By Plenary Sessions: Andres Metsoja

Total Sessions: 4

Fully Profiled: 4

2024-01-23
15th Riigikogu, 3rd sitting, plenary session
The political platform focuses on economic growth and innovation, emphasizing the necessity of adding value to Estonia's national resources (agriculture, forestry, oil shale). The speaker criticizes the government's actions, pointing out that innovation has remained superficial and that entrepreneurs lack the confidence needed for investment. The primary objective is to increase the prosperity of the Estonian people, thereby calling the government's effectiveness into question.
2024-01-22
15th Riigikogu, 3rd session, plenary sitting
The political focus centers on the critical state of the electricity grid and ensuring security of supply, demanding a clear investment plan from the government to cover the estimated billion-euro funding gap. Criticism is aimed at the current inertia and the neglect of the living environment in rural areas. Furthermore, emphasis is placed on the contradiction between the recently enacted deforestation fee and the necessity of expanding power line corridors. The discussion is strongly results-oriented and values-driven, underscoring the need to maintain the integrity of the state.
2024-01-17
15th Riigikogu, 3rd sitting, information briefing
The political stance is highly critical of the government's economic policy, stressing the necessity of budget balance and protecting the economy. The criticism targets the absence of a concrete economic recovery plan and ambiguous decisions that have resulted in economic regression. The speaker urgently calls for clear economic positions and a cross-parliamentary agreement. The political framework is distinctly results-oriented and focuses on economic performance.
2024-01-09
15th Riigikogu, 3rd session, plenary session
The political position focuses on the rapid elimination of the legal loophole related to the alienation of national defense lands, emphasizing that the current situation is "the height of absurdity" and contradicts the legislator's original intent. The position is strongly policy- and value-based, demanding proportionality from the state: if the state takes the land for national defense, it must also relinquish the designated purpose when the object is no longer required. The aim is to ensure that the primary national defense designation automatically ceases upon the execution of the state property alienation transaction.