Plenary Sessions

The Riigikogu debated Bill 728, the draft act amending the Gambling Act, the Gambling Tax Act, and the Cultural Endowment Act, which was initiated by 16 members of the Riigikogu, led by Tanel Tein. The main objective of the bill is to create a new, stable model for financing culture and sports by involving international tax revenue from the remote gambling sector. To achieve this, a gradual reduction of the gambling tax from 6% to 4% is planned by 2029, in order to make Estonia more attractive to international operators. The projected additional revenue would be directed into target funds established under the Cultural Endowment: the Private Funding Attraction Fund and the Sports Facilities Fund. The bill's presenter, Tanel Tein, emphasized that this would bring new licenses and taxable activity to Estonia, projecting revenue growth up to 100 million euros per year. Criticism (primarily from Isamaa and Varro Vooglaid) focused on the moral aspect of the bill (whether favoring gambling is fair), money laundering risks, and the fact that the government refused to submit the bill itself. Annely Akkermann, Chair of the Finance Committee, confirmed that the committee supported the completion of the first reading of the bill, even though the government's opinion had not yet arrived. The Isamaa faction proposed rejecting the bill, but this did not find support.

The agenda item concerned the first reading of Bill 735, initiated by the Government of the Republic, regarding the amendment of the State Fees Act. Minister of Finance Jürgen Ligi introduced the bill, the purpose of which is to update the state fee rates for contesting public procurements. The Minister explained that the current rates have remained unchanged for 17 years, while the consumer price index has risen by 76% and the workload of the Appeals Committee has increased. The current fees cover only half of the committee's personnel costs. The bill provides for the doubling of state fees, raising them to 1,280 euros for procurements below the international threshold and 2,560 euros for procurements above the threshold. Ligi emphasized that the new rates are cost-based, cover operating expenses, and create the prerequisite for hiring a fourth member to cope with the increased complexity and volume of disputes.

Aivar Kokk and Peeter Ernits repeatedly asked the Minister how the decision was made to specifically double the fees and whether this figure was based on precise calculations. Ligi confirmed that efforts would be made to keep the fees cost-based, taking into account the need to hire an additional employee. Urve Tiidus, representing the Economic Affairs Committee, presented the committee's position, noting that no additional questions arose regarding the content of the bill within the committee, and the decision to propose concluding the first reading was consensual. Peeter Ernits criticized the committee's unanimity and asked why changes were only being initiated nearly 20 years after the previous rates were established. Tiidus responded that all materials and explanations regarding the increase in workload and the deficit in covering costs are available to Riigikogu members. After the conclusion of the debate, it was decided to conclude the first reading of the bill.

Today's agenda item concerned the first reading of Bill 693, initiated by the Government of the Republic, regarding the repeal of the Act on the Use of Funds Received from Privatization and the amendment of other related acts. Minister of Finance Jürgen Ligi introduced the bill, the main objective of which is to liquidate the Property Reform Reserve Fund, which was established in 1996 to cover costs associated with property reform. The Minister explained that the fund's objectives have mostly been met, as land reform is essentially in the final stages, with only about a dozen disputes remaining unresolved. Going forward, activities previously funded by the fund whose connection to the original objective is indirect (e.g., employment programs and business development) must be financed through the standard state budget procedure. The fund is planned to be terminated as of December 31, 2025. Riigikogu members Peeter Ernits and Arvo Aller asked questions regarding the remaining unresolved cases and the legality of using the fund to pay merger grants to local governments. The Minister answered negatively, emphasizing that Estonia is facing a budget deficit and money must be planned honestly within the state budget. Marek Reinaas, Chairman of the Economic Affairs Committee, confirmed that the committee supported the termination of the bill, having also consulted with the Association of Estonian Cities and Municipalities, which is aware of the changes.

The Riigikogu debated the draft act (696 SE) initiated by the Government of the Republic, concerning amendments to the Advertising Act and the Personal Data Protection Act, during its first reading. The purpose of the draft act is to designate supervisory authorities in the Republic of Estonia (the Consumer Protection and Technical Regulatory Authority and the Data Protection Inspectorate) for the implementation of the directly applicable European Union Regulation on the transparency and targeting of political advertising (2024/900). Minister of Justice and Digital Affairs Liisa-Ly Pakosta emphasized in her presentation that Estonia had not supported the adoption of the regulation due to its lack of legal clarity, particularly regarding the definition of political advertising, but since the regulation entered into force on October 10, the designation of supervisory bodies is unavoidable. The Minister explained that the purpose of the draft act is to exempt the Police and Border Guard Board (PPA) from performing these duties, and stressed that a provision emphasizing discretionary power has been exceptionally added to the law to prevent the initiation of proceedings in cases of minor violations.

The debate was emotional and focused primarily on the absurd overregulation inherent in the regulation itself, the unclear definition of political advertising (citing the examples of pens and Christmas cards), and the disproportionately high fines (up to 20 million euros). Varro Vooglaid (EKRE) and Aivar Kokk (Isamaa) sharply criticized the European Union's interference and the lukewarm opposition shown by the Estonian government. The Economic Affairs Committee proposed concluding the first reading.

The Riigikogu debate on the topic "Why is food expensive?" took place at the initiative of the Estonian Centre Party faction. The purpose of the debate was to address the rise in the price of foodstuffs and potential ways to mitigate it, focusing on lowering the Value Added Tax (VAT) rate.

The first speaker was Jana Guzanova, the initiator of the popular initiative to reduce the VAT rate on foodstuffs, whose petition gathered nearly 100,000 signatures. Guzanova highlighted the sharp increase in the cost of the food basket and emphasized that 25% of the Estonian population lives in poverty, making the high VAT rate (24%) unfair and particularly painful for low-income individuals. She pointed to restaurant closures and the rise in food thefts as signs of a deepening crisis.

Economist Heido Vitsur confirmed that Estonian food prices are disproportionately high compared to incomes, placing Estonia among the wealthiest European countries. He explained that the price of food largely determines the wage level and thus the country's competitiveness. Vitsur agreed with the International Monetary Fund's (IMF) recommendation to make the tax system more flexible but found that, due to political rigidity, lowering the VAT rate is currently the only real lever for influencing prices.

The third speaker, Lauri Laats, chairman of the Centre Party faction, sharply criticized the tax policy of the Reform Party-led government, which, according to him, has driven food prices 57% higher since 2019. Laats highlighted alternative revenue measures, such as a bank tax, and referred to the success of other EU countries (e.g., Spain and Latvia) in implementing VAT exceptions. During the discussions, the Social Democrats (Züleyxa Izmailova) and the Centre Party (Vadim Belobrovtsev) supported lowering the VAT, while Eesti 200 (Diana Ingerainen) considered it ineffective and unfair, preferring targeted subsidies. Isamaa (Riina Solman) emphasized the need for comprehensive tax reform. No decision was adopted at the conclusion of the debate, but the session was extended until the agenda item was exhausted.

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.

Member of Parliament Martin Helme submitted an inquiry to Culture Minister Heidy Purga concerning the event "ÖÖ25" held at the Estonian National Museum (ERM) on September 27. Helme described the performance by the artist "Valge Tüdruk" (White Girl) during the event as "disgusting filth," which included swearing, semi-naked writhing, imitation of sexual intercourse, orgasm, and rape, as well as mocking the audience by stamping their foreheads with the words "slut" and "venereal patient." Helme asked whether such activity constituted culture approved by the Ministry of Culture, which taxpayers should be funding, and what action the Minister intended to take regarding the state museum's director, Laura Kipper.

Minister Purga refused to give a substantive assessment of the ERM program, emphasizing that the Ministry of Culture does not interfere with the content activities of cultural institutions or dictate their programming. Purga stressed the importance of creative freedom and warned that public criticism should not devolve into political pressure or self-censorship. She expressed confidence in ERM head Laura Kipper and noted that the evening program in question was only a small part of a seminar that lasted all day. In a follow-up question, Varro Vooglaid criticized the minister's stance, arguing that she was washing her hands of the matter and giving free rein to processes that erode national cohesion and cultural norms. Purga maintained her position, stating that she trusts strong leaders and would not politically pressure the work of any cultural institution.

The second question of the Riigikogu information session concerned the government's fiscal policy and state budget strategy. Riigikogu member Urmas Reinsalu (Isamaa) presented sharp criticism to Prime Minister Kristen Michal regarding the planned budget deficit, which is set to reach 4.5% of GDP for several years. Reinsalu quoted the warning from the Fiscal Council that this constitutes a historically large shortfall, which will lead the state into "unmanageable financial flows" and bring about uncertain risks for new tax increases. He asked how the government plans to reach the -1% deficit stipulated in the long-term sustainability assessment, and criticized the fact that the European Commission's granted exception for national defense expenditures (1.5%) is being used with borrowed money to service the Reform Party's "tax hump" project, rather than for real-time cost cutting.

Prime Minister Michal acknowledged the existence of the deficit but emphasized that it is largely due to essential national defense expenditures (which are growing to 5% of GDP). She explained that acute crises are often responded to by borrowing, and the deficit will begin to fall after peaking at 4.5% (with forecasts of 3.8% and 3.6%). Michal defended the government's policy, stressing that the budget is being tightened through cost cutting, citing the €1.4 billion in cuts already made and promising additional cuts in the coming years. She rejected Reinsalu's claims about the tax hump, noting that the previous coalition (including Isamaa) was the creator of this progressive income tax structure, and that abolishing the tax hump will lead to a decrease in the tax burden and leave the average wage earner with about €1800 more per year. In a supplementary question, Mart Maastik (Isamaa) criticized the expenditure of €100,000 on a study commissioned by the Ministry of Climate regarding the health effects of wind turbines, the results of which, he claimed, were available via ChatGPT. Prime Minister Michal defended the work of the scientists, accusing the questioner of attacking researchers.

The third question in the Riigikogu concerned the topic of cultural workers' salaries, which was presented to Minister of Culture Heidy Purga by Riigikogu member Helmen Kütt. Kütt began with a sharp comparison, highlighting that the average salary for nurses and midwives has risen by 67% over five years, while the minimum salary for cultural workers with higher education has increased by only 23%, reaching 1,600 euros. She also cited the low median salary (1,640 euros) for top musicians in an internationally renowned symphony orchestra, as pointed out by Olari Elts, and asked how the minister explains such "crying material devaluation and inequality," fearing protests similar to those in Lithuania.

Minister Purga responded that a 10% increase in the wage bill for the 3,600 people working under the jurisdiction of the Ministry of Culture is a good result given the current budget situation. She emphasized that the ministry's goal in the "Culture 2030" development plan is for the average salary of cultural workers to reach 90% of the Estonian average salary by 2030. Purga explained that the heads of the institutions have given a clear signal that they prefer differentiating the wage bill rather than a massive, blanket increase in the minimum wage, as fewer and fewer people are earning the minimum. In a follow-up question, Kütt inquired about the minister's plans to change the minimum wage system for cultural workers, which was agreed upon with TALO (Estonian Association of Cultural Workers' Trade Unions) in 2001. The minister confirmed that she is aware of the need for a bilateral agreement to change the system and that a discussion on how best to motivate cultural workers is necessary. Madis Kallas, who posed an additional question, inquired why cultural workers' salaries have not been advocated for as strongly as teachers' salaries. Purga replied that the salaries of teachers, rescuers, police officers, and cultural workers have always been raised together, and the 10% increase in the wage bill was the maximum that could be agreed upon in the government, also covering coaches and the leaders of song and dance festival collectives.

Riigikogu member Helle-Moonika Helme submitted an interpellation to Prime Minister Kristen Michal on the topic "The Situation in the Country," focusing on the discrepancies between the government's priorities and its use of funds. Helme sharply criticized the underfunding of the cultural sector, citing the low salaries of ERSO orchestra members as an example, and contrasted this with expenditures reaching billions for Rail Baltic, wind farm entrepreneurs, and an alleged 400 million salary increase in the Ministry of Climate. She accused the government of violating the constitution and of "bungling, corrupt governance," asking for whose benefit the country is being run.

Prime Minister Michal rejected the claims of a 400 million salary increase in the Ministry of Climate and defended the Minister of Culture, emphasizing that the cultural sector was one of five areas where salary increases took place. He highlighted the growth in ERSO funding and the completion of new cultural objects (the National Library, the Art Hall). In a follow-up question, Helme focused on attacking the Estonian Institute of Economic Research (Konjunktuuriinstituut) and its director, Peeter Raudsepp, accusing the government of suppressing independent economic analyses because they show an economic decline lasting 13 quarters. Michal responded that economic experts themselves had pointed to the questionable methodology and then highlighted positive indicators from the Institute of Economic Research's own latest studies, including an improved economic climate index and increased confidence in the government's economic policy. Martin Helme intervened, calling Michal's rhetoric "Soviet-era propaganda" and his cited experts "mouthpieces for the Reform Party." Michal, in turn, stressed that he was quoting the very Institute of Economic Research that the opposition considers trustworthy.

Member of Parliament Mart Maastik submitted an interpellation to Prime Minister Kristen Michal regarding the government's planned loan guarantee scheme for large energy projects, such as offshore wind farms, energy storage facilities, and a nuclear power plant. Maastik criticized the measure, arguing that it contradicts the government's promise of a market-based energy sector and places a significant risk on the taxpayer: in case of loss, the state covers the costs, while in case of profit, the entrepreneur skims the cream. He referred to Sweden's negative experience with a similar program. Prime Minister Michal responded that the guarantee measure is still at a conceptual level and is being developed by several ministries with the goal of attracting long-term industrial and energy investments to Estonia, where private sector financiers are unwilling to bear the risks alone. Michal rejected the indirect criticism aimed at renewable energy, accusing Maastik's party (Isamaa) of "EKRE-ization."

In a follow-up question, Maastik criticized the €100,000 study commissioned by the Ministry of Climate on the health effects of wind turbines, claiming it was a senseless waste of state money, as the results of a review of existing scientific works could have been obtained using artificial intelligence. Michal defended the study, emphasizing that the work of scientists is necessary to provide people with scientifically grounded answers to their concerns. In an additional question, Rain Epler criticized the Prime Minister's "love for intermittent power" and suggested he familiarize himself with Spanish blackout analyses, which demonstrate the dangers of prioritizing renewable energy development. Michal responded ironically that Estonian energy experts have long been aware of the need to balance uncontrollable and controllable energy sources.

The sixth item on the agenda concerned border security, focusing specifically on the Saatse Boot road section in Southeast Estonia, which briefly traverses Russian territory. Riigikogu member Anti Allas posed a question to Prime Minister Kristen Michal, asking why construction of the Saatse Boot bypass road had not commenced a year after the funding was allocated (which happened at the insistence of the Social Democrats in the autumn of 2024). Allas highlighted the security risk, which culminated in the appearance of armed Russian combatants on the road and the subsequent closure of that section.

Prime Minister Michal confirmed that preparatory work for the road began in 2024 and funding was secured in 2025. He deemed the decision by the Police and Border Guard Board to close the road segment entirely correct. As urgent measures, Michal announced that the government would immediately discuss the widening and maintenance of RMK (State Forest Management Centre) roads to ensure an alternative connection. Efforts will be made to accelerate the deadline for building the new permanent bypass from the originally planned 2027 to 2026, utilizing possible legislative changes or national defense exceptions. In a follow-up question, Tiit Maran inquired about the consideration of environmental protection (Mustoja Landscape Protection Area, Natura sites) during the accelerated construction, to which the Prime Minister replied that the national defense and security interest currently outweigh the environmental restrictions, and confirmed that compensation measures would be considered.

MP Rain Epler submitted a detailed inquiry to Prime Minister Kristen Michal regarding the migration and climate goals to be discussed at the European Council, seeking to clarify Estonia's specific plans and initiatives. Regarding the Migration Pact, Epler asked whether Estonia plans to follow Poland's example and seek an exemption from the obligation to accept quota refugees, given the large number of war refugees who have arrived from Ukraine. Prime Minister Michal responded that the President of the European Commission will first give an overview at the Council, followed by a discussion, indicating that a position will be adopted after hearing the overview. He stressed that Estonia expects the large number of refugees to be taken into account in various activities.

Regarding climate goals, Epler asked whether the Prime Minister intends to send a message to the Council calling for a review of the burdensome obligations placed on Estonia's LULUCF (Land Use, Land-Use Change and Forestry) sector, and whether there are plans to cooperate with Poland toward alleviating these obligations. The Prime Minister confirmed that Estonia proceeds based on the conditions discussed in the Riigikogu (the existence of technologies and funding, and a review clause) and that proposals have been repeatedly made to change the LULUCF methodology. Martin Helme subsequently criticized the Prime Minister for a lack of initiative, accusing him of passivity and relying on other countries (Poland) to fight for Estonia's interests. Prime Minister Michal rejected the criticism, calling it an Orbán-style anti-EU fight, and stressed that Estonia presents its views politely during the debate and cooperates with like-minded countries.

Under the eighth item on the agenda of the Riigikogu, the answers given by Prime Minister Kristen Michal to questions from Riigikogu member Priit Sibul (Isamaa) concerning border infrastructure, the Saatse Boot road section, and the establishment of the Baltic Defence Line were discussed. Sibul inquired about the Prime Minister's trip to Saatse and asked for clarification on why the Saatse Boot road section is closed while the Lutepää Triangle can still be crossed. He emphasized the need for a quick solution regarding the Saatse road and highlighted concerns related to the restriction of landowners' rights (the so-called "neo-nationalization") in the context of expanding defense areas, referring to the Vastseliina cases. Sibul also wanted to know the exact timeline for the construction of border infrastructure and its IT readiness.

Prime Minister Michal confirmed that the expansion of the RMK road and the construction of a new road are underway, and a solution is being sought through legislative amendments or a national defense exception, emphasizing the priority of human safety. He provided an overview of the eastern border infrastructure construction, noting that the main part of the land border will be completed by the end of 2025, when 80%, or 90 kilometers, will be fenced with a delay barrier. Readiness of surveillance technology will be achieved in 2026–2027, including the establishment of stationary drone surveillance capability. Regarding the Baltic Defence Line, Michal described the procurement for barrier elements in 2024 and 2025, and the construction of strongpoints (28 bunkers, 26 of which will be on state land). The budget for the defense line is 60 million euros, and completion is planned for 2027. In a supplementary question, Martin Helme (EKRE) sharply criticized the actions of Minister of the Interior Igor Taro regarding the closure of the Saatse road section, accusing him of inciting hysteria for personal or party gain. Prime Minister Michal rejected these accusations, defending the PPA's (Police and Border Guard Board) decision as correct and appropriate, based on a threat assessment due to Russia's irrational behavior.

Riigikogu member Mart Helme submitted an interpellation to Prime Minister Kristen Michal regarding security, focusing on the border issues concerning the Saatse Boot and threats to internal security. Helme first explained that the road into the Saatse Boot was deliberately left unbuilt because the area is considered exchangeable territory pending a border treaty with Russia. He also criticized the "political-technological hysteria" being whipped up around the movement of Russian border guards.

The main focus of the discussion quickly shifted to internal security and the threat posed by the "fifth column." Helme warned that Estonia has an estimated 5,000 trained individuals and a large number of Ukrainian war refugees whose backgrounds are unverified. He claimed they could, on Putin’s orders, organize domestic unrest, quickly seize Stenbock House, and declare the Free City of Tallinn or an autonomous Ida-Virumaa—an action NATO would not intervene in. He questioned the government's preparedness and the lack of a crisis reserve. Prime Minister Michal dismissed the scenarios presented by Helme as "pure fiction." He stressed the exemplary functioning of Estonia’s internal security apparatus, the successful counter-intelligence work carried out by the Security Police (KAPO), and denied that any organized "fifth column" was actively working to destabilize the state. Martin Helme broadened the topic to immigration, criticizing the government’s "everything is fine" attitude, and highlighted the large influx of immigrants from East Slavic countries whose backgrounds, according to KAPO's public admission, security agencies cannot collectively verify. Prime Minister Michal concluded by affirming that, based on the facts, Estonia is one of the safest countries, migration is controlled, and the government remains committed to investing in both defense and internal security.

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.

As the first item on the agenda, 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 debated. The presentation was given by the Minister of Regional Affairs and Agriculture, Hendrik Johannes Terras, who explained that the purpose of the act is to ratify the amendments to the Fourth Additional Protocol to the General Regulations and the First Additional Protocol to the Postal Convention of the Universal Postal Union (UPU), adopted in 2023. The main objective of the amendments is to specify the role of the UPU Consultative Committee, increase the UPU budget ceiling, and make small packet services within the universal postal service more competitive and compliant with e-commerce expectations. This includes adding services expected by consumers, such as electronic trackability, to the list of mandatory supplementary services.

A co-report was presented by Urve Tiidus, a member of the Economic Affairs Committee, who provided an overview of the draft's discussion within the committee. The committee thoroughly addressed issues concerning the prevention and suppression of sending dangerous items via post, to which it was responded that Eesti Post (Estonian Post) has implemented security mechanisms (e.g., eliminating anonymous sending from parcel lockers) and is engaged in staff training. Directives on customs reform and ensuring the security of shipments were also discussed. Tiidus also highlighted a topic of general interest in the context of postal reform, noting that the proliferation of parcel lockers has changed human behavior, but the option of sending a postcard remains, although its price should cover the actual costs. The Minister's representative confirmed that, in light of the convention, amending the Postal Act is not necessary, but Eesti Post may need to change its standard terms and conditions. Furthermore, it was announced that starting from 2027, the maximum weight limit for letter-post items will decrease from 2 kg to 1 kg. The Economic Affairs Committee made a consensus proposal to conclude the first reading.

The agenda item concerned the first reading of Bill 725, initiated by the Government of the Republic, amending the Public Transport Act. The bill was introduced by the Minister of Regional Affairs and Agriculture, Hendrik Johannes Terras. The main objective of the bill is to streamline the organization of taxi services, bringing it into line with the principles of the digital state, and to end the duplication of data between two registers. Going forward, all data related to taxi services (operating license, vehicle card, service provider card) would be managed solely in the Register of Economic Activities (MTR), which allows for the closure of the outdated Transport Administration's Public Transport Register. This step should reduce administrative burden, IT costs, and cyber risks. Another significant change is the abolition of the photo requirement for the service provider card, as it no longer creates added value and generates data protection risks.

During the debate, Riigikogu members (Rene Kokk, Mart Maastik, Priit Sibul) focused mainly on the abolition of the photo requirement, emphasizing that a picture is necessary to ensure the client's sense of security and for driver identification. The Minister acknowledged the aspect of security perception but stressed that the service provider card is not an identity document according to the law. Also raised was the proposal by the Association of Estonian Cities and Rural Municipalities to grant local governments the right to carry out control transactions (mystery shopping) regarding platform service providers, which the Minister postponed to a broader package of amendments to the Public Transport Act, citing the urgent technical nature of the current bill. The rapporteur of the Economic Affairs Committee, Mario Kadastik, confirmed that the committee wishes to retain the photo requirement, recommending the use of photos available in the Population Register for this purpose, and the Minister promised to analyze this possibility before the second reading. The lead committee proposed concluding the first reading.

The agenda item was the first reading of Draft Act 718, initiated by the Government of the Republic, 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 fraud. Minister of Finance Jürgen Ligi introduced the draft act, explaining that the purpose of the agreements is to promote cross-border investments, prevent discriminatory taxation, and curb tax avoidance. The agreement is based on the OECD Model Convention and is the 64th valid tax treaty for Estonia (the 65th, including Oman). The Minister highlighted the most important provisions, such as the limited right to tax dividend income (up to 10% for natural persons), the exemption of corporate interest from withholding tax, and a maximum tax rate of 5% for royalties. To eliminate double taxation, Estonia uses the exemption or credit method, and the agreement establishes a comprehensive obligation for the exchange of information between tax authorities.

Riina Sikkut, representing the Finance Committee, presented the committee's discussion, which took place on October 7, 2025. Both in the committee and in the plenary session, Peeter Ernits raised the question of the differences between the Liechtenstein agreement and the recently processed Oman agreement. It was explained that although the OECD Model Convention serves as the basis, adjustments were made during negotiations concerning the tax rates for passive income and specific exemptions, ensuring they correspond to the tax systems of the partner countries. The Finance Committee made a consensus proposal to conclude the first reading.

The Riigikogu deliberated the first reading of Draft Act 733, the supplementary budget bill for the state for 2025, initiated by the Government of the Republic. The draft bill was introduced by Minister of Finance Jürgen Ligi, who noted that this is already the second supplementary budget this year, with diverse objectives. The budget reduces expenditures by 19.9 million euros and investments by 12 million euros, while simultaneously increasing budget-neutral financing transactions by 72.3 million euros. The main focus remained on national defense: the budget of the Ministry of Defense is increased by 39 million euros (for procurements and aid to Ukraine). Within the framework of comprehensive national defense, the share capital of Elering, which falls under the jurisdiction of the Ministry of Climate, is increased by 45 million euros, of which 35 million is directed towards protecting energy infrastructure (transformers) against hybrid threats. Several projects are postponed because they cannot be implemented this year, including activities related to the transition to Estonian-language education (6.5 million euros). During the question round, MPs Aivar Kokk, Rain Epler, and Peeter Ernits were primarily interested in the transparency of innovation loans distributed via SmartCap, the justification for increasing Elering's share capital, and the ministers' tendency to overestimate their capacity to spend money. Minister Ligi explained that the funds' decisions are project-based and autonomously controlled, and strengthening Elering's capital is necessary for attracting foreign capital. Annely Akkermann, Chairman of the Finance Committee, presented the committee's deliberation, where it was decided by consensus to propose concluding the first reading.

The Riigikogu held the first reading of Draft Law 734, initiated by the Government of the Republic, concerning the Act on Simplified Taxation of Business Income, the amendment of the Income Tax Act, the Act on the Repeal of the Security Tax Act, and the amendment of the Income Tax Act. Minister of Finance Jürgen Ligi introduced the draft law, the main objective of which is to improve the competitiveness of the Estonian tax system by abandoning the previous coalition's planned increase of the income tax rate to 24% (leaving it at 22%). Furthermore, the 2% taxation of all private individuals' income will be cancelled. Ligi emphasized that foregoing the tax hike and eliminating the tax bracket distortion will put nearly 1,848 euros more per year into the hands of the average wage earner. Additionally, the income tax exemption for donations to NGOs assisting Ukraine will be extended until the end of 2027.

The debate was emotional and focused on fiscal responsibility in tax policy. The opposition (Isamaa, EKRE, SDE) criticized the government for tax policy "flip-flopping" and deepening the budget deficit, arguing that the tax cuts were being financed by borrowed money. Urmas Reinsalu (Isamaa) highlighted the record negative net position of foreign investments in 2024, which Ligi disputed. Social Democrats (Riina Sikkut, Anti Allas) accused the government of short-sightedness and decisions driven by populism that harm the nation's finances. Ligi, in turn, defended the draft law for its economy-stimulating effect and criticized the idea of lowering VAT on foodstuffs as a foolish and socially misdirected policy.

The agenda item was the first reading of Draft Bill 736, initiated by the Government of the Republic, concerning the amendment of the State Budget Act and the Act amending the State Budget Act. Minister of Finance Jürgen Ligi introduced the draft bill, the main objectives of which were the transposition of the European Union budgetary framework directive (including establishing a new ceiling for the structural deficit at 1.5% of GDP), increasing budget transparency (by integrating an activity-based and economic view into the 2026 budget), streamlining the granting of subsidies, and increasing the flexibility of local government financing. Ligi also explained the limitation of the government reserve to 3% of the volume of expenditure and the termination of carrying over unused balances.

During the debate, Members of the Riigikogu (Peeter Ernits, Rain Epler, Aivar Kokk) criticized the new rules, arguing that they increase bureaucracy and restrict the democratic decision-making process (especially in connection with the EU's four-year frameworks). Ligi defended the new rules, emphasizing the role of expertise and the European Commission in curbing political populism. A discussion also arose regarding the level of budget detail, where the opposition demanded a more precise breakdown of expenditures (labor, economic, social costs), to which Ligi replied that international recommendations and practical necessity require flexibility in reallocating expenditures. Maris Lauri, the rapporteur for the Finance Committee, confirmed that members of the Riigikogu have exceptionally good access to detailed budget data through the budget information system.

The Riigikogu debated Inquiry No. 802, submitted to the Minister of Regional Affairs and Agriculture, Hendrik Johannes Terras, concerning the state of the revenue base for local governments (LG). The inquiry was submitted by Riigikogu members Anti Allas, Reili Rand, and Jaak Aab from the Social Democratic Party faction. The questioners emphasized the need to ensure equal and accessible public services in all Estonian regions and sought clarity regarding the impact of the so-called Robin Hood measure.

Minister Terras responded to six questions, refuting the claim made by Tartu Deputy Mayor Meelis Leidt that the Robin Hood measure would take 14 million euros from Tartu over three years. According to the Minister’s analysis, the total impact of the Robin Hood measure on the city of Tartu between 2025 and 2028 is approximately 8.7 million euros, which is significantly less than the city's projected increase in land tax revenue. Terras confirmed that the Robin Hood reform is working as expected, reducing financial inequality among local governments. The negative impact affects approximately one-fifth of local governments (mainly in Harju and Tartu counties), while nearly 80% of local governments, including regional centers and sparsely populated rural municipalities, benefit from it. The Minister highlighted that the biggest structural problem for local governments is decreasing financial autonomy, as only 2.3% of revenues come from local taxes. Future plans foresee transferring state subsidies (e.g., funding for basic schools and local roads) into the permanent revenue base of local governments and creating a legal framework for new local fees (e.g., development fees for solar parks and social infrastructure). During the subsequent discussions, Riigikogu members emphasized that Estonia needs a broad political debate on the division of tasks and funding between the state and local governments.

The agenda item concerned Inquiry No. 804 submitted by Riigikogu members Züleyxa Izmailova, Tiit Maran, Tanel Kiik, Riina Sikkut, Heljo Pikhof, and Andre Hanimäe to the Minister of Energy and Environment, Andres Sutt, regarding the necessity and timeliness of establishing a general nesting peace. Züleyxa Izmailova, speaking on behalf of the petitioners, emphasized that Estonia's biodiversity indicators are in continuous decline, nearly 30% of species are endangered, and bird populations are decreasing. She referred to a 2022 study, according to which 93% of people support the establishment of nesting peace in both private and state forests. Izmailova criticized the fact that Estonia lacks a binding and universal nesting peace, and the recommended restrictions by RMK (State Forest Management Centre) are insufficient, especially on private lands.

Minister Andres Sutt responded that the Ministry of Climate is awaiting the Supreme Court's decision concerning the legal dispute between OÜ Voore Mets and AS Lemeks Põlva and the Environmental Board, which relates to the intentional disturbance of birds during the nesting period. Until then, the current practice will continue. Sutt noted that RMK implements a voluntary logging truce (in recent years, until June 30) in state forests, which covers about half of the forest land. He stressed that the associated socio-economic impact must be considered when establishing a general nesting peace. Sutt explained that the Environmental Board uses a breeding bird population density matrix for risk-based supervision, which has helped direct control to areas of greater impact. During the debate, Izmailova criticized the minister's answers as vague and non-committal, accusing the government of ignoring nature conservation issues. Minister Sutt rejected the accusations, highlighting that 18–19% of forests in Estonia are under strict protection, which is significantly more than in neighboring countries.

The Riigikogu debated the interpellation (No. 809) submitted to Andres Sutt, the Minister of Energy and Environment, concerning the future of the Climate Law. The interpellation was submitted by Tiit Maran, Züleyxa Izmailova, Tanel Kiik, Riina Sikkut, and Heljo Pikhof. Tiit Maran, the representative of the questioners, criticized the long delay in drafting the law and the shift in focus. He recalled that the Climate Law was originally a central theme of the coalition, and public consultations were promised by June 2024. Instead, a significantly narrower draft bill—the "Climate-Resilient Economy Law"—was presented in August 2024. In Maran's assessment, this draft did not meet international obligations and practically ignored the adaptation aspect (preparing the population for inevitable changes). Maran also highlighted the confusion that arose after the change of government in 2025, where Minister Sutt initially expressed doubt about the introduction of a single law but later confirmed it.

Minister Andres Sutt confirmed that climate policy remains a government priority, emphasizing the impact of climate change (e.g., the exceptionally heavy precipitation in the summer of 2025). He explained that the new Climate-Resilient Economy Law is a short, specific, and realistic framework law that sets nationwide and sector-specific emission reduction targets. A significant difference from the previous draft is that the implementing details will be moved into sectoral roadmaps, which will be prepared in cooperation with stakeholders and should be finalized by the end of the year. Sutt stressed that this approach ensures flexibility and allows for avoiding constant amendments to the law. The Minister promised that the draft bill would reach the Riigikogu for proceedings during the current year. Follow-up questions addressed the unfairness of LULUCF (land use) requirements and the process of changing them at the EU level, as well as the potential relaxation of emission reduction targets, which the Minister denied, confirming the commitment to the goal of climate neutrality by 2050.

The agenda item concerned the interpellation by Riigikogu members Aivar Kokk and Priit Sibul to the Minister of Energy and Environment, Andres Sutt, regarding the closure of the Endla Nature Centre in Tooma. Interpellator Aivar Kokk expressed indignation that the nature centre, which had an annual cost of 80,000 euros, was closed without consulting the local community and municipality, while the state is spending 67 million euros on a new environment building being constructed next to the Seaplane Harbour in Tallinn. Kokk also inquired about the lost owner’s revenue of RMK (State Forest Management Centre) related to protected forests and the necessity of the new Tallinn environment building. Minister Andres Sutt explained that the closure of the Endla office was a result of the Environmental Board’s budget cuts (over 3 million euros), noting that the building (over 800 m²) had a low utilization rate, serving only two employees (who were transferred to the Jõgeva state building). Sutt emphasized that the construction of the Tallinn environment building was not the reason for the closure of Endla. He confirmed that RMK would continue to maintain the infrastructure of the nature area, and educational materials were distributed to local educational institutions. Sutt offered to present the exact financial data (Endla costs and rental costs of the Jõgeva state building) in writing. Aivar Kokk reiterated during the negotiations that the biggest problem was the failure to inform the local municipality and stressed the importance of the Endla centre for conducting nature tourism and training.

The Riigikogu debate centered on the key national issue, "The Future of the Estonian Economy," initiated by the faction of the Estonian Reform Party. The presentations provided a comprehensive overview of the current economic situation and future visions. Maris Lauri (Reform Party) analyzed the four pillars of Estonian competitiveness: natural resources, labor, capital, and the smart utilization of knowledge. She stressed the need for continuous innovation and adding value to natural resources, noting that the advantage of cheap labor has been lost. She also criticized the dismantling of the second pension pillar for reducing domestic capital. Minister of Economic Affairs and Industry Erkki Keldo presented an optimistic forecast, predicting Estonia would be the fastest-growing economy in Europe in the coming years, underpinned by security (5% of GDP defense spending), export growth targets (43 billion euros by 2028), and R&D investments. He also highlighted major investments (400 million euros) and the necessity of accelerating planning processes. Allan Martinson (Estonian Founders Society) focused on the startup sector, which contributes 4.5% to GDP and is shifting from extensive to intensive growth, particularly in the fields of artificial intelligence and defense technology. He emphasized the requirement for a stable economic environment. Liina Vahtras (EIS) provided an overview of the success of e-residency, which has generated 370 million euros in revenue for the state treasury, and introduced a planned cardless solution designed to shorten the time required to establish a company to two weeks, thereby maintaining Estonia's competitive edge as a digital state. During the negotiations, faction representatives underscored the need for a stable economic environment, reduced bureaucracy, and reform of the education and healthcare systems, while Urmas Reinsalu sharply criticized the government's tax experiments and policies that undermine economic confidence.

The session continued the first reading of Draft Bill 737, the 2026 State Budget Act, initiated by the Government of the Republic. Annely Akkermann, Chairman of the Finance Committee, delivered the leading committee's report, providing an overview of the budget's processing within the committee and introducing its key parameters: revenues of 18.6 billion, expenditures of 19.5 billion, and a general government financing need of 1.7 billion euros. Akkermann highlighted the budget’s two main themes: robust growth in defense spending (over 5% of GDP) and a reduction in the tax burden (through the abolition of the tax notch). In the subsequent round of questions and negotiations, the opposition sharply criticized the budget’s irresponsibility, particularly the record deficit and the use of borrowed funds to cover current expenses. The fairness of the income tax reform was also a central issue, with the opposition (including Tanel Kiik, Riina Sikkut, and Reili Rand) arguing that the wealthiest would benefit the most, while the social and cultural sectors suffered cuts. Coalition representatives (Õnne Pillak, Toomas Uibo) defended the budget, emphasizing the priority given to national defense and the positive impact of abolishing the tax notch on the average wage earner. Four opposition factions (Centre Party, SDE, Isamaa, EKRE) submitted a motion to reject the draft bill during the first reading. The motion failed to gain support in the vote (32 in favor, 44 against). The first reading of the draft bill was concluded.

Social Minister Karmen Joller presented a report to the Riigikogu on the implementation of the state’s long-term development strategy "Eesti 2035," focusing on the areas of health and welfare. The Minister emphasized the need for better integration of the healthcare and social systems. In the health sector, Joller highlighted the increase in women's life expectancy (83.4 years) but stressed concern over men’s lower life expectancy and health inequality, which is particularly acute regionally (there is a 12-year difference in healthy life years between Hiiumaa and Võrumaa). The biggest public health problems are increasing obesity (over half of adults), high alcohol consumption, and the spread of e-cigarettes among young people. The Minister confirmed that the Health Insurance Fund’s (Tervisekassa) budget deficit has decreased (from the planned 177.6 million to 104.9 million euros), but the system requires efficiency improvements through the reorganization of the hospital network and the expansion of e-consultations. In the welfare sector, the biggest concern is the birth rate, which fell to the lowest level of the century in 2024 (9,690 births). Joller rejected accusations of pressuring families and emphasized that family policy must be cross-sectoral. During the discussions, the opposition criticized the government for underfunding healthcare, long treatment waiting lists, and insufficient support for the social sector (e.g., special care). Sharp criticism was leveled at the squandering of the Health Insurance Fund’s administrative costs and the continued development of the SKAIS2 system.

The Riigikogu debate focused on the third reading of Draft Bill 670, initiated by Riigikogu members Peeter Tali, Ando Kiviberg, Anti Haugas, and Mati Raidma, which aimed to supplement the Police and Border Guard Act by legalizing and regulating the use of the license plate recognition camera system. The debate was extremely polarized, deeply touching upon issues of fundamental rights, privacy, and trust in state authority.

Opposition parties (Centre Party, Isamaa, EKRE) sharply criticized the conduct of the Ministry of the Interior and the government, accusing them of illegally launching the system and seeking retroactive legalization. Anastassia Kovalenko-Kõlvart (Centre Party) and Varro Vooglaid (EKRE) saw the bill as a step towards a surveillance society, emphasizing the lack of a broad-based debate regarding the proportionality of camera density and officials' access. Urmas Reinsalu (Isamaa) accused the government of employing a cowardly method and causing a loss of trust, also citing the Tax and Customs Board's access to the data as a worrying development.

Supporters of the bill, Andre Hanimägi (SDE) and Peeter Tali (Eesti 200), defended the draft as an essential tool for the Police and Border Guard Board (PPA) in solving serious crimes. They stressed that the bill represented a compromise that had received approval from both the Office of the Chancellor of Justice and the Data Protection Inspectorate, and they rejected accusations of scaremongering. In the final vote, Draft Bill 670 was adopted as law.

The Riigikogu debated Draft Resolution 658 OE, submitted by the Estonian Centre Party faction, the aim of which was to oblige the Government of the Republic to develop a plan for increasing competition in the mobile communications market and accelerating number portability. The presenter of the draft resolution, Lauri Laats, emphasized that Estonian mobile communication services are 30–35% more expensive compared to other Baltic states, citing the operators' high profit margins (approximately 20% of turnover). The main problem is that the long number transfer time (up to 50% of transfers are left incomplete) allows operators to offer better prices only to those customers who threaten to leave, thereby creating a so-called convenience tax. The draft resolution proposed shortening the number transfer period to a maximum of one working day and establishing real-time portability in the future.

During the debate, questions were raised regarding coverage issues in sparsely populated areas and the government's inaction. Mario Kadastik, representing the Economic Affairs Committee, announced that the Ministry of Justice and Digital Affairs is already working on accelerating number portability, planning to shorten the process to a matter of hours. Despite the government addressing the issue, the Centre Party did not withdraw the draft resolution. During discussions, Andres Metsoja stressed that the state had made a mistake by failing to mandate the provision of high-quality data communication in rural areas through frequency tenders. The draft resolution was put to a final vote, but the required majority of the Riigikogu membership was not achieved (17 in favor, 0 against, 1 abstention), and the bill was dropped from the proceedings.

The Riigikogu debated the first reading of Draft Act 663, initiated by the Government of the Republic, concerning accession to the convention establishing the International Association of Marine Aids to Navigation and Lighthouse Authorities (IALA). Minister of Infrastructure Kuldar Leis introduced the draft act, emphasizing that IALA has become an intergovernmental organization and that Estonia needs to accede to the convention in order to gain voting rights and participate in decision-making processes. Currently, Estonia is a member with limited rights, paying membership fees but unable to contribute to the development of standards and guidelines. Accession confirms Estonia’s reliability in ensuring maritime safety. The Minister confirmed that the implementation of the act would not entail additional costs for the state. Questions posed to the Minister mainly concerned topics indirectly related to maritime affairs, such as bringing ships under the Estonian flag and the removal of border markers that occurred on Lake Peipus, which the Minister classified as a border guard issue. Urve Tiidus, representative of the Economic Affairs Committee, confirmed the discussion held in the committee and supported the further processing of the draft act. The committee proposed concluding the first reading.

The first reading of Draft Bill 717, initiated by the Government of the Republic, concerning amendments to the Health Insurance Act and the Occupational Health and Safety Act, took place in the Riigikogu. Minister of Social Affairs Karmen Joller introduced the four main amendments of the draft bill, the goal of which is to make the health insurance system fairer, more flexible, and more efficient. Among the most significant changes, the Minister highlighted the possibility of starting part-time work during a long-term illness as early as the 31st day (instead of the current 61st day), increasing the flexibility of voluntary health insurance payments (the option to pay in installments), and ending the payment of double compensation in the form of sickness benefits to recipients of unemployment insurance benefits.

The fourth amendment, concerning the change in the basis for calculating the incapacity benefit for pregnant women, generated the sharpest discussion. Henceforth, the benefit will be calculated based on the income subject to social tax from the previous calendar year (MTA data), thereby equating pregnant women with other working people. Previously, the average salary for six months submitted by the employer was taken into account for pregnant women. The Minister justified the change by reducing the administrative burden and mitigating the risk of system abuse. Riina Solman (Isamaa) and Rain Epler (EKRE) expressed concern that this amendment could bring negative consequences for pregnant women who have recently returned from parental leave or whose salary has recently increased, and they found that suspecting pregnant women of fraud is hypocritical. Irja Lutsar, a representative of the Social Affairs Committee, confirmed that the amendment was discussed thoroughly in the committee, highlighting officials' explanations that the change affects approximately 1,300 individuals and is necessary to prevent fraud.

The Riigikogu debated the first reading of Draft Act 701, initiated by the Government of the Republic, concerning amendments to the Chemicals Act. The draft act was introduced by the Minister of Economic Affairs and Industry, Erkki Keldo. The main objective of the amendments is to resolve the infringement procedure initiated by the European Commission regarding the deficient transposition of the EU Directive (Seveso III), and to prevent major accidents involving hazardous chemicals. There are 133 such establishments in Estonia (e.g., fuel terminals, fertilizer storage facilities). The amendments focus on three topics: specifying the tasks of the authorities (the Rescue Board, TTJA) following an accident, clarifying the obligations of operators (including cooperation in the event of a domino effect risk and informing neighbors), and reducing the administrative burden. To reduce the administrative burden, all required documents will be submitted electronically via the TTJA information system. Furthermore, the state will assume responsibility for hazard notification (sirens and e-alarms/SMS notifications) so that operators do not have to create expensive systems themselves. During the debate, Rain Epler (Cjw223MbyUk) raised questions regarding unlimited liability for remedial measures and the operator's liability if state notification systems (e-alarms) fail during an accident. Minister Keldo confirmed that limits on liability are not considered reasonable and that disputes will be resolved in court in a state governed by the rule of law. Regarding notification liability, the minister promised to clarify whether the operator's obligation is considered fulfilled upon the transmission of information to the Emergency Response Centre. Mait Klaassen (RqbcXTim2Pc), representative of the Environment Committee, provided an overview of the committee's discussion, confirming that the draft act resolves the infringement procedure and reduces the administrative burden. The committee made a consensus proposal to conclude the first reading.

The agenda item covered the first reading of Draft Act 683, initiated by the Government of the Republic, concerning amendments to the Planning Act and related legislation. Minister of Economic Affairs and Industry Erkki Keldo introduced the draft, stating that its main objective is to make the planning procedure clearer, faster, and more flexible by reducing bureaucracy and enhancing legal certainty. Key amendments highlighted by the minister include abolishing the local government special plan and replacing it with a detailed plan, as well as establishing a 10-year validity period for new detailed plans (starting in 2027) if their implementation has not yet commenced. Furthermore, the advance notice period for public display will be shortened from 14 days to one day, and the requirement to publish notices in county and national newspapers will be eliminated, granting local governments discretion in this matter. The draft also introduces a requirement that planning must take into account the principles of climate change and high-quality spatial design.

The debate was intense, particularly concerning issues of public involvement and notification. The EKRE faction (Rain Epler, Martin Helme, Arvo Aller) sharply criticized the proposals, viewing them as a "steamroller" designed to limit community involvement and push through large development projects (such as wind farms). Minister Keldo stressed that the amendments are intended to boost efficiency, support economic growth, and prevent unnecessary delays, confirming that the Land and Spatial Planning Board will oversee adherence to deadlines. The leading committee proposed concluding the first reading, but the EKRE faction submitted a motion to reject the draft, which was subsequently voted down (5 in favor, 45 against).

The Riigikogu debated the first reading of Bill 681 SE, initiated by the Government of the Republic, concerning the Act on Accession to the International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance. Minister of Justice and Digital Affairs Liisa-Ly Pakosta introduced the bill, noting that Estonian domestic law already complies with the convention's requirements, and accession would not entail new obligations, the need to amend the Penal Code, or additional funding. The primary goal of accession is to improve Estonia's international reputation and standing.

During the debate, questions arose regarding the convention's terminology and its relevance within the Estonian cultural context. Rain Epler criticized the term "enforced disappearance" as being bureaucratic jargon. The Minister explained that this is a specific type of crime that differs from kidnapping because the victim is forced to leave. Peeter Ernits asked whether re-introducing the convention to the agenda was related to immigration from countries (e.g., Iraq, Sri Lanka) where such crimes are widespread, to which the Minister replied in the negative. Peeter Ernits, Deputy Chairman of the Legal Affairs Committee, presented the committee's position, ironically calling the bill the "werewolf bill"—a bill addressing phenomena that do not occur in the Estonian cultural context. The committee decided by consensus to propose concluding the first reading.

The Riigikogu held the first reading of Draft Bill 656, initiated by the Government of the Republic, concerning the amendment of the Penal Code and the Code of Criminal Procedure (criminal jurisdiction and the destruction of subsea infrastructure). Minister of Justice and Digital Affairs Liisa-Ly Pakosta introduced the draft bill, which addresses legal gaps resulting from several recent events. The draft bill extends the applicability of Estonian criminal law to offenses committed within the premises of foreign representations (in response to a Supreme Court decision regarding the annulment of a diplomat’s fine) and expands jurisdiction over damage to critical infrastructure located in Estonia’s exclusive economic zone and continental shelf. Penalties for the destruction of subsea infrastructure are significantly increased, providing for up to ten years of imprisonment and fines of up to 4 billion euros for legal persons. Furthermore, the possibility of using surveillance activities is added to § 203 of the Penal Code (damage to property) to investigate acts of vandalism commissioned by the special services of states hostile to Estonia, even if the resulting property damage is not extensive.

During the discussion, questions were raised regarding the recent decision by a Finnish court concerning the destruction of the Estlink 2 cable, where the Finnish court found that it lacked jurisdiction. Minister Pakosta criticized the Finnish court decision, finding that it relied on incorrect provisions of international maritime law, and confirmed that Estonia is considering prosecuting the case, as the economic damage occurred in Estonia. The scope of the Penal Code expansion and the deterrent effect of the 4 billion euro fine were also discussed. The Legal Affairs Committee proposed concluding the first reading.

The Riigikogu (Estonian Parliament) began debating 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. Minister of Justice and Digital Affairs Liisa-Ly Pakosta introduced the draft, emphasizing its technical nature. The purpose of the draft is to bring Estonian domestic law into conformity with four different European Union legal acts, in respect of which the European Commission, during subsequent review, found that Estonian law requires further specification. The amendments concern making the preparation of computer crimes punishable (Section 137 of the Penal Code), harmonizing the grounds for the surrender of third-country nationals within the framework of the European Arrest Warrant, regulating the right to counsel and notification of detention, and clarifying the procedural safeguards for juvenile suspects, including more frequent review of decisions on detention. Member of Parliament Peeter Ernits posed questions regarding the technical complexity of the amendments and the continuous control process for the transposition of European Union law. The Minister explained that this is an ongoing harmonization process where legal acts are compared line by line, and that such specifications are necessary to ensure uniform applicability across Europe. Anti Haugas, a member of the leading committee (the Legal Affairs Committee), confirmed that the committee had discussed the draft and found that although infringement proceedings have been initiated, they will be terminated upon the rectification of the deficiencies. The committee proposed concluding the first reading.

The Riigikogu debated the first reading of the draft Act on Amendments to the Value Added Tax Act (661 SE), initiated by the parliamentary group of the Social Democratic Party, the aim of which was to lower the VAT rate on basic foodstuffs from 24% to 9%. Rapporteur Lauri Läänemets emphasized that the rise in food prices in Estonia has been unprecedented (over 50%) and that implementing a lower VAT rate would help alleviate the burden of the regressive tax, support people with lower incomes, stimulate domestic consumption, and improve the competitiveness of the domestic agricultural sector. Läänemets highlighted that Estonia is one of the few EU countries where a reduced rate is not applied to food, and he criticized the government's plan to take out a loan to distribute income tax concessions to the wealthier population, offering the VAT reduction as a better alternative.

Diana Ingerainen, the representative of the Finance Committee, presented the committee's position, according to which the rejection of the draft bill was supported primarily because the tax reduction would create a deficit of nearly 200 million euros in the state budget, and there was no certainty that this reduction would reach the final consumer. During the debate, the Social Democrats were accused of hypocrisy, as they had previously supported VAT increases while in government and had voted against similar draft bills proposed by the Centre Party. Despite the support of the opposition and several professional associations, the draft bill was voted down in the first reading.

The Riigikogu debate focused on the final item on today's agenda, which was the first reading of Bill 625, the draft act amending the Motor Vehicle Tax Act, initiated by the Estonian Centre Party faction. The aim of the bill was to restore fairness and exempt motor vehicles owned by disabled persons from the annual tax, while keeping the registration fee in force. Presenter Vadim Belobrovtsev emphasized that disabled people are specially protected by the constitution and often depend on personal transport due to mobility restrictions. He criticized the government's conduct, which deprived disabled people of the initial tax exemption, offering insufficient subsidies instead.

Annely Akkermann, Chair of the Finance Committee, presented the committee's position, noting that the Government of the Republic does not support the bill. Akkermann explained that after the President failed to promulgate the original car tax law (citing unequal treatment, as the benefit only applied to modified cars), the government decided to increase social benefits by 9.1 million euros annually. She justified abandoning the tax exemption due to technical difficulties (connecting the Transport Agency and disability registers) and the risk of potential misuse. The opposition (Anastassia Kovalenko-Kõlvart and Helmen Kütt) countered, stressing that the increase in benefits was neither sufficient nor comprehensive enough to cover all groups of disabled people, and that the Chancellor of Justice and the President had demanded a unified tax exemption, not subsidies. Following negotiations, the leading committee's proposal to reject the bill was put to a vote and was supported.

The Riigikogu session addressed the topic of state finance, during which Prime Minister Kristen Michal answered questions posed by Riigikogu members Lauri Läänemets (SDE) and Jaak Aab (KE). The discussion centered on the government's planned tax changes, primarily the abolition of the tax hump and its impact on various income groups, as well as the growth of the state's debt burden.

Lauri Läänemets criticized the government's budget policy, arguing that abolishing the tax hump is an unjustified "gift" to the wealthiest (the 10th decile, salaries €4,000–€7,000), who stand to gain €1,848 annually, while low-wage earners (€1,000–€1,400) gain minimally. Läänemets stressed that to finance these changes, the state is taking out loans, which will increase interest costs to €464 million over four years—an amount equivalent to paying 3.7% of income tax abroad. He deemed this financially irrational.

Prime Minister Michal rejected the accusations of "gifts," emphasizing that collecting less tax is a principled choice designed to leave people with more of what they earn. He argued that the abolition of the tax hump primarily helps the middle class, citing the example of a basic school teacher (salary €2,133), whose annual gain is also €1,848. Michal also presented data on the gains of low-wage earners (e.g., a security guard earning €1,306, gaining €325 annually), challenging Läänemets’ assertion that they gain nothing. Michal criticized the Social Democrats and their former coalition partners for creating the tax hump, which specifically burdened the middle class.

In a supplementary question, Jaak Aab highlighted the impact of high VAT on food prices and domestic consumption, asking why the government did not consider lowering the VAT on foodstuffs, a measure widely supported by the public. Michal explained that the VAT increase is necessary to finance defense spending (5% of GDP), pensions, and healthcare. He confirmed that price increases should subside next year, and the best way for people to cope is by leaving them with more money through the abolition of the tax hump.

Riigikogu member Lauri Laats raised the issue of road safety in a question directed at Infrastructure Minister Kuldar Leis, focusing primarily on the "unstoppable light traffic anarchy" caused by light personal transporters (scooters and small mopeds) in cities. Laats emphasized the lack of supervision, the inaccurate registration of traffic accidents (referencing the Pärnu example, where hospital data showed 72 accidents in one year, while a national register is missing), and the lack of authority for the municipal police to control the situation. He also criticized the recent exception to the insurance requirement (for vehicles weighing under 25 kg), which he believes favors certain companies, and called for rapid inter-agency cooperation.

Minister Kuldar Leis acknowledged the seriousness of the problem and its growing danger in major cities and their suburban areas. He confirmed that the Ministry of Climate and the Transport Administration are addressing the issue systematically. The Minister announced that the situation regarding light personal transporters will be discussed at the scheduled meeting of the Government Traffic Commission on October 29, involving the Ministry of the Interior, the Ministry of Social Affairs, the City of Tallinn, and the Tallinn University of Technology. Leis suggested that the solution must be multifaceted, involving both stricter regulations, increased administrative burden (e.g., a license requirement), and the addition of penalties. In a supplementary question, Anastassia Kovalenko-Kõlvart criticized the governing parties (Reform Party and Eesti 200) for previously voting down regulatory draft bills. She proposed solutions such as establishing limits on the number of rental light transporters by local governments, mandatory age verification within the app, and regulating helmet use, questioning whether the freedom of enterprise outweighs the protection of children's health. The Minister stressed that the solution must be comprehensive and systemic, not merely the implementation of isolated measures.

Riigikogu member Martin Helme posed a question to Prime Minister Kristen Michal on the topic "A Better Protected Estonia," calling into question the Reform Party's capability to ensure national defense and security. Helme claimed that the Reform Party's self-image of a securely protected Estonia has been shattered, referencing criticism from the National Audit Office regarding the use of defense expenditures and failures in border construction (the drone barrier, ditches). The main question, however, concerned an alleged exchange of words with NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte regarding the activation of NATO Article 4 following a border incident. Helme speculated that Rutte had admonished Estonia for using Article 4 too frivolously, fearing an escalation of the situation or the exposure of a NATO bluff.

Prime Minister Kristen Michal categorically refuted Helme's claims. She affirmed that Mark Rutte has supported the activation of Article 4 both privately and publicly, deeming it justified and timely. Michal emphasized that NATO is functioning very well and that the collective defense mechanisms have been correctly implemented. Michal responded to Helme's accusations with a counter-attack, highlighting a 2019 ERR article where Martin Helme, as Finance Minister, decided to reduce funding for the construction of the eastern border and drone capabilities. In a supplementary question, Mart Helme accused the government of corruption related to wind farms and the defense industry park, and repeated his concern about Rutte's displeasure, asking whether the government realizes that a frivolous activation of Article 4 could push Estonia into war. Michal concluded the debate by stressing that Russia is the aggressor and that EKRE is trying to create the impression that Europe is looking for war.

The fourth question during the Riigikogu information hour focused on budget and tax policy, posed to Prime Minister Kristen Michal by Riigikogu member Helir-Valdor Seeder. Seeder sharply criticized the government's budget plan, arguing that it fuels inflation through tax hikes, increases the debt burden to cover current expenditures, and contains "hot air" and deception, particularly concerning the period after 2027, referencing the new motor fuel tax (ETS2). Seeder requested that the Prime Minister avoid giving the usual demagogic response regarding the tax hump and teachers' salaries.

Prime Minister Michal dismissed the criticism, stressing that the tax burden will actually decrease next year from 36.6% to 35.2%, which he claimed represents the largest tax reduction in history (€780 million). He defended the abolition of the tax hump, calling it a "foolish election promise" implemented by the previous government (Isamaa, Social Democrats, and the Centre Party). In a follow-up question, Seeder focused on the "lame car tax," criticizing the Finance Minister's lack of preparation and asking whether the government was prepared to repeal it. Michal defended the amendments to the car tax, particularly the concessions offered to families with children. Mart Maastik, posing a supplementary question, cast doubt on the government’s promised savings, citing the increase in the number of ministry employees and rising salaries as examples. Michal affirmed that the cuts are, in fact, substantial (totaling €1.4 billion) and provided examples from the administrative reform where the number of employees had been reduced.

MP Helmen Kütt submitted a formal inquiry to Prime Minister Kristen Michal regarding the state of special welfare services, highlighting the sector's underfunding, low wages (average gross salary of €1,150–€1,250), and long service queues (1,000 people are currently waiting for services). Kütt referenced an audit by the National Audit Office, which found that the established service prices cover only 60% of the actual costs, thereby forcing local governments to fulfill state obligations. She asked what steps the government planned to take to resolve the situation and what advice it would offer to local governments that have been forced to resort to legal action. Prime Minister Michal responded by emphasizing the significant growth in the special welfare budget—by 2026, it will reach 57.7 million euros, a 154% increase compared to 2015. Michal confirmed that despite the state budget deficit, special welfare is one of five priority areas receiving additional funds (€4.2 million) for wage increases. He added that the Ministry of Social Affairs is working to streamline the service queues to ensure that those with greater needs gain faster access to services. In a supplementary question, Madis Kallas asked the Prime Minister to articulate the main problem facing special welfare, to which Michal replied that the current additional funding primarily addresses the issues of employee salaries and economic sustainability.

Minister of the Interior Igor Taro responded to an interpellation by Riigikogu member Vadim Belobrovtsev concerning the salaries of rescue workers and police officers. Belobrovtsev highlighted the dissatisfaction of frontline workers with the government's planned salary increase of up to 10%, noting that this is ridiculously small, considering the 40% inflation over the last two years. He also emphasized that employees lack certainty regarding the continuation of salary increases in the following years (2027, 2028), which is why a demonstration is forthcoming. The rescue workers' original goal was to achieve a salary equivalent to 1.2 times the Estonian average wage. Minister Taro confirmed that the administrative area of the Ministry of the Interior received 28.9 million euros for increasing the wage fund, which was the maximum achievement possible given the current budgetary situation. He explained that the 10% average growth in the wage fund allows agency heads to direct a larger increase (over 10%) to those positions where the salary is most critical. Furthermore, the minister pointed out that the abolition of the tax hump positively affects those receiving the average wage, such as rescue workers, thereby increasing their disposable income. Taro commended the rescue workers for the demonstration, which keeps the topic relevant, and confirmed that he is also aware of concerns regarding working conditions (especially 24-hour shifts). He could not give written promises for long-term, multi-year salary increases but affirmed the government's commitment to revitalizing the economy so that better salary increases could be ensured in the future. Lauri Laats raised the issue of wage poverty in a supplementary question, to which the minister replied that the 10% increase exceeds the average salary increase of the last eight years (6.6%).

The report addresses the interpellation (Question No. 7) by Riigikogu member Varro Vooglaid to Prime Minister Kristen Michal concerning the demographic crisis. Vooglaid emphasized the extreme seriousness of the demographic crisis, highlighting the drop in the total fertility rate to 1.18 and the decrease in the number of births to below 9,000 annually (while the number of deaths stands at 16,000). He criticized the government for not dedicating attention and resources to the demographic crisis that is even remotely comparable to what is dedicated to the security crisis, noting that the demographic crisis is at least as crucial for the preservation of the Estonian nation, language, and culture. Vooglaid cited the large additional funds (845 million) directed to the administrative area of the Ministry of Defence as an example, and suggested that similar sums should be spent on promoting the desire to have children and introducing family studies into 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 world-class, especially the parental benefits system, and that the state's contribution to children and families is approximately 1 billion euros (2.2% of GDP), which is the highest indicator in Europe. Michal referred to the Ministry of Social Affairs' recent analysis ("Supporting the having and raising of children: analysis and proposals"), which offers a wide range of measures (housing availability, reconciling work and family life), and emphasized that the best prerequisite for increasing the birth rate is a calm and child-friendly environment. He also stressed the liberal viewpoint that people make smart choices themselves, contrasting this with Vooglaid's conservative view that choices should be guided. In follow-up questions, the government's previous tax changes were criticized and questions were asked about setting new goals, to which Michal responded that new steps would be based on the recent analysis.

The eighth question during the Riigikogu (Parliament) information hour concerned the government's draft budget and the deficit. The question was posed by Riigikogu member Urmas Reinsalu, and the answer was provided by Prime Minister Kristen Michal. Reinsalu sharply criticized the budget, calling it "paltry" and a "post-us-the-deluge" budget. He accused the government of irresponsible behavior because the Reform Party's promise to eliminate the tax hump is being fulfilled with borrowed money, which forecasts the continuation of the deficit until 2070. Reinsalu claimed that the government's promise to reduce administrative costs remains unfulfilled; according to his data, administrative costs (personnel, economy, non-statutory subsidies) will actually increase by 1.9 billion euros by 2026 compared to the 2024 budget. He cited unreasonable expenditures, such as the construction of a 60-million-euro log house for environmental agencies and large sums allocated for the administration of the car tax.

Prime Minister Michal rejected Reinsalu's figures, accusing him of arbitrary manipulation of data. Michal confirmed that the government has implemented cuts totaling 1.4 billion euros since the time of Kaja Kallas's government, and further cuts are forthcoming. He emphasized the positive aspects of the budget, particularly raising defense spending to 5% of GDP and lowering the tax rate, which leaves the working person with roughly the equivalent of a 13th month's salary annually. Michal demanded concrete proposals for cuts from Reinsalu, rather than generalized criticism. In a follow-up question, Reinsalu continued the dispute over the figures, demanding a specific explanation of where this 1.4 billion euro saving is visible in the 2026 budget. Michal replied that the cuts also consist of eliminating growth in an inflationary environment and reallocating funds, citing as an example the 19% reduction in staff achieved through the merger of the Land and Space Board. In an additional question, Tõnis Lukas asked about agreements with local governments regarding teacher salary increases and the career model. Michal responded that the Prime Minister does not conduct these negotiations but confirmed an increase in the minimum salary by approximately 8% and an increase in the differentiation fund by 2%.