By Plenary Sessions: Urmas Reinsalu

The speaker adopts a strongly opposing stance regarding the government's fiscal policy, criticizing its irresponsibility, unpredictability, and lack of long-term vision. The primary political objective is the postponement, for at least four years, of the income tax-free minimum reform (the abolition of the tax hump/kink) planned by the Reform Party, as its cost—1.2% of GDP—is unaffordable for the state. The criticism is primarily policy- and performance-based, accusing the government of relaxing budgetary rules and knowingly submitting a false program to the European Commission.

The speaker positions himself as a staunch critic of the government's actions, focusing on the administration's lack of vision in energy policy and its financial irresponsibility. While he supports the teachers' pay raise, he sharply criticizes the procedural style used to implement it and the government's overall prioritization. He views initiatives to change electoral rules as populist distractions, stressing the necessity for comprehensive and rational policy. The political framework is heavily geared toward criticizing the government's poor performance and failures.

The political position is strongly oppositional, focusing on government transparency and public trust. The speaker sharply criticizes the presentation of misinformation to Parliament and the government's inability to address the reduction of administrative costs and economic stimulation. The main framework emphasizes government inefficiency and "deceptive politics." The political strategy is heavily geared toward criticizing the government's performance and ethical standards.

The political focus centers on the government coalition's broken promises, particularly the scrapping of the income tax exemption for the average pension, which has been dubbed "lying politics." The speaker adopts a position of strong opposition to the cascade of tax hikes, stressing the necessity of rational governance. The political framework is clearly results-oriented and values-driven (honesty), cautioning the public against trusting the ruling parties in the upcoming European Parliament elections.

The speaker adopts a strongly oppositional stance regarding the incumbent government's economic policy, accusing it of undermining Estonia's competitiveness and destroying confidence in the economy. The political framework is clearly results-oriented, focusing on the government's failures concerning tax hikes, bureaucracy, and the slow utilization of EU structural funds. The primary task is for the government to abandon its anti-economic measures.

The political focus is split into two areas: strong, value-based support for assisting Ukraine using frozen Russian assets, recognizing the inherent value in setting such a precedent, and fierce opposition to the government’s leftist, restriction- and tax-heavy "climate socialism." It vigorously defends Estonian homeowners, forest owners, and businesses against additional levies. The stances are overwhelmingly policy- and value-driven, emphasizing economic liberty and the sound management of state finances.

The political stance is strongly opposed to the government's financial management, highlighting the failure of state budget targets in 2023, 2024, and the worst-case scenario projected for 2025. The speaker demands concrete numerical data regarding budget execution, citing significant confusion surrounding the nation's financial status. This constitutes a forceful, results-oriented critique of the government's fiscal policy.

The most crucial issue is the suspension or revocation of voting rights for Russian citizens based on security considerations. The political position is firmly directed toward restricting suffrage, stressing the necessity to "live in truth" and cease the manipulation of the public. This is a stance framed strongly around core values and centered on security concerns.

The political position is strongly results-oriented, focusing on the crisis in the government's fiscal policy and non-compliance with the Maastricht criteria. Also at the forefront is strong opposition to the violation of the Riigikogu Rules of Procedure Act, which is evident in the arbitrary bundling of proposed amendments. It vigorously supports the swift implementation of the law concerning the utilization of Russian oligarchs' assets, viewing this as an opportunity to establish an international precedent.

The political stance is strongly oppositional, demanding the prime minister's resignation due to a crisis of leadership and indecisiveness within the government. The primary focus areas are the economic recession, the detrimental effects of tax hikes, and the necessity of reducing government expenditure. The policy framing is clearly outcome-based, emphasizing Estonia's position amidst Europe's deepest economic downturn.

The political stance is strongly oppositional toward Kaja Kallas’s government, demanding the resignation of the prime minister and the cabinet due to their indecisiveness and "deceptive policies." The main issues include separating Estonia from Russia's sphere of influence (which encompasses resolving the church schism and addressing the voting rights of citizens of the aggressor state) and the vigorous implementation of the transition to Estonian-language education. Although the motion of no confidence against the Minister of Education is supported, the objection regarding the shift to Estonian-language education is not fundamental; rather, it concerns the government's inability to fulfill salary promises and resolve ongoing crises. These positions are strongly value-based, focusing on security and the national interest.