By Months: Margit Sutrop
Total Months: 16
Fully Profiled: 16
10.2025
4 Speeches
No direct political opponent is criticized, but the opposition is aimed at the reduction in funding planned for 2027 within the State Budget Strategy (RES). The criticism is policy-based because it could force universities to introduce tuition fees, which the speaker opposes. The dissatisfaction of universities regarding the future reduction is mentioned as indirect support for the criticism.
06.2025
10 Speeches
There is no direct confrontation, but the discussion addresses concerns related to the infringement of research institutions' autonomy, over-regulation, and the risk of political influence in science funding. Regarding the end-of-life topic, religious objections are neutralized by noting that the Council of Churches has also approved the draft bill. Criticism is directed more at systemic shortcomings (e.g., judicial training, excessive bureaucracy) rather than specific individuals.
05.2025
3 Speeches
There are no direct attacks or criticism aimed at the opposing parties. The questions are directed at the ministers to clarify the rationale behind the policies and laws, demonstrating a scrutinizing, rather than confrontational, stance.
04.2025
7 Speeches
A direct political opponent is not criticized; instead, the criticism is aimed at previous legislation (specifically, the unforeseen nature of the car tax) and the decisions made by administrative bodies (the Estonian Tax and Customs Board), which made the technical solutions overly complicated. He/She also criticizes the historical medical approach, which was overly paternalistic and failed to respect the patient's will.
03.2025
4 Speeches
Strong opposition is directed at political interference in the autonomy and academic freedom of scientific institutions. The speaker warns against a potential "EKREIKE government" that could restrict scientific autonomy, and criticizes the funding of pseudoscience. The criticism is values-based, citing the cases of the USA and New Zealand, where science funding has been politically restricted.
02.2025
9 Speeches
In foreign policy, the government is being criticized for sending conflicting signals regarding Israel, a move that has damaged historical friendships. Regarding science policy, there is strong opposition to political interference in the autonomy of scientific evaluation panels. This opposition cites the US experience and the opinion of one colleague regarding the termination of funding for unsuitable topics. Furthermore, the Ministry of Finance is also being criticized for its inability to establish a system for measuring research expenditures.
01.2025
4 Speeches
There is not enough data.
12.2024
21 Speeches
The main opposition was directed at the Isamaa faction, especially regarding proposals to form kindergarten groups based on home language, which the speaker rejected, citing the risk of discrimination and unconstitutionality. The criticism was grounded in both political and legal arguments, emphasizing that segregation is incompatible with the principle of equal opportunities.
11.2024
13 Speeches
The speaker does not directly criticize the opposition parties, but rather corrects or clarifies the arguments made by other speakers, for instance, by correcting a misconception regarding the categories of foreigners eligible to vote. He/She criticizes the general political delay in adopting crucial legislation (such as the law on the organization of research and development), expressing a desire for bolder movement forward.
09.2024
2 Speeches
None. The speaker neither criticizes nor opposes the government representatives; instead, they acknowledge the minister's actions and initiatives.
06.2024
2 Speeches
The primary criticism is directed at the Ministry of Finance, which is accused of distorting the accounting of R&D expenditures and deviating from the agreed funding level (1%). The criticism is policy- and procedure-based, not personal.
05.2024
9 Speeches
The criticism is primarily aimed at the progressive income tax system introduced by the previous government (Isamaa/Jüri Ratas), which created a tax hump and harmed teachers' incomes. He/She also indirectly criticizes local municipalities (KOV), especially the city of Tallinn, for the inappropriate use of the differentiation fund to pay the salaries of support specialists at the expense of teachers.
04.2024
7 Speeches
The criticism is primarily aimed at the EKRE faction for procedural obstruction, as they submitted 50 mutually exclusive proposals which delayed the processing of the bill. Isamaa’s bill is criticized because it fails to comprehensively address the goals of education quality and teacher salaries, focusing instead only on keeping rural schools open. In the debate over the Language Act, EKRE is criticized for an overly categorical approach that is not needs-based.
03.2024
6 Speeches
There is no direct political opposition or personal criticism. The criticism is aimed at systemic shortcomings in education and healthcare, as well as the government’s inability to resolve key energy issues. The criticism is policy-based, not personal.
02.2024
10 Speeches
The speaker is strongly opposed to the draft legislation put forward by the Estonian Conservative People's Party (EKRE). They criticize both the methods used to achieve the party's goals and the conceptual shortcomings of the bills themselves (such as combining multiple topics into one bill or the unequal treatment regarding loan forgiveness). The speaker is especially critical of the opposition's rhetoric, questioning whether the claims regarding "diploma laundering" are supported by evidence.
01.2024
7 Speeches
The primary criticism targets the actions of the Ministry of Economic Affairs and Communications (MKM) concerning the establishment of the national applied research center utilizing Metrosert as its base. This criticism is strategic in nature, arguing that the center duplicates existing university functions and competes for limited human resources, thereby jeopardizing academic instruction.