First Reading of the Draft Act on Amendments to the Public Transport Act (725 SE)
Session: The 15th Riigikogu, 6th Session, Plenary Sitting
Date: 2025-10-14 13:10
Participating Politicians:
Total Speeches: 42
Membership: 15
Agenda Duration: 38m
AI Summaries: 42/42 Speeches (100.0%)
Analysis: Structured Analysis
Politicians Speaking Time
Politicians
Analysis
Summary
The Riigikogu debated the first reading of Draft Law 725, initiated by the Government of the Republic, concerning amendments to the Public Transport Act. The goal of the draft, introduced by Minister of Regional Affairs and Agriculture Hendrik Johannes Terras, was to streamline the organization of taxi services, bringing it into line with the principles of the digital state. The main change involved ending data duplication by consolidating all data regarding taxi operation licenses, vehicle cards, and service provider cards into the Register of Economic Activities (MTR), thereby eliminating the outdated public transport register managed by the Transport Administration. This is expected to reduce administrative burden, costs, and security risks.
The proposal in the draft that generated the most controversy was the abolition of the requirement for a photo on the service provider card, which the minister justified by citing data protection and bureaucracy reduction, as it is not an identity document. However, Riigikogu members (Rene Kokk, Mart Maastik, Priit Sibul) emphasized that the photo is crucial for the customer's sense of security and verifying the driver's identity. Mario Kadastik, the rapporteur for the Economic Affairs Committee, confirmed that the committee had reached a consensus that the photo should remain, and the minister promised to analyze the possibility of using a photo from the Population Register for the second reading. A question was also raised regarding the disregard of the proposal by the Association of Estonian Cities and Municipalities to grant local governments the right to carry out control transactions (test purchases) concerning platform service providers. Minister Terras justified this omission by citing the urgency and technical focus of the draft, promising to address the topic within the framework of broader amendments to the Public Transport Act.
Decisions Made 2
The first reading of Bill 725 (the Draft Act amending the Public Transport Act) has been concluded.
The deadline for submitting amendments was set for October 28th at 5:15 PM.
Most Active Speaker
Rene Kokk (EKRE faction, right) was an active questioner and negotiator, repeatedly posing critical questions regarding the removal of the photo from the service card and the alleged urgency of the draft bill. He also criticized the failure to take into account the proposal made by the Association of Cities and Rural Municipalities.
Aseesimees Toomas Kivimägi
AI Summary
The Riigikogu has commenced the first reading of Draft Bill 725, initiated by the Government of the Republic, concerning amendments to the Public Transport Act. Regional and Agriculture Minister Hendrik Johannes Terras was invited to the floor to introduce the draft bill and respond to questions from Riigikogu members. This is a significant legislative amendment that affects the organization and financing of public transport in Estonia. The likely objective of the draft bill is to modernize the current law to ensure better accessibility and quality of public transport services nationwide, taking regional policy needs into consideration. The Minister’s participation emphasizes the importance of these amendments for rural areas and regional development.
Regionaal- ja põllumajandusminister Hendrik Johannes Terras
AI Summary
The speaker introduced a draft bill to the Riigikogu (Parliament), which is a modest, yet very concrete step in streamlining the state's information systems and reducing bureaucracy in the taxi service sector. The main objective of the bill is to align the organization of taxi services with the principles of a modern digital state by eliminating the duplication of service provider card data. Currently, the system is inefficient because taxi drivers must interact with two registers when applying: the Register of Economic Activities (MTR) and the Public Transport Register maintained by the Transport Administration. This historically developed situation causes double data entry, administrative burden, and maintains an outdated IT system, leading to costs and cyber risks for the state. The bill eliminates this duplication: henceforth, all data related to taxi services—the taxi transport license, vehicle card, and service provider card—will be managed solely within the MTR. This means unified responsibility, less confusion, and permanent savings for the state, saving thousands of euros annually on the maintenance of the technical solution. A second significant change is the removal of the requirement to submit an identity photo to obtain a service provider card. This requirement is outdated, does not enhance security, but instead creates data protection and misuse risks. The change was initiated by the entrepreneurs themselves, who found that a photo entered into the national database does not create added value. The amendment affects approximately 23,000 service provider card holders, whose current rights and obligations remain the same; only the location of data management changes. The impact is positive for all parties: the state saves money and reduces risks, the administrative burden on businesses decreases, and the entire system becomes clearer and more transparent. This is a small but important reform that supports the smooth functioning of the mobility system as a whole. The law is scheduled to enter into force on January 1st of next year.
Aseesimees Toomas Kivimägi
AI Summary
At the opening of the session, the presiding officer delivered a brief acknowledgement, after which they immediately proceeded to the essential item on the agenda: answering questions from Riigikogu members. This introduction was strictly procedural and specific, emphasizing adherence to parliamentary rules of procedure and a readiness to begin substantive debate. The presiding officer announced that the round of questions had begun, thereby giving the deputies the opportunity to submit inquiries and questions to members of the government or other responsible officials. More specifically, it was noted that the order for asking questions had been established, and Riigikogu member Rene Kokk would be the first to take the floor. This announcement marked the transition from the formal introduction to the substantive part of the session, where topical issues and political questions are expected to be addressed. Therefore, the main purpose of the address was to usher in the question and answer session and give the floor to the first questioner, thereby activating the parliament's oversight function.
AI Summary
In light of the discussion that arose in the Economic Affairs Committee, the speaker expressed deep skepticism regarding the requirement to remove the photograph from the service provider card, asking the Minister for clarification on how this change would actually reduce the risks of misuse, simplify people's lives, or make the system more transparent. Although the official justifications refer to making the system clearer, the speaker considers these arguments to be rather sloganistic, as it remains unclear how these improvements would actually materialize from the client's perspective. It was emphasized that the decision-making process should primarily be based on the interests of the client, not the preferences of the entrepreneurs. Clients have clearly expressed the desire to continue seeing the taxi driver's photo on the card in the future to verify the identity of the person behind the wheel. In the speaker's assessment, the reluctance of entrepreneurs toward the photo requirement is not a sufficient argument for its abolition, drawing a parallel with the obligation to pay taxes. Therefore, the Minister is asked what specific arguments justify the removal of the photo requirement and how this makes the service more transparent and better for the client.
Regionaal- ja põllumajandusminister Hendrik Johannes Terras
AI Summary
The speaker acknowledges the position that the photograph on a taxi driver's service card is a crucial element for passenger security, allowing them to compare the person behind the wheel with the image on the card. This provides assurance that the service is being provided by the individual to whom the corresponding work permit has been issued. The speaker accepts this logic and the security aspect. However, the speaker emphasizes from an administrative standpoint that the service card is essentially a work permit, not an identity document in the state's sense. If the card lacks a national identity verification function, the collection of photographs and the handling of this data generate unnecessary costs and administrative burden. Therefore, the question is whether the state should collect data that is not directly necessary for fulfilling the purpose of the permit. The speaker calls upon the members of the Riigikogu (Parliament) to weigh this dilemma from the perspective of security versus administrative costs. Should the legislator decide that retaining the photo on the service card is unavoidable for ensuring a sense of security, despite the accompanying data processing costs, that decision will be acceptable to the speaker.
Aseesimees Toomas Kivimägi
AI Summary
The submitted text "Mart Maastik, please!" does not constitute a speech delivered in the Riigikogu (Estonian Parliament) or its content, but is merely a procedural notification made by the chairman of the session, granting the floor to the aforementioned member of the Riigikogu. Therefore, in this instance, there is a complete absence of any substantive argumentation, political position, or topic presentation that could be analyzed and reported in summary form. The compilation of a summary requires the existence of the speech content, topics, proposals, and counterarguments presented. Since the text of the speech delivered by Mart Maastik is missing, it is not possible to provide a 2–3 paragraph summary of his main positions, whether they relate to the budget, security, or social issues. The only conclusion that can be drawn from the submitted text is that it was Mart Maastik’s turn to present his views or answer questions during the Riigikogu session. Thus, this "summary" is limited to the statement that the calling of Mart Maastik to speak was registered in the minutes of the Riigikogu session. We request that the actual text of the speech be submitted so that a summary of the required length and content in Estonian can be compiled.
Mart Maastik
Profiling Fraktsiooni mittekuuluvad Riigikogu liikmedAI Summary
The oversight capability of local government units (LGUs) regarding platform service providers was not taken into account in the legal amendments, which is why the question has been raised as to why the government is ignoring the proposal put forth by the Association of Cities and Municipalities. The Association submitted a comment and a proposal to supplement the supervision chapter of the Public Transport Act with a provision that would grant LGU protection or special enforcement units the right to carry out control transactions (test purchases) with respect to platform service providers as well. The speaker emphasizes that such an amendment is essential to ensure fair competition in the market, transparent service provision, and the actual capability of local governments to fulfill the supervisory function assigned to them. Since the proposal has not been considered, the minister is being asked directly why the position of the Association of Cities and Municipalities has been disregarded, thereby preventing LGUs from exercising effective oversight over the platform economy.
Regionaal- ja põllumajandusminister Hendrik Johannes Terras
AI Summary
The speaker emphasizes that the primary objective of the current draft legislation is to streamline the outdated register. This is a very specific and minor step, focusing solely on the management and modernization of these registers. Broader issues concerning the overall organization of public transport and related adjustments are planned to be addressed through a second, more comprehensive piece of legislation. Thus, while the matter of register streamlining falls within a wider package of amendments, it is currently being presented as a separate, narrowly focused draft bill.
Aseesimees Toomas Kivimägi
AI Summary
This text excerpt is not the content of Priit Sibul’s speech; rather, it is a procedural introduction during a Riigikogu session. It is the presiding officer’s address, granting the floor to a specific member of parliament. The short phrase, "Priit Sibul, please!" marks the moment the MP is invited to the podium to present their report or position. Therefore, there are no substantive arguments, political stances, or discussion topics here that could be summarized. Since the material presented is limited only to the act of granting the floor, it is impossible to identify the main topics, central arguments, or the political message of the speech. This sentence is merely a formal reference to the Riigikogu Rules of Procedure, which regulates the order and commencement of addresses. The summary must therefore focus on the fact that this is an anticipation or preparation, not content that has already been delivered. Finally, it can be said that this brief address fulfills an important role in parliamentary work, ensuring a smooth transition from one speaker to the next. It signals that Priit Sibul is ready to present his views, but his actual positions—whether related to the budget, legislative amendments, or any other topical issue—remain unknown based on this text.
Priit Sibul
Profiling Isamaa fraktsioonAI Summary
A member of the Riigikogu addressed the minister with a critical question regarding the register-based verification of service providers. The speaker expressed confusion and dissatisfaction with the minister's position, which holds that it is not considered important for the service consumer—be they a bus, taxi, or platform rider—to be able to subsequently understand and verify whether the person providing the service is the same individual who was issued the corresponding operating license in the register. The speaker emphasized that if the consumer lacks the ability to verify the service provider's compliance, this constitutes a significant shortcoming. Continuing the topic of service quality and consumer rights, the speaker posed an additional question to the minister regarding the necessity of language skills. He wanted to know whether, in the government's estimation, taxi drivers and platform workers should be able to communicate in Estonian with the passengers who use their services, or whether the minister considers this requirement unnecessary to any extent as well.
Regionaal- ja põllumajandusminister Hendrik Johannes Terras
AI Summary
The speaker addressed two main topics in their presentation: the status of documents and ensuring security, and the relevance of language requirements in platform work. Regarding security, he emphasized that the document in question is not legally an identity document, which is why there is no statutory necessity to include certain elements. At the same time, he fully understands that these requirements generate a significant sense of security among people. Although the speaker doubts the direct impact of these measures on mitigating real security risks, he maintains that if the legislator decides in favor of continuing the requirements to ensure a sense of security, this is entirely acceptable to him. As a second important argument, the speaker touched upon language requirements related to platform work. He found that when providing a service where the start and end points are already determined via a phone or other digital means, the need for communication between the taxi driver and the client is no longer critical for the high-quality provision of the service. Based on this, the speaker assessed that imposing a strict language requirement is no longer justified in platform-based services.
Aseesimees Toomas Kivimägi
AI Summary
The minutes of the Riigikogu session show that Rene Kokk started the round of speeches. The Presiding Officer gave him the floor, calling him to the podium with the phrase, "Rene Kokk, please!"—marking the official transition to the speaker's presentation. Since the submitted text contains only the introduction and the speaker's name, the content of Rene Kokk's presentation required for making a summary is absent. Therefore, it is not possible to analyze or summarize his main arguments, the topics addressed, or his political proposals. In conclusion, we can only confirm that the speaker was designated and given the floor, but his political message and positions were not presented.
AI Summary
The speaker addressed the Minister seeking clarification as to why a crucial proposal submitted by the Estonian Association of Cities and Municipalities was omitted from the current draft legislation. This proposal sought to grant local government law enforcement units the authority to inspect platform service providers, which is considered the actual source of the problem. The justification provided for disregarding the proposal was the extreme urgency of the bill's proceedings. The speaker challenged this justification, demanding an explanation from the Minister regarding the source of such urgency that it prevents the core issue from being resolved by the present law. Furthermore, a precise timeline was requested for the submission and processing in the Riigikogu (Parliament) of the second, corrective bill, which the Minister had previously promised. The central focus of the question was why it was impossible to resolve the actual problem—the one highlighted by the cities and municipalities—during the expedited legislative procedure.
Regionaal- ja põllumajandusminister Hendrik Johannes Terras
AI Summary
The speaker stressed the urgent need to streamline the registers within the public transport sector. The goal is to abolish the public transport register currently administered by the Transport Administration starting next year, by consolidating the registers. This proposal has also come from the Estonian Association of Cities and Municipalities. Although an agreement has not yet been reached regarding the specific register issue, this discussion should take place within the framework of broader amendments to the Public Transport Act. This broader draft law also focuses on improving oversight functions. The broader legal amendment addresses the supervision of taxi services and platform services, as well as other bottlenecks in the public transport sector. The draft law is currently under development, but the exact timeline for its completion could not yet be provided.
Aseesimees Toomas Kivimägi
AI Summary
The submitted text, "Tanel Kiik, palun!" does not constitute the content of a Riigikogu (Estonian Parliament) speech. Instead, it is a remark made by the board or the presiding officer, granting the floor to the speaker, Tanel Kiik. This is a procedural phrase marking the beginning of the speaking turn. For this reason, the text lacks any substantive argumentation, political stance, or thematic development that could be summarized. Consequently, compiling a summary that covers the main points and key claims of the speech is not possible based on the material provided. To create a summary, the actual content of the speech is required, addressing specific bills, political questions, or current topics.
Tanel Kiik
Profiling Fraktsiooni mittekuuluvad Riigikogu liikmedAI Summary
The speaker raises a crucial question before the Riigikogu concerning the organization of public transport, a matter that affects many residents across Estonia. The focus is on the government's plan to reduce and merge the current 11 public transport centers (ÜTKs). While earlier media reports and political debates suggested reducing the number of centers to three or four, the latest information indicates that the creation of just one or two centers is now on the agenda. A specific question is being put to the Minister: how far along is this ambitious merger plan, and what are the primary arguments justifying such drastic centralization? The main concern, however, is how the merger process intends to ensure that local knowledge and understanding of the route network's needs and frequency are preserved in the best possible way. The speaker stresses the regional policy aspect, warning that merging these centers must not lead to a situation where peripheral regions and their specific transport requirements are overlooked. It is vital to prevent centralization from resulting in a decline in service quality, especially in those areas where local expertise is most essential.
Regionaal- ja põllumajandusminister Hendrik Johannes Terras
AI Summary
The discussion surrounding the merger of public transport centers is currently very intense and is a key focus for the government, as fewer centers offer advantages at the management level. Central to the debate is the question of how to organize transport most reasonably and what number of transport centers is optimal. Currently, different views are clashing regarding what the new management structure should look like, and active negotiations are underway to find a solution. The most crucial aspect of the merger is ensuring that even if the centers are legally combined, local knowledge is retained. It is emphasized that the centers are being merged, not eliminated. The expertise of local public transport center employees is extremely important for ensuring high-quality service, as they are familiar with the details of bus routes and understand community needs, such as how to guarantee bus connections for children traveling to school. Therefore, local knowledge must be preserved, and intensive negotiations are also underway with local governments to ensure this.
Aseesimees Toomas Kivimägi
AI Summary
The presented text, "Priit Sibul, please!" is a procedural phrase within the context of the Riigikogu (Estonian Parliament) session transcript, used by the chairman to give the floor to the speaker. This sentence itself does not constitute the substance, arguments, or positions of Priit Sibul’s presentation; it merely signifies the transfer of the right to speak. Consequently, it is impossible to compile a summary of the main points of the speech—such as the content of the bill under discussion, political standpoints, or criticism offered—because that data is absent. Since the actual content of the speech has not been provided, the summary is limited only to the fact that Priit Sibul was designated as the next speaker. This phrase is relevant only from the standpoint of the Riigikogu’s rules of procedure, marking the beginning of a speaking turn. In short, the given phrase signifies the taking of the Riigikogu podium, not the content of the speech itself. To create a summary, Priit Sibul’s actual speech text would be required.
Priit Sibul
Profiling Isamaa fraktsioonAI Summary
The speaker is revisiting the issue of language proficiency in public transport, which is, after all, a public service. He points out that while technological solutions (such as inputting the start and end points) allow for minimal interaction, especially on city routes, the bus driver’s role remains more significant on longer journeys—they greet passengers and inquire about their needs. The speaker’s core question revolves around attitudes and perceptions: whether, in his view, public service providers are not expected to understand and speak Estonian. He cites Finland as an example, where the situation is the reverse. He acknowledges that various technical solutions are possible, but asks the parliamentary group whether they have discussed and deem it justified to establish language requirements and proficiency standards for these service providers.
Regionaal- ja põllumajandusminister Hendrik Johannes Terras
AI Summary
The speaker expressed clear opposition to the arbitrary inclusion of service providers, including public transport providers, into a single regulatory package. This particularly affects platform workers, whose specific mode of service provision differs significantly from traditional service industries. For platform workers, contact with the service recipient is often minimal, and potential communication needs can be addressed through alternative methods. Therefore, the speaker does not see a pressing need to impose a strict language proficiency criterion on them. Although language proficiency is welcome when living in a certain environment and develops naturally over time, it should not be the determining factor in enabling them to work. The main argument is that if the start and end points of the service are clearly defined digitally or otherwise, language proficiency should not be such a critical criterion that prevents platform work. Regulation should take into account the nature of the work and avoid disproportionate requirements in sectors where human contact is limited.
Aseesimees Toomas Kivimägi
AI Summary
This text excerpt does not contain Mart Maastik's speech in the Riigikogu or the substance of the question he posed, but is rather a procedural interjection or an address by the session chair. The short sentence "Mart Maastik, second question, please!" indicates that a round of questions or interpellations was underway during the parliamentary session, and MP Maastik had been granted permission to ask his second question in the sequence. Therefore, the necessary arguments, positions, or thematic treatments required for a summary are absent. This phrase refers to the organizational aspect of the Riigikogu's work, emphasizing that the debate takes place within a prescribed order and time limits. This shows that Maastik had already presented one question previously and was continuing to exercise his rights as a member of parliament. A substantive summary of Maastik's address is thus impossible, as there is no topic raised by him, no content of the question posed to the government, or any reasoned defense of his positions. The analysis is limited merely to the conclusion that Maastik was an active participant in the ongoing debate.
Mart Maastik
Profiling Fraktsiooni mittekuuluvad Riigikogu liikmedAI Summary
An MP criticized the minister over the timing of the legislative proposal concerning the exercise of the right to conduct scrutiny transactions by platform service providers. The speaker stressed that this issue has been debated for years, leading to confusion as to why it is now being presented to the Riigikogu as a highly important and urgent bill, especially given that a certain system was already functioning previously. He questioned whether the previously existing system worked well or poorly, but maintained that the current haste is unwarranted. The speaker also challenged the efficiency and bureaucracy of the ministry’s operations, asking why related issues could not be resolved simultaneously through a single, comprehensive bill. Furthermore, the question was raised whether the ministry is short on staff to handle these simple matters, or what exactly is so complex about granting the right to conduct scrutiny transactions that it demands years of preparation, and why it cannot be incorporated into the current proposal. He implied that the ministry is stalling on straightforward tasks.
Regionaal- ja põllumajandusminister Hendrik Johannes Terras
AI Summary
The speaker emphasized that the draft legislation currently under debate is technical in nature. Its primary objective is to streamline national registers, which includes the abolition of one specific register. This measure is required to reduce the number of data points and the volume of aggregated information, thereby simplifying overall data management. The government's stance is to proceed with the bill precisely with the aim of achieving a more efficient and clearer structure for the register system. Nevertheless, the speaker affirmed the right of Riigikogu members to submit amendments to the bill should they deem it necessary and identify opportunities to enhance its substance.
Aseesimees Toomas Kivimägi
AI Summary
This brief phrase is not an independent speech but rather a procedural interjection made by the Chairman of the Riigikogu session. It marks the moment when Riigikogu member Tanel Kiik is called upon to present his second question, indicating that this is part of either an information hour or some other debate where members have been allocated multiple rounds of questioning. Therefore, the main purpose of this address was to ensure the smooth running of the session and to give the floor to the next speaker in accordance with the established rules of procedure. Since this is merely an invitation to pose a question, the text lacks substantive arguments, political positions, or introductions of specific draft legislation. Based on this passage, it is impossible to deduce Tanel Kiik's views on economic, social, or security policy issues, as those were meant to be contained within the second question he was about to present. Thus, this is not a political message but purely technical and administrative guidance. In summary, this brief sentence emphasizes the organization of parliamentary work and the role of the session chairman in managing procedures. The substantive debate or political message should have followed the presentation of Tanel Kiik's second question, the content of which is not revealed in this text. This phrase was merely an introduction to the subsequent substantive contribution.
Tanel Kiik
Profiling Fraktsiooni mittekuuluvad Riigikogu liikmedAI Summary
The Speaker of the Riigikogu addressed the issue of public transport funding, commending the government's recent decision to increase base funding to cover fixed costs. The Speaker considered this sound practice, as it helps avoid the constant need to request money from the reserve, which should be earmarked only for extraordinary circumstances. However, the Speaker also pointed out that despite the adjustment to base funding, both the Minister and the heads of the public transport centers have noted that the necessary additional funds for densifying the route network and opening new routes are currently unavailable. Therefore, the Speaker posed a question to the Minister regarding the optimal funding requirement for the coming years. They wanted to know the government's estimated sum of money that would be necessary to improve public transport services and create an optimal route network, bearing in mind that establishing a stop in the yard of every single farm is not realistic.
Regionaal- ja põllumajandusminister Hendrik Johannes Terras
AI Summary
The presentation emphasized the importance of developing railway infrastructure and launching new, significantly faster train lines, which will result in a dramatic improvement in service quality. If the service provided is high quality and accessible, there is an opportunity to increase the user contribution to public transport funding, provided that it remains economically reasonable for the consumer. This is part of a broader strategy to improve service quality. Although funding needs for the immediate future are covered, long-term sustainability remains a challenge due to rising fuel prices, infrastructure fees, and general inflation. Solutions must be found to secure public transport funding and optimize the route network. Estonia's scattered settlement pattern makes providing uniform service difficult, but successfully piloted on-demand transport solutions, such as the bus service implemented on the Sõrve peninsula, are being expanded to save costs and ensure service accessibility.
Aseesimees Toomas Kivimägi
AI Summary
It should be noted that the text presented is not a standalone speech, but rather a procedural address by the Chairman of the Riigikogu session, granting the floor to the next speaker. Specifically, Andres Metsoja was called to the podium. Consequently, this text segment lacks any political positions, lines of reasoning, or substantive arguments that could be summarized. Since the text consists of only one sentence ("Andres Metsoja, please!"), it is impossible to provide a 2–3 paragraph summary of the speech's main points or key assertions. The text merely signifies the next phase of the Riigikogu debate and a change of speaker. This is a purely procedural announcement, indicating that Metsoja has received permission to present his statement or question. A substantive summary would require the existence of the content of the speech actually delivered by Metsoja.
Andres Metsoja
Profiling Isamaa fraktsioonAI Summary
The esteemed speaker raises a question before the Riigikogu concerning the principles of public transport funding, focusing on the choice between a system of completely free transport funded by the taxpayer and a system requiring a user contribution. He draws attention to the current regrettable practice where ticket revenue (i.e., the user contribution) is collected and then distributed among regions that have implemented completely free public transport. The speaker considers it essential that the user contribution be maintained and that this money stays with the regions that are actually contributing to the public transport funding pool. He asks the minister whether the government has reviewed this funding matrix, emphasizing that this is a question of principle. His position is that regions where passengers contribute by buying tickets should actually benefit from this revenue, rather than having to support those regions where there is no user contribution.
Regionaal- ja põllumajandusminister Hendrik Johannes Terras
AI Summary
The speaker agrees with the principle that a balance must be struck between subsidy and user contribution when funding public transport. It is acknowledged that only a very small number of lines in Estonia operate reasonably under market conditions, which is why state support is essential. Therefore, a thorough recalculation of the entire funding matrix and the user contribution component is currently underway to find solutions to existing problems. One of the main challenges associated with completely free public transport is the reliability of the data. When tickets are absent, the number of passengers carried, as reported by carriers—especially bus companies—is often merely an estimate. This makes data verification extremely difficult and has led to several problematic legal disputes where the accuracy of the submitted data is uncertain. The solution is seen as transitioning to a unified system, which requires agreements with local governments, some of whom are prepared to offer additional subsidies based on political decisions.
Aseesimees Toomas Kivimägi
AI Summary
According to the minutes of the Riigikogu session, MP Anti Allas was granted the floor, thereby marking the transition to a new speaker in the debate or presentation phase. The fixed phrase "Anti Allas, palun!" (Anti Allas, please!) is a procedural call that authorizes the MP to begin presenting his views or responding to previously asked questions. Although the substantive content of Allas’s speech is absent from the current text, this moment underscores the importance of parliamentary procedure and the democratic process, where the session chairman ensures the smooth and correct sequence of speaking turns. The invitation for Anti Allas to approach the podium indicates that the agenda included a topic requiring a stance from his faction or his personal viewpoint. Such moments are critical in parliamentary work, as they allow the MP to present their arguments regarding draft legislation or political statements. Thus, although the content of the speech remains unknown, it is clear that this procedural step must have been followed by a substantive contribution to the debate, which is the foundation of the Riigikogu's work. In summary, the phrase "Anti Allas, palun!" reflects the smooth management of the Riigikogu session, signaling the transition of the speaking round. In the absence of substantive arguments, the emphasis remains on procedural correctness, which is an integral part of parliamentary work.
Anti Allas
Profiling Fraktsiooni mittekuuluvad Riigikogu liikmedAI Summary
The speaker highlighted before the Riigikogu the concern regarding deficits in regional transport connectivity, which have become particularly acute between county centers and major regional hubs. It was emphasized that commercial lines are no longer able to guarantee sufficient service precisely during critical hours, especially in the mornings, when people need connections to get to work or travel further. This situation hinders daily mobility and is causing growing dissatisfaction among residents. In light of this, the Minister was addressed directly with two specific questions. Firstly, they sought to know whether the government is aware of this widespread transport issue. Secondly, and most importantly, a clear answer was demanded as to whether next year's state budget offers concrete solutions and financial resources to improve the situation and ensure the necessary and reliable connections for residents.
Regionaal- ja põllumajandusminister Hendrik Johannes Terras
AI Summary
The speaker stressed that developing the public transport network has been an extremely long process, one that has taken over 34 years. Ensuring quality service requires continuity and reliability above all else—the bus must leave from the same stop at the same time every single day. For this reason, we caution against overly rapid or ill-considered changes, which ultimately fail to provide good service to the users. While there is no widespread problem yet, we have started receiving scattered reports regarding incorrect bus times, particularly concerning travel between major hubs. We are actively seeking solutions for these specific issues that have been brought to our attention. However, it is stressed that when finding solutions, we must consider the holistic impact, as bus routes often serve not just major centers, but also fulfill broader functions, such as connecting passengers with rail services. Therefore, every change must be assessed comprehensively.
Aseesimees Toomas Kivimägi
AI Summary
This text excerpt is not the content of Jaak Aab's speech, but merely a procedural note given by the Chairman of the Riigikogu session. The phrase "Jaak Aab, please!" grants the floor to the Member of Parliament so that he may present his views, answer questions, or participate in the debate. Consequently, the text contains no substantive arguments, political positions, or proposals that could be summarized. Since the content of the speech is absent, it is impossible to identify main themes, such as economic policy, social issues, or the state budget discussion. Creating a summary would require the existence of Jaak Aab’s actual address, which is missing from this material. In this instance, we are dealing only with a phrase reflecting the operational procedure of the Riigikogu, which signifies a change of speaker. Thus, a summary of the speech’s substantive points cannot be provided, as the material presented is limited solely to the granting of permission to speak.
AI Summary
An honorable Member of the Riigikogu addressed the minister with a question regarding Elron's funding and railway usage fees, a topic that has repeatedly been on the agenda. The speaker highlighted a long-standing issue where the amount Elron pays to Eesti Raudtee for using the tracks has consistently resulted in shortfalls, forcing the state either to allocate additional funds or to raise ticket prices. Although the bill in question did not directly address this topic, the MP used the opportunity to seek clarity from the minister regarding public transport funding. The main question was directed at whether, in light of state budget support, Elron's funding is sufficiently secured for the next year and whether the issue of railway usage fees has been resolved. The MP sought confirmation from the minister that this recurring funding bottleneck concerning state-supported rail public transport has been agreed upon in the budget and that next year the situation will not arise again where funds are insufficient or ticket prices need to be raised.
Regionaal- ja põllumajandusminister Hendrik Johannes Terras
AI Summary
The speaker addressed financial planning issues between Eesti Raudtee (Estonian Railways) and Elron, emphasizing that the solution depends on the cooperation of three parties: Eesti Raudtee, Elron, and the Technical Regulatory Authority (TTJA). The main problem lies in the fact that changes to the price per line-kilometer, which are determined by the TTJA mid-year, complicate planning. These unexpected changes lead to a situation where one party incurs unplanned over-expenditure and the other experiences corresponding excess revenue, neither of which was originally planned for the year. During the discussions, an understanding was reached that since both parties are state service providers, the over-expenditure and excess revenue must be treated as mutually linked—one party’s unexpected cost is the other party’s unexpected revenue. According to the speaker, there is currently an understanding between Eesti Raudtee and Elron that cooperation must proceed precisely in this spirit. The current cooperation is functioning well, and it is hoped that thanks to the agreement reached and improved planning, a similar problem will not arise in the next fiscal year.
Aseesimees Toomas Kivimägi
AI Summary
The speaker began their statement to colleagues, concluding the previous round of questions. They presented a clear procedural position regarding the Parliament’s Rules of Procedure, emphasizing that if the rapporteur of a bill permits the discussion of a topic broader than the bill’s direct subject matter, this automatically grants members of the Riigikogu the right to ask questions on that broader scope as well. This constitutes an important principled safeguard for comprehensive debate. The speaker encouraged colleagues to utilize this right, noting that there should be no fear or embarrassment in raising wider issues. Finally, they yielded the floor, directing the Riigikogu to proceed with the discussion in the lead committee, which is the Economic Affairs Committee. Colleague Mario Kadastik was then welcomed to the Riigikogu rostrum as the next speaker.
Mario Kadastik
Profiling Fraktsiooni mittekuuluvad Riigikogu liikmedAI Summary
The Economic Affairs Committee debated the draft bill over two sessions. The primary point of contention was the requirement to remove the driver's photograph from the service provider card. The Minister justified dropping the photo requirement by citing efficiency and the proliferation of digital platforms, noting that the driver's picture is already visible there anyway. However, the majority of committee members felt that the photo on the card was essential for ensuring public safety and security, verifying that the taxi driver was indeed the license holder. A proposed solution was to utilize the existing document photograph found in the Population Register, rather than requiring the upload of a new image. While the potential additional cost was debated, the presenter confirmed that downloading the image via the X-Road data exchange layer should not constitute an expensive development project. The Committee decided, largely by consensus, that the photograph must remain on the card. The Minister promised to assess the cost of the register-based solution and submit the corresponding amendment proposal for the second reading. Furthermore, it was clarified that a separate language requirement would not be explicitly written into the Public Transport Act, as this is already regulated by other legislation, which mandates B1 level language proficiency for drivers providing public transport services. The Committee adopted decisions concerning the inclusion of the draft bill on the plenary agenda and the conclusion of the first reading.
Aseesimees Toomas Kivimägi
AI Summary
At the Riigikogu session, formal debates were officially opened following the conclusion of the question and answer period. The Chairman announced that there were no further questions and yielded the floor to the next item on the agenda, which was speeches by representatives of the parliamentary groups. The opening address for the debates was delivered by Mart Maastik, the representative of the Isamaa faction, who had been waiting for his turn to speak. He was given the opportunity to present the faction's positions and commence the debate. Mart Maastik stepped up to the podium to present the Isamaa faction's stance on the topic under consideration.
Mart Maastik
Profiling Fraktsiooni mittekuuluvad Riigikogu liikmedAI Summary
The speaker addressed a draft bill in the Riigikogu concerning the reform of the Public Transport Act, considering it a small but important change. Specifically, the proposal to remove photos from taxi drivers' service provider cards generated a lively response in the Economic Affairs Committee. Although the ministry justifies this by reducing the risk of data collection and abandoning an outdated requirement, the speaker is of the opinion that removing photos does not reduce risks, but rather increases them. In the case of a card without a photo, identifying the taxi driver becomes difficult, and this creates the possibility for arbitrary duplication of permits and their use in random cars, which calls the transparency of the service into question. Another critical issue is the proposal by the Association of Estonian Cities and Municipalities to grant local government law enforcement units the right to conduct control transactions (test purchases) concerning platform service providers. This is necessary to ensure fair competition. The speaker wonders why this simple solution, which has been discussed in the Riigikogu for years, has not yet made it into the draft bill. Furthermore, he questions the minister's claim regarding the urgency of the bill, finding that the removal of a photo cannot be urgent, while the important issue of the right to inspection remains unresolved. The speaker expressed suspicion that certain ruling parties are not interested in regulating platform services, citing a possible conflict of interest, as these service providers might be their supporters. Finally, the speaker promised that the Isamaa party will submit amendments regarding the photos and urgently demands that the issue of municipalities' right to inspection reaches the Riigikogu floor for discussion in the near future, instead of being shelved again for years.
Aseesimees Toomas Kivimägi
AI Summary
At today's sitting of the Riigikogu, the floor was granted to the representative of the EKRE faction, who utilized their allotted time for a brief introductory statement. The speaker thanked the previous participants and subsequently invited their fellow faction member to the podium. Specifically, esteemed colleague Rene Kokk was invited to address the Riigikogu on behalf of the EKRE faction. The introduction was purely procedural, focusing solely on presenting the new speaker so that he could convey the faction's official position. The substance and arguments of the speech will become apparent during Rene Kokk's subsequent address.
AI Summary
The speaker sharply criticizes the draft bill—which the minister claims should reduce risks and increase transparency—arguing that in substance, it achieves the exact opposite. He specifically objects to removing the driver's photo from the service provider card. He stresses that this makes the service less clear and less secure for the customer, as taxi users want to verify that the person behind the wheel matches the photo on the card. The speaker noted that out of ten people he surveyed, not a single one thought removing the photo would make things safer or better. He also dismisses the argument that retaining the photos would be burdensome for the state, since the necessary images already exist in the ID card and passport registers. Beyond the substantive flaws, the speaker criticizes the speed at which the bill is being processed. In his view, the alleged urgency is unjustified and is being used as a pretext to avoid considering substantive proposals—a clear example of poor legislative practice and merely formal inclusion. He specifically highlighted the proposal by the Association of Estonian Cities and Rural Municipalities to grant local government law enforcement units the right to conduct sting operations (or 'control transactions') against platform service providers. This proposal, which arose directly from real-life necessity, was rejected using the very argument of speed. The speaker calls on the ministry to slow down, properly revise the draft bill, and consult with the people whom the law affects, in order to create legislation that genuinely improves the situation. Finally, he confirms that the EKRE faction will submit an amendment to the bill ensuring that photos remain mandatory on the service provider cards.
Aseesimees Toomas Kivimägi
AI Summary
Upon the proposal of the lead committee, the first reading of Draft Act 725 was concluded in the Riigikogu. This decision means that the bill will move forward to the next procedural phase. Following the conclusion of the first reading, the deadline for submitting amendments was established. Members are able to submit their proposed amendments until 5:15 PM on October 28th of the current year. This also marked the conclusion of today's Riigikogu sitting, for which all contributors were thanked.