By Plenary Sessions: Margit Sutrop

Insufficient data.

The criticism is aimed at confrontation and the leveling of accusations against one another, as well as the desire to form separatist groups that would hinder the implementation of an Estonian-language learning environment. The opposition is directed more toward anti-reform attitudes and ineffective behavior than toward specific political forces. An uncompromising stance is expressed regarding the language issue, emphasizing that there is no turning back on the transition to Estonian-language instruction.

The criticism is directed at the procedure for the repeated submission of the draft bill, demanding explanations from the rapporteur regarding the content of the legislation. There are no direct personal attacks or strong opposition toward political groups.

The main confrontation was with the Isamaa faction, whose proposed amendments to separate groups of children based on Estonian as their home language were rejected. The criticism was based on policy and legal grounds, arguing that Isamaa’s proposals would result in segregation and discrimination based on language, which is unconstitutional. Isamaa’s proposal concerning the qualification requirements for music and movement teachers was also criticized and subsequently voted down by the committee.