By Plenary Sessions: Helir-Valdor Seeder

The political position is strongly opposed to the draft election law, particularly the provisions concerning voting via smart devices, emphasizing the risks to public trust and security. This stance is deeply procedural, criticizing the unlawful bundling of amendments and the violation of the fundamental rights of Riigikogu members. The Isamaa faction demands the interruption of the second reading of the bill in order to take expert comments into account and ensure the integrity of the elections. This position is rooted in core values (democratic elections, the rule of law) and adherence to proper procedure.

The political stance is strongly oppositional, focusing on the demographic crisis and the reduction of benefits for large families. The speaker opposes the government’s policy, which, in their estimation, consciously pits families with one or two children against larger families. This position is framed around core values, emphasizing the sustainability of the Estonian nation-state and the critical necessity of investing in children. The speaker criticizes the government’s actions due to the revocation of promises and the undermining of legal certainty.

The political stance is heavily focused on security, stressing the necessity of revoking the voting rights of third-country nationals in local elections, viewing this as a matter of Estonian national security. Simultaneously, it sharply criticizes the government for implementing tax hikes, arguing that tax collection is being prioritized over security. This position is strongly opposed to the government's current activities and is results-driven, highlighting the administration's perceived lack of action.

The political stance is fiercely oppositional, centered on defending the Riigikogu's rules of procedure and constitutional voting requirements, alongside the ideological critique of the government's economic policy. The speaker is convinced that the opposition is correct on procedural matters, even when the coalition uses its majority to vote them down. The framework is dual: procedural (the constitution) and political (the contentious nature of tax increases and spending).