First reading of the draft resolution of the Riigikogu "Proposal to the Government of the Republic to initiate proceedings in the European Union to invalidate the obligation to prepare sustainability reports" (601 OE)
Session: Fifteenth Riigikogu, Fifth Session, Plenary Session.
Date: 2025-05-21 17:58
Participating Politicians:
Total Speeches: 50
Membership: 15
Agenda Duration: 1h 6m
AI Summaries: 50/50 Speeches (100.0%)
Analysis: Structured Analysis
Politicians Speaking Time
Politicians
Analysis
Summary
The agenda item concerned discussion of draft Resolution 601 of the Riigikogu submitted by the Isamaa faction, proposing that the Republic of Estonia initiate proceedings in the European Union to invalidate the obligation to prepare sustainability reports. Presenter Urmas Reinsalu (Isamaa) emphasized that the obligation to prepare sustainability reports, introduced into Estonian legal order, imposes an administrative burden of approximately 36 million euros on businesses and damages their competitiveness. Isamaa's position was that this is an ideological bureaucratic pyramid that should be completely removed from the European Union legal environment.
During the debate, a sharp confrontation arose between the coalition and the opposition. Representatives of the Reform Party (Kristo Enn Vaga, Õnne Pillak) argued that the draft is unnecessary, as the Republic of Estonia had already previously (after Isamaa submitted the draft) confirmed its position that reporting should be made voluntary in the European Union, and that Isamaa is "walking through an open door." Reinsalu and other opposition members (Mart Maastik, Rene Kokk) however emphasized that the obligation remains in force in Estonian laws and that parliament needs to give a clear mandate for its complete annulment. The government was also criticized for concealing the financial impacts of other large administrative burden-generating regulations (e.g., the "Fit for 55" package). The leading committee (the economic affairs committee) proposed conducting a final vote. As a majority of the Riigikogu membership (51 votes) was required to pass the decision, the draft was rejected with 19 votes in favor.
Decisions Made 2
The steering committee proposed conducting the final vote on bill 601.
The draft resolution of the Riigikogu, "Proposal to the Government of the Republic to initiate proceedings in the European Union to declare the obligation to prepare sustainability reports null and void," with number 601, was rejected (19 in favor, 0 against, 0 abstentions).
Most Active Speaker
The most active speaker was Urmas Reinsalu (Isamaa), who presented the bill, answered questions, and participated in several lengthy speeches, defending the opposition's position regarding the abolition of the obligation for sustainability reports.
Aseesimees Toomas Kivimägi
AI Summary
Under the fourth agenda item, we will discuss the first reading of Riigikogu decision 601, submitted by the Isamaa faction, the aim of which is to initiate negotiations concerning the annulment of the obligation to prepare sustainability reports in the European Union. Furthermore, the adoption of the decision requires a majority vote of the Riigikogu membership; the presenter is Urmas Reinsalu.
Urmas Reinsalu
Profiling Isamaa fraktsioonAI Summary
Urmas Reinsalu emphasized that the obligation to produce sustainability reports generates a significant administrative burden. While Isamaa wants to delay its implementation in Estonia, he stated that, in his opinion, all this bureaucracy must be unconditionally eliminated from the European Union's legal environment, and Estonia should take a clear stand on the issue.
Aseesimees Toomas Kivimägi
AI Summary
Toomas Kivimägi thanks you for the efficient use of time and for the clarity, and invites Hanah Laht to ask questions.
Hanah Lahe
Profiling Fraktsiooni mittekuuluvad Riigikogu liikmedAI Summary
Hanah Lahe pointed out that the draft bill and the explanatory memorandum are laconic and lack impact assessments. She then asked why sustainability reports—which are supposed to evaluate a company's impact on the environment, social welfare, and economic sustainability—are being planned for cancellation, and whether those three components are not crucial for business.
Urmas Reinsalu
Profiling Isamaa fraktsioonAI Summary
Urmas Reinsalu states that the government’s sustainability initiative is ideological and economically onerous, threatening entrepreneurial freedom and Estonia’s competitiveness, and calls for a thorough review of both the Fit for 55 package and sustainability reports.
Aseesimees Toomas Kivimägi
AI Summary
Deputy Speaker Toomas Kivimägi calls upon Kristo Enn Vaga to speak.
Kristo Enn Vaga
Profiling Fraktsiooni mittekuuluvad Riigikogu liikmedAI Summary
Kristo Enn Vaga claimed that the substantive goal of the draft bill had been met, and Isamaa supported it because the submission of sustainability reports should be voluntary for all companies, and we are doing it regardless. Therefore, it would be sensible to withdraw the bill and thank the government, saying, "You are doing the right thing."
Urmas Reinsalu
Profiling Isamaa fraktsioonAI Summary
Urmas Reinsalu stated that Estonia is a state governed by the rule of law and the sustainability reporting requirement must be implemented solely on the basis of legislation. Furthermore, the parliament’s plenary session should vote to decide on repealing this obligation, given that the mandates of the government and the EU Commission have failed to deliver the desired outcomes, and the parliament’s stance must be clear and directional.
Aseesimees Toomas Kivimägi
AI Summary
It's simply a request to invite Peeter Ernits to speak.
Peeter Ernits
Profiling Fraktsiooni mittekuuluvad Riigikogu liikmedAI Summary
Peeter Ernits expresses concern over whether we should try to avert the apocalypse with a full-scale sustainability report, or instead focus on pulling the Estonian economy out of the mud and avoiding additional costs for businesses.
Urmas Reinsalu
Profiling Isamaa fraktsioonAI Summary
Urmas Reinsalu claims that the government lacks a substantive grasp and an understanding rooted in the state's official position, and that they are rushing to fulfill sustainability reporting obligations without a clear legal basis. He simultaneously questions whether the Constitution and laws are more important in Estonia, or the protocol decisions made by ELAK.
Aseesimees Toomas Kivimägi
AI Summary
Toomas Kivimägi stated that as the presiding officer of the session, he is not permitted to intervene in the substance, and he stressed that both the laws and ELAK have their own respective roles. Mart Maastik, please.
Mart Maastik
Profiling Fraktsiooni mittekuuluvad Riigikogu liikmedAI Summary
Mart Maastik notes that the Economic Affairs Committee decided to postpone the sustainability reporting requirement for two years, rather than repealing it, and although he submitted a proposal for its repeal, it was set aside due to the postponement initiated by larger countries. He then asks the rapporteur how substantial this bureaucracy is, and whether it improves the world in any way or merely imposes significant obligations on businesses.
Urmas Reinsalu
Profiling Isamaa fraktsioonAI Summary
According to Urmas Reinsalu, the proposed regulatory measures will significantly alter companies' access to loans and capital, bringing with them additional risks and restrictions. The economic impact of these measures primarily affects the territory and the legal system. Furthermore, while these issues concern social welfare and justice, mixing in ideological enforcement is inconsistent with the operating culture of a free society, because states function based on rights and rules, while societies function based on values and morality.
Aseesimees Toomas Kivimägi
AI Summary
Deputy Speaker Toomas Kivimägi invited Mart Helm to speak.
Mart Helme
Profiling Eesti Konservatiivse Rahvaerakonna fraktsioonAI Summary
Mart Helme expressed agreement that totalitarian ideology, including sustainability reports, is contrary to reason and a free society; he highlighted the recently approved bill concerning underrepresented genders and called on Urmas Reinsalu to launch a campaign to lead Estonia out of the European Union, which is turning totalitarian.
Urmas Reinsalu
Profiling Isamaa fraktsioonAI Summary
Urmas Reinsalu criticized the Reform Party's sudden shift in supporting gender quotas for listed companies, highlighting the contradiction between their rhetoric and their actions, and stressing that laws must be genuinely implemented and their impact must be immediate.
Aseesimees Toomas Kivimägi
AI Summary
Toomas Kivimägi felt it necessary to make a remark and apologized to Mart Helme, stating that the assessments of colleagues and Riigikogu members voiced in his question were clearly insults, and requesting that similar expressions not be used.
AI Summary
Rene Kokk stated that EKRE had recommended either scrapping the draft sustainability reporting bill altogether or at least postponing it until the next European Parliament elections in 2029, arguing that it was harmful and burdensome for businesses. However, the bill was ultimately passed by consensus, as only a minor delay was proposed.
Urmas Reinsalu
Profiling Isamaa fraktsioonAI Summary
Urmas Reinsalu stated that precise interpretations are crucial, and a majority vote of the membership is primarily needed when Estonian laws, the budget, or financial obligations are changed. He also warned against an expanding logic under which EU or international actions would automatically require a higher parliamentary threshold, which could create financial and legal order difficulties in other countries.
Aseesimees Toomas Kivimägi
AI Summary
Toomas Kivimägi thanks Reinsalu, states that he has no further questions, and asks Mart Helme to put a question to the chairman of the session.
Mart Helme
Profiling Eesti Konservatiivse Rahvaerakonna fraktsioonAI Summary
Mart Helme said that the dissemination of untrue accusations by coalition representatives and a derogatory attitude towards dissent has become commonplace in the chamber, which is a sign of ideological brain death, and he requested balance and the same standard for everyone, because ministers have disparaged women and our members.
Aseesimees Toomas Kivimägi
AI Summary
Toomas Kivimägi thanked his colleague, affirmed that he has defended both opposition and coalition members of parliament against derogatory expressions, and stated that those expressions were inappropriate and impolite. He requested attention be paid to the choice of words and noted that the addition of the adjective "ideological" brings a different nuance to the matter. Finally, as the representative of the leading committee, he invited Tõnis Mölder, a member of the Economic Affairs Committee, to the Riigikogu podium to introduce the committee's discussion and the decisions reached therein.
Tõnis Mölder
Profiling Fraktsiooni mittekuuluvad Riigikogu liikmedAI Summary
The Economic Affairs Committee of the Riigikogu discussed the topic of the sustainability report in two sessions and reached a consensus decision to include the draft bill on the plenary session agenda on May 20th and conduct the final vote in the main hall, emphasizing that the sustainability report stems from the Green Deal and increases the burden on businesses, but the question of whether it should be voluntary or mandatory, as well as the shaping of Estonia's positions, require a further parliamentary mandate.
Aseesimees Toomas Kivimägi
AI Summary
Thanks are expressed in the address, questions are invited, and Hanah Lahe begins the questioning.
Hanah Lahe
Profiling Fraktsiooni mittekuuluvad Riigikogu liikmedAI Summary
Hanah Lahe stated that the draft legislation aimed at scrapping the mandatory sustainability reports is problematic because sustainability reports are an excellent tool for assessing a company's environmental impact, and without sound environmental conditions, business cannot operate. She then asked what alternative the bill's initiator was proposing and how, in their estimation, the environmental impact of business could be measured at all.
Tõnis Mölder
Profiling Fraktsiooni mittekuuluvad Riigikogu liikmedAI Summary
Mölder said that there was no direct discussion in the committee and that the purpose of the draft bill is to make the system voluntary, allowing companies to voluntarily prepare sustainability reports, especially those for whom this is important for international outreach, and that the initiator's comprehensive positive view on the matter was not voiced in the committee.
Aseesimees Toomas Kivimägi
AI Summary
A request to invite Urmas Reinsalu is made in the speech.
Urmas Reinsalu
Profiling Isamaa fraktsioonAI Summary
Urmas Reinsalu expressed his dismay and inquired about Estonia's position regarding the postponement of sustainability reports at the European Union level, specifically asking about the outcome of the Coreper vote on March 26, and whether Estonia supported the deferral or the cancellation.
Aseesimees Toomas Kivimägi
AI Summary
It was a brief thank-you.
Urmas Reinsalu
Profiling Isamaa fraktsioonAI Summary
Urmas Reinsalu asks the committee if there was any information regarding March 26.
Aseesimees Toomas Kivimägi
AI Summary
Deputy Chairman Toomas Kivimägi thanks his good colleague.
Tõnis Mölder
Profiling Fraktsiooni mittekuuluvad Riigikogu liikmedAI Summary
Tõnis Mölder stated that there was no specific discussion on the matter during that committee session, but the Economic Affairs Committee had to draft Estonia's positions before the decision and subsequently provided an assessment to the Riigikogu European Union Affairs Committee. This assessment supported a postponement of one or two years. Furthermore, during the debate, the termination of the sustainability reporting system was also proposed as a starting position, but this did not receive full backing. He finds it difficult to gauge the level of support within the European Union Affairs Committee, as he does not participate in those particular discussions.
Aseesimees Toomas Kivimägi
AI Summary
Toomas Kivimägi thanked everyone, announced that there were no further questions, and opened the floor for debate. Mart Maastik will speak on behalf of the Isamaa faction.
Mart Maastik
Profiling Fraktsiooni mittekuuluvad Riigikogu liikmedAI Summary
Maastik criticized the excessive burden that sustainability reports and the associated bureaucracy place on businesses. He pointed out that this costs hundreds of thousands of euros, doesn't actually improve the environment or the sustainability of forestry, and makes it harder to secure loans. Consequently, he wants the requirement either abolished or postponed.
Aseesimees Toomas Kivimägi
AI Summary
During the speech, three more minutes were requested.
Mart Maastik
Profiling Fraktsiooni mittekuuluvad Riigikogu liikmedAI Summary
Maastik urged everyone to vote for this Isamaa bill, emphasizing that bureaucracy must be reduced so that entrepreneurship and competitiveness can be maintained, and that the result is what matters, not partisan debate.
Aseesimees Toomas Kivimägi
AI Summary
Toomas Kivimägi thanks everyone and, on behalf of the EKRE faction, asks Rain Epler to take the floor.
Rain Epler
Profiling Fraktsiooni mittekuuluvad Riigikogu liikmedAI Summary
There's a lot to deal with here, and I'm going to take some extra time right away.
Aseesimees Toomas Kivimägi
AI Summary
He adds three minutes just in case, making eight minutes in total.
Rain Epler
Profiling Fraktsiooni mittekuuluvad Riigikogu liikmedAI Summary
Rain Epler recalls his response on October 9, 2023, regarding the introduction of mandatory sustainability reporting, where he recommended a unified voluntary format. He predicts that even though this specific requirement was made voluntary, mandatory reporting obligations will start being added across various sectors in the coming years.
Aseesimees Toomas Kivimägi
AI Summary
On behalf of the Estonian Reform Party faction, Õnne Pillak is requested to be given the floor.
Õnne Pillak
Profiling Eesti Reformierakonna fraktsioonAI Summary
Õnne Pillak emphasized that reasonable decisions must be made for businesses, and that we must avoid overregulating the legal framework. She backed the proposal to postpone the mandatory sustainability reporting requirement by two years, coupled with efforts to reduce bureaucracy and improve collaboration, ultimately aiming to enhance the economic environment and people's welfare.
Aseesimees Toomas Kivimägi
AI Summary
He/She thanks the speaker and announces that a counter-speech will be presented on behalf of the Isamaa faction, contingent upon receiving the necessary authorization, and requests Mart Maastik to deliver it.
Mart Maastik
Profiling Fraktsiooni mittekuuluvad Riigikogu liikmedAI Summary
Maastik emphasizes that even though the Isamaa bill was submitted and Rain Epler is pleased about it, it is crucial that the result is achieved regardless of the path taken. Therefore, the bill should be voted in favor of, allowing the government to move forward with the matters.
Aseesimees Toomas Kivimägi
AI Summary
He announced that Hanah Laht has been authorized to deliver a reply on behalf of the Reform Party faction.
Hanah Lahe
Profiling Fraktsiooni mittekuuluvad Riigikogu liikmedAI Summary
Hanah Lahe noted that the Committee on European Union Affairs supported the proposal to make the submission of sustainability reports voluntary, not their cancellation, and this fundamental difference is clearly highlighted in the explanatory memorandum and the draft text.
Aseesimees Toomas Kivimägi
AI Summary
Thank you! Deputy Speaker Toomas Kivimägi has concluded the debate, announced the leading committee's proposal to put Draft Act 601 to the final vote, and is now moving forward with the process.
Aseesimees Arvo Aller
AI Summary
Deputy Speaker Arvo Aller put to the final vote the Riigikogu Resolution submitted by the Isamaa faction, titled "Making a proposal to the Government of the Republic to initiate negotiations in the European Union for the annulment of the obligation to prepare sustainability reports," and asked the Riigikogu to take a position and vote.
Aseesimees Arvo Aller
AI Summary
Draft law 601 received 19 votes in favor from Riigikogu members, 0 votes against, and 0 abstentions, which is why the bill was rejected.