Politics watchers have no reason to be bored. The first signs of the election campaign are already visible on the streets, the Riigikogu is processing the state budget, and the opposition is preparing yet another no‑confidence motion against the prime minister. All this in a context where the governing parties have lost their parliamentary majority and the opposition is threatening early elections.

For those who have tuned out of politics for a while: as of Thursday evening, the governing parties — Reform Party and Eesti 200 — hold 50 of the Riigikogu's 101 seats, meaning less than half. In theory, MPs not belonging to the government have a good chance of voting down coalition‑backed bills. This is loudly demanded by MPs from Isamaa, Center Party, and EKRE, while the Social Democrats have said they are willing to support the budget under certain conditions.

The budget bill currently under consideration is weightier than usual, because if the Riigikogu fails to pass it, this leads to early elections. True, the constitution says early elections must be called if the government cannot pass the budget within two months after the start of the fiscal year — meaning by February 2027. But regular elections are already scheduled for March. If a no‑confidence motion against the prime minister succeeds, it leads to forming a new government, but not necessarily early elections.

In this light, I wanted to steer the debate a bit more toward research‑based understanding and briefly introduce what political science has found about minority governments.

First, what exactly are minority governments and why are they sometimes chosen?

Generally, it is more comfortable to govern with a secure majority, allowing you to implement promises made to voters. Sometimes, however, the coalition that would form is so diverse and contradictory in its goals that it is simpler and more logical to proceed without a parliamentary majority and rely on cooperation with opposition parties on issues where views overlap.

Minority governments are quite common in the Nordic countries, where the spectrum of parties entering parliament is broad. But they have also been used elsewhere — for example in Spain, Romania, the United Kingdom, and even in Estonia, when Andrus Ansip's minority government hoped to pass certain issues with the support of the Estonian Greens. Research shows minority governments are not necessarily less effective than majority governments.

Minority governments can differ greatly in structure and effectiveness. Sometimes such cooperation is covered by formal agreements; sometimes it is more ad hoc. Some minority governments have stable partners; others change them frequently. The circle of cooperating parties also varies. Sometimes minority governments rely on small regional parties; other times on parties with more radical views.

For example, Sweden's outgoing minority government led by Ulf Kristersson relied on the so‑called Tidö Agreement with the Sweden Democrats, who were not part of the government but provided parliamentary support.

The government's interest in such cooperation is obvious. But why are partners who remain outside the government willing to cooperate?

Every political move has a political cost. Entering government makes you more visible, gives your members political posts, and allows you to directly shape policy. At the same time, as a government member you are responsible for decisions your voters may dislike, and in many eyes you share blame for any blunders the state makes.

As a supporter of a minority government, you do not get political posts, but you also do not have to support all government decisions or share responsibility for them. And from time to time, in exchange for your support, you can negotiate a decision that pleases your voters.

Research shows that parties supporting minority governments generally perform better in elections than small coalition partners — though not necessarily better than parties that remain in opposition.

Parties that support the government on a case‑by‑case basis and are not tied to cooperation agreements tend to do best in elections. Minority governments also appeal to some voters because they create a sense that voter preferences are taken into account more than in majority governments. This is likely the strategy the Social Democrats and Reform Party are hoping for.

The rest of the opposition continues to beat the drum of early elections. This is a familiar tune, played mainly to highlight the government's weakness in a more dramatic light. The campaign‑covered cityscape amplifies this message: look, things are serious. But most likely election day will still be 7 March, no matter what is said.

--

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