By Plenary Sessions: Tanel Kiik

Insufficient data

The speaker poses a critical question regarding the government’s tax policy, asserting that the current tax amendments (the VAT hike and income tax reforms, such as the removal of the tax kink) disproportionately hurt low-wage earners, while benefiting the wealthy. The critique is directed at the government’s general policy, rather than being a personal attack on the minister, and further expresses worry about the worsening accessibility of the cultural sector.

The speaker launched a scathing attack on the Reform Party and other right-wing parties over the injustice of the tax system, accusing them of decades of favoring the wealthiest segment of society. Intense criticism was also leveled against the EKRE representative, who faces accusations of three criminal convictions and abuse of power in Tallinn. Furthermore, the speaker demanded that the Riigikogu debates maintain their focus strictly on the scheduled agenda topics. The critique is both intense and systematic, addressing both personal allegations and fundamental political points of contention.

The speaker expresses strong opposition to the government, particularly concerning the minister whom he accuses of expanding the scope of the draft bill. The criticism targets both the political substance and the process itself—he accuses the government of ignoring feedback from stakeholders and doing the exact opposite of what was discussed during the consultations.

The commentator sharply criticizes the Reform Party regarding their conduct toward the Chancellor of Justice. He accuses the party both of employing an aggressive style and of leveling accusations of political interference against others. He demands that the Reform Party adopt a more humble and empathetic approach when responding to expert criticism, citing the attacks on the head of the Institute of Economic Research as another example. The critique is unambiguous and calls for a fundamental change in the party's behavior.

The speaker adopts a clearly oppositional stance toward the government, criticizing the Prime Minister for demagoguery and accusing the cabinet of ignoring social partners in the labor market. The critique is both policy-based (specifically the draft Employment Contracts Act) and procedural (misuse of the information hour/Q&A session). The speaker demands that the Speaker of the Riigikogu intervene regarding the conduct of government members during the information hour, stressing the opposition's limited ability to pose questions.

The speaker criticizes the Government of the Republic for employing double standards, highlighting the contradiction between the gender balance requirements imposed on listed companies and the composition of the cabinet itself (nine men, four women). The criticism is primarily policy-driven, focusing on the lack of consistency in the government's actions. The speaker also expresses concern regarding the quality of the debate taking place in parliament, criticizing the approach as one that "digs for pretexts" or "seeks out petty excuses."