Agenda Profile: Priit Sibul

The political position is strongly critical of the Ministry of Education and Research's capacity to implement reforms and the lack of necessary resources. The sharpest criticism is leveled against replacing compulsory schooling with compulsory learning, which is viewed as a meaningless exchange of words that fails to address the real underlying problems. A key priority is reforming the per-capita funding model to ensure that the taxpayer's contribution is consistent regardless of the school's form of ownership. The position is primarily results-oriented, focusing on the ministry's inefficiency and the systemic deficiencies.

The speaker demonstrates detailed knowledge of education system funding models (per-capita funding), school network planning, and the impacts of establishing state gymnasiums. Special emphasis is placed on the impact of socio-economic background on student dropout rates and the need for additional resources and a personalized approach. Issues concerning the payment of supplementary allowances for the transition to Estonian-language education are also highlighted.

The rhetorical style is analytical, skeptical, and sharply critical, employing strong metaphors (e.g., "Potemkin village") and irony ("By the pike's command, by my will: oven, drive!"). The speaker balances logical argumentation concerning the lack of resources with a personal anecdote about a deskmate’s educational journey to highlight systemic failures. The overall tone is formal, but the attacks on the ministry's competence are direct.

The speaker is participating in the Riigikogu session, which focuses on the report by the Minister of Education and Research concerning the implementation of the national long-term development strategy "Estonia 2035." Activity patterns outside this parliamentary debate are not evident.

The main criticism is directed at the Ministry of Education and Research (HTM), citing a lack of capacity and failed planning. The criticism is policy-based and procedural, noting, for example, that the ministry had to hire an external academic (Aaviksoo) just to dissect the school network issue. The opposition is intense, accusing the ministry of building "Potemkin villages."

The speaker values the substantive debate taking place in parliament but emphasizes that implementing reforms requires a more personalized approach, or "tailor-made solutions." Furthermore, greater trust is called for in schools and school leaders, especially concerning issues of internal evaluation and measurement.

The regional focus is directed towards Ida-Virumaa, where there are problems concerning the transfer of supplementary payments promised to Estonian-speaking teachers. Additionally, the example of Põlva is used to illustrate the negative consequences of the centralized model for establishing state high schools on the local school network.

Economic views focus on the fair and equitable distribution of taxpayer money among state, private, and municipal schools through the reform of the per-capita funding model. It is emphasized that for the successful implementation of these reforms, it is essential to allocate additional resources, rather than just exchanging words, given the prevailing lack of funding within the system.

Education is the primary social issue, widely regarded as the greatest asset of Estonian society. Emphasis is placed on how socio-economic background affects student dropout rates, highlighting the need for systemic support that is currently unavailable. There is also criticism regarding the overloading of school curricula with social topics such as family studies and financial literacy, which ultimately dilutes core instruction.

The legislative focus is currently on replacing compulsory school attendance with mandatory learning until the age of 18, alongside reforms to the school network and the per-capita funding model. The speaker is a critic of these reforms, demanding specific resources and evidence that these solutions will actually work.