The first working days of the composition of the new Riigikogu have been relatively rough. Surely some people have wondered what is going on there and how such people got into the parliament at all, who can’t even open a drawer or don’t understand the answers and are not ashamed to ask stupid enough questions, which can be heard even behind the village shop.
However, this is a peculiarity of Estonian politics. In many other places, questions are resolved in parliament with fists, we have verbal obstruction, a sad-humorous show. It does not give any special pleasure to anyone. It’s true, it’s not all that serious. You can have fun too. Especially if you’ve already been up for hours, and some good shards fly from one of your colleagues to ease the tension. Both coalition and opposition MPs can laugh.
There are also angry looks, cursing, pounding on the table with fists. Most of the deputies, however, continue to say hello to each other even after all this. At least initially it seems so, and thank God. Words like “respected” and “good” can fit into a completely disrespectful question. In any case, the question arises, why all this? Is it really necessary and right?
Let’s start with the content – the cut in family allowances and the tax package. These are the two reasons that are in dispute. The new procedure for family allowances was adopted five months ago by consensus in the parliament. Now the coalition has the understanding that it was too much for large families. Must be reduced. In the midst of the greatest demographic crisis of all time.
I well remember these arguments and the fact that families with one or two children felt that all of this was indeed not quite right. It is particularly unfair that the child allowance is different for the first, second and third child.
But the cut is not to equalize child benefits. The cut is also not to give all this freed money to sick children or to improve services. This is a cut that will help improve the state of the state budget. And maybe family benefits should have been increased less in December last year.
But to give before the election and now take away right after the election seems like a particularly cynical policy. That’s not how it’s done. Especially without warning. No one planted such an idea in their election platform. From a political technological point of view, of course, it is also understandable, it was necessary to win the elections.
However, the reader will surely now have a question about money. The budget is in the red, fixed costs have increased. So what should be done? Despite the low debt burden of the Estonian state, I also do not think endless borrowing is right, especially under the current conditions. However, it is reasonable to get the state’s finances in order and keep loan money for very necessary future investments.
The question is, of course, how this knowledge came about during the election night. At one point we were moving in the direction of a responsible budget, but at the next we were suddenly in a crash. An eye-opening month this March…
However, the crocodile tears of today’s government cannot be believed purely because of one thing, the elimination of the so-called tax hump, which is the most expensive promise of the elections, with a cost of up to 500 million euros according to various estimates.
In short, it raises the income tax-free minimum to 700 euros for everyone and eliminates the income tax-free minimum steps. In Valga, Võru and Põlva counties, the median wage is less than 1,200 euros. With 1,200 euros, you will gain a full six cents every payday from such an income tax reform. Powerful.
On the other hand, VAT, income tax, land tax, alcohol and cigarette excise will be increased, a car tax will be created, income tax benefits for families with children will be abolished, and public transport will be free. So this loss will definitely be bigger than the winning six cents.
However, those who earn more than 2,000 euros can still be more satisfied – they will gain nearly one hundred euros per month minus the taxes and cuts just listed with the income tax reform. But now the question arises: if there is so little money, shouldn’t it be distributed more where it is really needed more?
Any sensible family would rather start with roof repairs than expensive landscaping – what if that is also nice and necessary. But if the roof leaks, problems can easily arise, and looking at the beautiful garden from the window while the rain drips on your head is not rational. Today’s government seems to want to act like that.
Since it was the main promise of the Reform Party, it will have to be done at the expense of children, the elderly, healthcare and low-wage earners. At the expense of those who are already struggling with huge price increases. Not that a person earning 2,000 euros is extremely rich, not at all, but he is probably not the one who has the hardest time either. Especially when the budget situation is so critical.
With this same hunchback millions, the allowance for the first and second child could be raised to equal that of the third, family allowances could be kept, pensions could be increased exceptionally, tax changes could be canceled. So it’s a matter of choices. And now we get to the core of why the party hall is better for nightlife than the parliament, but despite that, people still sit at Toompea.
The coalition’s voices are together and the goal is clear: they want to get through the hall with the change quickly, so that they can forget what they did in the summer and move on with their lives. On the one hand, the opposition hopes to force the coalition to compromise, so that the latter will change something in their plans. However, this generally does not happen in Estonian politics, at least not to a significant extent.
So it is not bad that the voters consider what is happening in the hall to be absurd, because at least there are spotlights on what is happening. And if nothing else, at least you can make an informed decision next time, no matter what it is. Obstruction ends one way or another. The decisions made today will follow us for years.
