By Plenary Sessions: Varro Vooglaid

The political position is one of strong opposition to the large-scale wind and technology park project being implemented by the government, a project deemed contrary to the best interests of Estonian society. The speaker emphasizes that the project serves narrow corporate interests, and that their stance is fundamentally value-based, focused on protecting the welfare of the people. Crucial elements include the protection of property owners and ensuring fair compensation for easements (or "servitude fees"), citing Danish law as an example.

The speaker adopts a strong, value-based position against the current e-voting system, stressing that it undermines democratic legitimacy and constitutional principles. The primary political objective is to restore confidence in the electoral system—which nearly 40% of citizens distrust—and to strongly advocate for the establishment of an investigative committee. This position is fundamentally procedural and rooted in the rule of law, thereby calling into question the legal force of legislation passed by a parliament installed as a result of those elections.

The political focus centers on the decision-making process for major infrastructure projects (offshore wind farms and the reconstruction of the electricity grid). The speaker is a strong proponent of direct democracy, stressing that the ultimate sovereign power rests with the people, and proposes holding a national referendum for decisions that have far-reaching consequences. This stance is value-based, focusing on democratic procedures and respect for the will of the people.

The political position is strongly geared towards direct democracy, demanding the organization of a referendum concerning the gigantic offshore wind farm project, citing the first paragraph of the Constitution. Emphasis is placed on the right of the people, as the bearer of the supreme state power, to make decisions, particularly when billions of euros and extensive environmental impact are involved. This stance is value-based, focusing on popular sovereignty.

The political position is strongly opposed to the motor vehicle tax, which is deemed unfair and unconstitutional for several reasons. The focus is value-based, emphasizing the obligation to provide special care for large families and people with disabilities, an obligation that the imposed tax violates. The speaker criticizes the government's deliberate disregard for the constitution when adopting the law.

The political stance is fiercely anti-government, centered on opposing tax hikes (such as the car tax and land tax) and draft legislation that infringes upon the rule of law and religious freedom. It stresses constitutional values, particularly the protection of large families and people with disabilities, and condemns the government's actions as shameful, dishonest, and manipulative. The political framework itself is strongly value-driven and highly critical of the government's performance.

The political focus is currently centered on the transparency and accountability of state spending, particularly concerning the 100 million euro defense industry order placed for Ukraine. The speaker sharply criticizes the lack of information regarding the companies involved, the products, and the prices, thereby calling the government's priorities into question by contrasting this expenditure with the difficulties faced in funding teacher salary increases. The stance taken is strongly demanding of transparency and is results-oriented.

The political position is strongly opposed to the inaccurate representation of the bill's content, particularly concerning the sanctions imposed for violating gender balance requirements. It is stressed that the draft legislation mandates substantial monetary penalties (up to 400,000 euros), contrary to the claims made by the opposing side. This discrepancy points to fierce political resistance regarding the manner in which the bill is being presented. Furthermore, a question is being raised about the legal definition of gender identity (biological versus social gender) within the law.