By Plenary Sessions: Tiit Maran

The speaker emphasizes that the current decision-making process lacks negotiation, debate, and balanced judgment, indicating that they value thorough discussion and consensus. Direct cooperation or a willingness to compromise is not demonstrated in this speech; rather, the speaker criticizes the opposing side for its lack of these qualities.

The speaker stresses the need for broader cooperation and inclusion, demanding the involvement of scientists, environmental advocates, and trade unions in government councils. This indicates a desire to bring a wider spectrum of experts and stakeholders into the decision-making process to ensure balanced decisions.

The speaker underscores the need for broad-based engagement and building trust between the state and its citizens. He points out that the development plan for the environmental sector involved numerous ministries, stakeholders, experts, and scientists, and calls for the continued inclusion of all parties in strategic planning. Restoring trust with landowners is set as the primary objective of the compensation scheme.

As the Commission's representative, he stresses the need for consensual decisions during the handling of the draft legislation (e.g., the motion to conclude the first reading). Nevertheless, his personal stance and that of his faction are uncompromising: they propose suspending the bill's proceedings until the issues of landowner compensation and civil rights have been resolved.

There is too little data.

The speaker commends the initiators of the amendment (the Isamaa faction) for its necessity and notes that procedural decisions within the committee were made consensually. Nevertheless, he expresses disappointment that his own substantive proposals, which the hunters deemed necessary, were disregarded due to political opposition, citing ineffective cooperation on matters of substance.

Not enough data.