By Plenary Sessions: Varro Vooglaid

The political focus is currently directed at the government's energy sector development plan and the enormous costs associated with it. The speaker expresses strong opposition to the current process, criticizing the rushed nature of the decisions and the lack of broad support. The core issue being raised is primarily procedural and centered on financial accountability, demanding clarity regarding the cost, which runs into billions of euros.

The political position is strongly value-driven, focusing on opposing the teaching of the concept of social or psychological gender in Estonian schools. The speaker frames the opposing viewpoint as a "complete lie" and "ideological brainwashing," emphasizing a worldview rooted in biological facts. The stance is intensely confrontational and uncompromising.

The political position is strongly opposed to the draft law concerning the Georgian elections, labeling it as based on falsehoods and inappropriate interference in Georgia’s internal affairs. The central framework is value-based, emphasizing national sovereignty, non-interference in the internal affairs of other states, and the necessity of an independent foreign policy, contrasting this stance with the "subservience characteristic of vassals." The need to improve democracy and the electoral system in Estonia is also highlighted, demanding greater decision-making power for the populace.

The political position strongly centers on the principle of non-interference in the internal affairs of states, a principle deemed crucial for Estonian security. The speaker sharply criticizes the growing tendency in Europe to annul election results when they are not favorable to the central authorities of the European Union. The government's foreign policy is viewed as selective and hypocritical, prompting questions about the criteria used to justify intervention in Georgia but not in Romania. This political framework is value-based, emphasizing respect for sovereignty and democratic processes.

The political platform places a strong emphasis on the transparency and efficiency of the national defense budget. The speaker rejects a purely slogan-driven approach, instead demanding concrete analyses and a qualitative leap forward in development, rather than just a simple budget increase. The position is skeptical and results-oriented, raising doubts about the actual effect of the 1.6 billion euro expenditure on national defense capabilities.

The most important topic is energy security and the pace at which we phase out oil shale energy. The speaker expresses moderate opposition to the current plan, considering it premature, especially given the vulnerability of submarine cables revealed by the Estlink 2 incident, and the simultaneous disconnection from the Russian electricity grid. The shaping of this position is heavily policy- and risk-based.