Plenary Sessions

The first agenda item reflected a declining birth rate for three consecutive years and the ensuing inquiries presented by Riina Solman, Priit Sibul, Aivar Koka, and Urmas Reinsalu. The questions concerned the nature of the birth crisis, its impact on the nation’s future population, and the tools available to the government and demographic policy to address it. Information regarding the number of births in 2024 (9646) and the development of population trends were also under scrutiny, along with questions regarding whether and when the situation should be declared a crisis and what measures have been changed or reduced in recent years. The discussion highlighted the need for a consistent, cohesive, and sustainable demographic policy, with attention to the connection between the cost of living and the ability of families to cope. The second part of the agenda covered the government’s response: plans for addressing the demographic challenge, the drafting of a health analysis, and improvements in the availability of funding and services, including the adoption of the pre-school education law and related support mechanisms. Finally, the discussions summarized the need for coordinated management and clear, carefully considered decisions, bringing out diverse viewpoints and expectations from the coalition and recommendations from researchers.

The second agenda item focused on a question posed to the Riigikogu regarding the impact of the car tax on families with children. Presenters Riina Solman, Jaanus Karilaiu, Helir-Valdor Seeder, Priit Sibula, and Andres Metsoja highlighted the deepening demographic crisis and the alleged burden of the car tax on the financial security of large families, rural areas, and families comprised of older parents. During the discussion, the need for differentiated benefits and support was emphasized, and there was consideration of whether government measures could compensate for the negative impact and whether the current tax increases would lead to a decline in birth rates.

Responses noted that tax revenue is necessary to finance public services and that the tax burden in Estonia falls between European levels. The Prime Minister then presented a plan and promises of tax reductions and social support measures, including the elimination of corporate profit tax, the elimination of income tax from the first euro, and an increase in the income tax-free minimum to increase family incomes. Questions of constitutionality were raised during the discussion, along with the need for differentiation for families with many children and people with disabilities—opinions that the initial differentiations were challenged in court—were confirmed and influenced by court rulings and ombudsman observations. Allegedly, no final legislative decision was made on the agenda, and the discussion will continue in subsequent stages and at the level of committees, where more balanced solutions are sought.

Under agenda item three, the inquiry submitted by Members of the Riigikogu – Kert Kingo, Helle-Moonika Helme, Martin Helme, Mart Helme, Rain Epler, and Arvo Aller – regarding the funding of Delfi and ETV+ produced in Russian (inquiry no. 715), submitted on January 29, 2025, was discussed. The presentation was given by Kert Kingo. The focus was on the targeted connection of state funding with media outlets run by individuals with Russian citizenship, and clarification was sought on three key questions: why are publications in Russian being funded when Estonia is cooperating with a country regarding which security risks have been expressed; how can restrictions on suffrage for Russian citizens be justified in comparison to those running leading media channels; and whether the impact of large Russian-language publications on Estonia's information landscape poses a greater or lesser security risk. The debate proceeded in response to the government's positions and within the context of media hubs, emphasizing media independence, the objectives of funding, and the roles of the state and public broadcasting in a situation where the dissemination of Russian-language information is an important part of informing society.

The Riigikogu's fourth item on the agenda addressed the question presented on January 27, 2025, concerning Maarjamaa Combined School (question number 710). Helle-Moonika Helme is the representative presenting the question. The question raises concerns about the integration of seven students with special educational needs into the combined school during the summer of 2025, and focuses on potential impacts on students, teachers, and the school's personnel structure. Attention is being paid to reducing bureaucracy, unifying documentation, and consolidating IT solutions, as well as to financial matters – a projected savings of 300,000 euros, and the creation of specific positions within the combined school. The discussion also includes the involvement of parents, guardians, and student representatives, and the creation of a unified admissions and support system, which should improve the quality of education and learning effectiveness, and reduce excessive movement of children between schools.

Under the first agenda item, the inquiry submitted by Jaak Valge and Leo Kunnas regarding the narrowing scope of Estonian language use (no. 711) was discussed, addressing the language structure and usage within Estonian society and the extensive aftermath of immigration. The inquiry's content focused on the increasingly profound use of worry language and official language, highlighting both official demographic data and efforts between language learning and usage: the number of immigrants and their language proficiency levels, the Estonian language proficiency exams conducted to date, and how their results interact with overall language policy and the promotion of the official language. The discussion covered where the forms of narrowing language use appear in different living environments and which key areas – such as schools, job requirements, and public services – it affects.

The second paragraph focused on the responses from the government and the Ministry of Education, as well as a broader language policy. Minister Kristina Kallas presented a vision that changes to the Language Act and the expansion of the scope of Estonian language use are long-term endeavors, and that the actual situation is not easily straightforward – considering both immigration and the proportion of official language proficiency exams. The need was emphasized to concentrate financial resources and responsibility for organizing adult language learning under the Ministry of Education, and to increase Estonian language requirements in the context of work and education. Discussions also covered stricter monitoring and penalties for language usage control, and ideas for expanding language learning in the style of Duolingo. Finally, it was noted that work continues in the discussions to ensure clarity and implementability of language policy, and to develop solutions for regional language issues and wording.

The Riigikogu’s sixth agenda item addressed a question posed by Jaak Valge and Leo Kunnas regarding the shrinking scope of Estonian as a language of science. The questioners asserted that the adoption of English in universities is deepening: the number of doctoral students in Estonian-language programs has decreased, and in 2024, the proportion of Master’s theses in Estonian was 65% and the proportion of doctoral dissertations was only 7% in public universities; in 2017, the proportion of doctoral dissertations in Estonian was still 23%. An argument was presented that the rapid adoption of English in higher education has not improved international rankings, and the increasing proportion of foreign doctoral students creates potential obstacles to the preservation of Estonian as a language of science. The discussion also touched on the possibilities of artificial intelligence in translating Estonian doctoral dissertations and the need to evaluate model indicators for academic careers that value the effectiveness of Estonian-language scientific work. Central to the matter was the question: can and should Estonian as a language of science be maintained in the context of international competition, and what steps are necessary to ensure a greater Estonian contribution within the framework of universities and research funding.

The agenda concerns the review of the first reading of draft resolution 557, submitted by the Conservative People's Party fraction of the Riigikogu, which aims to establish a Riigikogu investigative committee to assess the risks associated with modified mRNA COVID-19 vaccines. VARRO VOOGLAIDI will present the draft, and the meeting will take place on March 13, 2025. The Riigikogu’s positions and security issues will be discussed in the context of a critical review of coronavirus restrictions and protective measures, and concerns are expressed regarding potential conflicts of interest and the constitutionality of drug safety oversight systems. According to reports, NORTH Group has contacted the committee, highlighting three main problems: the impact of vaccines on preventing the spread of the virus, the observed substantial side effects and party-specific dangers; and plasmid DNA contamination in lipid nanoparticles. The draft’s primary objective is to establish the investigative committee and to submit a final report by August 2025, if possible, with proposals for amending legislation to prevent future risks. At the end, the governing committee decided to reject the draft in the first reading, and it is removed from the procedure.

As the first and only item on the agenda, the draft amending law on the breeding of agricultural animals, initiated by the Government of the Republic, was considered for its third reading. After the debate was opened and then closed without anyone wishing to speak, the steering committee proposed conducting a final vote on the draft. The Riigikogu began preparing for a vote to adopt the draft as a law. A total of 72 members of the Riigikogu participated in the final vote. Seventy-one members voted in favor of the draft, no one voted against (0), and one member abstained. Therefore, draft law 551 was adopted.

As the second item on the Riigikogu’s agenda, the draft law amending the Parental Benefit Act and other laws was considered in its second reading (bill No. 547). The main objectives of the draft law are to expand the target group for parental benefits and to adjust some forms of benefits to better enable parents to cope and care for children. The need arises from previous shortcomings, where both pregnant women and parents of children under three years of age have not received benefits sufficiently well to ensure their livelihood. The review noted that the current law, in the event of the father's death, enabled the widow to receive a survivor's pension, but the new system is considering broader coverage and potential extension of the period. In addition, discussions were held on how the parental benefit system interacts with issues related to working capacity, income, and attending kindergarten. Guests present included representatives of the Association of Estonian Cities and Municipalities, who were unable to attend due to notes; the Chancellor of Justice, who emphasized the need for clarification; and representatives of the ministry, who supported the assessment of various options. A key focus of the discussion was how the various drafted options impact the equal treatment of non-working and working parents, and how much needs to be clarified in the explanatory note regarding the possibility of applying for assistance in the event of the death of a spouse. Regarding the impact of kindergarten places and income, it was pointed out that Estonia's parental benefit system is one of the most generous and flexible in Europe, and it was emphasized that the current system allows participants to continue working and to replace part of their income with parental benefits. Amendments were presented in four points, and all submitted corrections were approved by the committee. In conclusion, it was decided to proceed with the draft law in the plenary session, and the completion of the second reading was carried out unanimously, after which the draft law was scheduled for a third reading in the Riigikogu plenary session on March 19th of this year.

The third agenda item concerned the draft law amending the Riigikogu Rules of Procedure Act, first reading 552. The draft was initiated by Rain Epler, Kert Kingo, and Arvo Aller, and the presentation was given by Kert Kingo. The purpose of the draft is to more clearly define the obligations of Riigikogu committees regarding appearances and the submission of documents, and to establish sanctions in cases of non-compliance with these obligations. The planned amendments include changing the wording of paragraph 2 of §22 and changes to §23, including an additional paragraph 4; the terms "mutual obligations" and "punitive sanctions” are also being replaced with "Riigikogu commission" instead of "investigatory commission." The draft’s budget neutrality lies in the fact that the provisions to be amended concern inter-parliamentary and government cooperation, not the state budget.

In the first question, the discussion revolved around the situation in the country and the impact of tax system changes on the coalition and society. Helle-Moonika Helme presented a critical overview, highlighting tax amendments and their effects on different social groups, emphasizing that the coalition, encompassing the Reform Party and Estonia 200, is responsible for many decisions and recommending simplification of the tax system and increased competition. She specifically mentioned income tax, car tax, land tax, taxation of corporate profits, VAT, taxes in the energy sector, and taxes related to security. The text emphasized the need to prevent an increase in the tax burden and economic risks, and to pay attention to the coalition's implemented or planned changes. The second part of the discussion focused on the coalition’s procedural matters and how relationships with the constitution and the functioning of parliamentary democracy would be triggered in the event of coalition changes. Part 2 also included a discussion about the long-term political course related to security, the economy, and taxes, as well as the importance of the Ukrainian issue and the coalition’s intentions regarding tax breaks and the defense budget.

Today's second question focused on an overview of state governance and important issues between the coalition and the opposition emerged on the speaking platform. Helir-Valdor Seeder posed a question to Prime Minister Kristen Michal, referencing potential previous social democratic initiatives and their possible withdrawal. The question highlighted specific ideas, such as the formation of oblasts into four, and the appointment of special representatives to regions, the transformation of county public transport hubs, online versions of the Ministry of Agriculture’s toolboxes, and the implementation of training at the level of local governments. The reduction of bureaucracy, making the state function effectively, and controlling costs were also brought up.

The second part addressed research and development funding and the reduction of the number of officials: the focus of the discussion was 1% of GDP for research and development, and the potential implementation of plans, which also brought up several questions about how these promises would actually be realized. In addition, cooperation in reforming state governance and fulfilling the coalition's promises was highlighted, which were discussed and for which there is currently no clear and formal decision. The focus of the third part was on the accusations made in Lauri Läänemets’s interview and their impact on claims of the coalition's disintegration, and an analysis of the state’s secrets and the future role of the Chancellery of the Government. Overall, the agenda primarily consisted of discussion, not the formalization of specific decisions.

The topic of the third question during the Riigikogu debate was RMK, as a state-owned institution, and the transparency of its long-term contracts and potential state aid. Anastassia Kovalenko-Kõlvart posed a question regarding secret long-term contracts, noting that RMK commissioned a state aid analysis from COBALT for 24,000 euros. The analysis claimed that there was no prohibited state aid and that similar secret contracts could continue in the future. Critics also pointed out that the analysis may have been compiled to justify the contracts and did not address all characteristics of state aid, and that RMK would not have treated the contracts throughout their entire duration, but only at the time of signing. A previous audit by the National Audit Office showed the existence of state aid risks, and the debate deepened regarding how much and how publicly disclosed transactions and conflicts of interest should be controlled. The question remained whether ordering a special audit would be sensible and whether a new, broader analysis was even necessary.

The Riigikogu discussed the fourth question regarding the new government's tax policy. Riigikogu member Tanel Kiik posed a two-part question to Prime Minister Kaja Kallas: first, he argued in a critical tone, questioning why the VAT increase to 24% is being continued and why the repeatedly suggested VAT reduction on foodstuffs, which would help the public, especially during a difficult economic time, is not being implemented. He also inquired about the analyses and calculations on which the Reform Party's tax policy appears justified and reasonable during the crisis, compared with European practices. In the second part, he seemed to bring out whether the security tax is temporary and whether there are plans to make the measures permanent, which could mean the 24% VAT remaining as a permanent normal level, and whether the taxes will increase or decrease societal inequality.

Throughout the session, further questions and answers followed: Raimond Kaljulaid raised a question about NATO permits and the composition of the government, emphasizing that deadlines must be met and all necessary documents must be properly formatted. The responses indicated that the proper processing of permits and adherence to existing permissions are an important part of the government's operations. Generally, the debate focused on tax policy: what is planned to be done in the near future and what are the main changes and their impact on people, businesses, and the community. The session concluded the day, confirming that further discussions and bill processing will continue.

Within a series of five questions, the general interpretation and strengths of the mechanisms responsible for ensuring Estonia’s security were addressed. The survey primarily focused on the role of the USA and NATO alliance, and the extent to which there is a need to increase the role of the European Union as a potential security actor. The speaker raised a concern that the historical understanding of Estonia's security – "everything is tied to the capabilities of NATO and the USA" – is changing or diminishing in recent years, and asked for specific sources and plans for the development of the European Union's military capabilities. The discussion continued in a question and answer format, also addressing the level of defense spending, regional deterrence, and security cooperation between the USA and the European Union.

The sixth parliamentary question focused on the current situation in Estonian politics and potential solutions for overcoming the political deadlock. In his address, Urmas Reinsalu proposed that the country's political leadership should seriously consider the German model and, if necessary, steer the country towards new elections, should the parliamentary majority and the president both provide the opportunity and the request. The aim was to quickly obtain a clear plan that would help the Estonian state and its people avoid losing time and stabilize the security, economic, and social crises. It was also emphasized that in a democratic process, the rules of the constitution must be respected, along with the need to reduce the impact of the crisis of trust on the functioning of the state.

The seventh question focuses on Estonia’s foreign policy and the security of the Baltic states; the interviewer, Aleksandr Tšaplõgin, poses questions regarding the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. The discussion primarily concerns the role of the United States as a partner of Estonia and NATO, the continuation of US aid, and the mechanisms for ensuring the security of the Baltic states. It also touches on US-EU cooperation, European efforts to enhance defense capabilities, and Estonia’s contribution as an ally and the future of relations between them.

The second part focused on examples of recent developments in diplomatic discussions, including the issue of statements by Kaja Kallas and narratives directed toward the Kremlin by the Trump administration. The discussion expands in its final phase to the topic of aid given to Ukraine and the possibilities for peace, including the principle of territorial integrity and the steps leading to the probability of achieving peace. Overall, the agenda addresses key issues of foreign and security policy related to allied relationships, the overall positions of European states, and joint cooperation to strengthen security.

This agenda item concerned the supervision of competition law and its transposition into the European Union’s competition directive. The aim is to enhance competition supervision, make it more transparent, provide the Competition Authority with better tools, and ensure effective penalties for violations, which is essential for the functioning of a free market economy. The discussion centered on the transition to administrative or misdemeanor proceedings, and which judicial remedy (administrative versus civil court) should determine fines. In addition, experiences from different countries were highlighted, along with the increasing burden on businesses due to the 400,000-euro fine and the associated financial risk. Diverging viewpoints among the different coalition parties and the European Commission's initial responses to the transposition of the directive created a persistent mismatch of opinions, and a plan to present a new draft bill or to obtain a new solution from the Minister of Justice for consideration by the Riigikogu.

In the Riigikogu information session, Foreign Minister Margus Tsahkna discussed the creation of a national wealth fund and Estonia's accession to the US-initiated Minerals Security Partnership (MSP). The question was raised by Evelin Poolamets, who wanted to know about developments in this cooperation and the connection between Estonia’s mineral resources, particularly rare earth metals and phosphorite, and the country’s security. Minister Tsahkna emphasized the sensitivity of the topic in relation to the trauma of Soviet-era phosphorite mining, but confirmed that the government is conducting studies, the results of which will be available within a year. He stressed the need for an open and evidence-based debate and highlighted the Norwegian oil fund as an example of how to use accrued wealth wisely and sustainably. Poolamets then posed a clarifying question regarding Tsahkna's assurances that mining would not damage groundwater quality or the living environment of local residents. Following this, Martin Helme raised an additional question, sharply criticizing the government’s foreign policy line, accusing it of corruption and denigrating the Trump administration, and asking what was being done to improve relations. Tsahkna rejected Helme’s accusations as “unfounded lies full of unrestrained abuse,” affirmed that Estonia’s relations with the US are strong, and cited the restored military aid to the Baltic states as an example of the government's successful work.

A key item on the agenda was the Prime Minister’s presentation on the implementation of the long-term development strategy "Estonia 2035" for 2025, including an overview of the situation regarding research and development activities and the government’s policy in that area. The aim of the presentation was to provide a broad picture of the directions for the economy, security, energy security, and the country's digital performance, and to discuss the sequential steps and possible solutions necessary for these key areas. The presenter was Prime Minister Kristen Michal. The plenary session included a presentation lasting up to 30 minutes, and members of the Riigikogu had the opportunity to ask one question, with discussions open to parliamentary factions.

The main item on the agenda was the first reading of draft resolution 543 of the Riigikogu, aimed at establishing a Riigikogu investigative commission to examine the circumstances surrounding the termination of Nordica. The proposal is submitted by the fraction of the Conservative People's Party of Estonia (EKRE), and the commission's tasks include clarifying shortcomings in state oversight, identifying management errors and accountability, and assessing the ministry's actions during the period when Nordica's problems emerged. Nordica’s financing and termination (the November 2024 announcement and bankruptcy filing) highlighted the need to gather an impartial and broad-based overview, the results of which could form a reasoned basis for the Riigikogu’s future decisions and to improve political culture. In addition, consideration was given to how and whether Nordica and related companies should be terminated in the future in a way that would be most beneficial to Estonia's interests. The first reading also discussed deadlines and procedures, as the draft resolution has been submitted previously, and an extension of deadlines is likely.

The agenda item concerns the interpellation numbered 709, submitted on January 23, 2025, by Members of the Riigikogu Priit Sibula and Jaanus Karilaiu, regarding the impact of the VAT increase on the Ministry of Defence’s budget. The objective was to clarify how a further VAT increase affects the budget for the years 2025–2028 and which expenditure categories may increase, and which projects or resources may be lost or reduced due to the VAT increase. In addition, data were requested for each year regarding the Ministry of Defence’s budget expenditure lines, and an analysis of how tax changes may affect government policy, the price of procurement (including ammunition prices), and the implementation of investments.

The other party turned to the matter requesting that the Minister of Defence responds to the interpellation and explains the expected overall impact and whether and to what extent changes in tax-TV will affect the defence budget and future procurement plans. The discussion included both budget planning and separate, calculated impacts regarding troop formations and the potential impact of NATO financing.

Under agenda item three, the inquiry regarding the procurement of ammunition for a sum of 1.6 billion euros, presented to the Riigikogu on January 27, 2025, was discussed. The inquirers are Priit Sibul, Riina Solman, Helir-Valdor Seeder, Mart Maastik, and Aivar Kokk, and its purpose was to clarify why and when accelerated and supplementary ammunition procurement steps are planned, and whether previously stated positions can be altered to make a larger portion of the equipment available earlier. The discussion highlighted contradictions between the coalition and the opposition, and the question of whether the public has been misled, and what additional steps the government is considering regarding the seven-year plan, and whether faster delivery deadlines can be achieved by 2027 or even earlier than 2027.

The Riigikogu debated the submitted written motion of no confidence against Climate Minister Yoko Alender. The names of the initiators of the motion of no confidence included Martin Helme and parties representing a far broader constituency than his own, and the debate was structured: an introduction by the representative of the initiators, a speech by the minister, each Riigikogu member could pose up to two oral questions, and then negotiations were opened. The main focus was on the transparency of energy policy, the subsidization of offshore wind farms, and the scale of large investments, as well as the reliability of calculations and the risks of corruption and conflicts of interest. The debate reflected a deep political division and societal concerns regarding issues such as energy consumption forecasts, prices, and burdens on consumers. Finally, a vote was held, and the Riigikogu did not grant the motion of no confidence against the Climate Minister, meaning the minister's continuation was guaranteed and the agenda was concluded.

The agenda item concerns the second reading of the bill to amend the Animal Breeding Act, initiated by the Government of the Republic, in the Riigikogu. The presentation was made by the Chairman of the Riigikogu Rural Affairs Committee, Urmas Kruuse, who remains the committee chairman.

Following the first reading, a deadline was set for amendments and opinions were requested from various organizations, but no proposals or opinions were received. The Rural Affairs Committee discussed the bill for the second reading on February 17th and decided to send the bill to the plenary session with yesterday's date. The plenary session decided to amend the agenda and the presentation of this bill is taking place today. As a procedural measure, a decision was made to conclude the second reading, and if the second reading is concluded, the third reading will be organized on March 12th, and a final vote will be taken on bill 551 SE.

This agenda item concerned the first reading of draft law no. 567 amending the Hunting Act. The draft was submitted by Rain Epler, Arvo Aller, Mart Helme, Varro Vooglaiu, and Rene Kok, and the presentation was delivered from the Riigikogu rostrum by Riigikogu member Rene Kok. The purpose of the draft is to expand the right to regulate the killing of nuisance animals and game if they damage property or threaten the life and health of a person and their close ones, and this could involve situations where a hunting license is not held, but a hunting certificate is. The planned amendment provides that a person holding a hunting certificate may shoot nuisance animals and game that damage property or directly threaten the life and health of the person and their close ones, even without a hunting license. This raises significant discussion about property settlement, transitions, and security issues, and also addresses damage prevention and animal welfare concerns.

The Riigikogu discussed the first reading of draft law 554, initiated by the Government of the Republic, regarding the organization of research and development and innovation activities. Minister of Education and Science Kristina Kallas introduced the draft, which creates a comprehensive framework for the R&D&I field, defining the roles of parties, principles of funding, and the basis for assessing research ethics and quality. Among the most significant changes, the Minister highlighted the integration of strategic management of R&D&I, the expansion of the Research and Development Council's focus to innovation (new name: TAIPN), and the replacement of two policy commissions with a single steering commission. In funding, institutional operational support will become more stable (70% base portion, 30% results-based). For the first time, the organization of research ethics will be regulated, establishing a central research ethics committee and a commission for handling cases of misconduct alongside the Estonian Research Agency. University assessment of research quality will also be simplified, linking it to institutional accreditation.

In the subsequent discussion, members of the Riigikogu raised questions regarding the situation of national sciences, the stability of research funding, the transfer of private sector funding to the Ministry of Economic Affairs and Communications, and the analysis of the link between science and higher education funding. Speakers from the opposition expressed concern about the risk of political interference and ideological direction in science, to which the Minister responded, emphasizing the protection of academic freedom and the autonomy of researchers, and explaining that the councils are merely advisory bodies. The representative of the Culture Committee, Margit Sutrop, provided a detailed overview of the draft’s handling in the committee, highlighting proposals to fix R&D&I funding at 1% of GDP and to resolve inter-ministerial conflicts regarding the regulation of quality criteria for research projects. During the negotiations, the Social Democratic Party faction stressed the need to ensure sufficient security for researchers and flexibility for research institutions, avoiding the transformation of research funding into a tool for political influence. The consideration of the agenda item concluded with the completion of the first reading. The next agenda item remained unaddressed due to the absence of the presenter.

The discussion primarily focused on Estonian energy policy, potential uses for support mechanisms for offshore wind farms, and the €2.6 billion support package, the indexing of which the government and the Riigikogu are discussing. In addition, expected state aid rules, the impact of indexing on consumers, and the involvement of market participants were addressed, as was the white industry notification and its impact on industrial development and energy security. A substantive discussion encompassed both financial, economic, and technological aspects, including the need for grid connections, the impact of prices, and potential alternatives (onshore wind farms, a nuclear power plant special plan, new state aid approvals).

The discussion focused on a scheme for distributing 2.6 billion euros from state funds to wind energy companies and the related questions of transparency, conflicts of interest, and credibility. Critics claimed that the distribution of funds occurred within a narrow circle and that it may be underpinned by party agreements or private interests, with accusations extending to both the funding itself and ethical questions regarding the functioning of the state. At the same time, the discussion pointed to the need to continue the green transition and to find broader solutions for energy security and a reasonable level of energy prices, including the further development of onshore wind farms, the discussion of nuclear energy topics, and the evaluation of various options in light of the Net Zero Industry Act. This passage concluded with the note that the future goals for the topic are the efficiency of the energy system and the protection of consumer interests.

Within the framework of the third question, the topic of aviation was discussed: The Riigikogu asked Infrastructure Minister Vladimir Svet whether the Estonian state should intervene in aviation regarding Tallinn Airport fees and the sustainability of routes. Ryanair's announcement to close six routes from Tallinn starting in April generated some expectations and fears, as the reason given was the increase in airport fees. Other airlines (Wizz Air, Aegean Airlines, AirBaltic) also pointed to operational directions in Tallinn (various routes, partial or complete closures) and the noteworthy platform-based intention of the Dubai route. The central question was whether the Estonian state should intervene to ensure affordable flight options, a wider selection of destinations, and the sustainability of aviation in the European periphery.

Minister Svet responded that competition functions in the market and that state intervention in business negotiations is not recommended. He emphasized that trends in Tallinn show growth in both the number of routes and passenger capacity, and that the strategy is based on cooperation between the airport and private capital. A central element was also the sale of Nordica's assets and the channeling of the revenue into airport development, and there are ongoing plans to increase routes and daily flight operations, according to his assessment, within market conditions. However, it remained unaccented that the state does not want to intervene in individual business negotiations, but trusts the functioning of the market and the use of its infrastructure acceleration opportunities.

The fifth question concerned the topic of car tax. Member of the Riigikogu, Rene Kokk, raised a concern that the implementation of car tax creates significant confusion and unequal treatment – for example, the annual tax and registration fee may differ greatly for the same car model. Kokk presented specific examples and the public justification of the inquiry to explain why the tax system does not appear uniform and fair. In addition, the question was raised as to how many disputes regarding car tax are currently in proceedings, and how to ensure the transparency and understandability of taxation for citizens.

In the second part, discussion centered on compensation and covering special needs: people with disabilities and families with low incomes may need better impacts and clarification, as they can be significantly affected by car tax. The Prime Minister responded that a written overview and clarifications can be provided, and emphasized the approach agreed upon within the coalition – after implementation, an assessment will be made as to whether the differences and special cases function fairly, and mechanisms will be amended if necessary. The context of electric car usage and support for older electric cars was also discussed, and it was emphasized that the goal is a clearer and simpler tax system and that cases concerning treatment will be improved if they prove to be problematic.

Today’s sixth question before the Riigikogu concerns administrative oversight of the City of Narva and its managed general education schools in connection with the transition to Estonian-language instruction. The questioner is Member of the Riigikogu Aleksei Jevgrafov, and the central topic is how the oversight is organized, what its scope is, and what objectives it aims to achieve. It is noted that Narva’s municipal schools and one primary school, Narva Vanalinna Põhikool, have come under scrutiny, highlighting a lack of information—particularly concerning Narva and Kohtla-Järve—in the collection of specific information by state institutions regarding the implementation of Estonian-language instruction. The oversight will last for two months, and planned visits will be conducted without prior notification; the aim is to assess the quality of instruction in the first and fourth grades and to provide teachers with methodological support as needed.

The central focus of this seventh question was the confusion in energy policy and bringing it under better control. Based on a projected vision for the next 10–15 years, the Riigikogu considered what Estonia’s energy portfolio should look like: renewable resources (wind, sun, biomethane) and their connectivity, as well as current grid solutions (EstLink 1–3), in addition to the role of oil shale and the possibility of incorporating nuclear energy. The impact on consumer prices and the burden on the payer was also a significant consideration; price levels were compared to Finland, and the similarities and differences between calculations from various experts and the Ministry of Climate were examined. In this regard, it was pointed out that energy policy formation has not been transparent enough to date, and a more understandable and clear framework is needed that connects security issues, the stability of production capacity, and affordable energy consumption.

Eight questions in the Riigikogu addressed security-related topics, focusing on the continuation of aid to Ukraine and the role of Estonia and the European Union in that context. Mart Helme presented a series of critical and thorough observations: alternative approaches, from energy prices and the economic impacts of renewable energy to Estonia’s larger security plans and the development of its independent defense capability. He also raised questions concerning the anniversary of the Afghan president's presence in Kabul and the involvement of foreign countries, emphasizing that Estonia must safeguard its primary national interests and readiness to act for its people. The opening remarks and responses involved strong debate and substantive discussion in an area where energy security, capability, and cooperation with NATO and the European Union were inextricably intertwined with security policy.

The information session continued with an additional question posed by colleague Mart Helme (k2Jg87FGsDs) to Prime Minister Michal. Helme raised a significant defense policy dilemma, asking whether Estonia and Europe can realistically fulfill two major tasks simultaneously: continue assisting Ukraine in its current capacity and, at the same time, rapidly rebuild their independent defense capability, which has meanwhile been neglected. Helme wanted to know which is the priority, considering the possibility that the war in Ukraine might end sooner than expected, requiring Estonia to be quickly prepared.

Prime Minister Michal dismissed the assertion that Europe could not fulfill both tasks, emphasizing that assisting Ukraine and strengthening their own defense capabilities are inseparable, as Ukraine's fight is directly a fight for Europe's security. Michal urged Europe (which is 10–11 times larger economically) to "pull their socks up" and rapidly develop the defense industry. He expressed confidence that within three to seven years, there will be a very respectable defense industry sector in Europe and also in Estonia (which already has 153 companies in the defense industry association). The Prime Minister affirmed that the Estonian Defense Forces are necessary and resistance will be offered one hundred percent in any case.

The Riigikogu discussed the draft law amending the Constitution of the Republic of Estonia in its 536th second reading, aiming to restrict the right to vote in local government council elections from citizens of aggressor states (Russia and Belarus). The Chairman of the Constitutional Committee, Hendrik Johannes Terras, provided a detailed overview of the committee's seven sessions, where the opinions of several legal experts and security agencies were heard. The discussion mainly focused on whether the constitutional amendment should leave the definition of the right to vote open to stateless persons (holders of a "grey passport"). The opposition (Isamaa, EKRE) sharply criticized the coalition's proposal, arguing that it enshrines a security risk in the constitution, as many grey passport holders may have Russian citizenship.

Two amendments were put to a vote. The opposition's proposal (no. 1), which sought to limit the right to vote only to Estonian citizens, was rejected (25 in favor, 55 against). The coalition's proposal (no. 2), which removed a redundant sentence from the draft law regarding the conditions for electoral registers, was adopted (52 in favor, 24 against). After reviewing the amendments, the proposal by the EKRE and Centre Party factions to halt the second reading was also rejected (17 in favor, 61 against). The second reading of the draft law was completed, and the deadline for submitting new amendments was set for March 11th at 5:15 PM.