By Plenary Sessions: Mart Maastik

A strong opposition stance focused on criticizing the government’s actions and administrative capacity. They are particularly opposed to the reorganization of the Ministry of Climate, deeming it costly (2 million) and ineffective. Accountability and answers are being demanded regarding previous issues (the Lehtme case), highlighting the government’s lack of transparency.

The political position is strongly opposed to state support schemes for renewable energy, which are viewed as market distortion and a socialist approach. The speaker emphasizes the need for adherence to market economy principles and supports all competitive and clean energy types, including dispatchable energy (oil shale, biomass). The stance is skeptical regarding the fulfillment of climate goals, prioritizing energy security and economic competitiveness.

The political position centers on a sharp critique of the government's budget and bureaucracy policies. The speaker strongly opposes the government's "modern austerity policy," providing examples of job relocations within the purview of the Ministry of Climate that actually end up increasing costs. The focus is placed squarely on the government's actual performance and its inefficiency, framing the argument as performance- and policy-based criticism.

The political focus centers on the government’s actions and accountability amidst a perceived crisis. The speaker heavily criticizes the Reform Party’s tendency to blame their coalition partners (the Social Democrats, EKREIKE) for failures, thereby questioning their capacity to accept responsibility. The stance is strongly anti-government, focusing on the administration’s performance and its failure to demonstrate value-based accountability.

The political focus is on demanding accountability for the financial failures of state-owned enterprises and major projects (Nordica, Eesti Energia). The speaker sharply criticizes a political culture where nobody is held responsible for the squandering of billions of euros, contrasting this with the accountability standards of the private sector. This position is strongly opposed to the government's inaction and is framed primarily as both value-based criticism (centered on accountability) and results-based criticism (focused on inefficiency).