Plenary Sessions

The Riigikogu debate focused on a matter of national importance initiated by the Estonian Centre Party faction, titled "Why is food expensive?" The presenters—Jana Guzanova (initiator of the popular initiative), economist Heido Vitsur, and Lauri Laats (Chairman of the Centre Party faction)—addressed the sharp rise in food prices and its social and economic impact. Guzanova emphasized that the popular initiative, which garnered a record 100,000 signatures, demonstrates the acuteness of the problem, especially among lower-income people, and criticized the government’s refusal to lower the VAT on foodstuffs (which stands at 24% in Estonia). Vitsur asserted that the Estonian price level is anomalously high compared to incomes and that the cost of food affects the country's competitiveness. He considered lowering the VAT the most realistic short-term solution. Laats directly blamed the price increase on the government's tax hikes and political choices, highlighting the example of other European countries (e.g., Spain, Sweden) that have implemented VAT exceptions to mitigate inflation. During the negotiations, opinions were divided: the opposition supported lowering the VAT as a necessary measure, while the coalition representative (Eesti 200) deemed it ineffective and unfair. The sitting was extended until the agenda item was exhausted, but no substantive decisions were adopted.

The European Commission's proposal for the next Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF), extending until 2035, was presented to the esteemed members of the Riigikogu. The speaker highlighted Estonia's historical role and current strategic importance on the European Union's northeastern border, particularly in Narva, considering Russia's war of aggression against Ukraine. The proposal aims to strike a balance between maintaining successful policies (cohesion, agriculture) and addressing new geopolitical challenges (defense, security, competitiveness).

The MFF proposal keeps the budgets for cohesion and agricultural policies nominally stable but redirects new resources to strategic areas. The defense and space component within the competitiveness fund will increase fivefold, reaching 131 billion euros. Support for border management and migration to member states will triple to 34 billion euros, and the funding for Frontex and Europol will also be doubled. Furthermore, a €150 billion SAFE instrument will be established for defense sector investments, utilizing the EU's borrowing capacity. Funding for military mobility will increase tenfold to 18 billion euros, supporting infrastructure projects such as Rail Baltic. Estonia's role in protecting the EU's external border is clearly acknowledged, which will result in reinforced funding for border management and infrastructure. The budget also emphasizes flexibility in responding to crises and the continued conditionality of receiving EU funding upon respecting the rule of law principle.

The Riigikogu held a debate on a matter of national importance concerning the European Union’s 2028–2034 long-term budget (MFF), focusing on Estonia’s choices and opportunities in the negotiations. Meelis Meigas, a representative of the Ministry of Finance, provided an overview of the European Commission’s proposal, which has a total volume of 1.98 trillion euros (1.26% of EU GNI). The budget structure has been simplified into four headings, with an emphasis on security, competitiveness, and cohesion. The volume of Estonia's national plan would increase by approximately 1 billion euros, reaching 6.5 billion, with internal security funding growing tenfold. Estonia is generally satisfied with the proposal but is critical of the lack of funding for the socio-economic impacts on the eastern border. Estonia is also opposed to several new own resources (e.g., 30% of emissions trading revenue, a levy on large enterprises), considering them regressive and a redirection of member states' budgetary revenue.

Peeter Tali, Chairman of the Committee on European Union Affairs, emphasized the importance of the debate and the need to set political priorities early. Estonia's main priorities should be enhancing defense capabilities, securing Rail Baltic and energy connections, and increasing competitiveness. Representatives of the parliamentary groups highlighted concerns regarding the potential reduction of agricultural subsidies and regional development funding in the new budget, and also criticized the growth of the EU's debt burden and interference in the taxation competence of member states. The debate confirmed that negotiations are still in the initial stages and require active and strategic action on Estonia's part.

Under this agenda item, the third reading of Draft Act 633, initiated by the Government of the Republic, concerning the amendment of the Securities Market Act and consequently the amendment of other acts (regulation of derivatives and repo transactions), took place. The Chair opened the debates, but as no requests to speak were submitted, they were immediately closed. Upon the proposal of the lead committee, the final vote on the draft act was conducted. The voting results indicated widespread support for the draft act: 55 members of the Riigikogu voted in favor, and there were no votes against or abstentions. Draft Act 633 was adopted as law.

The Riigikogu debated the first reading of Draft Act 684 on Amendments to the Act on the Election of the President of the Republic, which was initiated by 37 members of the Riigikogu. The bill was presented by Riigikogu Speaker Lauri Hussar, who emphasized the need to improve the transparency and credibility of the electoral process. The main substantive changes concern bringing forward the deadlines for nominating presidential candidates both in the Riigikogu (12–9 days instead of the current 4–2 days) and in the Electoral College (7–5 days). Furthermore, the bill grants candidates the right to address both the Riigikogu and the Electoral College to present their views and to record the process for historical purposes. The bill also includes a technical correction, replacing the non-existent "State Register of Estonian Citizens Entitled to Vote" in the current law with the Population Register.

During the debate, several Riigikogu members (including Peeter Ernits and Varro Vooglaid) criticized the bill as "cosmetic," arguing that it failed to address the main problem—the introduction of direct presidential elections. The issue of the proportions within the Electoral College following the administrative reform was also repeatedly raised, as the number of representatives from local governments has decreased, making the composition of the Electoral College almost equal to the number of Riigikogu members. Lauri Hussar confirmed that restoring the proportions of the Electoral College was considered, but due to the complexity of finding a common model, it was excluded from the current draft bill. Ando Kiviberg, Chairman of the Constitutional Committee, introduced the committee's debate, which focused on the length of the speaking time (10 minutes) and the application of deadlines in the event of an extraordinary election. The lead committee proposed concluding the first reading.

The Riigikogu held the first reading of Bill 732, initiated by the Government of the Republic, concerning amendments to the Social Welfare Act and other acts. The purpose of the bill is to make the application process for subsistence benefits clearer and fairer, to enable remote sign language interpretation and writing interpretation services for people with hearing loss through permanent state funding, and to specify the obligations of care service providers regarding the provision of hygiene supplies. Furthermore, the establishment of the payment rate for the benefit for pensioners living alone will be made more flexible, and the Social Insurance Board will be authorized to expand the functions of the pension calculator (including the third pillar). Minister of Social Affairs Karmen Joller emphasized that the changes to the subsistence benefit system, which affect approximately 28,000 people, will reduce bureaucracy and support 18–19-year-old students.

Several critical questions were raised during the debate. Rain Epler (EKRE) challenged the amendment in the bill that replaces "dignified livelihood" with "primary subsistence" in the basis for calculating the subsistence benefit, arguing that this lowers the social standard. Helmen Kütt (SDE) focused on two concerns: first, that the text of the law lacks a provision regarding the savings limit (two subsistence limits, or 440 euros for a person living alone), which she considers too small an amount (the so-called "coffin money") and creates insecurity among people. Secondly, Kütt asked about the legalization and funding of audio description services for the visually impaired, which the bill does not include. Signe Riisalo, Chairman of the Social Affairs Committee, confirmed that an increase in the subsistence limit is planned for the coming years and that the methodology for the subsistence minimum is currently under review.

The agenda item concerned the first reading of Draft Bill 697, initiated by the Government of the Republic, regarding the amendment of the Atmospheric Air Protection Act and other acts (transposition of the Renewable Energy Directive RED III). Andres Sutt, the Minister of Energy and Environment, introduced the draft bill, emphasizing its goal to simplify permit procedures for renewable energy projects by establishing a single point of contact in the form of the Estonian Building Register and setting deadlines for obtaining permits. The draft bill also addresses the transport sector by abolishing the 6% greenhouse gas emission reduction obligation for fuel suppliers and creating a framework for the wider use of hydrogen and liquefied biomethane. A significant amendment involves extending biomass sustainability criteria to smaller production units (starting from 7.5 MW). During the debate, opposition politicians (Rain Epler, Kalle Grünthal) expressed concern. Epler criticized the strictest possible transposition of the directive, which, in his assessment, promotes market consolidation and imposes excessive obligations on small enterprises. Grünthal raised the question of the safety of wind turbine infrasound, casting doubt on the validity of existing studies. Mario Kadastik, the rapporteur of the lead committee, provided an overview of the discussion in the Economic Affairs Committee, which also addressed the requirement for bidirectional charging of electric cars, which the ministry wishes to make voluntary.

The Riigikogu debated the first reading of Bill 698, initiated by the Government of the Republic, concerning amendments to the Earth's Crust Act, the Land Cadastre Act, and the State Assets Act (development of renewable energy production in areas with a mining permit). The presenter was Andres Sutt, Minister of Energy and Environment. The main objective of the bill is to create a legal basis for the construction of renewable energy facilities (solar and wind parks) in areas subject to a mining permit, especially in exhausted quarries or peat production areas. This should accelerate the transition to climate neutrality and simplify the reclamation of mining areas by reducing bureaucracy for smaller mining plots (up to 15 ha) and peat production areas (up to 150 ha). Minister Sutt emphasized that the changes help diversify land use and stimulate economic activity without compromising the quality of reclamation.

Several critical questions arose during the debate. Rain Epler (EKRE) challenged the ideological focus of the bill, warning that it prioritizes the state's climate goals over economic expediency and potentially locks up active oil shale and peat reserves for 50 years under renewable energy developments, which threatens Estonia's energy security. Tiit Maran (SDE) acknowledged the necessity of the bill but considered it "underdeveloped," criticizing the Climate Ministry's analysis for its one-sided approach. He highlighted that the bill does not adequately consider biodiversity and climate aspects, especially concerning 150-hectare peat fields, where failure to rewet them could lead to significant CO2 emissions. Minister Sutt confirmed that the restoration obligation remains with the developer, and mining permit holders can decide for themselves whether they see commercial prospects in the area.

The report addresses the response of Minister of Culture Heidy Purga to the interpellation by Martin Helme (EKRE) concerning the scandalous event "ÖÖ25" held at the Estonian National Museum (ERM). Martin Helme highlighted that an artist named "Valge Tüdruk" (White Girl) performed on the stage of the state museum, which is funded by taxpayers, whose performance included extreme vulgarity, semi-naked writhing, imitation of rape, orgasm, and ejaculation, as well as the humiliation of the audience (e.g., stamping foreheads with the words "whore" and "sexually diseased"). Helme asked the minister whether such activity constitutes culture, whether the ministry approves of it, and whether the taxpayer should fund it, while also demanding an action plan regarding the museum's management.

Minister Purga replied that she herself was not present at the event and therefore could not give a personal assessment. She emphasized that the Ministry of Culture does not assess the suitability of the content activities of cultural institutions nor interfere with the compilation of their programs. Purga appealed to creative freedom and warned against political pressure that could lead to self-censorship. She expressed complete confidence in ERM Director Laura Kipper, noting that the scandalous program was only a small part of the day-long event. Both Helme and Varro Vooglaid criticized the minister's "washing her hands" attitude, arguing that allowing state-funded vulgarity destroys national cohesion and poisons society. The minister stood by her position, confirming that she trusts strong leaders and will not politically pressure the work of cultural institutions, considering ERM's activities, including the handling of uncomfortable topics, to be their right.

Riigikogu member Urmas Reinsalu posed questions to Prime Minister Kristen Michal regarding the government's fiscal policy and state budget strategy, focusing particularly on the large budget deficit. Reinsalu emphasized that the planned shortfall (4.5% of GDP in the coming years) is unprecedented in Estonian history and will lead the country into a financially unmanageable situation, bringing with it uncertain risks for new tax hikes. He asked the Prime Minister for specific methods on how the government intends to reach the long-term deficit target of -1%, and criticized the use of borrowed money to finance the abolition of the Reform Party's 'tax hump' at the expense of the national defense spending exception. Prime Minister Michal defended the government's policy, explaining that the deficit is largely due to essential national defense expenditures, which are growing to 5% of GDP. He affirmed that the government prefers cutting costs over generating new revenue when balancing the budget, and that additional cuts are planned for the coming years. Michal rejected accusations regarding the authorship of the tax hump, noting that it is a legacy of the previous coalition (including Isamaa), and stressed that abolishing the tax hump lowers the tax burden and leaves people with more money in their hands. In a supplementary question, Mart Maastik criticized the €100,000 study on the health effects of wind turbines, commissioned by the Ministry of Climate, as inefficient and wasteful spending, arguing that the results could have been obtained using artificial intelligence. Prime Minister Michal defended the work of the scientists, accusing Maastik of attacking the researchers.

The Riigikogu debate focused on the inequality and slow increase of cultural workers' salaries compared to other sectors. MP Helmen Kütt began by highlighting that the minimum wage for highly educated cultural workers has risen by only 23% over five years (reaching 1,600 euros), while the average salary for nurses and midwives rose by 67% and the Minister of Culture's salary rose by 46%. Kütt asked Minister of Culture Heidy Purga how to explain such "blatant material undervaluation" and whether protests should be expected.

Minister Purga responded that the Culture 2030 development plan stipulates that the average salary in the cultural sector will reach 90% of the Estonian average salary by 2030. She emphasized that a 10% increase in the wage fund is a good result given the current state budget situation. Purga explained that the focus has shifted from raising the minimum wage to differentiating the wage fund so that institution heads can motivate top specialists, as the number of employees receiving the minimum wage within the ministry's administrative area has decreased. Kütt also asked for clarification regarding plans to change the minimum wage system agreed upon with TALO in 2001, to which the Minister replied that exiting the system requires a bilateral agreement and discussion is necessary to find more effective solutions. Madis Kallas further asked why cultural workers' salaries are not advocated for as strongly as teachers' salaries, to which the Minister replied that salary increases have always occurred together (teachers, rescuers, police officers, cultural workers) and the 10% increase affected a wide range, including trainers and Song Festival conductors.

Riigikogu member Helle-Moonika Helme submitted an interpellation to Prime Minister Kristen Michal regarding "The Situation in the Country," focusing on the government's priorities and use of funds. Helme sharply criticized the cuts in the cultural sector and the low salaries of ERSO (Estonian National Symphony Orchestra) musicians, contrasting this with the billions being directed to Rail Baltic, wind energy entrepreneurs, the defense sector, and allegedly 400 million for salary increases at the Ministry of Climate. She accused the government of violating the constitution by failing to prioritize the protection of culture. Prime Minister Michal rejected the claims regarding the size of the salary increases at the Ministry of Climate and defended the Minister of Culture, highlighting that culture was one of the five sectors where wages rose. He also mentioned the increase in ERSO funding and the completion of new cultural facilities. In a clarifying question, the focus shifted to the economy. Helme accused the government of attacking the Institute of Economic Research (Konjunktuuriinstituut) and its director, Peeter Raudsepp, arguing that the institute's independent analyses show a recession lasting 13 quarters, caused by the government's incorrect tax and monetary policies. Michal responded that economic experts have questioned the methodology of the consumer confidence barometer and cited the Institute of Economic Research’s own recent data, which indicates an improvement in the economic climate and growing confidence in the government's economic policy. In a supplementary question, Martin Helme accused the Prime Minister of copying Soviet-era propaganda and called the experts cited by Michal "spin doctors," emphasizing that any improvement merely means climbing out of a deep hole.

The fifth item on the Riigikogu's agenda concerned Prime Minister Kristen Michal's answers to Riigikogu member Mart Maastik's question regarding the state guarantee program in the energy sector. Maastik expressed concern about the new loan guarantee scheme being developed at the Ministry of Climate, which is intended for large energy projects (such as offshore wind farms, storage facilities, and a nuclear power plant). According to Maastik, this measure contradicts the principles of a market economy, where the taxpayer bears the risks (in case of loss) and the private sector skims the cream (in case of success). He referred to the suspension of a similar Swedish program due to the complex calculation of risks and socio-economic efficiency. Prime Minister Michal confirmed that the guarantee measure is under conceptual discussion and is being developed by several ministries (EIS, KliM, MKM, RaM). The goal of the measure is to bring large industrial and energy infrastructure projects to Estonia that are too risky for private sector financiers, and he emphasized that state risks must be mitigated in the contract terms.

In a follow-up question, Maastik criticized the Ministry of Climate's expenditure of 100,000 euros on a systematic review of the health effects of wind turbines, claiming it was a simple report that could have been compiled using artificial intelligence, and considered it a waste of state money. The Prime Minister defended commissioning the research, explaining that a scientific review is necessary to address public concerns regarding the health effects of renewable energy. In an additional question, Rain Epler expressed concern about the preferential development of intermittent electricity, referring to a recent power outage in Spain and warnings indicating that prioritizing wind and solar energy increases system costs and the risk of outages. Prime Minister Michal responded ironically that Estonian energy specialists have long been aware of the need to balance non-dispatchable and dispatchable capacities, referring to Estonia's successful desynchronization from the Russian frequency area.

The discussion focused on security at the Estonian-Russian border, specifically the Saatse Boot road section in Southeast Estonia, which briefly crosses into Russian territory. Riigikogu member Anti Allas (SDE) questioned Prime Minister Kristen Michal as to why, a year after funding was allocated, construction of an alternative bypass road had not yet begun, especially considering the recent deterioration of the security situation and the Police and Border Guard Board’s (PPA) decision to close the road. Allas stressed that the Social Democrats had already demanded the allocation of these funds during the 2024 budget negotiations.

Prime Minister Michal explained that preparations for construction began in 2024 and the necessary funds were secured in 2025. He deemed the PPA’s decision to close the road for security purposes to be the only correct course of action. Michal confirmed that the government would discuss the situation and the threat assessment at its next session, and that they were working on widening the RMK road as a temporary solution to ensure local residents maintain access. Regarding a permanent solution, the goal is to accelerate the completion of the new road from the originally planned 2027 to 2026. To achieve this acceleration, legislative amendments are being considered, including changes to the Nature Conservation Act, or the utilization of national defense exceptions. In a follow-up question, Tiit Maran inquired about how environmental values (Natura areas) would be handled under the accelerated construction timeline. The Prime Minister responded that security and national defense interests outweigh environmental restrictions in this specific situation, which dictates the priority.

The discussion focused on Prime Minister Kristen Michal's plans for the upcoming European Council, particularly concerning migration policy and climate goals. Riigikogu member Rain Epler posed a very specific question: whether Estonia, similar to Poland, intends to seek an exemption from the EU Migration Pact's quota system or financial obligations, citing the large number of war refugees from Ukraine. Prime Minister Michal avoided a direct answer regarding seeking the exemption, noting that Estonia supports the rapid implementation of the Returns Directive and expects the large number of refugees in Estonia to be taken into account in various activities. Epler also asked whether Estonia plans to cooperate with Poland to challenge the burdensome LULUCF obligations and the 2040 climate goals. The Prime Minister confirmed that Estonia's positions on climate goals are conditional (requiring the existence of technology, funding, and a review clause) and that proposals to change the LULUCF methodology have been made repeatedly. Martin Helme criticized the Prime Minister for a lack of initiative, accusing her of relying on other countries, which the Prime Minister sharply rejected, emphasizing Estonia's active participation in debates and clear national positions.

A discussion between Prime Minister Kristen Michal and Riigikogu member Priit Sibul addressed issues related to the infrastructure and security of Estonia's eastern border, focusing on the closure of the Saatse Boot road section and the establishment of the Baltic Defence Zone. Priit Sibul expressed concern regarding the speed of the Saatse road closure and the lack of alternative solutions, emphasizing the need for a swift resolution that takes into account the interests of local residents. Sibul also raised concerns about the expansion of Natura sites and the failure to inform landowners, using the term "neonationalization" to describe this.

Prime Minister Michal confirmed that the Transport Administration is working on widening and maintaining the existing RMK (State Forest Management Centre) road, and that legal amendments or a national defense exception are being considered for the construction of a new road, prioritizing the safety and security of the public. Michal provided an update on the status of the eastern border infrastructure construction, noting that the main part of the land border should be completed by the end of 2025, and monitoring capabilities, including the "drone wall," will be achieved by 2027. Regarding the Baltic Defence Zone, the Prime Minister explained that barrier elements were procured in 2024, and the construction of strongholds (bunkers) will begin in 2025, primarily on state lands. The project budget is 60 million euros, and completion is planned for 2027. In an additional question, Martin Helme criticized Minister of the Interior Igor Taro's actions regarding the Saatse road closure as irresponsible hysteria, a claim Michal dismissed, defending the Police and Border Guard Board's (PPA) decision as correct and appropriate, stemming from Russia's irrational behavior.

Riigikogu member Mart Helme posed a question to Prime Minister Kristen Michal regarding security, focusing primarily on internal security and Estonia’s preparedness against domestic threats. Helme began with a brief discussion of the Saatse Boot issue, clarifying that the lack of a road is connected to the border treaty and a potential land exchange, rather than an oversight. The main point of concern, however, was the "fifth column" in Estonia. Helme claimed that there are an estimated 5,000 trained individuals in the country who might rise up against the Republic of Estonia, in addition to a large number of war refugees with unverified backgrounds who have arrived via Russia. He described a hypothetical scenario where an internal rebellion (e.g., the takeover of Stenbock House) would lead to the emergence of Russian-recognized autonomous regions, which NATO would treat as an internal conflict. Helme also criticized the lack of a crisis reserve.

Prime Minister Michal responded that Estonia’s internal security is exemplary and the Security Police Board (Kapo) performs counter-intelligence work very successfully. He assessed Estonia as one of the safest countries in the world and rejected claims of destabilizing activities by an organized fifth column, calling the examples presented by Helme "fictional." Martin Helme joined the debate, linking security concerns to uncontrolled immigration, particularly people arriving from East Slavic countries and the growing Muslim community. The Prime Minister affirmed that migration is under control and the government continues to invest in both defense and internal security, while acknowledging the strength of Russia as an aggressive adversary.

During the information hour, a security-related question was raised concerning restrictions on the possession and acquisition of weapons in Estonia. A member of the Riigikogu (PID: lbM-4Rz4iuw) asked the Prime Minister whether the government intends, given the current security situation, to move in the direction of making it possible for more Estonian people to acquire weapons for self-defense, and the protection of family and property. The questioner noted that the National Defence Committee and the Ministry of Defence have been in agreement regarding simplifications, while the Ministry of the Interior has been critical, even though Minister of the Interior Igor Taro promised during the debate to lift the restrictions.

The Prime Minister responded that the government has discussed weapons laws primarily in the context of improving the competitiveness of the defense industry, giving examples of obstacles to weapons production in Estonia. Regarding the acquisition of weapons by private individuals, the Prime Minister expressed the instinctive view that owning a weapon should certainly be easier for law-abiding, vetted, and loyal citizens of the Estonian state. He emphasized that he is waiting for Minister of the Interior Igor Taro to bring the promised material and position to the government in order to precisely review which obstacles are currently in force.

The first reading of Draft Act 689 on the ratification of the final acts of the Extraordinary Congress of the Universal Postal Union in Ar-Riyāḑ, initiated by the Government of the Republic, was on the agenda. Hendrik Johannes Terras, the Minister of Regional Affairs and Agriculture, introduced the draft act, the purpose of which was to ratify the amendments to the UPU General Regulations and the Postal Convention. The amendments were aimed at specifying the role of the UPU Advisory Committee, increasing the budget ceiling, and modernizing the universal postal service so that it better meets the expectations of e-commerce, for example, by adding electronic traceability to the mandatory services.

Urve Tiidus, the representative of the Economic Affairs Committee, provided a thorough overview of the discussions held in the committee. The committee addressed issues concerning the prevention of sending dangerous items (including the abolition of the use of anonymous parcel lockers), the safety of goods ordered from outside the EU, and the impact of the postal reform on people's behavioral patterns. Tiidus also highlighted a significant future change, according to which the maximum weight of letter-post items will decrease from 2 kg to 1 kg starting in 2027. Upon the proposal of the lead committee, the first reading was concluded.

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.

The Riigikogu held the first reading debate on Draft Act 718 concerning the ratification of the agreement between the Republic of Estonia and the Principality of Liechtenstein for the avoidance of double taxation with respect to taxes on income and capital, and the prevention of tax evasion and tax fraud, along with the protocol attached thereto. Minister of Finance Jürgen Ligi introduced the draft, explaining that the agreement is based on the OECD Model Convention and its primary objective is to foster international investments and curb tax avoidance. The Minister highlighted the key limitations on taxation, such as the maximum rates for income tax withheld at source on dividends (10% for natural persons), interest (10% for natural persons), and royalties (5%). Interest paid to companies is exempt from withholding tax.

Riina Sikkut presented the outcomes of the discussion on behalf of the Finance Committee, confirming the committee's support for proceeding with the draft legislation. During the debate, a comparison was drawn with the recently processed agreement with Oman. Both the Minister and the committee representative clarified that while the OECD Model Convention serves as the foundation, specific adjustments were made during negotiations for both treaties, reflecting the tax systems and interests of the partner states. The Committee proposed concluding the first reading.

The Riigikogu debated the first reading of Draft Law 733 on the state's 2025 supplementary budget, initiated by the Government of the Republic. Minister of Finance Jürgen Ligi introduced the draft, emphasizing that this is the second supplementary budget this year, which reduces expenditures by 19.9 million and investments by 12 million, while increasing financing transactions by 72.3 million. The main focus of the budget is national defense, within which the budget of the Ministry of Defense is increased by 39 million euros. A significant part of the changes concerned comprehensive national defense, especially energy infrastructure: within the administrative area of the Ministry of Climate, Elering's share capital is increased by 45 million euros, of which 35 million is directed towards protecting transformers against hybrid threats. Also, the implementation of several major projects, such as activities related to the transition to Estonian-language education (60.5 million euros), is postponed because they cannot be realized this year.

During the debate, MPs asked questions regarding the financing of Elering, investments in hydrogen infrastructure, and the intended use of the 17.8 million euros distributed via SmartCap. Minister Ligi explained that strengthening Elering's capital is necessary for attracting foreign capital and admitted that the postponements of projects stem from the tendency of ministers to overestimate their capacity to implement their projects. Annely Akkermann, Chair of the Finance Committee, introduced the committee's discussion, where it was decided to conclude the first reading of the draft law.

The Riigikogu debated the first reading of Draft Bill 734, initiated by the Government of the Republic, concerning the simplified taxation of business income, amendments to the Income Tax Act, and the repeal of the Security Tax Act. The main objective of the bill is to cancel the income tax rate increase to 24% planned by the previous government coalition, leaving the rate at the current level of 22%. Furthermore, the 2% taxation of private individual income starting from the first euro will be dropped, and the tax rate for the business account will be maintained at 20%. Finance Minister Jürgen Ligi emphasized that the changes improve the competitiveness of the tax system and stimulate the economic environment, although they will create a shortfall of nearly 250 million euros in the budget position. Additionally, the income tax exemption for donations made to specific NGOs assisting Ukraine will be extended by two years (until the end of 2027).

During the debate, the opposition (Urmas Reinsalu, Aivar Kokk, Riina Sikkut) criticized the government for deepening the budget deficit and damaging political trust, particularly in connection with the negative net position of foreign investments. The issue of lowering the VAT on foodstuffs was also repeatedly raised (Peeter Ernits), to which Minister Ligi responded with a categorical denial, calling it a foolish and socially misdirected tax policy decision, citing international recommendations. Caution regarding granting tax benefits to NGOs assisting Ukraine was also discussed, as this is a risky area open to abuse.

This agenda item concerned the first reading of Draft Act 736, initiated by the Government of the Republic, concerning the amendment of the State Budget Act and the Act amending the State Budget Act. Finance Minister Jürgen Ligi introduced the objectives of the draft act, which included the transposition of a European Union Council Directive to increase the state's short-term fiscal policy flexibility, as well as the improvement of the clarity and transparency of the state budget. A significant change is the integration of the activity-based and economic perspectives in the 2026 state budget, along with limiting the size of the government reserve to 3% of the volume of budget expenditures and investments. Furthermore, the grounds for granting and reclaiming domestic subsidies are specified. Regarding the financing of local governments, the distribution principles of the equalization fund and the support fund are being changed to increase financing flexibility and reduce bureaucracy. The debate focused on the increase in bureaucracy associated with the new rules and the question of how EU fiscal supervision affects the democratic decision-making process. Minister Ligi emphasized the importance of expertise and rationality in curbing political populism.

The fifth item on the Riigikogu’s agenda concerned the inquiry submitted to the Minister of Regional Affairs and Agriculture, Hendrik Johannes Terras, by Social Democratic Party faction members Anti Allas, Reili Rand, and Jaak Aab regarding the state of the revenue base for local authorities (LAs). Speaking on behalf of the petitioners, Anti Allas emphasized the need to ensure equal and accessible public services in all regions of Estonia, regardless of the local authority's financial capacity. He asked the Minister to clarify the situation regarding LA funding and the effects of the so-called Robin Hood measure, especially in connection with the processing of next year's state budget.

Minister Terras responded to the inquiry, confirming that the financial capacity of LAs is directly linked to the quality of everyday services. He refuted the claim by Tartu Deputy Mayor Meelis Leidt that the Robin Hood measure and the care reform would take 14 million euros from Tartu over three years, estimating the total impact of the Robin Hood measure over four years to be approximately 8.7 million euros. The Minister noted that nearly 80% of local authorities benefit from the reform, while the negative impact affects only one-fifth of local authorities, mainly in Harju and Tartu counties. Terras highlighted the low financial autonomy of LAs as the biggest structural problem (only 2.3% of revenues originate from local taxes). In future plans, he foresees incorporating state subsidies (e.g., subsidies for schools and roads) into the permanent revenue base of LAs, creating new local fees (e.g., a local benefit fee for solar parks), and gradually implementing the Robin Hood mechanism until 2036. In the subsequent debate, Aivar Kokk (Isamaa) criticized the limited impact of the Robin Hood measure and emphasized the need for fundamental changes to the funding models, while Anti Allas stressed the importance of increasing the equalization fund to help poorer local authorities.

A debate on Interpellation No. 804 took place in the Riigikogu (Estonian Parliament), submitted by Riigikogu members Züleyxa Izmailova, Tiit Maran, Tanel Kiik, Riina Sikkut, Heljo Pikhof, and Andre Hanimäe to Andres Sutt, the Minister of Energy and Environment, concerning the necessity and timeliness of establishing a general, binding nesting moratorium. The interpellators, led by Züleyxa Izmailova, emphasized that Estonia’s biodiversity indicators are in continuous decline, nearly 30% of species are endangered, and that 93% of the population supports a universal logging moratorium during the period from April 15 to July 15. They criticized the current recommended restrictions (including those implemented by RMK) as insufficient.

Minister Andres Sutt replied that the Ministry of Climate is awaiting the Supreme Court’s decision in the legal dispute concerning the deliberate disturbance of birds during the nesting period. Until then, the current practice will continue. The Minister pointed out that RMK (State Forest Management Centre) has been implementing a voluntary logging moratorium for over 20 years, recently extending it until June 30, which covers about half of the forest land. Sutt defended the current legal framework and the breeding bird population density matrix adopted by the Environmental Board for risk-based supervision. The interpellators submitted several clarifying questions regarding the impact of the Supreme Court’s decision, the complexity of forest management under climate change conditions, and the mapping of the green network promised by the government. Izmailova expressed profound disappointment during the discussions regarding the minister's responses, deeming them vague and justifying inaction, and accused the government of neglecting nature conservation.

As the seventh item on the Riigikogu's agenda, the inquiry (No. 809) submitted by Riigikogu members Tiit Maran, Züleyxa Izmailova, Tanel Kiik, Riina Sikkut, and Heljo Pikhof regarding the future of the Climate Act was discussed, to which the Minister of Energy and Environment, Andres Sutt, responded. Tiit Maran, representing the inquirers, sharply criticized the government's inaction and contradictory signals, noting that the ambitious Climate Act, originally promised by June 2024, was replaced by a weaker draft of the "Climate-Resilient Economy Act." This draft failed to meet international obligations and practically left adaptation aspects unaddressed. Maran expressed concern that mitigating climate change and preparing the population are no longer government priorities, while simultaneously pointing to economic decisions (e.g., increasing logging volumes, exceptions for oil shale mining) that move in the opposite direction.

Minister Andres Sutt confirmed that climate policy remains a government priority. He explained that the new approach is a short, specific, and realistic framework law, differing from the previous version by moving details into sectoral roadmaps. This approach offers greater flexibility for adapting to rapid changes in the economy and technology. Sutt emphasized that the submission of the bill to the Riigikogu has been delayed by the need to discuss and finalize the sectoral roadmaps with stakeholders to ensure a comprehensive picture. The Minister promised to submit the bill to the Riigikogu later this year. During the debate, difficulties in meeting LULUCF (Land Use, Land-Use Change and Forestry) targets and the need to find realistic solutions at the European Union level were also addressed.

The Riigikogu debated the interpellation submitted by Aivar Kokk and Priit Sibul concerning the closure of the Endla Nature Centre. The questioners sharply criticized the Environmental Board’s decision to close the centre located in Tooma (with an alleged annual cost of 82,000 euros) without prior consultation with the local community and municipality. Aivar Kokk highlighted the contrast between the closure of Endla and the construction of the new Environmental House in Tallinn, costing 67 million euros, questioning whether the savings were justified. Minister of Energy and Environment Andres Sutt explained that closing the Endla office was part of the Environmental Board’s broader savings plan (over 3.3 million euros over five years) and that the building was inefficient for two employees, as the exhibition only accounted for 9% of the floor area. The Minister confirmed that the Endla and the new Environmental House projects are not mutually related alternatives. Sutt stressed that the closure of the nature centre does not impede access to the nature trails, the maintenance of which remains the responsibility of RMK, and the educational materials were transferred to local educational institutions and organizations. He added that State Real Estate Ltd (RKAS) is evaluating the possibility of selling or leasing the building, addressing the interest shown by the NGO Endla Nature Society. Aivar Kokk stood by his position that failing to notify the local government (Jõgeva Rural Municipality Government) before the closure was a serious error, and asked the minister to ensure better cooperation with local partners in the future.

The Riigikogu debate focused on the nationally important issue "The Future of the Estonian Economy," initiated by the Reform Party faction. Presentations were given by Maris Lauri (Reform Party), Minister of Economic Affairs and Industry Erkki Keldo, President of the Estonian Founders' Society Allan Martinson, and Liina Vahtras, a member of the Management Board of the Entrepreneurship and Innovation Foundation. Maris Lauri addressed the competitive advantages of the Estonian economy through four pillars: natural resources, labor, capital, and knowledge, emphasizing the importance of continuous innovation and convergence. Minister Keldo presented an optimistic vision, promising Estonia would become one of Europe's fastest-growing economies, highlighting security (5% of GDP defense spending), export growth, and the development of a knowledge-intensive economy. Allan Martinson provided an overview of the strength of the startup sector (contributing 4.5% to GDP), noting that the extensive growth model is running out, and the future depends on the application of artificial intelligence and defense industry niches. Liina Vahtras highlighted the success of the e-residency program (370 million euros in revenue) and introduced plans for the rapid implementation of a cardless digital solution to increase Estonia's competitiveness. During the discussions, coalition members (Pillak, Reinaas) praised the government's steps regarding tax burden reduction and investments, while the opposition (Aab, Reinsalu) sharply criticized the government's tax experiments, activities that destroy economic confidence, the large budget deficit, and inflation.

The sitting continued the first reading of the draft 2026 State Budget Act (737), initiated by the Government of the Republic. The report of the leading committee was presented by Annely Akkermann, Chairman of the Finance Committee, who emphasized the reduction of income tax and the growth of national defense expenditures to over 5% of GDP as the budget's main priorities. She noted that budget revenues stand at 18.6 billion and expenditures at 19.5 billion euros, and the government sector's financing need reaches 1.7 billion euros. Akkermann defended the goal of abolishing the tax bracket system (or "tax hump"), arguing that it would bring the largest net salary increase specifically to those earning the average wage. The debate was heated, with the opposition criticizing the budget for irresponsibility, citing a record deficit (4.5% of GDP) and the use of borrowed funds to cover current expenses. Urmas Reinsalu and other opposition members questioned the government's mandate for increasing taxes and the debt burden, and criticized the tax gift to the wealthier, while social sectors (such as special welfare) remain underfunded. Coalition representatives (Õnne Pillak, Toomas Uibo) defended the choices, stressing the priority of ensuring security and promising to bring state finances into balance in the long term. At the conclusion of the negotiations, four opposition factions submitted a motion to reject the bill, which was voted down.

Minister of Social Affairs Karmen Joller presented a report to the Riigikogu on the implementation of the state's long-term development strategy "Eesti 2035" in the fields of health and welfare. The Minister emphasized the need to integrate these sectors, highlighting that although life expectancy is on the rise (especially for women, at 83.4 years), people are living longer in poor health, and health inequality based on education and regional affiliation is significant (up to 12 years). The biggest concerns in the health sector are rising obesity, high alcohol consumption, the spread of e-cigarettes among young people, and a decline in childhood vaccination coverage (83.3% for the measles, mumps, and rubella vaccine). The Minister also pointed out the increasing frequency of mental health problems. Regarding healthcare financing, Joller noted that the Health Insurance Fund's (Tervisekassa) budget deficit has decreased as a result of internal efficiency improvements and better collection of social tax, but the system needs stability to implement lasting changes.

In the welfare sector, the focus was on the decline in the birth rate, which in 2024 was the lowest in the last 100 years. Positive developments noted included the slow reduction in the absolute poverty rate and the impact of the care reform on easing the burden of care. Future plans prioritize the reorganization of the hospital network, the integration of the social and healthcare systems, improving the quality of primary healthcare, and developing digital solutions (including the establishment of the SKAIS2 system). During the debate, opposition politicians sharply criticized the government's inaction in supporting the birth rate, as well as the Health Insurance Fund's high administrative costs and alleged wastefulness at a time when waiting lists for treatment are long. The Minister defended the Health Insurance Fund's development activities and emphasized that healthcare problems are structural and related to a shortage of specialists, rather than being solely about money.

The discussion of the agenda item focused on the third reading of Bill 670, an amendment to the Police and Border Guard Act, initiated by Riigikogu members Peeter Tali, Ando Kiviberg, Anti Haugas, and Mati Raidma, which concerned the legalization of the license plate recognition camera system. The debate was extremely heated and centered primarily on the infringement of personal liberties and fundamental rights. The opposition (Centre Party, Isamaa, EKRE) sharply criticized the Ministry of the Interior’s "cowardly" approach and systematic efforts to expand surveillance, arguing that the system was being legalized retrospectively without anyone being held accountable for its illegal use. The criticism also addressed the bill's broad wording, which would allow for the unlimited installation of cameras and grant data access to a large number of officials, including the Tax and Customs Board. The bill's supporters (Social Democrats, Estonia 200) emphasized that it was an essential tool for the police to solve serious crimes and that the draft legislation had received approval from the Data Protection Inspectorate and the Office of the Chancellor of Justice. Despite strong opposition and criticism regarding the procedural methods, the bill was adopted in the final vote with 49 votes in favor and 16 votes against.

The agenda included Riigikogu Draft Resolution 658 OE, submitted by the Estonian Centre Party faction, which proposed that the Government of the Republic develop a plan to increase competition in the mobile communications market and speed up number portability. The bill's presenter, Lauri Laats, stressed that the prices of mobile communication services in Estonia are, on average, 30–35% higher than in neighboring Latvia and Lithuania, a situation exacerbated by the lengthy number transfer time between operators. This protracted process (which results in 50% of transfers being abandoned) allows operators to maintain abnormally high profit margins (approximately 20% of revenue). The draft resolution aimed to shorten the number transfer period to a maximum of one working day and establish a framework for real-time portability. During the discussion in the Economic Affairs Committee, it was revealed that the Ministry of Justice and Digital Affairs is already working on similar changes, planning to reduce number portability to a matter of hours, although technical implementation will require time. During the ensuing debate, issues regarding coverage in sparsely populated areas and the state's inability to guarantee high-quality data communication were also raised. The draft resolution was put to a final vote, requiring a majority of the Riigikogu membership for adoption.

The Riigikogu adopted for its first reading Draft Act 663, initiated by the Government of the Republic, concerning accession to the Convention on the Establishment of the International Association of Marine Aids to Navigation and Lighthouse Authorities (IALA). Infrastructure Minister Kuldar Leis introduced the bill, emphasizing that accession is necessary to ensure Estonian maritime safety standards and grants Estonia voting rights in the development of international aids to navigation systems (such as buoys, lighthouses, and AIS). The Minister explained that Estonia has participated in IALA activities since 1994 through a non-governmental association, paying membership fees; however, following the organization’s transition into an intergovernmental body, Estonia would lack decision-making power if it did not accede to the Convention. Accession will not incur additional costs for the state. During the debate, several off-topic questions were raised, including the flagging of vessels under the Estonian flag and the theft of border markers that occurred on Lake Peipus. The Minister confirmed that the process of flagging vessels is a lengthy one, currently being managed by the newly appointed Deputy Secretary General for Maritime Affairs, and that the Peipus incident is primarily a matter for the border guard and national security. Urve Tiidus, representing the Economic Affairs Committee, confirmed that the committee had supported the bill unanimously and proposed concluding the first reading.

The Riigikogu debated the first reading of Bill 717, initiated by the Government of the Republic, concerning amendments to the Health Insurance Act and the Occupational Health and Safety Act. Social Minister Karmen Joller introduced the four main amendments of the bill, the goal of which is to make the system fairer, more flexible, and more efficient. The amendments include shortening the period during which part-time work is possible during a long-term illness from the 61st day to the 31st day, making voluntary health insurance payment terms more flexible (allowing payments in installments), ending the double payment of unemployment insurance benefits and sickness benefits, and changing the basis for calculating sickness benefits for pregnant women.

The last amendment, under which benefits for pregnant women will be calculated based on income from the previous calendar year (MTA data) instead of data submitted by the employer, sparked a lively discussion among members of parliament. Riina Solman and Rain Epler expressed concern that this could negatively affect women who were on parental leave the previous year or whose salary had increased immediately before pregnancy. Minister Joller and Irja Lutsar, representative of the Social Affairs Committee, justified the change by citing the need to reduce the administrative burden on the Health Insurance Fund (Tervisekassa) and prevent system abuse related to inaccurate salary data submitted by employers. The report from the Social Affairs Committee revealed that ending the double benefits will have a positive impact of 1.2 million euros on the 2026 state budget. The first reading was concluded.

The item on the agenda was the first reading of Draft Law 701 on the amendment of the Chemicals Act, initiated by the Government of the Republic. Minister of Economic Affairs and Industry Erkki Keldo introduced the draft bill, the main objective of which was to address deficiencies identified during the European Commission's infringement procedure (in the transposition of the Seveso III Directive), prevent major accidents involving hazardous chemicals, and reduce their impact on people, the environment, and property. The amendments concern the clarification of the tasks of official authorities following an accident, making the obligations of undertakings clearer (e.g., cooperation with the Rescue Board in the event of a domino effect risk), and reducing the administrative burden. The reduction of the administrative burden is achieved through the electronic submission of documents and the introduction of national hazard notification systems (sirens, e-alarm), which exempt undertakings from the obligation to create expensive notification systems. During the discussion, Rain Epler raised questions regarding the unlimited liability of undertakings for post-accident remedial measures and the distribution of liability in the event of failure of national notification systems. Minister Keldo explained that limitations were not deemed necessary and disputes would be resolved in court. Regarding the liability for notification systems, the minister promised to provide a clarifying answer. Mait Klaassen, representative of the Environment Committee, confirmed that the committee unanimously supported concluding the first reading of the draft bill.

The first reading of Draft Bill 683, initiated by the Government of the Republic, concerning the amendment of the Planning Act and related legislation, took place under this agenda item. The bill was introduced by the Minister of Economic Affairs and Industry, Erkki Keldo, who emphasized the need to make the planning procedure clearer, faster, and more flexible to support investments and economic growth. The Minister highlighted several significant changes, including the abolishment of the local government special plan, the establishment of a 10-year validity period for new detailed plans (extendable by 5 years, applicable starting 2027), simplifying the completion of ongoing plans, and streamlining notification and public disclosure. The latter included eliminating the requirement for announcements in county and national newspapers, and shortening the advance notice period for public display from 14 days to one day. Keldo also stressed future amendments that would grant the Land and Spatial Planning Board (MaRu) the right of administrative supervision over the activities of local governments (LOAs) to ensure compliance with deadlines.

The debate was tense, with the faction of the Conservative People's Party of Estonia (EKRE) (Rain Epler, Martin Helme, Rene Kokk, Arvo Aller) expressing strong opposition. The opposition viewed the bill as a "steamroller" policy that restricts community involvement and the rights of local authorities, especially concerning large developments such as wind farms. The inclusion of a provision regarding the consideration of climate change also drew criticism, as it was deemed vague and likely to increase the risk of official arbitrariness. Minister Keldo rejected the accusations, explaining that the amendments are aimed at reducing unnecessary bureaucracy and clarifying the process. The proposal of the leading committee (the Economic Affairs Committee) was to conclude the first reading. The proposal by the EKRE faction to reject the bill was voted down.

The agenda item was the first reading of Draft Act 681 SE, initiated by the Government of the Republic, concerning the accession to the International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance. The Minister of Justice and Digital Affairs, Liisa-Ly Pakosta, introduced the draft act, explaining that although Estonia was supposed to accede to the convention already in 2013, the process was left unfinished at that time due to technical reasons. The Minister emphasized that Estonia's domestic law fully complies with the requirements of the convention—there is no need to amend the Penal Code or allocate additional funding. The main objective of the accession is to improve Estonia's international relations, thereby increasing the country's credibility and standing. During the discussion, questions arose regarding the bureaucratic wording of the convention's central concept, "enforced disappearance," and its potential connection to immigrants arriving in Estonia from countries where such crimes are prevalent (e.g., Iraq, Sri Lanka). The Minister explained that this is a type of crime distinct from kidnapping and denied any connection to immigration. Peeter Ernits, speaking on behalf of the lead committee, the Legal Affairs Committee, confirmed that the committee had unanimously supported the conclusion of the first reading of the draft act, referring to it as a theoretical act that does not occur within the Estonian cultural context but which nevertheless demonstrates Estonia's participation in the global community.

The tenth item on the Riigikogu agenda was the first reading of Bill 656, initiated by the Government of the Republic, concerning the Act amending the Penal Code and the Code of Criminal Procedure (criminal jurisdiction and destruction of subsea infrastructure). The presentation was given by Liisa-Ly Pakosta, the Minister of Justice and Digital Affairs, who explained that the bill addresses legal gaps resulting from several recent events, including the issue of jurisdiction over Estonian foreign representations and the need to protect critical subsea infrastructure. The bill provides for the extension of criminal law to Estonia's exclusive economic zone and continental shelf, and significantly raises the penalties for damaging subsea infrastructure (up to 10 years imprisonment and fines of up to 4 billion euros for legal entities). Furthermore, surveillance activities are permitted in cases of property damage where there is reason to suspect commissioned work by the special services of hostile states. The ensuing discussion focused on the recent decision by a Finnish court regarding the damage to the Estlink 2 cable, which the Minister considered a misinterpretation of international maritime law, and debated the deterrent effect of criminal law.

The agenda item was the first reading of Draft Act 695, initiated by the Government of the Republic, concerning amendments to the Penal Code and the Code of Criminal Procedure. The Minister of Justice and Digital Affairs, Liisa-Ly Pakosta, introduced the draft act, emphasizing its technical nature. The purpose of the draft act is to bring Estonian domestic law into full compliance with four different European Union legal acts, as a subsequent review by the European Commission found that Estonia’s initial transposition still required clarification. The amendments concern attacks against information systems (the punishability of preparation for the interception of computer data), the European Arrest Warrant (harmonization of the grounds for the surrender of third-country nationals), the right to counsel and notification upon detention, and procedural safeguards for juvenile suspects, providing for more frequent review of the decision on detention. Peeter Ernits repeatedly asked questions regarding the technical nature and timing of the amendments, questioning whether this would lead to a huge number of similar clarifying draft acts. The Minister explained that this is a continuous and routine process of monitoring the transposition of EU law. Anti Haugas, a member of the Legal Affairs Committee, provided an overview of the committee’s discussion, confirming that infringement proceedings will be terminated upon the rectification of deficiencies. No debate took place.

The agenda item was the first reading of draft bill 661 SE on amending the Value-Added Tax Act, initiated by the faction of the Social Democratic Party and members of the Riigikogu. The aim of the draft bill was to lower the VAT rate on basic foodstuffs (root and vegetables, dairy, meat, grain and fish products, and eggs) from 24% to 9%. The presenter, Lauri Läänemets (SDE), emphasized that food prices in Estonia have risen unprecedentedly in recent years, particularly affecting lower-income families, and that the tax reduction would stimulate domestic consumption and support Estonia's food security and agricultural sector. He criticized the government, which, in his estimation, prefers taking out loans to give financial gifts to the rich instead of supporting the wider population. Diana Ingerainen, representative of the Finance Committee, announced that the committee proposed rejecting the draft bill because there was no certainty that the tax reduction would reach the final consumer, and it would create a deficit of approximately 200 million euros in the state budget. During faction negotiations, the draft bill was supported by SDE, EKRE, and the Centre Party, although the latter two criticized the Social Democrats for previously supporting the VAT increase. The bill was rejected in the vote.

The Riigikogu debated the first reading of Bill 625 on amendments to the Motor Vehicle Tax Act, initiated by the Estonian Centre Party faction. The aim of the bill was to restore fairness and establish an exemption from the annual motor vehicle tax for vehicles owned by disabled persons. Presenter Vadim Belobrovtsev (Centre Party) stressed that disabled people are separately protected by the Constitution and require an exception regarding personal transport due to their mobility restrictions. He criticized the government's actions, which initially removed the tax exemption for disabled people and replaced it with insufficient benefits, despite the recommendations of the President and the Chancellor of Justice. Annely Akkermann (Reform Party), Chairman of the Finance Committee, presented the committee's position, stating that the government does not support the bill. The government had decided to increase social benefits by 9.1 million euros annually instead of granting the tax exemption, justifying this decision with technical difficulties in reconciling the register of disabled persons and the database of the Transport Administration, as well as the desire to prevent misuse. During the debate, questions were raised regarding the inadequacy of the benefits and the late scheduling of the bill's discussion. The leading committee proposed rejecting the bill.

During the Riigikogu session, Prime Minister Kristen Michal addressed the answers to an interpellation concerning state finances, which had been submitted by MP Lauri Läänemets. Läänemets criticized the government’s budget policy and planned tax changes, particularly the income tax system reform, which he claimed offered "handouts" to the wealthiest (those earning €4,000–€7,000) while low-wage earners (€1,000–€1,400) received minimal benefit. Läänemets stressed that the state was borrowing to fund these changes, with interest costs projected to rise to €464 million over four years. He argued this was economically unsound and essentially amounted to paying a 3.7% income tax to foreign banks.

Prime Minister Michal defended the government’s policy, rejecting the claim that the changes were handouts. She emphasized that reducing taxes and eliminating the ‘tax hump’ was aimed at alleviating the burden on the middle class. She provided examples, noting that working families earning near the average wage (e.g., teachers, security guards) would see a significant annual saving (up to €1,848), improving their ability to cope financially. Michal stressed that the economy develops better through lower taxation and by leaving more earnings in the hands of the people.

In a follow-up question, Jaak Aab raised the issue of the VAT increase and its impact on food prices and domestic consumption. He advocated for lowering VAT on foodstuffs to stimulate the economy and stabilize prices. Prime Minister Michal responded that the VAT increase was part of a conscious choice to fund the growth of defense spending to 5% of GDP, as well as pensions and healthcare. She affirmed that inflation is forecast to abate next year, and that leaving more money in people’s hands is the best way to manage rising prices.

Member of the Riigikogu Lauri Laats submitted an interpellation to Minister of Infrastructure Kuldar Leis regarding road safety, focusing on the uncontrollable anarchy of light traffic in cities caused by scooters and micro-mopeds, over which there is no effective supervision and for which there is no unified register of resulting accidents. Laats stressed that neither the municipal police nor the Police of the Republic of Estonia possess sufficient mandates to control the situation, and warned that authorities are attempting to shirk responsibility until a tragic accident occurs. He also highlighted the exception in insurance obligations, which exempts rental scooters weighing under 25 kg (such as Bolt) from the insurance requirement.

Minister Leis acknowledged the seriousness of the problem, especially in major cities and sprawling suburbs, and confirmed that the Ministry of Climate and the Transport Administration are addressing the issue. He announced that the situation concerning light vehicles has been added to the agenda of the Traffic Commission of the Government of the Republic's session on October 29. Leis emphasized that the solution must be comprehensive, involving the Ministry of the Interior, the Police, the Ministry of Social Affairs, and the City of Tallinn, and may include both increasing the administrative burden (e.g., a permit requirement) and tightening penalties. In a supplementary question, Anastassia Kovalenko-Kõlvart criticized the governing parties for voting down similar draft legislation and asked whether the freedom of enterprise outweighs the protection of children's health, referring to the need to regulate the quota of rental scooters, age verification, and helmet use. The Minister confirmed that all previous proposals will be systematically reviewed by the Traffic Commission.

The session addressed the third question posed to Prime Minister Kristen Michal, the topic of which was "A Better Protected Estonia." Riigikogu member Martin Helme (EKRE) questioned the reputation of the Reform Party as a defender of the state, referencing the Auditor General's criticism regarding the use of Ministry of Defence funds and failures in border construction and the establishment of a drone wall. The main focus was on the alleged spat between the Prime Minister and NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte concerning Estonia's supposedly too-casual activation of NATO Article 4 (consultations). Helme hypothesized that the Reform Party was either fueling war hysteria to boost ratings or that the activation of Article 4 exposed NATO's actual inability to defend Estonia.

Prime Minister Michal rebutted these claims, asserting that Rutte had supported Estonia's decision to activate Article 4 both publicly and privately, deeming it justified and timely. Michal responded to the criticism by highlighting Martin Helme's previous actions as Finance Minister, where he allegedly decided to cut costs for the construction of the eastern border and the establishment of drone capabilities in 2019. In a supplementary question, Mart Helme (EKRE) accused the Prime Minister of corruption related to wind farm and defense industry park projects, and repeated the claim that Michal was risking dragging Estonia into war solely for the sake of the Reform Party's popularity. Michal concluded by emphasizing that NATO is functioning, allies are committed, and that Russia is the aggressor, not Europe or Estonia.

Today's fourth question concerned budget and tax policy, which was posed to Prime Minister Kristen Michal by Riigikogu member Helir-Valdor Seeder. Seeder criticized the government's draft budget, accusing it of fueling inflation, increasing the debt burden, and fulfilling a "stupid election promise" (referring to the abolition of the tax hump). He also pointed out that the budget strategy plans for revenue (€330 million after 2027) from the ETS2 system, which the government allegedly does not support, deeming this a deception. Seeder asked the Prime Minister to avoid repeating talk about the tax hump and teachers' salaries, as this is a repetitive and tiresome topic.

Prime Minister Michal responded that abolishing the tax hump is a positive step that leaves more money in people's hands (€1,800 annually for those on the average salary). He categorically rejected claims of tax increases, emphasizing that the tax burden will actually fall from 36.6% to 35.2%, which represents the largest tax reduction in history (€780 million). In a follow-up question, Seeder focused on the car tax, criticizing its preparation and asking whether the government was ready to cancel it. Michal defended the car tax, highlighting the concessions for families with children and for minivans. Finally, Mart Maastik asked about the government's promised savings and cuts, pointing to salary increases and the growth in the number of employees across ministries. Michal confirmed the need for savings, but emphasized previous cuts (€1.4 billion) and provided examples of the success of the administrative reform.

Member of Parliament Helmen Kütt submitted an interpellation to Prime Minister Kristen Michal regarding special welfare services, focusing on the sector's underfunding and the availability of services. Kütt highlighted the low gross wages of special welfare workers (1150–1250 euros) and referenced a State Audit Office audit which showed that the established service prices cover only about 60% of the actual costs. She emphasized that the waiting list for receiving the service has doubled between 2018 and 2024, and nearly 1,000 people are at home under the care of family caregivers, even though the service has been allocated to them. Kütt asked what the government plans to do in a situation where local governments are forced to fulfill state obligations and have consequently turned to court.

Prime Minister Michal responded that the budget for special welfare services has grown by 154% compared to 2015, reaching 57.7 million euros by 2026. He stressed that despite the state budget deficit, special welfare is one of five priority sectors (alongside teachers, cultural workers, rescuers, and police officers) to which an additional 4.2 million euros will be allocated in the 2026 budget specifically for raising employee salaries. Michal added that the Ministry of Social Affairs continues to streamline the service waiting lists so that those with greater needs can receive services faster. Madis Kallas posed a supplementary question, asking the Prime Minister to articulate the main problem facing special welfare services. Michal reiterated that the main goal of the current additional funding is to resolve the issue of employees' economic well-being.

Riigikogu member Vadim Belobrovtsev submitted an inquiry to Interior Minister Igor Taro regarding the salaries of rescue workers and police officers, emphasizing the dissatisfaction of frontline workers with the salary increase offered by the government. Belobrovtsev referred to the fact that although the government decided to raise the wage fund by up to 10%, this is insufficient considering the nearly 40% inflation over the last two years. He also highlighted the uncertainty regarding the salary policy for future years (2027/2028), which is the main reason for the planned demonstration by teachers and rescue workers.

Minister Igor Taro confirmed that the administrative area of the Ministry of the Interior received 28.9 million euros for increasing the wage fund during budget negotiations, which was his priority. He stressed that this was a significant achievement, as most ministries had to implement cuts. Taro conceded that the 10% increase would not solve all problems, but explained that institution heads have been instructed to direct a larger salary increase (over 10%) to where "the shoe pinches the most," i.e., frontline positions. In addition, the minister pointed out that the abolition of the tax hump will have the greatest percentage impact precisely on those receiving the average salary, including rescue workers, thereby increasing their actual income. In a clarifying question, Lauri Laats raised the problem of wage poverty faced by rescue workers and police officers and called for a comprehensive review of the system. Minister Taro thanked the rescue workers for keeping the topic alive and confirmed that the government is working to improve the economy so that better salary increases can be ensured in the future.

Varro Vooglaid, a member of the Riigikogu (Estonian Parliament), submitted an inquiry to Prime Minister Kristen Michal regarding the demographic crisis, emphasizing that Estonia is facing a demographic catastrophe, as the total fertility rate has dropped to 1.18 and the number of births threatens to fall below 9,000 per year. Vooglaid criticized the government for paying disproportionately little attention to the demographic crisis compared to the security crisis, citing as examples the massive additional funding for the Ministry of Defence and the abolition of the position of Minister of Population. Vooglaid proposed concrete steps, such as spending a comparable sum (e.g., 26 million euros) on promoting the desire to have children and introducing family education in schools.

Prime Minister Michal acknowledged the seriousness of the demographic crisis, noting that it is a pan-European problem. He defended the government’s actions, stressing that Estonia's family policy is among the best in Europe, spending approximately 2.2% of GDP (about one billion euros annually) on children and families. Michal emphasized that financial benefits alone will not solve the problem and referred to a recent analysis by the Ministry of Social Affairs, which proposes several policy recommendations, such as improving housing availability and reconciling work and family life. The Prime Minister stressed that the government bases its policy choices on analysis and that the best prerequisite for birth rate growth is a peaceful and child-friendly environment.

Today’s information session focused on the eighth question, which was posed to Prime Minister Kristen Michal by Riigikogu (Parliament) member Urmas Reinsalu (Isamaa party) regarding the state budget. Reinsalu sharply criticized the government's draft budget, calling it "paltry" and irresponsible (a budget based on the principle of "after us, the deluge"). He accused the government of financing the abolition of the Reform Party's tax hump using borrowed money, which will lead to the deficit persisting until 2070. Reinsalu demanded a reduction in governance expenditures, highlighting that, according to his calculations, these costs (personnel costs, operating expenses, and non-statutory subsidies) have actually increased by 1.9 billion euros between the 2024 and 2026 budgets, rather than decreasing, as the Prime Minister had promised.

Prime Minister Michal defended the budget, emphasizing that it is a "very good budget" thanks to historically high defense spending (5% of GDP) and the largest tax rate reduction (the abolition of the tax hump), which leaves more money in people's hands. He disputed Reinsalu's figures, noting that cuts totaling 1.4 billion euros have already been made, with more to come. Michal accused Reinsalu of arbitrarily manipulating figures and demanded specific proposals for cuts. In a follow-up question, Reinsalu demanded specific line items from the 2026 budget that would prove the 1.4 billion euro savings in governance expenditures, and criticized specific spending (e.g., the establishment of bogs, the construction of a new building for environmental agencies). Finally, Tõnis Lukas asked about agreements with local governments regarding teacher salary increases and the career model, to which Michal replied that a salary increase is planned, but details must be requested from the Minister of Education. The information session ended prematurely because the members scheduled to ask the subsequent questions were absent from the hall.

The sitting included the first reading of the draft 2026 State Budget Act (737), initiated by the Government of the Republic, which was presented by Minister of Finance Jürgen Ligi. The Minister emphasized that the budget was drafted in anticipation of accelerated economic growth, but it is characterized by a historically large deficit (4.5% of GDP), primarily due to the extraordinary increase in security expenditures (over 5% of GDP), which remains within the limits of the European Union exception. The budget priorities are security, supporting the economy, and incomes. Ligi highlighted the decrease in the tax burden (from 36.6% to 35.2%), the increase of the tax-free minimum income to 700 euros, and the cancellation of several planned tax hikes, calling this an economic stimulus. The budget also provides for an increase in the wage fund in the education, culture, internal security, and special welfare sectors, as well as large investments in infrastructure.

During the question round, the opposition focused on the rapid growth of the budget deficit and national debt, accusing the government of fulfilling election promises with borrowed money (Urmas Reinsalu, Martin Helme). Criticism was also leveled at directing tax relief towards higher-income individuals and the continuing deficit of the Health Insurance Fund (Tervisekassa). Minister Ligi defended the budget, emphasizing that the deficit is mainly caused by external security factors and that reforming the tax system is necessary to ensure the competitiveness of the economy. Ligi also sharply criticized the negative sentiment prevalent in the public and the methodology used by the Estonian Institute of Economic Research (Konjunktuuriinstituut). During the sitting, the proposal by the Reform Party faction to extend the session until the agenda was exhausted, but no later than 14:00, was put to a vote.

The Riigikogu debated the first reading of Bill No. 690, initiated by the Government of the Republic, concerning amendments to the Securities Market Act. Finance Minister Jürgen Ligi introduced the bill, emphasizing that the changes stem from European Union law and are intended to reduce fragmentation in the European capital market and promote non-banking financing. The bill focuses on four main amendments: raising the threshold for the obligation to draw up a prospectus from 8 million to 12 million euros; easing language requirements (allowing the prospectus to be prepared in English, provided an Estonian summary is included); reducing the administrative burden for investment service providers; and enabling the Financial Supervision Authority to impose more flexible sanctions (turnover-based fines) in cases of market abuse. The amendments are scheduled to enter into force on June 5, 2026.

Aivar Sõerd, a member of the Finance Committee, confirmed that the committee unanimously supported the bill, viewing it as a significant step toward diversifying the Estonian financial market, which is currently overly banking-centric. The committee also discussed finding a balance between investor protection and reducing the administrative burden. Following a brief debate, during which the justification for easing the language requirements was questioned, it was decided to conclude the first reading.

The Riigikogu agenda included the first reading of Draft Act 692, initiated by the Government of the Republic, concerning the ratification of the agreement and its accompanying protocol between the Republic of Estonia and the Sultanate of Oman on the avoidance of double taxation with respect to taxes on income and the prevention of fiscal evasion. Minister of Finance Jürgen Ligi introduced the draft act, explaining that the purpose of the agreements is to ensure a stable tax environment, prevent international double taxation, and curb tax evasion. The agreement, which was signed in Muscat on October 27, 2024, is based on the OECD Model Convention and is Estonia's 64th valid tax treaty. The Minister highlighted the main provisions, including limited taxing rights on dividends (up to 10%, 0% in certain cases), interest (up to 5%, 0% for government institutions), and royalties (up to 8%), and emphasized the obligation for comprehensive information exchange between tax authorities.

Speaking on behalf of the Finance Committee, Diana Ingerainen proposed concluding the first reading. During the debate, Peeter Ernits posed questions to both the Minister and the Committee representative, inquiring why Oman was chosen as a partner, given the small volume of trade and the significant imbalance between the countries. Minister Ligi explained that concluding the agreements depends on the interest of the counterparty, and while Estonia's trade balance is traditionally in deficit, the services balance is in surplus. The Riigikogu decided to conclude the first reading of the draft act, and the deadline for submitting amendments was set for October 20 at 5:15 p.m.

The Riigikogu debated the draft act 694 SE, initiated by the Government of the Republic, amending the Motor Vehicle Tax Act, during its first reading. Minister of Finance Jürgen Ligi introduced the bill, the main objective of which is to alleviate the tax burden on families with children. The draft act provides for a reduction in motor vehicle tax of up to 100 euros per year for every minor child. Additionally, the tax is reduced for M-category vehicles with more than seven seats, which will henceforth be taxed at the lower N-category rate. According to Ligi, the tax liability will decrease to zero for approximately 55,000 families, and the burden on families with children will decrease by over 50% on average.

The debate was emotional and largely focused on the political background and fairness of introducing the car tax. The opposition criticized the necessity of the tax, its negative impact on the economy, and the resulting increase in regional inequality. Questions were also raised regarding the lack of special provisions for disabled people and the technical details of refunding already paid taxes (via the Tax and Customs Board prepayment account). Annely Akkermann, Chairman of the Finance Committee, confirmed that under the draft act, a child is defined as being up to 18 years old (inclusive), and the cost of implementing the IT solutions is 680,000 euros.

The Riigikogu debated the first reading of Draft Act 677 SE on Amendments to the Motor Vehicle Tax Act, initiated by the Finance Committee. The bill was presented by the Chairman of the Finance Committee, Annely Akkermann. The impetus for initiating the draft act stemmed from the proposals made by the Chancellor of Justice on February 26, aimed at bringing the Motor Vehicle Tax Act and the Traffic Act into compliance with the Constitution. The substance of the draft act focuses on establishing grounds for shortening the taxation period in cases where a vehicle is removed from the traffic register or is declared wanted due to theft. This amendment is necessary so that the Tax and Customs Board can make corrections to the second tax notice before the payment deadline of December 15.

During the debate, the opposition (Social Democrats, Centre Party, Isamaa) sharply criticized the government's approach, calling it "cutting the tail off bit by bit." They questioned why all the shortcomings of the law were not being addressed simultaneously, such as the lack of a regional component, the unfair registration fee, and the absence of special provisions for disabled people. Anastassia Kovalenko-Kõlvart and Anti Allas emphasized that the law remains in conflict with the Constitution even after cosmetic changes, particularly due to the unequal treatment of disabled people. Akkermann defended the committee's pace, explaining that they are dealing with the most urgent constitutional infringement, and other topics, such as the support system for disabled people, require the separate and more thorough preparation of a draft act. Aivar Kokk called for the complete abolition of the car tax, citing its failure and the state's wasteful budget policy.

The Riigikogu debated Interpellation No. 794, submitted by Jaak Valge and Leo Kunnas, concerning the granting of international protection in Estonia to Ukrainian refugees, particularly men of mobilization age. Interpellator Jaak Valge sharply criticized Estonia’s refugee policy, asserting that mobilization-aged men constitute an unnaturally large proportion (allegedly 65%) of those receiving international protection, which, in his estimation, undermines Ukraine’s struggle and provides refuge to deserters. Valge demanded clarification on why Estonia is protecting these men seemingly from the Ukrainian state, and whether their status regarding Ukrainian military service obligations is being verified.

Minister of the Interior Igor Taro categorically refuted the statistics presented by Valge, accusing the interpellator of demagoguery and confusing data (international protection versus temporary protection). Minister Taro confirmed that a total of 12,500 mobilization-aged men out of 35,000 protection recipients have been granted protection in Estonia, making the proportion less than 30%. He noted that this figure is close to the European average (24%) and does not indicate any specific Estonian anomaly. Taro stressed that Estonia protects Ukrainian citizens from Russian aggression, and the Ministry of the Interior has offered assistance to the Ukrainian embassy regarding those subject to mobilization, though no official request has been received. The debate was tense, with Valge and other opposition politicians (Ernits, Põlluaas) accusing the minister of obfuscation and lack of specificity, particularly within the specific category of international protection recipients.

The Riigikogu debated Interpellation No. 803, which was addressed to Minister of the Interior Igor Taro and concerned the transfer of criminals from the Kingdom of Sweden to Estonia and their subsequent imprisonment at Tartu Prison. The questioners, led by Heljo Pikhof, voiced concerns regarding the impact of this government "business plan" on Estonia's internal security, especially in Southern Estonia, where the shortage of police officers and community constables is already severe. The opposition feared that recruiting prison guards would intensify competition between the PPA (Police and Border Guard Board) and other internal security agencies, thereby weakening the overall system, and would also damage Estonia’s reputation. Questions were also raised about the project's actual economic benefits and the potential strain on the healthcare system. Minister of the Interior Igor Taro defended the government's stance, stressing that this was a long-term strategic decision designed to ensure the functioning of the underutilized Tartu Prison and bring a minimum of 30 million euros in revenue to the state budget. The Minister confirmed that the Ministry of the Interior, the Police and Border Guard Board (PPA), and the Estonian Internal Security Service (KAPO) had been consulted, and identified risks (such as preventing organized crime and radicalization) had been mitigated. Taro highlighted that the project would create approximately 250 new jobs in Southern Estonia, calling it a regional policy win. He dismissed claims regarding worsening security, pointing to the planned salary increases for frontline workers and the growing popularity of the Estonian Academy of Security Sciences.

The Riigikogu debated an interpellation submitted by the Social Democratic faction regarding the insufficient state funding for school meals and the resulting inequality. Reili Rand, representing those who submitted the interpellation, stressed that due to the rapid rise in food prices, the state subsidy (€1 per child) has become outdated, forcing local municipalities (LMs) to cover their share by diverting funds from other areas or by passing costs on to families, which exacerbates social inequality. The significant role of school meals in Estonia's food security and in supporting local production was also highlighted.

Minister of Education and Research Kristina Kallas responded to the interpellation by repeatedly emphasizing the principle of Estonian state governance, which dictates that covering the costs of school meals is the responsibility of the school maintainer—i.e., the local municipality—and not the primary obligation of the state. The state merely supports this obligation. The Minister rejected the proposal to link the school meal subsidy amount to the Consumer Price Index (CPI), noting that her priority during state budget negotiations was increasing teachers' salaries. She confirmed that, according to the Ministry of Social Affairs, the new health requirements would not increase the price of school meals. The Minister acknowledged that she lacked an overview of the LMs' capacity to cover the shortfall, but stated that, to her knowledge, no child in Estonia goes without a warm meal at school due to their socio-economic status. During the debate, the questioners criticized the Minister's rigid stance on the division of responsibility and highlighted concerns about the declining quality of school meals resulting from insufficient funding.

The agenda item concerned the Riigikogu members' inquiry (No. 800) regarding failures in basic school final exams, particularly the mathematics exams, in the spring of 2025, focusing specifically on the extremely poor results at Valga Basic School. The inquirer, Ester Karuse, highlighted that over half of the graduates at Valga Basic School (50 out of 85) failed to achieve a passing grade on the mathematics exam, which casts doubt on their future opportunities to study in gymnasium. Karuse asked how the state supports young people with learning gaps and how the fulfillment of compulsory education until the age of 18 is ensured.

Minister of Education and Research Kristina Kallas explained that the national average math exam result (64%) was comparable to previous years, but the problem is concentrated in schools serving children from socio-economically weaker backgrounds and those with special educational needs. The Minister introduced changes for 2026, which will abolish the mathematics resit exam, given that compulsory schooling lasts until the age of 18. Kallas confirmed that the state is creating and funding preparatory study places (primarily in vocational schools) to close learning gaps, including for children whose home language is Russian or Ukrainian. She recommended implementing smaller study groups and temporary support groups to aid schools similar to Valga. In her concluding remarks, Ester Karuse sharply criticized the educational management of the Valga municipality, referencing a court dispute between the municipal government and teachers that has led to a mass exodus of teaching staff, and demanded state support for Valga equal to that provided to Ida-Virumaa due to linguistic diversity.

The Riigikogu debated an interpellation submitted by Riina Solman, Helir-Valdor Seeder, and Mart Maastik regarding the organization of basic school leaving exams and gymnasium admissions. The submitter, Riina Solman, sharply criticized the Ministry of Education’s decision to move the final exams earlier, which, in her estimation, increased the mental burden and stress on children, leaving little time for quality revision. She also faulted state gymnasiums for not taking re-examination results into account during admissions and for closing the acceptance of applications before the exams had even taken place.

Minister of Education and Research Kristina Kallas defended the changes, arguing that the previous system caused students longer and greater stress, as tests and admissions occurred parallel to regular studies over several months. The Minister confirmed that moving the exams earlier did not negatively affect results and that, thanks to the change, many state schools dropped entrance examinations entirely. Kallas also explained the reasoning behind abolishing re-examinations, noting that they masked actual learning gaps. Children who do not pass the final exams are now provided with a preparatory year in the next educational stage so that these gaps can be covered, thereby preventing them from dropping out of the education system. Madis Kallas posed an additional question about the future of Saaremaa gymnasiums (especially Orissaare and Kuressaare Adult Gymnasium), to which the Minister replied that there are no plans for closure in the coming years.

The Riigikogu debated an interpellation concerning the budget residuals of the Ministry of Education and Research (HTM), submitted by Anti Allas, Tiit Maran, and Züleyxa Izmailova. The questioners expressed concern that in a situation where the education sector faces significant underfunding and cuts are being implemented (particularly affecting vocational education in smaller regions, such as Vana-Vigala and Hiiumaa), the budget residual of the ministry's administrative area has grown to a significant €107.9 million.

Minister of Education and Research Kristina Kallas explained the reasons for the accumulation of these residuals. She emphasized that a large portion of the residuals is covered by commitments and does not represent unallocated funds. The residuals are mainly divided into two categories: funds for research and development (e.g., €45 million related to the co-financing of twinning/teaming projects awaiting decisions from the European Commission) and resources for the transition to Estonian-language education. In the latter case, this involved incorrect planning, where the 2024 residual (€44 million over two years) had to be reallocated to subsequent years to cover future shortfalls, as the burden of salary increases grows annually. Kallas confirmed that approximately €18 million of the residuals intended for the transition to Estonian-language education, which will not be needed in the future, was returned to the State Treasury. The Minister refuted claims that the reorganization of vocational education (such as in Vana-Vigala and Hiiumaa) is linked to cuts, explaining that these changes stem from the decreasing labor market demand identified by the OSKA analysis and the need to ensure vocational training opportunities for basic school graduates in every county. The debate also raised issues concerning salary support for kindergarten teachers and the funding of hobby education, where the Minister expressed support for analyzing Iceland's per-capita funding system for hobby education.