By Plenary Sessions: Helir-Valdor Seeder

The speaker holds a strongly oppositional stance, focusing on two main themes: opposition to the tax burden and the emphasis on the long-term perspective of security issues. He sharply criticizes the government’s economic policy and tax hikes, demanding a reduction in the tax burden for both private citizens and businesses. Regarding security matters, he stresses foresight and deems the accession to the 2004 convention a short-sighted error, supporting its annulment.

The political position heavily emphasizes the stability of agricultural policy and rural development, calling for a strategic approach. The most pressing demand is the need for legislation protecting fertile agricultural land, which is viewed as a strategically vital issue because it is a non-renewable natural resource. Criticism is aimed at the government's structural instability and the absence of a substantive response, underscoring the necessity of a policy-based framework.

The political focus is heavily centered on national security, supporting the adoption of a bill deemed essential for Estonia's security and consistent with the constitution. The speaker adopts an oppositional stance, demanding clarity from the coalition regarding the 20% budget cuts and criticizing colleagues who have, seemingly overnight, acquired a surprisingly strong faith in the president's authority. Their framework is primarily policy- and value-based (security) and procedural (constitutionality).

The speaker strongly emphasizes the crucial role played by professional civil servants and contrasts this with the government’s purely rhetorical approach to reducing bureaucracy and implementing cuts. The political focus is on holding the ruling coalition (the Reform Party and Eesti 200) accountable for both the vague budget cuts and the offensive domestic rhetoric. He/She heavily criticizes the government’s actions, viewing them as slogan-driven rather than substantive.

The most prominent issue is the procedural correctness of the Riigikogu session and the minister's obligation to be physically present during the debate on their report. The speaker is strongly opposed to the minister participating remotely, deeming it precedent-setting and inappropriate, as it diminishes the minister's actual involvement and accountability. The focus is clearly on institutional functionality and ensuring accountability.