By Plenary Sessions: Pipi-Liis Siemann
Total Sessions: 27
Fully Profiled: 27
2025-10-09
15th Riigikogu, 6th Session, Plenary Sitting
The criticism is aimed more at the structural inertia and the slow pace of procedural processes within the public sector, which prevents the reduction of staff numbers. Specific political opponents or groups are not being criticized.
2025-09-24
Fifteenth Riigikogu, sixth sitting, plenary sitting.
No opposition exists; the address is focused on raising questions and seeking solutions, while acknowledging the minister's work to date.
2025-09-23
15th Riigikogu, 6th session, plenary session
There is no opposition. The speech is neutral and focuses on presenting the commission's work, rather than criticizing other parties. Instead, the focus was on highlighting concerns raised within the commission (e.g., service availability), for which the Ministry of the Interior provided clarifications.
2025-09-18
15th Estonian Parliament, 6th sitting, plenary session.
Insufficient data.
2025-09-11
15th Riigikogu, 6th plenary sitting
There is too little data.
2025-09-10
15th Riigikogu, 6th sitting, plenary session
The direct opposition is aimed at the draft bill currently under discussion, which the commission recommended rejecting because it does not offer a sufficiently well-considered solution. He/She also criticizes the practical shortcomings of the current system, noting that rural municipality and city secretaries are not interested in verifying the actual place of residence. The criticism is based on both policy and procedure.
2025-06-11
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary sitting
No data available.
2025-06-05
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary session.
Insufficient data.
2025-06-03
Fifteenth Riigikogu, fifth session, plenary session
The criticism is directed against the failed conditions and targeting of previous rental housing programs, which signals dissatisfaction with prior political decisions. There is no direct personal antagonism; rather, the focus is on improving the overall effectiveness of the policy.
2025-05-14
15th Riigikogu, 5th sitting, plenary session
The opposition is aimed at the initiators of the draft legislation and their proposal to establish a new investigative commission. The criticism is procedural and based on feasibility, highlighting the sheer volume of tasks planned for the proposed commission and the unrealistic deadline (May 1st). Questions are also being raised about why a new commission needs to be established when existing bodies could handle the matter.
2025-05-13
15th Riigikogu, 5th sitting, plenary session
Direct confrontation is not expressed, but criticism is aimed at the fragmentation and bureaucracy of the current court management system, which is considered the source of conflict. Jaak Valge’s concerns regarding the length and expense of proceedings are mentioned, but it is noted that the draft bill under consideration does not directly resolve them.
2025-04-15
Fifteenth Riigikogu, Fifth Session, Plenary Session.
The criticism is aimed at parents who abuse their custody rights and parental responsibilities, and indirectly at the legal system that fails to guarantee children's rights. Specific political opponents or groups are not named.
2025-01-30
Fifteenth Estonian Parliament, fifth session, plenary session.
The opposition is directed at the legislative path chosen by the bill's initiator, not at the objective of the bill itself. The criticism is procedural because, in the assessment of the government and the committee majority, amending the Local Government Council Election Act is insufficient for restricting suffrage. The committee proposed rejecting the draft bill.
2024-12-12
15th Riigikogu, 4th session, plenary session
Criticism is aimed at the initiators of the bill (Lauri Laats and his group), who are accused of employing populism by pitting "our group or your group" against the people. The opposition is primarily value-based, calling into question the necessity and effectiveness of the draft legislation, given that it may fail to prevent the misuse of funds. The speaker observes that the initiator's rhetoric has shifted toward left-wing populism during the plenary session.
2024-12-10
15th Riigikogu, 4th session, plenary session
The opposition is aimed at the initiators of the draft bill (represented by Lauri Laats), the rejection of whose proposal the committee recommended by a vote of 5 in favor and 3 against. Furthermore, the speaker criticizes the low standard of the plenary debate, accusing participants of straying from the topic and presenting irrelevant arguments (e.g., investment plans).
2024-10-10
Fifteenth Riigikogu, Fourth sitting, plenary session.
Not enough data.
2024-10-09
Fifteenth Riigikogu, Fourth Session, Plenary Session.
The Speaker reported opposition to the draft bill, which was aimed at preventing the duplication of activities, given that the Ministry of the Interior has begun drafting a development plan for a cohesive society. The criticism was both procedural and policy-based, emphasizing that instead of establishing a commission, efforts should focus on deepening the sense of economic security.
2024-09-10
15th Riigikogu, 4th sitting, plenary sitting
The opposition is directed at the content of the draft legislation and the insufficient analysis thereof, not at individuals. The criticism is policy- and procedure-based, highlighting the government's (Ministry of Justice) remarks concerning economic impacts and the Ministry of Education and Research's concerns about student workload. Regarding the Election Law, he/she personally criticizes the fairness of the system based on absolute numbers due to the size of the electoral districts.
2024-06-06
15th Estonian Parliament, 3rd sitting, plenary session
The conflict arose from the Ministry of Justice's position, which defended the existing regulation and its constitutionality by offering an alternative legal interpretation. The criticism was exclusively legal and procedural, focusing on the interaction of the provisions rather than on individuals.
2024-05-16
Fifteenth Riigikogu, Third Session, Plenary Session
The criticism is aimed at systemic issues, such as the disconnect between education and the labor market, and excessive bureaucracy that hinders investment. Specific political opponents or groups are not being criticized.
2024-05-15
15th Riigikogu, 3rd session, plenary session
Insufficient Data
2024-05-14
15th Riigikogu, 3rd sitting, plenary session
There is no direct criticism or confrontation. The speaker notes that one committee member asked questions regarding the candidate's experience with the Venice Commission, but this is presented as part of the standard procedural process.
2024-03-12
15th Riigikogu, 3rd plenary sitting
The opposition is aimed at a specific draft bill. While its initiators are not directly criticized, the proposed solution is viewed as too narrow and insufficient for enhancing security. The criticism is policy- and procedure-based, stressing that ensuring security requires a complex and systemic approach, rather than creating isolated exceptions. The commission proposed rejecting the draft bill, with two dissenting votes.
2024-03-06
15th Riigikogu, 3rd session, plenary session
There is no direct opposition to a specific political group or individual. The speaker describes disagreements within the committee (e.g., regarding the rejection of the draft bill and the relevance of the government's opinion), but does so within the framework of neutral procedural reporting.
2024-03-05
15th Estonian Parliament, 3rd sitting, plenary session
There is not enough data.
2024-02-21
15th Riigikogu, 3rd session, plenary session
The opposition is aimed at a specific draft bill that requires council members to have a C1 language proficiency level, arguing that this would restrict democratic participation. Criticism is also directed at those local governments that fail to comply with the established procedures for Estonian-language official business, citing the necessity of improving political culture.
2024-01-18
15th Riigikogu, 3rd sitting, plenary session
The criticism is aimed more at ineffective political concepts and a traditional way of thinking that favors the mere existence of the school over the quality of education. Specific political opponents or groups are not named or criticized.