By Plenary Sessions: Siim Pohlak

The political position is strongly oppositional, focusing primarily on abolishing the Riigikogu’s expense allowances and addressing the credibility of e-voting. The abolition of these allowances is strongly supported, citing the need for fairness and improving Parliament’s reputation. The government’s economic policy is criticized as incompetent, having led the country into Europe’s deepest economic crisis.

The political stance is strongly focused on supporting cancer patients, proposing to reduce the VAT on cancer medicines to 5% and establish an additional support measure to enhance the accessibility of these drugs. This position is driven by a social necessity, given that the current solidarity-based healthcare system does not cover all essential medications. This represents a policy- and value-driven approach, underscoring the need for governmental attention.

The political position is vehemently opposed to the government's (Reform Party's) tax policy, which critics have dubbed the "tax experiment" and the "tax spree." The primary demand is the reduction of VAT on food and medicines to mitigate the impact of the economic crisis. This is contrasted with the government's decision to abolish the tax bracket that favored the wealthy. The overall stance is strongly rooted in values and outcomes, highlighting inequality and the suffering experienced by the populace.

The political position is strongly critical of the current model of "liberal democracy" in Estonia, which it labels as a "post-serfdom democracy." The primary emphasis is placed on increasing direct democracy through referendums, arguing that the current system excludes the public from governance. This stance is values-driven, focusing specifically on the lack of citizen engagement.

The political stance is strongly opposed to the government's proposed car tax bill, focusing on its social impact, particularly on large families. The speaker calls into question the thoroughness of the government's analysis, demanding specific budgetary data regarding the cost of potential tax exemptions. The focus remains on the policy's effectiveness and value-based social justice.

The political position is strongly oppositional toward the government's actions, particularly in education policy, where the "retreat policy" that facilitates the closure of the third school stage is criticized. The speaker views the government's actions as an avoidance of responsibility and "passing the buck" between the state and local municipalities. Furthermore, he expresses deep skepticism regarding the climate crisis, viewing it as a historically recurring panic that only results in tax increases.

The speaker is fiercely opposed to the government's economic and tax policies, accusing the administration of prioritizing the interests of banks and big capital at the expense of ordinary Estonian people and small businesses. The political stance is deeply rooted in values, stressing the need for fairness in tax distribution and criticizing the government for ignoring the will of the people. The main themes addressed are the unfairness of the tax burden and the economic recession.