Session Profile: Riina Sikkut
The 15th Riigikogu, 6th Session, Information Hour
2025-10-22
Political Position
The political stance is strongly opposed to the government's budget choices, criticizing the chronic underfunding of special needs care and the cuts made to nature education. It is stressed that the government fails to address social problems within the state budget framework and is making choices that exacerbate regional inequality. The underlying political framework is value-driven, underscoring the necessity of valuing both the wages of social workers and the comprehensive education of children.
3 Speeches Analyzed
Topic Expertise
The speaker demonstrates expertise in the fields of social welfare (underfunding of special care, court rulings, waiting lists) and environmental education (Environmental Board cuts, the Endla and Iisaku centers, compensation for transport costs). Specific references are made to political documents, such as the draft state budget, and educational outcomes, such as PISA tests.
3 Speeches Analyzed
Rhetorical Style
The tone is critical, persistent, and demanding, especially concerning the issue of regional impacts, where a repeated follow-up question is posed. Logical contrasts are employed (Tallinn investments versus cuts in rural areas; PISA tests versus real-world knowledge of nature), and the negative social and regional consequence of government decisions is emphasized.
3 Speeches Analyzed
Activity Patterns
The speaker is active in the Riigikogu plenary sessions (the Information Hour) and is actively engaged in legislation, having drafted an amendment proposal to the state budget bill, which they plan to submit later the same day.
3 Speeches Analyzed
Opposition Stance
The main opponent is the government and its ministers (including both the Minister of Social Affairs and the acting Prime Minister), who are being criticized for their budget priorities and cuts. The criticism is policy-based, focusing specifically on the disregard for regional impacts and the underfunding of the social sector. This leaves the impression that the government fails to consider the broader consequences of its decisions.
3 Speeches Analyzed
Collaboration Style
Reference is made to cooperation within their own parliamentary group, as the Social Democrats have drafted and are submitting a state budget amendment proposal to the Finance Committee. There is no information regarding cross-party cooperation or a willingness to compromise with the government.
3 Speeches Analyzed
Regional Focus
The focus is heavily regional, criticizing government decisions that favor Tallinn (investments, jobs, new facilities) at the expense of rural areas. Specific examples cited include the closure of the Endla and Iisaku centers, the closing of the Põlva courthouse, and cuts to transport cost compensation, which make it harder for children in rural areas to access education.
3 Speeches Analyzed
Economic Views
Supports increasing state expenditure in the social sector (special welfare services) and education to solve the problems of underfunding. It demands a dignified wage for people working in social welfare departments and opposes cuts that affect regional services.
3 Speeches Analyzed
Social Issues
It highlights issues concerning social welfare (specifically, the underfunding and lack of capacity in special care services) and the accessibility of education. It emphasizes the need to value children’s real-life skills and knowledge of Estonian nature alongside academic success (PISA scores), while criticizing the worsening accessibility of environmental education.
3 Speeches Analyzed
Legislative Focus
The primary legislative focus is the draft state budget, for which the Social Democrats have prepared an amendment proposal aimed at resolving the underfunding of special care services. The goal is to initiate budget amendments to create new positions and ensure dignified wages in the social sector.
3 Speeches Analyzed