By Plenary Sessions: Varro Vooglaid

The political position centers on the practical consequences and procedural expediency of denouncing international treaties. The speaker is concerned about whether terminating the agreement will cause real problems for Estonia, and offers suspending the treaty as an alternative, to avoid the significant effort required to reinstate it later. The argument is primarily policy- and procedure-driven.

The political position is strongly oppositional, centered on calling into question the government's actions and motives. The speaker vehemently opposes the fear-of-war campaign being disseminated on the streets of Tallinn, considering it inappropriate and suspecting that it is a strategic communication project designed to serve the government's interests, aimed at mobilizing the populace through fear given their low approval ratings.

The political position is strongly oppositional and results-oriented, focusing on the government's inaction regarding economic issues. He/She expresses deep skepticism that the government would take into account important proposals concerning energy prices, tax policies that undermine competitiveness, and over-regulation. The speaker sees a near-zero prospect for the situation to improve while the current government remains in office.

The political focus is on the continuity of international security and foreign policy. The speaker criticizes the government's actions, highlighting the contradiction between supporting Ukraine and the continued presence of the Estonian defense forces in Iraq, despite opposition from the local government. This position is value-based, demanding critical self-analysis from the government and the tackling of uncomfortable questions.

The political stance centers on student subsistence and the inadequacy of student loans, which compels students to seek employment. A question is raised regarding whether the current system guarantees optimal academic performance. This represents a policy question specifically focused on effectiveness and outcomes.

The political stance is clearly opposed to the government's tax policy, especially concerning the hike in VAT for accommodation services. It is stressed that the government’s decision to raise the VAT on accommodation establishments to 14% (instead of the general 22%) is illogical and demands an explanation. The focus is on the lack of substance in the policy and the absence of any numerical justification.