By Months: Tiit Maran
Total Months: 10
Fully Profiled: 10
12.2024
2 Speeches
The criticism is aimed primarily at systemic inertia, the government's reactive approach to environmental policy, and the fact that Estonia is lagging behind the EU. The trade system and production habits that promote excessive plastic use and the generation of food waste are also criticized. The criticism is focused on policy and procedure, not personal.
11.2024
7 Speeches
He/She indirectly criticizes those colleagues who deny the anthropogenic nature of climate change or the scientific consensus, labeling their claims as "strange" and "baseless." Strong criticism is also directed at the Riigikogu (Estonian Parliament) procedures, which prevent speakers from responding to biased or false accusations leveled against them, deeming this practice unfair.
10.2024
4 Speeches
The opposition is directed at the government's structural reforms, particularly the reallocation of planning powers, with critics describing the responses as inadequate and arbitrary. Strong opposition is also aimed at the institutional influence of the church branch linked to Russia, which is viewed as a potential security threat and a weapon in the war. The criticism is primarily based on policy and procedure.
09.2024
2 Speeches
The criticism is directed at legislative procedures, particularly the practice of introducing conceptual changes under the guise of simple amendments. The opposition is policy- and procedure-based, targeting the methods used by the bill sponsors, rather than the individuals themselves. The technical inconsistency of the renewable energy and nature conservation bill is also being criticized.
06.2024
14 Speeches
The criticism targets the policies and procedures of the government (or the ruling coalition), particularly concerning the rushed decision on nuclear energy and the absence of necessary analyses. It specifically critiques decisions being made based on lobbying and raises doubts about the operational procedures of the Environmental Committee, given that the conditional nature of the proposed amendments was not considered. Furthermore, factual claims regarding energy prices are being challenged, with demands for information that accurately reflects reality.
05.2024
6 Speeches
The criticism is directed against the political choices of the Ministry of Climate and the government, particularly concerning the Climate Act’s narrow economic focus and the prioritization of nuclear energy. The opposition is primarily procedural and political, criticizing the timing of decisions (nuclear energy being decided before the development plan) and the lack of clarity in the policy (e.g., the 30% of "well-protected" nature). Separate opposition is also highlighted regarding fast-growing timber plantations and the preparations for phosphorite mining.
04.2024
9 Speeches
The criticism is not aimed at specific individuals, but rather at procedural deficiencies and political assumptions. In particular, there is criticism of rushing and the bundling of unrelated topics into emergency legislation, and the assumption that agriculture is always beneficial to biodiversity is being challenged. Furthermore, a warning is issued against emotional lobbying concerning the issue of nuclear energy.
03.2024
3 Speeches
Direct political opposition is not voiced, but criticism is leveled at the procedural haste and the potential risks associated with the emergency legislative amendment, particularly concerning the provision of replacement land. Concern is also expressed regarding the difficult position of the head of the Environmental Board when making a considered decision that runs counter to the interests of the Minister of Defence. The criticism is aimed at the procedure used to draft the bill and its potential consequences.
02.2024
1 Speeches
The counter-argument targets the previous speaker’s points, specifically their advocacy for treating insect protein meal separately based on cultural unfamiliarity or potential health risks. This critique is grounded in policy and data, challenging both the definition of cultural boundaries and the evidentiary basis used to prove health risks.
01.2024
4 Speeches
The opposition is directed against existing environmental usage practices (the discharge of used water into the receiving body) and political assumptions. The speaker criticizes the view that the removal of the monument is necessary to ensure the credibility of identity. Furthermore, he/she demands specific data (the proportions of nanoparticles in the fuel) from the presenters when claims concerning environmental problems are made.