Agenda Profile: Mart Võrklaev

The political focus is currently centered on sharp criticism of the financial decisions made by the previous EKREIKE government (Ratas, Helme, Reinsalu), particularly the allocation of 30 million euros to Nordica at a time when the company wasn't even flying out of Estonia anymore. The speaker stresses the need for accountability and criticizes the government's distribution of questionable subsidies (like the Porto Franco case) which were carried out under the guise of the COVID crisis. Although the incident is seen as a cautionary tale, there is resistance to forming a new Riigikogu (Parliamentary) investigative committee, with a preference for relying on existing criminal proceedings.

The speaker demonstrates thorough expertise regarding Nordica's financial history and the details related to the case, referring to specific dates, monetary sums (30 million euros), and the European Commission's state aid conditions. Macroeconomic data is also utilized concerning the growth of the state's loan burden from 2019 (8.5%) to 2020 (18.6%). Separate emphasis is placed on knowledge of the content of the meetings involving Nordica's former CEO, Erki Urva, and the Special Committee for State Budget Control.

The rhetorical style is sharply critical and accusatory, focusing on facts and logical arguments to demonstrate the previous government's unreasonable decisions. Rhetorical questions are repeatedly employed to call the opponents' motives into question ("Why did he do that?"), and previous scandals (Porto Franco) are referenced to increase the weight of the accusations. The tone is formal and analytical, highlighting the waste of taxpayer money.

The patterns of activity demonstrate active participation in the sittings of the Riigikogu (Parliament) and, specifically, in the work of the Special Committee for State Budget Control, where the Nordica issue has been repeatedly discussed. The speaker references their attempt to invite the then Prime Minister Jüri Ratas to a committee session, which points to an active investigative role.

The main criticism is directed at the EKREIKE government (Jüri Ratas, Martin Helme, Urmas Reinsalu), accusing them of the unreasonable and deliberate wasting of taxpayer money. Martin Helme is highlighted as a recurring Finance Minister linked to both the Nordica and Porto Franco criminal cases. The criticism is intense and accusatory, claiming that the money was knowingly provided "to be burned with a bright flame."

Not enough data

The focus is on the national level (Estonian state funds, i.e., taxpayer money) and the international level (the European Commission's state aid approval, and the provision of subcontracting services in the airspace of other countries). Regionally, emphasis is placed on Nordica's final flights from Tallinn and the unprofitability of the Tallinn routes.

Economic views are strongly fiscally conservative and liberal, criticizing the doubling of the national debt burden and the persistent long-term budget deficit. Emphasis is placed on the principle that the state should avoid intervening in business, especially when such intervention is not strictly necessary, and there is criticism of the indiscriminate distribution of subsidies under the guise of the COVID crisis.

Not enough data

The legislative focus is currently on opposing Draft Bill 543 OE, which proposes the formation of a new investigative committee to examine the circumstances surrounding Nordica. The preferred approach is to await the results yielded by existing legal and oversight mechanisms (specifically, criminal proceedings initiated by the Prosecutor's Office and a special audit). Furthermore, the significance of the special audit initiated by the former Minister of Climate and the subsequent criminal proceedings is underscored.