leader is also the head of the governing coalition and the prime minister. In that case, replacing the party leader would effectively mean reshaping the entire coalition and there would be the question of how all of that could be carried out. We're discussing all of those possibilities. We'll see where things stand in the fall, weigh all the options, decide which one makes the most sense and proceed accordingly.

You say these things are being discussed, but who's doing the discussing?

The people who lead the party are discussing them.

So there's really no dissatisfaction within the party? Everyone has simply accepted that the Reform Party will continue to trail EKRE, the Social Democrats, Isamaa and the Center Party?

There is definitely concern — concern, dissatisfaction, however you want to put it. Naturally, we're not happy with the current situation. That's perfectly clear. The question is what the solution is and what moves we have available to change it.

My personal view is that Isamaa is actually quite weak. If you take a close look at all of Isamaa's positions, you'll end up scratching your head, wondering what those positions really are and how the party expects to win.

The party leader is also weak. Although I have a great deal of respect for Urmas Reinsalu — he's one of the few politicians who actually reads books — a leader is someone who takes charge and puts themselves on the line. That's simply part of the job.

But Urmas Reinsalu stepped aside when the question was who would become mayor of Tallinn. To me, that was completely baffling — a highly convoluted maneuver with far too many moving parts.

He should have stepped forward decisively, taken the lead, assumed responsibility and built on that going into the election. As for what they'll campaign on now, time will tell.

I consider the Center Party to be a strong and serious political force and the Social Democrats also have fairly clear positions. There are still plenty of possibilities. As the saying goes, it's not yet late in the day.

It certainly isn't over, but at the same time it's clear that continuing with the current approach doesn't seem likely to produce a turnaround. In recent elections, the Reform Party has also joined those promising to hand out ever more taxpayer money. What other choice do you have?

I completely agree that this is a problem. My own views on the matter are fairly clear, because I don't believe that handing out all kinds of benefits automatically makes everyone like you. People also think about where those benefits come from. In earlier years, we were considerably more restrained.

I recently met with Mart Laar and we reminisced about the old days. In 1999, when Mart Laar's government took office and I was serving as finance minister, we began by making cuts totaling 1 billion kroons, and we followed through on them.

It isn't necessarily the case that people find it most appealing to be constantly told they're going to receive yet another benefit. At least I believe that the truth is rational, and the truth has to be visible.

We touched briefly on the early stages of the presidential race. The day before yesterday, Alar Karis announced that he does not intend to seek a second term. What kind of president does Estonia need in its current situation in 2026?

There are seven or eight countries in Europe that essentially don't have an active head of state — in other words, they have monarchs who bring a sense of glamour to public life and are deeply loved by the people. But they don't actually make decisions.

If you read the books about the adoption of Estonia's 1992 Constitution and the debates that took place at the time, you'll see that the biggest question was precisely this: we have never really been clear about what kind of president we want. No one has.

There are only two countries in Europe where the president has somewhat — or significantly — more power: Cyprus and France. Everywhere else, presidents have primarily ceremonial powers and the same issue exists.

In every country, people say the president should be directly elected. The public wants to elect the president directly, and then, once the president has been directly elected, it becomes clear that the office doesn't actually have much power. Power remains in the hands of parliament and that creates all kinds of tensions and contradictions.

We've seen that in many countries and Finland experienced it in the past as well. So, fundamentally, we still haven't decided what kind of president we want.

We've had presidents with very distinct profiles. Arnold Rüütel, for example, had a very clear and strong domestic political profile and the public loved him. At the same time, Rüütel was very clear that Estonia needed to join the European Union and that carried tremendous weight. Lennart Meri was a phenomenon in his own right. Toomas Hendrik Ilves likewise made use of his extensive foreign policy network, knowledge, wide reading and education and earned considerable respect through that.

But to be precise — and having been involved in that world myself — the president's role is limited. Estonia is led by the prime minister and foreign policy is also led by the prime minister. The person sitting at the table where the most important decisions are made is the prime minister, whether that's at the European Union or NATO.

What we really need is a prime minister who is very strong in domestic politics. A prime minister with a strong domestic mandate can sit at those tables, where they are representing Estonia alone, pound the table if necessary and say, "No, our position is different." Foreign policy and domestic policy are, in fact, very closely connected and someone who is strong in domestic politics is also a strong foreign policy leader.

In my view, the country needs a strong leader at the head of the government — someone who commands authority at home. There are dozens of examples. You're sitting at a European Council meeting and there's a decision on the table about something that's completely foreign to Estonia, Latvia or Cyprus. If the leader is strong, they'll say, "Yes, we'll do it."

But if that leader isn't strong — which I've seen dozens and dozens of times — they begin to hesitate, evade the issue and come up with all sorts of alternatives. Then the European Union or NATO can't reach a decision because some leaders simply aren't capable of making one, as they're politically weak at home.

The political parties that won a commanding mandate in the spring 2023 election have every opportunity to choose the president they want. Have the party leaders been too hesitant and ineffective?

I wouldn't be so certain about everything. I think the president will be elected by the Riigikogu, especially now that Alar Karis has decided not to seek another term. In reality, the votes are there. There just needs to be some discussion, some agreement and some thought about who that person should be.

Your profession — journalists — has a tremendous appetite for discussing and speculating about this, but in reality there's still plenty of time. The president will effectively be decided in August and that's when the agreement will be reached among the Reform Party, Eesti 200, the Social Democrats and a few independent MPs. Then the votes will be there.

On the other hand, it could easily unfold the way it did last time, when the presidential election was shaped to a great extent by two people: Kaja Kallas and Jüri Ratas. I was asked to speak with both sides and in the end the picture became quite clear. I remember some people saying, "Oh, we'll keep discussing it and then it'll go to the Electoral College and who knows what will happen."

Kaja, in her characteristically direct way, said, "The votes are there. You can discuss it all you want, but the president will be elected." And that's exactly what happened.

I think the president will be elected without difficulty in early September. Who it will be, I have no idea. There isn't a candidate yet. To be frank, the Reform Party doesn't have a candidate and there isn't a clear favorite at this point. But one will emerge.

--

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