By Months: Õnne Pillak
Total Months: 17
Fully Profiled: 17
10.2025
6 Speeches
The primary criticism is aimed at the former EKREIKE government, which is accused of irresponsible fiscal management "during the good times" and dismantling the second pension pillar. Current critics of the budget deficit are dismissed as bitter and hypocritical, noting they failed to worry about the same issues previously. The criticism is predominantly political and intense, calling into question the opponents' past accountability.
09.2025
23 Speeches
The criticism is aimed at the opposition, who they accuse of painting an overly bleak picture of the economy and obstructing necessary decisions. The Centre Faction is specifically criticized for failing to support the construction of Rail Baltic, with their arguments being dismissed as emotional and lacking substance. The speaker rejects claims that the security dimension of Rail Baltic is simply empty rhetoric.
06.2025
5 Speeches
In procedural matters, the faction represented by the speaker is clearly opposed to changes to the agenda and the introduction of new agenda items. However, regarding substantive issues, the opposition’s draft bill will be supported, provided it aligns with the government’s objective of reducing bureaucracy, thereby demonstrating a pragmatic approach to achieving political goals.
05.2025
2 Speeches
He is critical of the opposition, accusing them of engaging in political theater, cluttering the legal framework, and submitting unnecessary bills solely for the purpose of generating a social media post. He sharply criticizes the discussion as a "truth commission" and asks them to stop the "mud-slinging and sharing of negative emotions."
04.2025
1 Speeches
The opposition is aimed at colleagues who downplay the consequences of women's discrimination or discuss everything but the topic at hand during the debate. The criticism targets their system of values and their procedure, as they do not consider the draft bill under discussion to be sufficiently important. The speaker criticizes the use of the word "but" after expressing support.
03.2025
4 Speeches
There is not enough data.
02.2025
4 Speeches
The main opponents are EKRE, Isamaa, and the Centre Party (EKREIKE), who are accused of engaging in political theater and diverting attention from a corruption scandal. Political criticism focuses on their opposition to all forms of development and their promotion of harmful energy policies designed to keep electricity prices high. The opponents are further criticized for their comfortable and politically simple stance of opposing everything (wind farms, nuclear power plants, and tram lines).
12.2024
1 Speeches
The opposition is aimed at the proposal to remove the third item from the agenda. The criticism is purely procedural and relates to the organization of the session's work.
11.2024
5 Speeches
The main opponents are the Centre Party faction, along with Urmas Reinsalu and Helle-Moonika Helme, whose proposals for changing the agenda are not supported by the faction. The opposition is strictly procedural, focusing on blocking any changes to the agenda. The stance on these issues is firm and uncompromising.
10.2024
3 Speeches
The speaker, on behalf of the Reform Party, expresses strong opposition to changing the agenda and adopts a critical position toward the government regarding budget cuts. This opposition is directed at the government's policy and the procedures of the Riigikogu (Estonian Parliament), demanding guarantees from the government concerning the inviolability of social benefits.
09.2024
5 Speeches
The speaker politically criticizes two opposing approaches to organizing state finances: the rapid escalation of the state's debt burden and a sharp increase in the tax burden. The criticism is policy-based, emphasizing that these choices would lead to instability and hinder economic growth. Furthermore, they contrast with Isamaa's proposals, requesting that they be voted down on behalf of the Reform Party faction.
07.2024
3 Speeches
The opposition is being criticized for trying to blow the issue out of proportion and minimizing the necessary changes made for people with disabilities. The speaker acknowledges that convincing the opposition to support the motor vehicle tax is impossible, but demands that they recognize the importance of the accompanying support measures. The criticism is based on policy and procedure.
06.2024
5 Speeches
The criticism is aimed at the opposition (EKREIKE deputies, the Center Party), accusing them of deception, lying, and hypocrisy concerning the past taxation of pensions. It strongly refutes claims about cutting pensions, labeling them as falsehoods, and criticizes the Center Party for its unfulfilled election promises.
05.2024
4 Speeches
The primary target of criticism is the Centre Party, which is being blamed for its previous failure to increase benefits for disabled adults during the economic boom. The criticism is policy-based and intense, directly refuting the opposing side's claims regarding the initiation of social measures.
04.2024
4 Speeches
Political opponents are not criticized; instead, we address the objections and proposals submitted by interest groups (e.g., the Chamber of Commerce and Industry, the Chamber of Bailiffs). Opposition to the proposals is justified by the requirements concerning resources (medical personnel/capacity) and international law (the European Social Charter). Criticism is directed at the details of policy implementation, not the general objective of the draft legislation.
03.2024
19 Speeches
The criticism is aimed at the opposition's claims that nothing has been done for families with children, a point to which the speaker responds with a list of specific legislative amendments. He/She notes that the opposition (the EKRE faction) prolonged the adoption of some changes and submitted numerous mutually exclusive amendments. The speaker argues against simplified solutions (e.g., merely raising benefits), emphasizing the complex and multifaceted nature of families' needs.
02.2024
1 Speeches
The speaker assumes unanimous support for the declaration and expresses surprise should it not be forthcoming, indicating a lack of resistance on the matter being addressed. Direct criticism of opponents is absent.