By Plenary Sessions: Signe Riisalo
Total Sessions: 9
Fully Profiled: 9
2025-10-15
The 15th Riigikogu, VI Session, Plenary Sitting
There is no criticism; the speaker rather neutrally references the sharp remarks and questions made by members of the opposition (e.g., Kalle Grünthal, Tanel Kiik, Helmen Kütt, Riina Solman). On certain points, such as the limit for protected savings, the opposition's positions are agreed with, acknowledging that it is "a shamefully small sum."
2025-09-17
15th Riigikogu, 6th sitting, plenary sitting.
The criticism is aimed at the proponents of the specific draft bill, who are accused of proposing an inefficient and overly costly solution that fails to target poverty effectively. The criticism is based on policy and resources, not personal grounds, and stresses that there is no point in forcing one's way through an open door.
2025-06-18
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary session
The main opponent is Urmas Reinsalu, who is sharply criticized for leveling sweeping and irrelevant accusations that were presented "without knowing the substance." The criticism is aimed at the opponent's incompetence and the unfair attack against the political process.
2025-06-11
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary sitting
No direct or intense confrontation is evident; the amendments proposed by the Centre Party faction (e.g., raising the age limit to 21) are handled as part of the standard procedure. The speaker mildly criticizes the practice of adding a provision unrelated to the bill, citing its unethical nature, but bases this criticism on the opinion of another committee member (Helmen Kütt).
2025-06-04
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary session
The opposition is directed at the continued processing of the draft bill, which is technically inefficient because the law being amended will soon lose validity. The criticism is purely procedural and aimed at ensuring the efficiency of the legislative process, not specific political opponents.
2025-05-15
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary session
There is no direct opposition or criticism aimed at specific political opponents. Instead, the criticism is directed at the ministry's inability to present a clear future vision regarding vocational training for young people with special needs.
2025-05-14
15th Riigikogu, 5th sitting, plenary session
Opponents are directly criticized for presenting half-truths and failing to thoroughly examine the draft legislation. The criticism is aimed at political inaccuracy and procedural negligence, particularly regarding the claims that people with special needs will be placed in a worse position.
2025-05-07
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary sitting
The speaker pushes back against criticism regarding the draft bill's alleged socialist nature, the increased burden on local municipalities, and insufficient consultation, dismissing these claims as half-truths. The primary critics include the Central Confederation of Trade Unions (focusing on funding issues), the Chamber of Commerce and Industry (concerned about rising costs), and political opponents who question the reform's motivating impact. The speaker rejects assertions that the number of beneficiaries will decrease or that the financing for the subsistence allowance is inadequate.
2025-04-23
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary session
The speaker does not directly criticize opponents but neutrally conveys the concerns and questions raised in the committee regarding the scope of the bills or their legal ramifications. He highlights questions posed by colleagues and guests (e.g., Varro Vooglaid, Priit Sibul) related to the absence of conventions addressing the discrimination of men and the legal consequences of failing to execute an end-of-life declaration.