Aivar Kokk: The biggest impact on the budget comes from cutting white‑collar ranks

The first target for cuts should be the Ministry of Climate, which engages in outright foolishness such as turning healthy forests into wetlands, fighting packaging or imposing new bureaucratic rules, Aivar Kokk writes.
A quick quiz question. Who said, during a difficult budget situation, about building an extremely expensive and flashy structure, that "finding the funds needed for its construction is important for several reasons" and that "new spaces will provide significantly greater opportunities for new exhibitions and activities for families and visitors"?
Those were former finance minister Mart Võrklaev's words three years ago when the topic was building a wooden nature house in Tallinn. Now Võrklaev is fighting against building cultural center Siuru in Tartu.
It is not even important whether building Siuru is a good or bad idea. Making such a proposal shows a fundamental misunderstanding of how projects are funded. The current project is co‑funded two‑thirds by the Cultural Endowment, because the Riigikogu decided Siuru is a nationally important cultural object, and one‑third by the city of Tartu. This means stopping the project would have no impact on the state budget at all, or if Võrklaev's other particularly spiteful wish — reducing municipal revenues and transferring them to the state — were realized, it would affect the budget only marginally.
I did not bring up the nature house example by accident. That project was clearly funded from the state budget, and the debate took place exactly when the Reform Party, Eesti 200 and the Social Democrats were holding their most active tax festival. When Isamaa pointed out that it was excessive extravagance, Kristina Kallas said in a TV debate that the project was funded by carbon money and that such money cannot be directed anywhere other than green projects. Therefore, she said, it was impossible not to build the house and Isamaa simply did not know what it was talking about.
At best this is bluffing, at worst simple lying. Across Europe, states subsidize public transport with carbon money because it also meets green goals. Estonia, however, tries to reinvent the wheel, forcing buses to depart every hour, two hours or four hours in a planned‑economy manner, ignoring the fact that transport must run when people need it, not according to a schedule written in a ministry for every corner of Estonia.
In essence, my colleagues from the Riigikogu finance committee, Võrklaev and Aivar Sõerd, point to the right problem: the state's finances have completely slipped out of control. And I am glad they have realized that raising taxes is not the solution, even though one of them was the chief architect of the tax festival as finance minister and the other voted for those decisions. I hope this is sincere understanding.
What I cannot agree with is their starting point: beginning cuts from investment budget lines. If we were to do that, we should start with the railway tracks from Pärnu onward, before Latvia gets its own affairs in order.
The biggest impact on the budget comes from cutting white‑collar ranks. On Thursday Prime Minister Kristen Michal — incidentally, the main advocate for building the nature house — tried to list how many people have already been laid off. I have not added up the numbers, but some savings may have occurred. However, considering that even in the recent supplementary budget the government found it necessary to allocate money for pay raises — meaning fixed costs — this cannot be stated with certainty.
Cutting white‑collar jobs has another, much more significant impact on the budget: stimulating the economy when entrepreneurs no longer have to deal with nonsense.
The first target should be the Ministry of Climate, which deals with outright foolishness such as turning healthy forests into wetlands, fighting packaging or imposing new bureaucratic rules that burden entrepreneurs and are ultimately paid for by consumers.
All ministries and their sometimes yeast‑swollen subordinate agencies are waiting their turn.
This should actually be a project very much to the Reform Party's liking. The AI‑leap should reduce positions and expenses in the public sector, and those people could find jobs in the private sector and contribute to improving our economy.
--
Editor: Kaupo Meiel, Argo Ideon













