Session Profile: Rain Epler

The political focus centers on sharp opposition to the government's budget priorities, particularly the funding of the green transition to the tune of hundreds of millions, which is widely viewed as absurd and simply throwing money down the drain. The utmost importance is placed on supporting children and families with children, and ensuring teachers' salaries, prioritizing these over green energy initiatives given the constraints of limited resources. A strong value-based stance is maintained, emphasizing the protection of children from social gender concepts imported from America. The overall political position is strongly oppositional and forceful.

The speaker demonstrates detailed knowledge of education funding mechanisms, particularly concerning teacher salary calculations (comparing reported ledger data versus the standard normative workload) and the inherent conflicts within the school network structure. In the social policy domain, they show awareness of international developments, referencing the United Kingdom's ban on puberty blockers and the practices observed in clinics across the United States. Their arguments rely on emphasizing science and biology, contrasting them sharply with the concept of social gender.

The style is highly confrontational, emotional, and sharply critical, expressing anger towards the government’s actions and accusing ministers of demagoguery and talking "stupid nonsense." It employs figurative and memorable phrases ("pouring money down the drain," "the airfield has been rigged") and accuses the presiding officer of suppressing the opposition's voice. The concept of "newspeak" is also utilized to criticize the government's terminology regarding social policy.

The speaker is highly active during the plenary session, raising questions and making statements concerning multiple agenda items and ministers in a short timeframe. They intervene with both substantive queries and procedural points of order, demonstrating a high level of responsiveness.

The confrontation with the government is intense and widespread, criticizing both budget priorities and the fundamental values underpinning social policy. Ministers are directly accused of demagoguery, presenting false data, and squandering money under the slogans of the green transition. Criticism is also aimed at the actions of the presiding officer, who is accused of attempting to silence the opposition's voice.

Not enough data.

The focus is primarily national (the state budget, the Estonian-language school network) and international, referencing developments in the social sphere in the United States and the United Kingdom. Specific local or regional projects are not highlighted, apart from the general issue concerning the closure of Estonian-language schools.

Their economic views are strongly fiscally conservative, standing in opposition to large-scale spending on green energy, which they view as a waste of money that drives up energy prices. They emphasize directing limited resources toward the social sphere, specifically supporting families with children and guaranteeing teachers' wages.

The stance on social issues is extremely conservative, strongly opposing the concept of social gender and the practice of harming children through "gender-affirming care." He/She warns against the rapid export of American culture, which encompasses "satanic misanthropic sects" and "gender-affirming clinics." Biological sex is emphasized, and there is a demand for protecting children from puberty blockers and surgical operations.

The focus is on opposing government policies and budget decisions, particularly regarding the financing of the green transition and value-based issues within the social sector. The priority is supporting families with children and teachers, and protecting children from social gender ideology. Specific draft legislation is not mentioned, but the creation of the "financing model working group" is criticized.