Plenary Sessions

The first reading of the draft State Budget Act for 2026 (737), initiated by the Government of the Republic, took place in the Riigikogu (Estonian Parliament). Minister of Finance Jürgen Ligi presented the budget, which has a revenue volume of 18.6 billion euros and an expenditure volume of 19.6 billion euros. The general government deficit reaches 4.5% of GDP, which is mainly due to the extraordinary increase in security expenditure (over 5% of GDP), while still remaining within the limits of the European Union derogation. Ligi emphasized that the budget priorities are security, supporting the economy, and income. The tax burden will decrease from 36.6% to 35.2% of GDP, primarily due to the increase in the income tax-free minimum to 700 euros and the abolition of the tax kink, which the minister considered an important economic stimulus. The budget also provides for an increase in the salary fund (up to 10%) for police officers, rescuers, teachers, and special welfare workers.

The debate focused on the large budget deficit and the growing debt burden. The opposition (Urmas Reinsalu, Martin Helme, and others) criticized the government for fulfilling election promises with borrowed money and for the long-term deterioration of state finances. Ligi defended the budget, emphasizing that the deficit was largely caused by an external factor (the import of defense procurements) and blamed previous governments for loosening budget rules. The minister also sharply criticized Peeter Raudsepp, the head of the Institute of Economic Research, accusing him of methodological errors and inciting negative sentiment. Discussions also covered plans to reduce the deficit of the Health Insurance Fund, the funding of research and development, and the revenue base of local governments.

The agenda item concerned the first reading of Draft Act 690, initiated by the Government of the Republic, amending the Securities Market Act. Minister of Finance Jürgen Ligi introduced the draft act, the main objective of which is to bring Estonian law into conformity with European Union regulations and to promote the development of the Estonian capital market by reducing its reliance on banking. The Minister highlighted four main amendments: firstly, raising the threshold for drawing up a prospectus for securities issues from 8 million euros to 12 million euros (while retaining the requirement for an information document for issues below 12 million euros); secondly, easing language requirements regarding the prospectus, giving the issuer freedom of choice (but retaining the requirement for an Estonian-language summary); thirdly, reducing the administrative burden on providers of investment services by eliminating certain reporting obligations; and fourthly, granting the Financial Supervision Authority the possibility of imposing more flexible monetary penalties, including as a percentage of the company's turnover.

Aivar Sõerd, representative of the Finance Committee, confirmed that the committee supported the draft act unanimously, emphasizing its importance in diversifying the Estonian financial market and enabling non-banking financing for companies. The committee discussed finding a balance between reducing the administrative burden and protecting investors, concluding that the 12 million euro threshold is reasonable in the European context. Aivar Sõerd also answered Ando Kiviberg's question regarding the justification for easing the language requirements, explaining that although the language of the prospectus becomes optional, the summary will remain in Estonian.

The Riigikogu debated, on its first reading, Draft Act 692 initiated by the Government of the Republic on the Ratification of the Agreement between the Republic of Estonia and the Sultanate of Oman for the Avoidance of Double Taxation with Respect to Taxes on Income and the Prevention of Fiscal Evasion, and the Protocol thereto. Minister of Finance Jürgen Ligi introduced the draft act, explaining that the purpose of the agreement is to ensure the stability of the tax environment for foreign enterprises investing in Estonia, as well as for Estonian enterprises operating in foreign markets. The agreement is based on the OECD Model Convention and is Estonia’s 64th or 65th valid tax treaty. Ligi highlighted the most important provisions, including the limited taxing right of the source state regarding dividend income (an upper limit of 10%, an exemption in the case of a 20% holding), interest income (an upper limit of 5%), and royalties (an upper limit of 8%). The comprehensive obligation for the exchange of information between tax authorities was also emphasized.

Riigikogu Member Peeter Ernits posed questions to the Minister and later to the committee representative regarding the choice of Oman and the large imbalance in the Estonian-Omani trade balance (exports of 1.42 million, imports of 12 million). Minister Ligi responded that the conclusion of agreements depends on the interest of the counterparty, and that the trade balance of a small state is traditionally in deficit, while the services balance is in surplus. Diana Ingerainen, Member of the Finance Committee, presented the committee’s discussion, confirming that the committee proposed concluding the first reading, but did not discuss the question raised by Ernits concerning the criteria for selecting partner countries.

The third item on today's agenda was the first reading of Bill 694, the draft act amending the Motor Vehicle Tax Act, initiated by the Government of the Republic. Minister of Finance Jürgen Ligi introduced the bill, the main objective of which is to alleviate the tax burden on families with children by reducing the motor vehicle tax liability by up to 100 euros per child annually. This measure is expected to reduce tax revenue by 16.3 million euros. Additionally, there are plans to reduce the tax rate for M-category vehicles with more than seven seats, taxing them at the N-category rate, which is significantly lower and affects large families and people with disabilities. The amendments are scheduled to enter into force on January 1, 2025.

The debate was extremely emotional and focused heavily on the political background and fairness of introducing the car tax. The opposition (Centre Party, EKRE, Isamaa) criticized the tax as a whole, demanding its repeal, citing the negative impact on the economy, regional inequality, and the situation of people with disabilities. Minister Ligi defended the necessity of the tax for meeting state budget and environmental goals. Technical questions were also raised during the debate, such as whether taxes already paid would be refunded to a bank account or remain in a prepayment account. Annely Akkermann, Chairman of the Finance Committee, confirmed that the committee proposes concluding the first reading.

The agenda item was the first reading of Draft Act 677 SE, the bill initiated by the Finance Committee to amend the Motor Vehicle Tax Act. The rapporteur, Finance Committee Chair Annely Akkermann, explained that the impetus for initiating the bill was the Chancellor of Justice's proposal of February 26 to bring the Motor Vehicle Tax Act and the Traffic Act into compliance with the Constitution. The draft focuses on establishing grounds for shortening the taxation period in two cases: the deletion of a vehicle from the traffic register or its temporary deletion for the duration it is declared wanted due to theft. Akkermann emphasized that the bill's goal is to resolve the most direct constitutional infringement quickly and concisely, and it should enter into force retroactively starting from January 1, 2025, provided it is adopted before December 1, so that the Tax Board can make the necessary corrections with the second tax notice.

The opposition (Social Democrats, Centre Party, Isamaa) sharply criticized the coalition's approach, faulting the insufficient preparation of the law and the correction of errors using the method of "cutting the tail piece by piece" (i.e., a piecemeal approach). Anti Allas and Anastassia Kovalenko-Kõlvart highlighted that the law still lacks a regional component, fair registration fees, and specific exemptions for disabled persons, which, in their assessment, leaves the law continually unconstitutional. Peeter Ernits repeatedly asked why the coalition only begins seeking reasonable solutions after the intervention of the Chancellor of Justice. Akkermann defended the committee's pace, citing the heavy workload, and explained that other issues, such as support for disabled persons (for which 14 million euros have already been allocated), require separate draft bills for resolution.

The Riigikogu debated the interpellation (No. 794) submitted by Riigikogu members Jaak Valge and Leo Kunnas concerning Ukrainian refugees, especially men of mobilization age. The submitter of the query, Jaak Valge (EKRE), sharply criticized Estonia's refugee policy, claiming that it favors mobilization-age men who are fleeing their country's mobilization, rather than the true victims of the war (women and children). Valge highlighted that mobilization-age men constitute as much as 65% (4,643 men) of Ukrainians who have received international protection, a figure which, according to him, is many times higher than in neighboring Latvia and Lithuania. He accused Estonia of undermining Ukraine's will to defend itself by providing shelter to deserters.

Minister of the Interior Igor Taro (Eesti 200) refuted the numbers and claims presented by Valge as demagoguery. The Minister explained that if all Ukrainians who have received protection are taken into account (recipients of both temporary and international protection, totaling approximately 35,000), the proportion of mobilization-age men is below 30% (12,500 men), which is close to the European average (24%). Taro emphasized that international protection does not inquire about gender or age, and it is granted against the Russian aggressor. He confirmed that the Ministry of the Interior has repeatedly contacted the Ukrainian ambassador, offering assistance regarding the issue of mobilization-age men, but no official request for the return of these men has come from the Ukrainian state. During the debate, the submitters of the query accused the Minister of fudging the facts and confusing concepts, while the Minister accused the submitters of distorting numbers and falling victim to Russian propaganda.

The agenda item concerned the interpellation (No. 803) by Riigikogu members Heljo Pikhof, Andre Hanimäe, Reili Rand, Jaak Aab, Züleyxa Izmailova, Anti Allas, and Lauri Läänemets to Minister of the Interior Igor Taro regarding the transfer of Swedish criminals to Estonia. The interpellators, represented by Heljo Pikhof (SDE), expressed deep concern over the agreement initiated by the Ministry of Justice, which sends Swedish criminal offenders to serve their sentences at Tartu Prison. Pikhof emphasized that this step would worsen Estonia's internal security, especially in Southern Estonia, where the PPA (Police and Border Guard Board) already faces a serious shortage of police officers. She asked how the Ministry of the Interior would ensure internal security capacity while simultaneously recruiting additional personnel for the prison service, and whether the PPA and the Internal Security Service (Kaitsepolitseiamet) were consulted when considering the deal.

Minister of the Interior Igor Taro (Eesti 200) defended the government's plan, asserting that institutions under the Ministry of the Interior's area of governance were consulted, and risks were mapped and mitigated. He stressed that renting out the prison was a beneficial solution for maintaining the infrastructure of the underutilized Tartu Prison, preventing 150 redundancies and creating 250 new positions in Southern Estonia. Taro highlighted the economic benefit, mentioning that the agreement guarantees the Estonian state a minimum revenue of 30 million euros. He confirmed that salary increases for prison guards would be synchronized with PPA salary increases to prevent staff turnover. Questions were also raised during the debate regarding the impact on Estonia's reputation (Raimond Kaljulaid) and the transparency of the budget strategy (Urmas Reinsalu). The interpellators maintained their position that this amounted to commodifying security and weakening the system, and Heljo Pikhof concluded her speech with the message: "Estonia is not a prison; Estonia is, after all, our home."

The Riigikogu debated an interpellation submitted by the Social Democrats concerning the insufficient state funding of school meals and the resulting inequality. Reili Rand, the representative of those submitting the interpellation, highlighted that the rapid rise in food prices has rendered the state support for school meals (which has remained unchanged for years) insufficient, forcing local governments (LG) either to make cuts in other sectors or to demand co-payments from parents, which deepens social inequality. Rand emphasized that school meals are an important form of social support, a guarantor of health, and a supporter of food security and the local economy.

Minister of Education and Research Kristina Kallas responded, stressing the clear division of responsibility between the state and local governments. She explained that the school maintainer (usually the local government) is the primary bearer of school meal costs, and the state only provides support. The Minister rejected the proposal to link school meal support to inflation, citing the autonomy of local governments in organizing procurements. Kallas affirmed that, according to the assessment of the Ministry of Social Affairs, the new health requirements will not lead to a price increase. She noted that her priority during state budget negotiations was raising teachers' salaries. The Minister reiterated her preference to transfer school meal support to the revenue base of local governments to increase their autonomy. Several Riigikogu members (including Tanel Kiik, Vladimir Arhipov, Lauri Läänemets) criticized the Minister's rigid stance, arguing that the state's minimal contribution leads to a decline in the quality of school meals and a deepening of inequality across Estonia.

The agenda item concerned Interpellation No. 800, submitted on June 17, 2025, by Riigikogu members Ester Karuse, Lauri Läänemets, Reili Rand, Madis Kallas, Jaak Aab, Züleyxa Izmailova, and Andre Hanimäe, regarding failures in basic school final exams, focusing specifically on the poor results of the mathematics exam. Interpellator Ester Karuse highlighted in her presentation the extreme situation at Valga Basic School, where 50 out of 85 graduates failed to achieve a passing grade on the mathematics exam, emphasizing that this constitutes a widespread social and regional problem. Karuse asked how remedial teaching is supported for students with weak knowledge and how the problem of those avoiding compulsory schooling is addressed, especially in connection with the extension of compulsory education to the age of 18. She also criticized the unequal treatment of Valga compared to Ida-Viru County regarding support for state language proficiency.

Minister of Education and Research Kristina Kallas responded that the national average result for the mathematics exam (64%) was similar to previous post-COVID years, but she admitted that results were very poor in certain schools with many children with special educational needs or from weaker socio-economic backgrounds (such as Valga Basic School). The Minister explained that due to the extension of compulsory education to the age of 18, the basic school final exam resit (school exam) will be abolished next year, as there is no longer a need to guide students out of the education system. Preparatory study curricula will be created in state schools, primarily vocational schools, for young people with learning gaps, with the obligation for financing resting with the state. The Minister confirmed that Valga Basic School requires special support. Riigikogu members additionally inquired about support measures (smaller study groups, temporary catch-up groups) and the impact of changes to the examination system on mental health. Ester Karuse concluded the debate by sharply criticizing the education management of Valga municipality, citing as examples the local government's court disputes with teachers and the large departure of teachers from Valga Basic School.

The Riigikogu debated the interpellation submitted by Riina Solman, Helir-Valdor Seeder, and Mart Maastik concerning the organization of basic school final exams and the continuation of studies in gymnasiums. The core of the interpellation was the concern regarding this year's organization of the national final exams, which took place significantly earlier than in previous years. Riina Solman (V6xrhBxABHI), the representative of the interpellators, highlighted that moving the exams earlier increased the students' workload and mental strain, as they had to study for the exams parallel to their daily schoolwork, thereby reducing the revision period. Criticism was also directed at the non-consideration of retake exam results for admission to state gymnasiums and the closure of application acceptance before the final exams had taken place.

Minister of Education and Research Kristina Kallas defended the changes, explaining that the previous system, where students entered gymnasium before completing basic school, created an even longer and more stressful period for students. The Minister confirmed that moving the exams earlier did not affect exam results and pointed out that many state schools had abandoned entrance tests, which reduced stress for children. Kallas emphasized that the elimination of retake exams is linked to the new compulsory education requirement, which demands that young people who have acquired basic education continue their studies. To support children with learning gaps, preparatory year study places will be created in state schools. During the debate, Solman expressed dissatisfaction with the Minister's answers, finding that the feedback from educators and parents had not been sufficiently taken into account.

The agenda item concerned the inquiry by Riigikogu members Anti Allas, Tiit Maran, and Züleyxa Izmailova regarding the budget balances of the Ministry of Education and Research (HTM). Inquirer Züleyxa Izmailova highlighted that despite the lack of funding in the education sector and cuts resulting from reforms (e.g., in Vana-Vigala and Hiiumaa), the budget balance for the HTM administrative area stands at 107.9 million euros, a figure that has grown compared to the previous year. This situation is difficult to comprehend given the sector's financial shortages.

Minister Kristina Kallas explained that most of the balances are funds covered by existing obligations that cannot be redirected elsewhere. The largest groups of balances are related to research and development (including 45 million euros for co-financing *twinning* projects, pending decisions from the European Commission) and funds allocated for the transition to Estonian-language instruction. The latter involved poorly planned sums that had to be reallocated to cover deficits in future years (especially 2027/2028). Kallas confirmed that the restructuring of vocational education in Vana-Vigala and Hiiumaa is not due to cuts, but rather stems from overproduction identified by the OSKA analysis, depreciated infrastructure, and the necessity of ensuring vocational training accessibility for basic school graduates in every county. Kallas also specified that the HTM returned approximately 18 million euros of unused transition funds for Estonian-language instruction to the State Treasury and implemented an additional cut of 5 million euros, on top of the already agreed-upon cut of 76 million euros. During the discussion, topics such as the salary fund for kindergarten teachers and the financing of hobby education (analysis of the Icelandic model) were also raised.

At the Riigikogu session, Prime Minister Kristen Michal presented the 2026 state budget draft on behalf of the government, calling it the "Budget of Security and Prosperity." The Prime Minister emphasized two main priorities: strengthening national defense and promoting economic growth. Defense expenditures will rise to an average of over 5% of GDP over the next four years, adding 2.8 billion euros to the defense budget. To revitalize the economy, the general income tax-free minimum will be restored to 700 euros per month, and the planned income tax increase will be scrapped, leaving nearly 780 million euros in the economy. Wage increases were also promised for frontline workers (rescuers, police officers, teachers), which will be covered by cuts to the operating costs of ministries.

The opposition sharply criticized the budget, accusing the government of irresponsible fiscal policy and accelerating the debt burden. Urmas Reinsalu (Isamaa) and Martin Helme (EKRE) pointed to the actual growth of governance costs, increased inflationary pressure, and the financing of election promises through loans, citing the "After me, the deluge" mentality. Helme claimed that the tax system is becoming regressive, favoring the wealthier. Lauri Läänemets (SDE) and Lauri Laats (Centre Party) criticized the budget's unfairness, noting that it offers no relief to low-wage earners and ignores society's expectation to lower consumption taxes, especially the VAT on foodstuffs. The coalition (Õnne Pillak, Peeter Tali) defended the budget, emphasizing the need for bold decisions to ensure security and support economic recovery, asserting that the Estonian people have never lived so well.

The Riigikogu debate focused on the matter of national importance initiated by the Isamaa faction, titled "The Impact of Price Increases on Economic Competitiveness and People's Well-being. What is to be done?". Presentations during the debate were given by Urmas Reinsalu, a member of the Isamaa faction, and economic experts Raivo Vare, Peeter Raudsepp, and Heido Vitsur. Reinsalu highlighted a 46.2% price increase spanning from the beginning of 2021 to the second quarter of 2025, emphasizing its unethical dimension and the government's systemic steps in accelerating inflation (tax hikes, growth in administrative spending). As solutions, he proposed a critical review of the indirect tax burden and a reduction in administrative costs. The experts confirmed the stagnation of the Estonian economy and the decline in competitiveness (33rd place in the IMD ranking; Lithuania and Latvia have overtaken Estonia). Peeter Raudsepp highlighted consumer barometer data showing the deterioration of people's purchasing power and financial security across all income quartiles. Heido Vitsur emphasized that Estonia's price level, especially for foodstuffs, is among the highest in Europe, which is inconsistent with our lower levels of productivity and prosperity. The experts recommended a bolder, more experimental economic policy, an audit of state expenditures, and a serious debate on taxation and regional policy, referencing the IMF's recommendation to consider a progressive income tax. The opposition (Centre Party, SDE, Isamaa) sharply criticized the coalition's absence from the debate and the government's regressive tax policy, which deepens inequality and slows down the economy.

Draft Act 662, initiated by the Government of the Republic, concerning amendments to the Emergency Situation Act and other acts, was on the agenda for its third reading and final vote. During the debates, the parliamentary groups emphasized the time-critical nature and importance of the Act in developing Estonia's crisis resilience and comprehensive national defense. Mati Raidma (Reform Party) highlighted that the bill creates the legislative basis for the accelerated development of civil protection, regulating the national threat notification system EE-ALARM, sheltering requirements, and civil protection training. Lauri Läänemets (Social Democrats) shared the recommendation of the Ukrainian Minister of Internal Affairs regarding securing the home front to ensure strong resistance on the front line, and called the adoption of the Act a historic decision awaited for 30 years. Vladimir Arhipov (Centre Party) supported the bill but demanded an honest analysis from the government regarding costs and technical capabilities, while simultaneously praising the work of the Rescue Board in streamlining the EE-ALARM system. Following the debates, the final vote was conducted.

The Riigikogu debated Draft Resolution 650, submitted by the parliamentary group of the Estonian Conservative People's Party (EKRE), which proposed that the Government of the Republic abandon the implementation of the Rail Baltic project in Estonia and withdraw from all related international agreements. Rapporteur Evelin Poolamets (EKRE) sharply criticized the project, calling it a failure and standing on "feet of clay." She highlighted the project's enormous unfunded portion (nearly 2 billion euros), the schedule slippage (2030 instead of the initial 2025), and significant construction compromises (a single-track solution, and the omission of viaducts and stations). Poolamets stressed that this was "wishful thinking" rather than a financial plan, and that there were no calculations regarding subsequent maintenance costs or the purchase of trains.

Õnne Pillak, representing the Economic Affairs Committee, presented the committee's positions, confirming that the government's goal is completion by 2030 and that the construction pace is realistic. Representatives of the Ministry of Climate had warned the committee that withdrawing from the agreements would necessitate leaving the European Union and would lead to major financial and legal claims, in addition to jeopardizing security logistics. The debate was passionate, focusing on the economic detriment of the project, the prioritization of developing domestic infrastructure, and the unclarity of the security aspect. Mart Helme (EKRE) called the project the "gigantomania of a dwarf state" and urged leaving the European Union if that was the only way to abandon the irrational project. The draft resolution was rejected in the final vote, as it failed to achieve the majority of the Riigikogu membership required for adoption.

The agenda focused on the second reading of Draft Act 670 on supplementing the Police and Border Guard Act, initiated by Riigikogu members Peeter Tali, Ando Kiviberg, Anti Haugas, and Mati Raidma. Madis Timpson, Chairman of the Legal Affairs Committee, presented a report, explaining that the purpose of the draft act is to create a clear legal basis for the license plate recognition camera system, as the previous practice of the PPA (Police and Border Guard Board) was, according to the assessments of the Chancellor of Justice and the Data Protection Inspectorate, in conflict with the constitution. The committee discussed one amendment proposal submitted by the Government of the Republic, which received approval from all involved institutions. Questions arose during the debate regarding the unlimited number of cameras, the identification of facial images, and access to the data (including by the Tax and Customs Board). The opposition (EKRE, Center Party) sharply criticized the draft act, considering it a step towards a surveillance society and emphasizing the PPA’s previous illegal activity in data collection. Varro Vooglaid shared his experience regarding the PPA’s refusal to release processed images. The Center Party faction proposed interrupting the second reading, but this motion did not find support (12 in favor, 50 against). The leading committee proposed concluding the second reading and holding the final vote on October 8, 2025.

The agenda item was the second reading of Draft Act 633, initiated by the Government of the Republic, concerning the amendment of the Securities Market Act and the resulting amendment of other acts (regulation of derivative and repo transactions). Aivar Sõerd, a member of the Finance Committee, presented the report of the lead committee, providing an overview of the discussions held during three sittings (on September 9, 15, and 22). The main substance of the draft act was to bring the regulation of derivative and repo transactions into line with international standards. During the discussions, an ancillary issue also arose concerning the valuation of real estate serving as collateral for consumer credit agreements, particularly the introduction of statistical models in the valuation of residential real estate, regarding which the Estonian Association of Real Estate Companies expressed concern about jeopardizing consumer interests. The Finance Committee submitted a total of nine amendments to the draft act, which were largely technical in nature and clarified the competencies of the Financial Supervisory Authority, the liability for violating requirements for issuing green bonds, and the regulation of netting. All nine amendments were fully adopted. The lead committee made a consensus proposal to conclude the second reading and hold the final vote on October 15. The Plenary Assembly concluded the second reading of the draft act.

The Riigikogu debated the first reading of Draft Resolution 703, submitted by the Government of the Republic, concerning the extension of the term of use of the Defence Forces in the European Union military operation EUNAVFOR Med/Irini. Minister of Defence Hanno Pevkur presented the draft resolution, providing an introductory overview of the general reduction in Estonia's participation in international military operations next year, focusing instead on raising the internal level of the Defence Forces and training instructors. The operation in Iraq has ended and contributions there are no longer being made. Regarding the EUNAVFOR Med/Irini operation, the Minister proposed increasing the contribution from one staff officer to two, while the total size of the mandate would be up to six servicemen. The objective of the operation is to ensure freedom of navigation and implement the UN arms embargo against Libya.

Alar Laneman, speaking on behalf of the National Defence Committee, confirmed the committee's support for the draft resolution, emphasizing the operation's importance in implementing the UN arms embargo, preventing illegal oil exports, and combating human trafficking. The committee had discussed the draft resolution at its session on September 15 and unanimously decided to propose to the Riigikogu that the first reading be concluded. Debates were not opened, and the first reading of the draft resolution was concluded.

Under this agenda item, the first reading of Draft Act 704 of the Riigikogu decision, submitted by the Government of the Republic, concerning the "Extension of the term for the use of the Defence Forces in fulfilling the international obligations of the Estonian state in the European Union's international military operation EUNAVFOR Aspides," took place. The rapporteur, Minister of Defence Hanno Pevkur, explained that the operation was launched due to Houthi attacks that began in the Red Sea region in October 2023, with the aim of ensuring freedom of navigation. The Minister confirmed that the situation in the region has improved. Estonia would contribute up to three members of the Defence Forces to the operation in 2026, with the initial contribution being one serviceman under Italian command.

Kalev Stoicescu, Chairman of the National Defence Committee, provided a comprehensive overview of the discussions held by the lead committee and the background of the operation. He specified that the EU Council established the EUNAVFOR Aspides operation on February 8, 2024, to ensure maritime security. The area of operation covers the Red Sea and the Arabian Sea, as well as several gulfs and straits. The nature of the operation is strictly defensive, focusing on the protection and escorting of vessels. The Committee decided by consensus to propose to the Riigikogu that the first reading of the draft act be concluded and that the deadline for amendments be set for October 8, 2024.

The agenda item concerned the first reading of Riigikogu Draft Resolution 705, which addresses the use of the Defence Forces in international military operations when contributing to them for the first time. Minister of Defence Hanno Pevkur explained that the purpose of the draft resolution is to grant the government a flexible mandate to send up to 100 members of the Defence Forces, if necessary, to new, unforeseen operations conducted under the leadership of NATO, the EU, or the UN. Pevkur emphasized that the mandate is necessary for rapid response and cited examples of previous urgent needs (e.g., EUNAVFOR Med/Irini, Mozambique, Red Sea operations). Deputy Chairman of the National Defence Committee Leo Kunnas supported the draft, noting that the current practice has proven justified and that despite the existence of the mandate, Estonia's contribution to operations next year is planned to be historically small. Varro Vooglaid (EKRE faction) presented sharp opposition, arguing that the draft resolution contradicts Article 128 (1) of the Constitution because Parliament is delegating its decision-making power to the government, essentially granting a "blanket authorization" for missions whose details (including potential participation in Ukraine) are unknown. He stressed that the Riigikogu Rules of Procedure and Internal Rules Act allows sessions to be convened even in urgent cases. Vladimir Arhipov (Centre Party) emphasized the importance of flexibility and strengthening allied relations. Following the debates, it was decided to conclude the first reading.

The Riigikogu debated Draft Resolution 706, submitted by the Government of the Republic, concerning the extension of the term of use of the Estonian Defence Forces for fulfilling Estonia's international obligations in the European Union Military Assistance Mission in Mozambique (EUTM Mozambique). The rapporteur was Minister of Defence Hanno Pevkur.

Minister Pevkur explained that the mission was initiated in July 2021, and although the security situation has improved, the 11 participating countries see the need to continue the mission. Estonia would contribute one officer to the mission, and the operation costs are approximately 40,000 euros. Enn Eesmaa, a member of the National Defence Committee, provided an overview of the committee's work, emphasizing that this is Estonia's only mission on the African continent and that the contribution is made in solidarity with other EU member states. The draft resolution confirms readiness to continue contributing until 2026 with up to three servicemen, although, in reality, the plan is to send one legal advisor whose task is to advise the mission commander and train the local armed forces on human rights issues. The National Defence Committee supported the draft resolution unanimously.

The agenda item concerned the first reading of Draft Resolution 707 of the Riigikogu, submitted by the Government of the Republic, which addresses the use of the Defence Forces in fulfilling the international obligations of the Estonian state within the framework of the United Kingdom's Joint Expeditionary Force (JEF). The rapporteur, Minister of Defence Hanno Pevkur, explained that JEF is a UK-initiated coalition of the willing, comprising ten members, and its focus is on the security of the Baltic Sea region, the High North, and the Atlantic Ocean. The Minister emphasized JEF's rapid response capability, citing as an example the activation of activities following the damage to the Estlink 2 submarine cable. The draft resolution proposes granting a mandate to use up to 24 servicemen in the JEF readiness unit, although no direct need is foreseen for the next year. Kristo Enn Vaga, a member of the National Defence Committee, presented the summary of the leading committee, confirming that cooperation within the framework of JEF is strategically important for Estonia, as the United Kingdom is a vital security partner. The draft resolution confirms Estonia's readiness to contribute up to 24 defence personnel to JEF readiness in 2026, similar to the contribution made this year. The leading committee proposed concluding the first reading and set the deadline for amendments.

The agenda item was the first reading of Draft Resolution of the Riigikogu 708, presented by the Government of the Republic, which concerned extending the term of use of the Defence Forces in fulfilling the international obligations of the Estonian state in the NATO Mission Iraq (NMI). The rapporteur, Minister of Defence Hanno Pevkur, explained that the mission was launched in 2018, and although Estonia has withdrawn from Erbil, the intention is to continue contributing to the mission based in Baghdad with one staff officer. The Minister emphasized the importance of the allies' presence and confirmed that the Iraqi central government desires the continuation of the allies' activities. Peeter Tali summarized the discussion of the lead committee, the National Defence Committee. He noted that the draft resolution was discussed at several sittings, involving both the Minister of Defence and representatives of the Defence Forces (Colonel Erki Soo and Colonel Priit Pikner). The committee found that all questions had been answered and made a consensus proposal to conclude the first reading of the draft resolution. Debates were not opened, and the Riigikogu decided to agree with the proposal of the lead committee, concluding the first reading of the draft resolution.

The Riigikogu debated the first reading of Draft Resolution 709 of the Riigikogu, submitted by the Government of the Republic, "On the Use of the Defence Forces in Fulfilling the International Obligations of the Estonian State within the Composition of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization Response Force." Minister of Defence Hanno Pevkur explained that Estonia contributes a naval unit, totaling up to 76 members of the Defence Forces, to the NATO Response Force (NRF). This is a high-readiness unit prepared for operations in various parts of the world. The Minister noted that the budget volume for this commitment is 1.2 million euros, making it the largest of all missions, as it involves deployment at sea.

Kalev Stoicescu, Chairman of the leading committee, the National Defence Committee, provided an overview of the committee's discussions, which took place on September 15 and 22. He emphasized that participation in the rapid reaction forces (ARF, or Allied Reaction Force, and SNF, or Standing Naval Forces) is crucial for the rapid activation of NATO collective self-defense operations and is directly linked to Estonia's security. According to the draft resolution, in 2026, Estonia will contribute a minehunter crew and a staff officer (up to 76 members of the Defence Forces in total) to the ARF and SNF. The use of the ARF is decided unanimously by the North Atlantic Council, meaning Estonia's consent is also required. The National Defence Committee made a consensus proposal to conclude the first reading of the draft resolution.

The Riigikogu debated the first reading of Draft Resolution 710 of the Riigikogu, submitted by the Government of the Republic, "Extension of the term of deployment of the Defence Forces in fulfilling the international obligations of the Estonian state in the UN peacekeeping operation in Lebanon," as the 12th item on the agenda. The rapporteur, Minister of Defence Hanno Pevkur, explained that the Lebanon operation (UNIFIL) is extensive, but Estonia's contribution is modest—currently, one staff officer serves there in the city of Naqoura. The draft resolution requests a mandate for the use of up to three active servicemen, although an increase in the composition is not foreseen. The annual costs of the mission remain below 60,000 euros.

Meelis Kiili, a member of the National Defence Committee, provided an overview of the committee's sessions, where the draft resolution and the security situation were discussed. He emphasized that UNIFIL is a classic UN peacekeeping operation, established in 1978, involving over 10,300 peacekeepers from 47 countries. Kiili confirmed that the National Defence Committee unanimously decided to propose to the Riigikogu that the first reading of the draft resolution be concluded. Debates were not opened, and the Riigikogu agreed with the proposal of the lead committee.

The Riigikogu debated Draft Resolution 711, submitted by the Government of the Republic, concerning the extension of the mandate for the use of the Defence Forces in the UN-led peacekeeping operation UNTSO across Lebanon, Israel, Egypt, Jordan, and Syria. Minister of Defence Hanno Pevkur emphasized that this is the UN's oldest peacekeeping operation, involving over 30 countries. According to the draft resolution, the mandate will be extended until the end of 2026, and the upper limit of the Estonian contingent will be increased to up to six servicemen (previously up to three). The reason for the increase is the opportunity to take command of the Cairo liaison office, which is why it was proposed to send two officers instead of one to the mission. The cost of the operation for two servicemen would be approximately 120,000 euros.

Kristo Enn Vaga summarized the debate on behalf of the lead committee, the National Defence Committee. He confirmed that the committee thoroughly reviewed the draft resolution at its sessions on September 15 and 22, receiving an overview from both the Minister of Defence and representatives of the Defence Forces General Staff and the Support Command. The committee unanimously decided to propose that the Riigikogu conclude the first reading of the draft resolution. Estonian military personnel have participated in the UNTSO mission as military observers and staff officers since 1997. Following the conclusion of the debate, it was decided to conclude the first reading.

The Riigikogu proceeded to the first reading of Draft Act 649 on the Amendment of the Traffic Insurance Act, initiated by the Isamaa faction. The bill aimed to reduce bureaucracy by abolishing the obligation to separately insure trailers with a maximum total mass exceeding 750 kg. Rapporteur Andres Metsoja (Isamaa) explained that a trailer does not operate independently, and its insurance should be automatically covered by the insurance of the towing motor vehicle, citing the practice of the Kingdom of Norway as an example. This would help avoid the application of mandatory insurance to trailers that are rarely used. Metsoja emphasized that this was a matter of user convenience and system simplification.

Mario Kadastik, the rapporteur for the Economic Affairs Committee, presented the committee's position, which was critical of the bill. The Ministry of Finance and the Motor Insurance Fund opposed the bill, citing European Union directives that require all registered vehicles to be insured. They also highlighted international risks, particularly using the example of Germany, where damages are divided between the insurance policies of the trailer and the towing vehicle. The committee proposed rejecting the bill (7 in favor, 3 against). In the subsequent vote, 44 members of the Riigikogu supported the rejection of the bill, resulting in the bill being dropped from the proceedings.

The Minister of Regional Affairs and Agriculture, Hendrik Johannes Terras, presented the 2025 report to the Riigikogu on the implementation of the country's long-term development strategy, "Eesti 2035," focusing on viable regional development and robust food security. The Minister emphasized that Estonia faces geopolitical instability, climate change, and an economic slowdown, which necessitates smart and often painful structural reforms. He highlighted a demographic tipping point where 60% of the population is concentrated in Harju and Tartu counties, creating a "golden circle" and an emptying periphery. To reverse this trend, the government aims to direct at least 40% of business support outside major cities and increase the financial autonomy of local governments. A key reform introduced was the smart and accessible mobility reform, designed to ensure flexible public transport (a unified ticketing system, fixed-interval timetables, and on-demand transport). Regarding agriculture, the Minister stressed the need to increase added value and reduce dangerous dependence on imported production inputs (fertilizers, feed). The goal was set at an 80% self-sufficiency level in key food groups, viewing this as part of comprehensive national defense. The crisis involving African Swine Fever (ASF) was addressed separately; it struck Estonia's largest pig farming complexes in August 2025, leading to restrictions and culling/layoffs affecting over 50,000 pigs. The Minister announced preparations for creating a national guarantee scheme for the agricultural sector to mitigate market risks against which private insurance offers no protection, alongside the necessity of a long-term wild boar population control plan. During the debate, the opposition criticized the government's slow response to the ASF crisis and the negative impact of tax increases on rural areas.

Member of the Riigikogu Helir-Valdor Seeder submitted an inquiry to Prime Minister Kristen Michal regarding Estonia's choices concerning the European Union's ambitious climate goals. Seeder sharply criticized the government's decision to unconditionally support the 90% carbon emissions reduction target set for 2040, arguing that it is unrealistic and harms the competitiveness of the Estonian economy, especially since there are no comprehensive economic and socio-economic impact assessments whatsoever. Seeder called this choice "stupid and detrimental." He also reproached the Prime Minister for Estonia's silence on crucial issues, such as the postponement of ETS2 and the failure to support the proposals of neighboring countries (Latvia, Poland) concerning the accounting of military expenditures.

Prime Minister Michal responded that Estonia's position was based on the mandate of the European Union Affairs Committee (ELAK), and the support was conditional. He emphasized that the future and competitiveness of the economy lie in new technologies and sustainable, lasting operations. Michal corrected Seeder's claims, noting that Estonia has been among the first countries to support the postponement or cancellation of ETS2. In a supplementary question, Mart Helme (EKRE) raised the issue of Donald Trump's warning that climate policy would lead to the collapse of the European economy. The Prime Minister rejected this claim, citing the positive forecast by the Bank of Estonia, which sees Estonia as one of the fastest-growing economies in the region in 2026–2027. Michal highlighted the government's steps (cancellation of tax increases, cuts, strong defense capability) that ensure economic growth and public confidence.

The Riigikogu information hour addressed Prime Minister Kristen Michal's answers on the topic of state finance, focusing on the budget deficit, the growth of national debt, and the fairness of tax policy. Riigikogu member Martin Helme (EKRE) accused the government of record national debt growth and breaking the promise to move towards budget balance, calling the government's handling of state finance "a drunken sailor in a brothel." Helme claimed that the economic recession was caused by the government's energy policy and tax hikes. Prime Minister Michal defended the government's fiscal policy, emphasizing that the budget has been made more frugal (referring to the structural surplus in the interim years) and that the government has agreed upon cuts totaling 1.4 billion euros. Michal also highlighted the abolition of the progressive income tax starting in 2026, which will leave 780 million euros in tax reductions in the hands of the economy and the people, essentially giving the average wage earner a 13th salary. Varro Vooglaid (EKRE) continued the criticism regarding the breach of the promise to move towards state budget balance and the increase in interest expenses.

Lauri Läänemets (SDE) focused on the social fairness of tax policy, accusing the Prime Minister of lying before parliament regarding the effect of the tax hump. Läänemets claimed that the government's changes direct 114 million euros to support the wealthiest 10% of people, while lower-income individuals receive minimal relief. Michal rejected the accusation of lying, explaining that only the effect of the tax hump was discussed last week, and defended the abolition of the progressive income tax as a measure to support the middle class. Helir-Valdor Seeder (Isamaa), in addition to financial issues, also raised the topic of ETS2 and inquired about the government's financial disarray, referring to the ministries' lack of clarity regarding the use of funds. Michal confirmed that Estonia's position regarding ETS2 is postponement and cancellation, and defended the ministries' actions, noting that investments are being reallocated (e.g., into roads).

The fourth question posed in the Riigikogu today was addressed to Erkki Keldo, the Minister of Economic Affairs and Industry, and focused on the impact of taxation on the Estonian economy. The question was raised by Riigikogu member Vladimir Arhipov, who voiced concern over the current state of the Estonian economy, pointing to decelerated growth, a deepening budget deficit, rising prices, and widespread redundancies. Arhipov sought to understand the government's view on the impact of taxes on Estonia’s competitiveness and its ability to attract investment, especially given the growing uncertainty.

Minister Keldo responded by stressing his pride in the Estonian tax system, which has been ranked the most competitive among OECD countries for 11 consecutive years. He explained that the cornerstone of the system is the zero income tax on reinvested corporate profits. Keldo highlighted the government's planned tax reductions, calling next year's income tax reform "historic"—the 700-euro tax-free minimum and the cancellation of the planned 2 percentage point income tax rate increase will leave approximately 800 million euros in the hands of the people. Furthermore, the tax increase for legal entities will also be scrapped. The Minister pointed to positive investment developments (such as the opening or expansion of three new factories last week) and the Bank of Estonia’s projected 3% economic growth, stressing the importance of stability and predictability for businesses.

In a supplementary question, Reili Rand (Social Democrats) criticized the government's "blind optimism" and its public finance policy, which significantly increases the national debt burden and violates the principle of not borrowing for current expenditures. Rand asked how this policy would affect Estonia's credit rating and the cost of borrowing. Keldo defended the borrowing, explaining that the deficit (4.5%) is directly linked to investments in national defense (5% of GDP), a trend that is widespread across Europe. He affirmed that national defense remains a priority and that the tax cuts will improve consumer confidence and boost the economy's competitiveness in the long term.

During the Riigikogu information hour, Prime Minister Kristen Michal was asked two questions regarding the current situation in the country. The first question came from Urmas Reinsalu (Isamaa), who sharply criticized the government's State Budget Strategy (SBS), calling it irresponsible and filled with unfunded figures. Reinsalu demanded explanations regarding the 100 million euro needs-based support planned for 2028–2029, the postponement of defense expenditures (several hundred million euros) to 2026 and 2027, and the revision of investments planned for 2029. Additionally, he asked why 330 million euros were planned in the SBS to cover ETS2 (the additional motor fuel tax), even though the Prime Minister opposes it. Prime Minister Michal defended the budget strategy, explaining that targeting needs-based support requires SKAIS IT developments, and while the 5% defense spending target remains, the Ministry of Defense is distributing procurements across the years. He emphasized that the revision of investments is necessary to cut costs and avoid tax increases. Michal confirmed that the government's official position is the postponement and cancellation of ETS2. Follow-up questions also addressed the growth of administrative costs and the low wages of special care workers.

The second question was posed by Helle-Moonika Helme (EKRE), who accused the Prime Minister of sugarcoating the situation and compared his performance to a North Korean news broadcast. Helme criticized the government's large budget deficit and the financing of the tax hump abolition with borrowed money, arguing that it is regressive and harms low-wage earners. Michal defended the abolition of the tax hump, calling it the largest tax cut in Estonian history (780 million euros) and necessary because the progressive income tax unfairly burdened middle-income earners. In a follow-up question, Helme also sharply criticized the consent law (the so-called "yes-model") approved by the government, calling it "absurd ideological mumbo-jumbo." Michal expressed bewilderment over EKRE's opposition to the yes-model, stressing that the law is intended to protect victims and support the weaker party.

The written topic of the presented agenda is the state of the country and the economic and budgetary measures resulting from it. The speeches primarily evolved into a critical discussion of the government's economic policy: there was discussion of reducing the budget deficit, reforming the tax system, and the need for borrowing, as well as confirmation of several planned steps such as SKAIS2 and an investment audit. Defence expenditure and the impact of European rules on the budget balance were also included. Regarding defence capabilities and sector funding, the importance of Ukraine and foreign policy was highlighted, while some decisions and phrasing concerning perceived cost control and tax promotions were criticised.

Another major topic was the consent law and the associated discussion and its impact on the protection of victims. Representatives of EKRE voiced criticism and pointed out potential dangers, suggesting concealing certain implementation aspects. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs' budget increase, along with the distribution of other costs, was also addressed, and various figures and the reliability of sources were compared. In conclusion, the agenda was closely linked to the discussion of the country's economy and social legislation – the aim being to clarify how to ensure a balanced budget and a fairer tax system, while reducing the negative impact on people with low and medium incomes.

The Riigikogu session discussed Prime Minister Kristen Michal's response to the interpellation by Riigikogu member Tiit Maran regarding the contract concluded between the Government Office (Riigikantselei) and the Law Office Sorainen OÜ concerning the deregulation of forest management and nature conservation restrictions. The questioner, Tiit Maran (pYyodysuidU), expressed deep concern as to why such a contract, focused on "reducing bureaucracy" in forest management, was concluded specifically by the Government Office and not through the Ministry of Climate. Maran suspected that the analysis, intended to provide input to the Council for Efficiency and Economic Growth, treats nature conservation as bureaucracy and actually serves the business interests of the raw materials industry. He also highlighted the strange circumstance that a preliminary analysis compiled by ChatGPT and someone else was attached to the contract.

Prime Minister Michal explained that the analysis was commissioned to support the work of the Entrepreneurs' Council, which the Government Office services. She emphasized that this is one of three commissioned analyses aimed at finding the simplest possible regulation that simultaneously protects the environment. Michal confirmed that the contract was concluded in cooperation with the Ministry of Climate, its cost was less than 30,000 euros, and the results will be made public. She rejected Maran's claims of exceeding authority, explaining that the analysis focuses on comparing Estonian regulations with EU minimum obligations and the practices of neighboring countries, in order to move towards a less bureaucratic forest policy while preserving natural values. In a supplementary question, Züleyxa Izmailova (OiizOPZyy6I) asked why the analysis was commissioned from a private company, to which Michal replied that commissioning legal and complex analyses from outside the ministries is a common and logical practice.

Today’s eighth question addressed Estonia's catastrophic demographic situation. Riigikogu member Vadim Belobrovtsev highlighted alarming statistics: in 2024, the birth rate in Estonia fell below the 10,000 child threshold for the first time in history (9,646 children), while deaths totaled 15,756. Belobrovtsev criticized the government's inaction and the lack of security felt by families, which he attributed to unstable family policy—citing, for example, the initial increase and subsequent cutting of benefits for large families. He demanded the government take concrete steps to boost confidence. Prime Minister Kristen Michal acknowledged the low birth rate issue but stressed that it is a widespread European trend. He referred to a comprehensive analysis of parental benefits and family allowances prepared by the Ministry of Social Affairs, whose proposals are currently being processed. Michal emphasized that Estonia is among the European leaders in family support, spending about 2.2% of GDP (approximately 1 billion euros) on this sector. He cited examples from other countries (Poland, Germany) to illustrate that financial support alone does not guarantee higher birth rates. He listed measures that support fertility, including more flexible working conditions, the childcare system, and improved access to fertility treatment. The PM deemed investments in national defense and economic growth crucial for building confidence. In a follow-up question, Lauri Laats questioned the effectiveness of the existing measures and demanded specific solutions, particularly regarding making housing more affordable for young families. The Prime Minister confirmed that the government is working to reduce bureaucracy to lower housing costs and is considering the use of the pension pillar as collateral for an apartment.

The Riigikogu debated the first reading of Draft Act 687, initiated by the Government of the Republic, concerning amendments to the Vital Statistics Registration Act, the Population Register Act, and the State Fees Act. Minister of the Interior Igor Taro introduced the bill, emphasizing its three main objectives: reducing administrative and state workload, and simplifying procedures for the public. As significant changes, the Minister highlighted the possibility of registering a child's birth in the population register based on supplementary evidence (e.g., pregnancy card, ambulance record, DNA test) if a healthcare provider was not present at the birth, thereby avoiding unnecessary litigation. Furthermore, the process of assigning personal identification codes to EU citizens will be simplified as part of the residence registration procedure, and they will be permitted to submit notices of departure from Estonia from abroad without a digital signature. The draft expands the administrative legal capacity of 15–17-year-olds in managing their data within the population register. During the debate, the reduction of birth registration locations from 79 to 16 (county centers plus Narva) raised the most questions, which the Minister justified by the widespread use of e-services and the lack of practical experience among officials. MPs also expressed concern regarding the security of the simplified submission of residence notices by EU citizens and the overly broad discretionary power granted to officials concerning the new types of birth registration evidence. Pipi-Liis Siemann, representative of the Constitutional Committee, confirmed that the committee had discussed similar issues regarding discretionary power and made a consensus proposal to conclude the first reading of the draft.

The Riigikogu debated the first reading of Bill 676, initiated by the Government of the Republic, concerning amendments to the Waste Act. Minister of Infrastructure Kuldar Leis introduced the bill, the main objective of which is to transpose the requirements of the European Union Battery Regulation into Estonian law. The regulation covers all batteries and accumulators, ranging from small ones to those used in electric cars and large energy storage systems, aiming for more environmentally friendly production, durability, and material recycling. Key changes highlighted included the requirement for a digital product passport for batteries (containing data on origin and handling) and the obligation to ensure battery replaceability in devices starting from 2027. The bill is largely technical, removing duplicate provisions, but the substantive change concerns producer responsibility: henceforth, all importers of batteries for electric vehicles, light personal transport devices, and industrial use must also join the producers' association to prevent waste management costs from falling upon the state.

A lively discussion arose during the debate regarding costs and consumer rights. Kalle Grünthal expressed concern that the new regulation might limit the consumer's right to remove and repair batteries themselves, thereby serving the interests of large manufacturers. Minister Leis clarified that the regulation itself does not prohibit repair, but the complexity of removing batteries is rather a technical issue. Mart Maastik and Henn Põlluaas doubted the Minister's claim that the new obligations (e.g., the battery passport) would not lead to increased bureaucracy or costs for the consumer. The Minister confirmed that the obligation for the battery passport rests with the producer, and according to the European Union's impact assessment, the price of small batteries will increase by 0.5–2 euros, which will be factored into the product price. Yoko Alender, Chairman of the Environment Committee, confirmed that the system ensures free handling of all batteries for the consumer, and the collection network is already largely in place.

At today's sitting, the Riigikogu discussed an interpellation submitted by Riigikogu members Lauri Laats, Andrei Korobeinik, Vladimir Arhipov, Vadim Belobrovtsev, Aleksandr Tšaplõgin, and Aleksei Jevgrafov regarding issues concerning the payment of pensions. The interpellation was submitted by Lauri Laats, who pointed out that the information system of the Social Insurance Board (SKA), known as SKAIS, has experienced repeated failures, which have prevented the timely receipt of pensions (which is generally the 5th of the month). Laats mentioned that, according to the head of the SKA, there were failures in as many as 11 months in 2024, and asked the Head of Government whether the system had been fixed and whether pensioners would be protected in the future.

Prime Minister Kristen Michal responded that the claim that SKAIS was "on the verge of collapse" was an exaggeration, but admitted that SKAIS2 is not the best information system and its shortcomings have been known for nearly ten years. Michal announced that the government has allocated 17.4 million euros for the overhaul of SKAIS during the processing of the 2026–2029 State Budget Strategy (RES), in addition to 2.16 million euros allocated this spring and summer for basic development. The Prime Minister confirmed that the SKA has a crisis plan in place to ensure the reliability of the information system. Follow-up questions addressed the necessity of backup systems (Vladimir Arhipov), the growing cost and burden of information systems on the e-state (Anastassia Kovalenko-Kõlvart), and the postponement of pension payments from weekends to working days (Vadim Belobrovtsev), which the latter called the tormenting of pensioners. Michal repeatedly emphasized the allocated sum of money as the solution for the long-term reorganization of the system.

The Riigikogu debated Interpellation No. 784, submitted by Riigikogu members Martin Helme, Rain Epler, Varro Vooglaid, Arvo Aller, Helle-Moonika Helme, and Rene Kokk, concerning the failed naval operation to stop a tanker (Argent/Jaguar) belonging to Russia’s shadow fleet in May 2025, an operation which culminated in the risk of military confrontation. The submitter of the interpellation, Martin Helme, sharply criticized the government's actions, blaming the failure of the operation, the information blackout, and Estonia’s helpless response in the face of Russian provocations. Helme emphasized that the vessel was moving in international waters and Estonia's attempt to force it to enter territorial waters was unsuccessful and dangerous, especially since Russian fighter jets appeared on the scene.

Prime Minister Kristen Michal categorically rejected the accusations, calling the opposition’s narrative one that honors Russia’s advocates. Michal stressed that the operation was a routine control measure consistent with Article 110 of the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), which grants the right to inspect stateless vessels. The goal of the operation was to prevent Russia from earning "blood money" to wage war. The Prime Minister confirmed that there was no plan for forced boarding; rather, the objective was to direct the tanker into Estonian waters for document inspection using non-escalatory means. The opposition (specifically Varro Vooglaid and Martin Helme) questioned the Prime Minister's answers, citing the assessment of former Navy Commander Jüri Saska that boarding had indeed been planned but was aborted. The debate was extremely confrontational, focusing on the government's lack of transparency and the adequacy of Estonia's security policy more broadly.

The Riigikogu debated an interpellation (No. 788) submitted by members of the Riigikogu concerning the establishment of the Business Advisory Council and the potential conflict of interest among its members. The interpellation was submitted by Tiit Maran, who expressed concern over the council's sudden formation, the lack of transparency in selecting its members, and the fact that it provides the government with a direct channel to represent the interests of only certain large entrepreneurs, sidelining other societal groups (such as local governments, NGOs, and trade unions). Maran also highlighted the suspicion of potential corruption, given that the council members are financial supporters of the ruling coalition parties.

Prime Minister Kristen Michal responded that the Council for Efficiency and Economic Growth is purely an advisory body lacking decision-making power, which means a conflict of interest is ruled out. He emphasized that the members were chosen to represent various sectors and company sizes, and that the council's goal is to reduce bureaucracy and support economic growth. Michal affirmed that all proposals from the council will go through the standard legislative process and public involvement stages. Opposition politicians (Läänemets, Kiik, Izmailova) criticized the council's narrow focus and gender imbalance. Peeter Ernits, conversely, praised the initiative but called for broader cooperation and a reduction in the number of civil servants.

The Riigikogu debated Interpellation No. 792, submitted by Riina Sikkut, Tanel Kiik, Reili Rand, Lauri Läänemets, Helmen Kütt, Andre Hanimägi, and Jaak Aab, concerning the transfer of Swedish prisoners to Tartu Prison in Estonia. Riina Sikkut, speaking on behalf of the interpellators, highlighted three main areas of concern: internal security costs, the deterioration of healthcare service availability in Estonia, and the deepening labor shortage in Southern Estonia. The Social Democrats asked the Prime Minister how filling the prison with foreign inmates enhances Estonian security, what the position of the internal security agencies is, and how healthcare and court costs will be covered.

Prime Minister Kristen Michal defended the government's decision, emphasizing that it constitutes a security partnership that aids Sweden and preserves essential internal security infrastructure in Estonia. He noted that leasing out Tartu Prison guarantees the retention of 160 jobs and creates 250 new positions, preventing the loss of specific expertise. Michal confirmed that the rental fee covers all expenses related to foreign prisoners, including healthcare and translation services. He stressed that inmates requiring serious medical or psychiatric treatment would not be brought to Estonia, and the prisoners would be released in Sweden. The opposition (Läänemets, Valge, Ernits, Kiik) sharply criticized the plan, labeling it "state capitalism" that worsens the labor situation for the Police and Border Guard Board (PPA) and lengthens treatment queues for Estonian citizens. They also accused the government of disregarding the opinions of Tartu residents. Michal dismissed the criticism, drawing parallels with prison lease agreements in other European countries.

The Riigikogu debated Interpellation No. 807, submitted to the Minister of Justice and Digital Affairs, Liisa-Ly Pakosta, concerning the activities of enforcement agents (bailiffs). The interpellation was triggered by articles published in the newspaper Õhtuleht regarding bailiffs Enno Kermik and Priit Petter. The interpellators (Lauri Laats, Vadim Belobrovtsev, Anastassia Kovalenko-Kõlvart, Peeter Ernits, and Vladimir Arhipov) highlighted cases where enforcement agents acquired property from auctions they themselves organized or through close relatives, earned rental income, and essentially operated as entrepreneurs, which has caused a widespread crisis of confidence.

Minister Pakosta acknowledged the seriousness of the problems, emphasizing that acquiring property involving a conflict of interest is not consistent with the official duties of an enforcement agent. She explained that the Ministry of Justice and Digital Affairs carries out administrative supervision on a needs basis, but resources are limited (essentially 1.5 positions). Over the past nine years, more than 1,700 appeals have been received, resulting in 17 disciplinary proceedings being initiated and one enforcement agent being removed from office. The Minister noted that many of the violations described in the media have expired under the statute of limitations, as offenses expire after three years. Pakosta highlighted that the Ministry is working on a development plan for a "quick reform of enforcement proceedings," the goal of which is to transfer the collection of state claims to the Tax and Customs Board. This should reduce the number of enforcement agents to 10–15, allowing for more effective supervision. The Minister also stressed the importance of debt counseling services in assisting debtors. Lauri Laats and Peeter Ernits criticized the lack of transparency in the system and the state's insufficient support for representatives of liberal professions, such as enforcement agents, which has fostered systemic problems.

The interpellation No. 789, submitted on May 21, 2025, by Riigikogu members Lauri Laats, Aleksandr Tšaplõgin, Vadim Belobrovtsev, Aleksei Jevgrafov, Andrei Korobeinik, Peeter Ernits, Vladimir Arhipov, and Anastassia Kovalenko-Kõlvart, addressed the situation of ferry connections to the Estonian islands, focusing on ticket prices, the profits of TS Laevad OÜ, and the procurement of the fifth ferry. The rapporteur for the interpellation, Lauri Laats, emphasized that high ticket prices and ferry queues hinder the economic development of the islands, highlighting the large profits of TS Laevad OÜ (nearly 20% of turnover).

Infrastructure Minister Kuldar Leis responded to the interpellation but immediately delineated his area of responsibility, stating that questions 1–4 and 9 (which concerned ticket prices and regional policy impact) fall under the competence of the Ministry of Regional Affairs and Agriculture. Answering the questions falling under the competence of the Ministry of Climate, the Minister explained that the previous ferry procurement failed because the most favorable bid exceeded the budget by 1,899,000 euros, and accepting it would have been risky (the contract would have been concluded with a micro-enterprise that relied on subcontractors located outside the EU/WTO). The new procurement procedure will be carried out using the "Competitive Dialogue" method, and four shipyards qualified, including the Estonian company Baltic Workboats together with BLRT. The expected completion time for the fifth ferry has been postponed until the summer of 2028. The Minister confirmed that the new vessel will be electric-powered, with backup diesel generators running on biodiesel. In the subsequent negotiations, Lauri Laats sharply criticized the Minister for refusing to comment on the pricing policy, promising to submit new interpellations to the Regional Minister to determine the economic impact of free ferry connections on the islands.

The Riigikogu debated the response of Minister of Infrastructure Kuldar Leis to the interpellation concerning the problems of the Uikala landfill (No. 776), submitted by Riigikogu members Lauri Laats, Andrei Korobeinik, Vadim Belobrovtsev, Aleksandr Tšaplõgin, and Anastassia Kovalenko-Kõlvart. The submitter of the interpellation, Lauri Laats, highlighted the recurring fires at the landfill, which waste rescue resources (e.g., the massive fire in May 2024, involving 200 rescuers over nine days), and the large tax debt of the landfill operator (Ekovir OÜ), which exceeded 2.5 million euros at the time of submission. Laats criticized the state's "toothlessness" in resolving the situation.

Minister Kuldar Leis confirmed that he was aware of the problems and had discussed them with the Minister of the Environment. He agreed that the problems at Uikala damage the credibility of the entire waste management sector. As a solution, Leis referred to the waste reform bill (657 SE) currently under proceedings in the Riigikogu, which separates transport and handling tenders, thereby increasing competition and transparency. Regarding the "black scenario," where the company ceases operations, the minister noted that the Environmental Board has analyzed the scenarios. Responsibility first falls to the landowner, Toila municipality, but the Ministry of Climate promised to support the local government (KOV) and, if necessary, use the emergency funds of KIK (Environmental Investments Centre). Leis added that Ekovir is making efforts to improve the situation by closing disposal areas (two out of three are closed, the third is planned by the end of the year) and that the tax debt (currently 2.1 million euros) has been scheduled for installment payments. During the debate, Vladimir Arhipov and Lauri Laats criticized the lack of clarity in the state's crisis plan and the insufficient role of local governments (KOV), emphasizing that the problems in Uikala and elsewhere (e.g., the Jõelähtme landfill) are systemic and threaten the living environment.

The Riigikogu (Estonian Parliament) debated the interpellation (No. 774) concerning the closure of the Kopli Rescue Command, submitted by Riigikogu members Vadim Belobrovtsev, Andrei Korobeinik, Lauri Laats, Aleksandr Tšaplõgin, Anastassia Kovalenko-Kõlvart, and Vladimir Arhipov on May 13, 2025. Vadim Belobrovtsev (Centre Party), speaking on behalf of the interpellators, emphasized the continuing relevance of the topic, highlighting the rapid population growth in North Tallinn (projected up to 100,000 residents) and the specific characteristics of the area (peninsula, wooden houses, industrial enterprises), which significantly increase fire risks. He criticized the decision made by former Minister of the Interior Lauri Läänemets to close the command at the beginning of 2024, which aimed to save 800,000 euros annually, noting that the Tallinn City Government was prepared to cover half of that amount. Belobrovtsev also referred to statements by former Minister of Finance Mart Võrklaev that millions of euros remained unused by the Ministry of the Interior in the same budget line, suggesting that the reason for the closure was not a lack of funds but a political choice.

Minister of the Interior Igor Taro responded that the closure of the Kopli command was a difficult but unavoidable decision resulting from cuts in the state budget strategy. He explained that the Ministry of the Interior managed to limit the action to closing only one command instead of the initially planned closure of three commands and the layoff of 50 police officers, by optimizing internal resources. Taro emphasized that the availability of rescue services in North Tallinn is ensured by the readiness of the Kesklinna (City Centre) and Lilleküla commands, supplemented by the Kopli Voluntary Rescue Command, which provides 24/7 life-saving capability. The Minister defended the long-term optimization of the internal security sector, noting that this has allowed for an increase in the minimum wage for rescue workers. He confirmed that the rescue network is continuously analyzed according to population changes, but the restoration of the professional Kopli command is not currently planned. A sharp dispute arose during the debate regarding the initiator of the cutback decision, where Raimond Kaljulaid (SDE) drew attention to the 2021 cutback decision, which was made during the tenure of Centre Party Minister of the Interior Kristian Jaani.

The Riigikogu (Estonian Parliament) addressed interpellation No. 780 concerning the salaries of the employees of the Police and Border Guard Board (PPA), submitted on May 15, 2025, by Riigikogu members Vadim Belobrovtsev, Vladimir Arhipov, Lauri Laats, and Aleksei Jevgrafov. The submitter of the interpellation, Vadim Belobrovtsev (Centre Party), emphasized the urgency of the topic, citing the extremely rapid inflation over the last two years, which has raised prices by an average of 40%, while PPA employees' salaries were last increased at the beginning of 2023. Belobrovtsev asked whether the current salary conditions are adequate and whether the government is capable of meeting the PPA's expectation to raise salaries to 1.2 times the average Estonian wage.

Minister of the Interior Igor Taro responded that, in his assessment, the current salary conditions are not adequate. He confirmed that the salaries of police officers, rescuers, and rescue dispatchers will increase next year. The government has allocated an additional 28.9 million euros to the salary fund of the Ministry of the Interior's administrative area, which constitutes approximately 10% of the total salary fund. The Minister emphasized that the focus of the salary increase is on frontline workers whose incomes are the lowest. In addition to the 10% increase in the salary fund, the Minister highlighted the government's decision to abolish the tax hump, which, according to him, provides the most noticeable percentage gain precisely for people at the salary level of rescuers and police officers, likely bringing their income growth close to 15%. The opposition (Belobrovtsev, Arhipov, Kaljulaid, Allas) criticized the modesty of the 10% increase, especially when compared to previous raises and the government's tax policy decisions, which, in their assessment, favor the wealthier deciles of the population. Minister Taro defended the government's decisions, emphasizing that this was a difficult effort where salary increases were granted only to the administrative areas of three ministries.

The Riigikogu debated the interpellation (No. 793) concerning the suspension of license plate recognition cameras, addressed to Minister of the Interior Igor Taro and submitted by Andre Hanimägi, Riina Sikkut, Reili Rand, Jaak Aab, Anti Allas, Tanel Kiik, and Helmen Kütt. The submitter of the interpellation, Andre Hanimägi, criticized the minister's decision to halt the system in the spring, emphasizing that it is a vital resource for the police in solving serious crimes (drug crimes, missing persons, pedophile networks). Hanimägi deemed the entire process—where the Ministry of the Interior's draft bill was first rejected, and then coalition members came out with an almost identical bill—to be strange and unduly time-consuming.

Minister of the Interior Igor Taro defended his decision, explaining that the suspension of the system was necessary to ensure the protection of the principles of the rule of law and fundamental human rights, given the criticism from the Chancellor of Justice and the Data Protection Inspectorate regarding the ambiguity of the existing regulation. He stressed that a conscious violation would have been inappropriate for a state governed by the rule of law. The Minister confirmed that legislative amendments are being processed quickly (the second reading will take place the day after tomorrow) and that the Police and Border Guard Board (PPA) has been able to solve crimes even during the summer period using alternative, albeit more time-consuming, methods. Taro also answered questions regarding cooperation with the Ministry of Justice and ensuring the rapid advancement of the draft bill in the Riigikogu, confirming that no substantive abuses in the use of the system have been identified, although the formulation of inquiries by the Tax and Customs Board was sometimes deficient.

A series of Riigikogu sessions, primarily focused on free microphone speeches, was filled with sharp criticism regarding government policy and the increasing social inequality. Several MPs (Läänemets, Arhipov, Allas) criticized the government’s planned tax reform, arguing that changes to the income tax-free minimum and the abolition of the tax hump would primarily benefit the wealthiest, while lower-income individuals would suffer due to the VAT increase. Concern was also voiced about the shift towards labor exploitation through new flexible employment contracts.

Issues of political transparency and the rule of law were also discussed. Anastassia Kovalenko-Kõlvart highlighted suspicions of lobbying concerning insurance requirements for electric scooters, which seemingly favor Bolt. Mart Helme labeled Kert Kingo’s conviction in the expense compensation case as political harassment, warning against the erosion of the principles of the rule of law. Kalle Grünthal questioned the reliability of party ratings, pointing to possible manipulation in surveys. On foreign policy issues, Grünthal warned of the danger of the escalation of the Third World War in connection with the use of long-range weapons in Ukraine. Rain Epler provided a comprehensive overview of world news, focusing on the failures of the green transition and the decline of European competitiveness. Additionally, Võro Language Week was celebrated, during which Igor Taro and Anti Allas spoke in Võro, emphasizing the importance of rural libraries and requesting regional language status for South Estonian languages.

The Riigikogu debated the Bank of Estonia’s 2024 annual report, which was presented by central bank president Madis Müller. In his presentation, Müller emphasized the fulfillment of the Bank of Estonia’s core tasks, especially ensuring price stability in the euro area. He noted that the slowdown of inflation in the euro area has allowed the European Central Bank to begin lowering interest rates, resulting in both the central bank's main interest rate and the 6-month EURIBOR dropping by half from their record highs. The Estonian economy is showing signs of revival, although the recovery is slow. The central bank forecasts a 5–6% price increase in Estonia for 2025, a third of which stems from tax hikes.

Müller highlighted risks to financial stability, particularly due to Estonia's rapid loan growth (nearly 10% annually), which is why the countercyclical capital buffer is being maintained at 1.5%. A significant part of the presentation focused on crisis resilience, including ensuring the continuity of cash circulation and payment systems, as well as the digital euro project. The central bank also stressed the importance of sound public finances as a cornerstone of economic growth, warning against a persistent budget deficit that would fuel inflation. Furthermore, proposals were introduced to improve competition in the housing loan market, such as eliminating the requirement for notarization and fees for early contract termination during refinancing. During the discussions between parliamentary groups, the work of the Bank of Estonia was praised, and the need for a responsible fiscal policy was emphasized, especially in finding permanent coverage for defense expenditures.

The first item on the agenda was the third reading of Draft Act 667, initiated by the Government of the Republic, concerning the amendment of the Atmospheric Air Protection Act and other acts (partial transposition of amendments to the Emissions Trading System Directive). During the negotiations, Andres Metsoja, representative of the Isamaa faction, expressed strong opposition, criticizing the draft act for poor legal practice, particularly due to the creation of retroactive payment obligations, which violates constitutional principles. Metsoja emphasized that the draft act distorts competition and pushes Estonian companies (e.g., in the peat and forestry sectors) out of the market, citing as an example the situation where tomatoes are imported from the Netherlands instead of being grown locally. Lauri Laats, representative of the Centre Party, also supported the opposition, noting that Estonian companies compete globally (e.g., with China) and that European green policy (dubbed 'green zealotry' or 'rohepaplus') places excessive burdens on them. Tarmo Tamm, representative of the Estonia 200 faction, conversely supported the draft act, emphasizing that cleaner air and the shift towards a bio-economy are economically beneficial for Estonia and Europe, and that the transposition of the directive ensures equal rules in maritime transport for all member states. Following the closure of negotiations, the final vote was conducted.

The Riigikogu debated the re-adoption of the Act amending the Churches and Congregations Act (570 UA), which the President of the Republic had declined to promulgate. The proceedings began with a report by Ando Kiviberg, Chairman of the Constitutional Committee, followed by a report from Andre Hanimägi, representative of the Legal Affairs Committee. Both committees had discussed the grounds for the presidential veto, which mainly concerned the ambiguity of the Act and the overly broad definition of the concept of "threat," especially regarding the doctrinal basis of religious associations. The committees heard the positions of both Hent-Raul Kalmo, the President's legal counsel, and Erik Salumäe, adviser to the Ministry of the Interior. The Ministry of the Interior and the majority of the committees found that the Act is in compliance with the Constitution and that its purpose is to sever dangerous administrative ties on security grounds, not to restrict religious freedom. The opposition (Centre Party, EKRE) criticized the parliament's decision to send the Act back in its unamended form, considering it a legal defect and a disregard for the President's competence. The coalition emphasized the necessity of the Act in ensuring national security and considered referring the matter to the Supreme Court a normal democratic process. In the final vote, the Act was re-adopted in its unamended form with 63 votes in favor.

The third item on the Riigikogu agenda was the re-adoption of the Act amending the Money Laundering and Terrorist Financing Prevention Act and the International Sanctions Act (640 UA), which the President of the Republic had left unpromulgated. The President had refused to promulgate the Act, citing a conflict with Sections 26 and 44 of the Constitution, arguing that it unduly restricts citizens' right to informational self-determination.

Ando Kiviberg, Chairman of the Constitutional Committee, and Maris Lauri, member of the Finance Committee, provided an overview of the committees' discussions. Both committees reached a consensus decision that the Act should not be re-adopted in its unamended form, thereby agreeing with the President's position. Hent-Raul Kalmo, the President's legal advisor, and representatives of the Financial Intelligence Unit (FIU, or RAB in Estonian) who participated in the discussions, conceded that the basis for restricting data subject rights in the Act was too broad and needed clarification. Lauri also highlighted an unprecedented case in the Supreme Court, which has referred the matter to the European Court of Justice for clarification regarding the legal basis for the FIU's data processing.

During the negotiations, the opposition (Urmas Reinsalu, Varro Vooglaid, Anastassia Kovalenko-Kõlvart, Peeter Ernits) sharply criticized the totalitarian nature of the Act, which would allow the creation of profiles of all citizens and companies using artificial intelligence, violating privacy and establishing a surveillance society. The opposition demanded the complete withdrawal of the Act, not just cosmetic amendments. Social Democrat Riina Sikkut emphasized the need for substantive discussion to find a balance between the secrecy of proceedings and trust in the e-state. In the vote, the adoption of the Act in its unamended form was rejected by 70 votes. The deadline for submitting amendments was set for October 1, 2025, at 5:15 PM.

The Riigikogu plenary session debated the second reading of Bill 662, initiated by the Government of the Republic, concerning amendments to the Emergency Situation Act and other legislation. The session began with a procedural question from Kalle Grünthal, who deemed the bill too voluminous and sought to postpone its proceedings. However, the session chairman rejected this claim, noting the brevity of the bill. Kalev Stoicescu, Chairman of the National Defence Committee, presented the committee's work, noting that a total of seven amendments had been submitted to the bill (one from the Social Democratic Party faction and six from the leading committee). The most significant substantive change (proposals No. 4 and 5) concerned the deadline for establishing shelters. It was decided by consensus to bring forward the mandatory deadline for establishing both public and non-public shelters to July 1, 2026, emphasizing the importance of speed given the current security situation. During the debate, the Reform Party (Kristo Enn Vaga), the Social Democrats (Raimond Kaljulaid), and Estonia 200 (Peeter Tali) supported the rapid adoption of the bill, stressing the vital necessity of improving civil defense and sheltering options, learning from the experiences of the war in Ukraine. The Centre Party (Vladimir Arhipov) supported the bill but raised concerns about the economic burden and the lack of state compensation, especially regarding buildings of 1,200 square meters and larger. Peeter Ernits criticized the historical sluggishness in establishing shelters. All proposed amendments were fully or substantively taken into account, and upon the proposal of the leading committee, the second reading was concluded.

The first reading of Bill 659, aimed at amending the Family Benefits Act, initiated by the Social Democratic Party faction and members of the Riigikogu, took place in the Riigikogu. The purpose of the bill was to raise the benefit for the first and second child to 100 euros per month (instead of the current 80 euros) and also to raise the single parent's child benefit to 100 euros, in order to value every child equally and alleviate economic inequality. Presenter Reili Rand (SDE) emphasized that Estonia is facing the deepest demographic crisis in its history, and economic uncertainty is the main impediment to the birth rate. She noted that the annual cost of the bill is estimated at 57.3 million euros, but part of this could be covered by savings resulting from the decrease in the number of children in the education and social sectors (estimated at 10–11 million euros).

Riina Solman (Isamaa), Deputy Chair of the lead committee (the Social Affairs Committee), confirmed that Isamaa supports the goals of the bill but highlighted concerns about the lack of funding sources. She stressed the need for cross-party consensus on population policy. Signe Riisalo, speaking on behalf of the Reform Party faction, agreed with the goal of valuing children equally but found that the bill was the most expensive of the alternatives proposed and was not sufficiently targeted to alleviate poverty. She called for waiting for the Ministry of Social Affairs' comprehensive action plan (due by spring 2026), which would address all concerns faced by families with children. During the debate, opposition parties accused the coalition of blocking family policy measures. In the final vote, the bill was rejected during the first reading, based on the proposal of the lead committee.

The Riigikogu debated the first reading of Draft Act 631 on supplementing the Traffic Insurance Act, initiated by the Estonian Centre Party faction, the goal of which was to establish a uniform insurance obligation for rented light personal mobility devices (electric scooters). Rapporteur Anastassia Kovalenko-Kõlvart (pid: G-9DV4OtynM) emphasized that the current law, which requires insurance only for light vehicles weighing over 25 kg, excludes market leader Bolt’s scooters (which weigh 24 kg) from the insurance obligation. She criticized this as a political decision stemming from Bolt's extensive lobbying and generous donations to government parties, creating an unequal competitive situation (referring, for example, to the sale of the Estonian company Tuul Mobility to Latvia) and leaving victims without sufficient compensation. Kovalenko-Kõlvart highlighted that officials from the Ministry of Finance, the Police and Border Guard Board (PPA), and the Health Insurance Fund (Tervisekassa) initially supported a uniform insurance obligation.

Mario Kadastik (pid: wv3u8Rqtm2o), the rapporteur for the lead committee, the Economic Affairs Committee, announced that the committee proposed rejecting the bill (5 in favor, 2 against). Kadastik justified this with the Ministry of Finance's stance that the bill goes too far beyond the EU directive and could hinder innovation. He argued that, according to police statistics, accidents involving private scooters are a greater problem than incidents related to rental scooters, and that the issue requires broader and more comprehensive regulation. The topic of Bolt's lobbying and donations was repeatedly addressed during the debate, which Kadastik dismissed as merely a coincidence. The bill was rejected in the vote.

The Riigikogu debated the first reading of Bill 620, initiated by the Estonian Centre Party faction, concerning the amendment of the Basic Schools and Upper Secondary Schools Act and the Vocational Educational Institutions Act. The aim of the bill was to raise the state minimum subsidy for school lunch from 1 euro to 2 euros per student per day, as the state's contribution has not increased since 2018, despite inflation. Presenter Vadim Belobrovtsev stressed that the rise in food prices (40% over the last two years) has led to a situation where the quality of the school meals offered has declined, resulting in children refusing to eat them. He criticized the government, which has refused to amend the law, arguing that a ministerial regulation would suffice, yet has failed to establish that regulation itself, leaving the situation unresolved.

Liina Kersna, Chairman of the Cultural Affairs Committee, introduced the committee’s discussion and its non-supportive position. The government’s position was that amending the law is not the appropriate method for increasing the subsidy, as this can be done via a Regulation of the Government of the Republic. Kersna emphasized that school lunch funding has always been tripartite (state, local government, parents) and that the government's priority is raising teachers' salaries, not increasing the school lunch subsidy, which would cost 30 million euros. The debate also covered the issue of funding sources, with Belobrovtsev proposing the introduction of a bank tax and the postponement of the abolition of the tax hump as solutions. Following the debate, the leading committee's proposal to reject the bill was put to a vote.

During the Riigikogu information hour, questions concerning the portfolio of Minister of Social Affairs Karmen Joller, which were presented by Riigikogu member Lauri Laats, were discussed. The debate centered on three main topics: the accessibility of healthcare services in Estonia, the cost of finding a new head for the Health Insurance Fund (Tervisekassa), and the Minister’s focus between the social and health sectors.

Lauri Laats highlighted Eurostat data showing that 15.5% of the Estonian population had foregone healthcare services due to unavailability or high cost, placing Estonia first in Europe in this negative ranking. Minister Joller inquired about the source of the data but conceded that some medical procedures had been canceled. Laats criticized the Minister for failing to follow through on her promise to delve into the data and cited the source (Euronews/Eurostat, shared on his Facebook page).

The second major topic was the decision by the Tervisekassa council to hire a recruitment firm to find a new director, the cost of which reaches 35,000 euros. Joller defended the decision, emphasizing that due to the institution's 2.5 billion euro budget and the reliance of all Estonian health on it, it was necessary to find a professional leader, rather than choosing based on connections. Laats criticized the "toothlessness" of the state system and the use of taxpayer money for private sector services.

Anastassia Kovalenko-Kõlvart presented a clarifying question regarding Tervisekassa's operating costs and office space, criticizing the high board fees and the choice of the more expensive Class A office building (Arteri), where the priority was the carbon footprint, not the optimal use of taxpayer money. Minister Joller distanced herself from the decisions of the former Tervisekassa head (e.g., summer retreats) and stressed the necessity of Tervisekassa's independence to avoid political interference in treatment decisions. She rejected the proposal to place Tervisekassa under the ministry. At the end of the session, Peeter Ernits raised a procedural question about the low attendance of coalition members, which the Speaker of the Riigikogu dismissed.

The Riigikogu information hour addressed the topic of state finance, initiated by Riigikogu member Lauri Läänemets (Social Democrats) with a question directed to Prime Minister Kristen Michal. Läänemets criticized the regressiveness of the Estonian tax system, arguing that people earning lower salaries (around 1,400 euros) bear a proportionally greater tax burden than the wealthier population (4,000+ euros). He emphasized that the government's plan to abolish the tax hump exacerbates this problem, granting a larger benefit in absolute terms to the wealthier segment of the population. As a solution, Läänemets proposed lowering the VAT on foodstuffs to 9%, citing the example of other Nordic countries.

Prime Minister Michal defended the government's position, stressing the liberal philosophy of the Reform Party, according to which it is better to return earned money to people by raising the income tax-free minimum, rather than relying on VAT exceptions, which may not reach consumers. Michal presented calculations showing that the abolition of the tax hump primarily alleviates the tax burden on the middle class—such as teachers, journalists, and technicians—who currently pay 1,300–1,500 euros more in taxes annually due to the failed progressive income tax. He disputed Läänemets's claims that Riigikogu members would receive a disproportionately large benefit from abolishing the tax hump. In a follow-up question, Riina Sikkut (Social Democrats) accused the Prime Minister of demagoguery and proposed shifting the tax hump further up the income scale instead of abolishing it, in order to direct tax relief specifically to those officeholders who need it.

Riigikogu member Tõnis Lukas submitted a question to Minister of Education and Research Kristina Kallas concerning the status of the Estonian language and the modernization of the Language Act. Lukas voiced concern over the declining use of Estonian in the service sector, particularly due to the influx of foreign labor and the rise of platform work, where current requirements appear outdated. He criticized the government for continually postponing the draft Language Act, noting that the promised mid-June deadline has passed. Minister Kallas responded that the amendments to the Language Act are scheduled to reach the government session either immediately or next week, and subsequently the Riigikogu. She clarified that the delay was not related to language requirements in the service sector but rather complex legal disputes regarding the status of dialects and South Estonian languages. Kallas confirmed that the draft includes increased fines and coercive payments for violations of Estonian language proficiency requirements, as well as provisions addressing the language use of municipal council members and individuals working in specific positions.

In a supplementary question, Helir-Valdor Seeder raised the issue of the transition to Estonian-language education, referencing statements by Narva politician Jaan Toots, who called the reform a "failed experiment." Minister Kallas affirmed that the government remains committed to the transition to Estonian-language instruction, stating there is "no turning back." She also mentioned an initiated amendment to the Private Schools Act, ensuring that the state would only fund Estonian-language private schools via the per-student allowance, thereby preventing local governments from attempting to finance Russian-language private schools. Seeder also inquired about the obligation placed on local governments (such as Viljandi) to organize native language instruction for Ukrainian war refugees, expressing concern about securing resources and teachers. Kallas stressed that native language instruction (two hours per week) supports the acquisition of the Estonian language and promised state support in facilitating teaching materials in cooperation with the Ukrainian government.

This report covers the question put to Prime Minister Kristen Michal during the Riigikogu information session regarding the security situation following the incident on August 24, where an attack drone crashed and exploded in the Elva municipality of Tartu County. Riigikogu member Varro Vooglaid (EKRE) demanded clarification from the Prime Minister regarding the drone's flight path and sought assurance that it was absolutely ruled out that the drone had taken off from the territory of the Republic of Estonia. Vooglaid stressed that this was a very serious incident, demonstrating that military activity had reached Estonian soil.

Prime Minister Michal responded that the investigation is being handled by the Prosecutor's Office, and based on current information, it is highly probable that the drone was Ukrainian, used in self-defense against Russian attacks. Michal stressed that the root cause of the problem is the aggression of Putin's Russia, and she rejected the assertion that the war had only just now reached Estonia, citing economic impacts, the shadow fleet in the Baltic Sea, and constant cyberattacks. In response to repeated follow-up questions, the Prime Minister confirmed that the Republic of Estonia has not granted Ukraine permission to use Estonian territory or airspace to conduct offensive operations. Martin Helme (EKRE) criticized the government's responses, accusing the Reform Party administration of failing in national defense and generating "Kremlin narratives," an accusation the Prime Minister categorically rejected.

The Riigikogu discussed the question presented to Minister of Social Affairs Karmen Joller regarding the deepening financial deficit of the Health Insurance Fund (Tervisekassa), which was submitted by Riigikogu member Aleksei Jevgrafov. Jevgrafov highlighted Tervisekassa’s critical budget forecasts, which project growing deficits (a predicted minus of 254.2 million euros by 2028) and the depletion of retained earnings and reserves by the same year. He demanded a concrete action plan from the minister to resolve the critical situation and ensure the availability of healthcare services.

Minister Joller acknowledged the problem but emphasized that her priority was system restructuring, not simply pouring in more money, comparing the Tervisekassa budget to a leaky pot. She pointed out systemic inefficiencies, such as unjustified laboratory costs (approximately 20%) and patients seeing the wrong specialists (in about a third of cases), for which Tervisekassa still pays. Joller announced that Tervisekassa’s budget positions have changed, and according to the new forecast, over 200 million euros should remain in reserve by 2029. As solutions, she proposed increasing funding transparency, strengthening primary care provided by family doctors, and integrating the social and healthcare systems. In response to Jevgrafov’s follow-up question regarding treatment waiting lists, the minister replied that the main obstacle to accessibility is the shortage of doctors and nurses, not solely funding, and resolving this requires long-term training. Reili Rand further inquired whether the minister had requested additional resources during state budget strategy negotiations, questioning whether internal system savings could cover a shortfall amounting to hundreds of millions. Joller replied that there is no point in injecting additional funds before patching the systemic holes.

The sixth question of the Information Hour addressed education policy in Hiiumaa, focusing on the planned merger of Hiiumaa Gymnasium and Suuremõisa Vocational School. Riigikogu member Reili Rand expressed deep concern, accusing the government (the Reform Party) of dismantling a functioning education system and ignoring the opinion of the local community. Rand highlighted the unambiguous opposition on the island, as well as questions regarding the sustainability of the vocational school and the future of the culturally significant Suuremõisa Manor. She also criticized the Minister of Education’s inability to visit Hiiumaa.

Prime Minister Kristen Michal responded by emphasizing that secondary education in Hiiumaa would be preserved, as he had promised during his summer visit. He directed more detailed questions about education policy to the Minister of Education. In a follow-up question, Tiit Maran criticized the Ministry of Education’s "mechanistic" approach and cited the example of a Culture Committee meeting where officials promised to consider the importance of preserving Suuremõisa Vocational School, but the ministry continued implementing the decisions, essentially rendering the committee’s work meaningless. Michal briefly confirmed that committee decisions do play a role. Rand then accused the Prime Minister of employing a rhetorical trick and minimizing the resistance of Hiiumaa residents as mere "fine-tuning," which the Prime Minister categorically rejected, confirming his support for Hiiumaa and promising to take the community’s views into account when selecting the school’s name.

During the seventh interpellation in the Riigikogu, the government's tax policy was debated between Prime Minister Kristen Michal and Riigikogu member Mart Maastik (Isamaa). Maastik called this policy a "tax festival," asserting that it has created chaos in state finances and eroded the confidence of entrepreneurs. Maastik criticized the constantly changing justifications for implementing the car tax (climate, defense, road construction) and demanded a concrete answer as to whether the government intends to abolish the car tax before the 2027 elections.

Prime Minister Michal rejected the accusations of creating uncertainty, emphasizing that the government's goal, as the economic situation improves, is to leave more money in people's hands through tax reductions. He highlighted the decrease in the tax burden (due to the rise in the income tax-free minimum and the abolition of the tax hump) and confirmed that car tax benefits for families with children (€100 per child) are currently being processed in parliament. Michal stressed that the tax burden will fall to the 1995 level, while defense spending will rise to 5% of GDP, thereby ensuring confidence. In a follow-up question, Andres Metsoja (Isamaa) criticized the feeling of neglect in rural areas and the unfair car tax. Michal responded that the car tax would become fairer and its revenue would be directed toward road construction.

The session moved on to the ninth question, which was addressed to Prime Minister Kristen Michal. Riigikogu member Anastassia Kovalenko-Kõlvart raised a question regarding the government's decisions and the case involving Eesti Energia's Enefit Green, which concerned the misuse of insider information in stock trading. Kovalenko-Kõlvart demanded information regarding the list of persons who had access to insider information, which Eesti Energia had refused to provide, and asked for the Prime Minister's position on the right of Riigikogu members to obtain the full list of insiders, especially in their capacity as members of the Special Committee on Anti-Corruption. Prime Minister Michal confirmed his principled support for sharing materials with Riigikogu members but emphasized the principle of separation of powers. He explained that since this is an ongoing criminal proceeding being conducted by the Prosecutor's Office, the parliamentary committee cannot interfere with or take over the investigation. The committee's role is systemic analysis after the court decision. In a supplementary question, Riigikogu member Lauri Laats asked about the Ministry of Finance's 330,000 euro public procurement for tax policy research. Laats criticized that the procurement for the in-depth analysis was being carried out after extensive tax increases had been implemented, suggesting a lack of knowledge-based decision-making. Prime Minister Michal explained that this is a procurement for post-analysis, the obligation for which stems from the explanatory memoranda of the already adopted legislative amendments. The goal is to assess whether the changes have achieved the desired objectives and what their impacts have been.

The Information Hour began with an unusual request to set aside procedural questions in order to give Riigikogu member Andres Metsoja the opportunity to ask Prime Minister Kristen Michal a question regarding the termination of the thematic plan for mineral resources in Rapla and Pärnu counties. Metsoja expressed concern about the proposal by the Land and Spatial Planning Authority to terminate mineral resource planning in these counties, fearing that it would reduce public transparency and create tensions, especially considering that planning continues in Harju County. He saw a risk that mining activities would be directed on a case-by-case basis to more distant areas, referring to a possible policy of directing activity outside the "golden ring."

Prime Minister Michal explained that the termination of the thematic plan was due to technical and geological circumstances. In Rapla and Pärnu counties, there are few prospective areas for construction minerals, and it is more expedient to handle them as individual cases. Furthermore, supporting the construction of Rail Baltic is no longer a current objective, as the necessary material has been largely secured. Another important factor was the amendment to the regulation of the Minister of the Environment (which entered into force on July 22, 2024), which updated the list of areas suitable for peat mining, meaning peat mining is no longer addressed in the thematic plan. Regarding limestone and dolomite, the work carried out by the Estonian Geological Survey revealed that there are very few geologically suitable areas in these counties, limiting the practical applicability of the plan only to existing areas. The Information Hour was concluded due to lack of time.