By Plenary Sessions: Helle-Moonika Helme

The political position is strongly opposed to the Rail Baltic project, viewing it as a pointless and inefficient investment of funds. It is emphasized that the priority should be the development of the domestic railway network (the Haapsalu, Pärnu, and Tartu lines). This stance is results-based, focusing on the project’s actual benefits, management errors, and the lack of clarity regarding security aspects.

The political stance is one of strong opposition, focusing on the government's incompetence in managing state finances and its ideological interference in public life. Key issues include the fiscal crisis, borrowing against future generations, and opposition to the so-called 'consent law,' with the government's actions being deemed unfit to govern and reminiscent of North Korea. The political framework is both results-oriented (the economic crisis) and values-oriented (social polarization).

The political position focuses on government accountability and the protection of state assets, criticizing the sale of state-funded strategic companies (such as Milrem Robotics) to foreign entities. Furthermore, it strongly opposes the removal of caps on land tax rates, which increases the burden on landowners and exacerbates the unfairness in local government financing. Its framework is heavily geared toward criticizing the government's actions and overall performance.

The political stance is strongly anti-government, emphasizing the necessity for ministers to assume responsibility for the chaos and corruption, and demanding their resignation. The speaker passionately defends Estonian sovereignty and parental rights, opposing both absurd pan-European taxes and mandatory vaccination for children. This position is deeply value-based, criticizing the ruling elite for clinging to power despite their support being in freefall.

The political stance is strongly anti-government, accusing the administration of incompetence and the deliberate use of fear (the threat of war) for the purpose of domestic political mobilization. The most salient issues concern the impact of national security messaging on the public's mental health and the economy, as well as family policy during times of crisis. This position is firmly opposed to tax hikes and spending cuts justified by war fears, while simultaneously demanding preparation for life, not just for war.

The political focus centers on the transparency of national defense funding and criticism leveled against the government's performance. The speaker vehemently opposes the management of the Ministry of Defence's 5 billion euro budget, citing corruption ("rats in the pantry") and referencing the State Audit Office report. Emphasis is also placed on public anger stemming from tax hikes and the government's tendency to label or stigmatize opponents, which ultimately diminishes the public's will to defend the country. This stance is fiercely oppositional and primarily targets the inefficiency of the government's operations.

The speaker stresses the critical role of beekeeping in ensuring food security and is highly critical of the state's failure to act in controlling the population of large predators (bears, wolves). The political position is strong, focusing on the government's inability to protect the assets and means of production belonging to primary producers (beekeepers, sheep farmers). This is results-oriented criticism that demands a concrete intervention plan from the state.

The political stance is fiercely oppositional, centered on criticizing the government’s actions and specific ministers (Kallas, Pakosta, Riisalo). Key issues include the shortcomings of the education reform (teacher workload, school closures), the plan to lease out prison capacity, and tax policy (specifically, lowering the VAT rate). This position is both value-driven (for instance, protecting national security and the education system) and procedural, stressing the necessity of improving the operational procedures of the Riigikogu (Parliament).