By Plenary Sessions: Rain Epler

The political position is strongly critical of the continuation of the e-voting system, citing low public trust and the "wall" formed by officials and politicians who defend the system. Furthermore, when discussing draft legislation, the focus is on practical economic consequences, specifically asking what will become more expensive or easier for ordinary people and businesses. These standpoints are primarily framed through the lens of government performance effectiveness and public confidence.

The speaker strongly emphasizes the very essence of the Estonian state, which is the preservation of national culture, language, and culture in a wider sense. He expresses strong opposition to the government’s economic policy and the climate minister’s energy plans, which he believes will lead to Estonia’s impoverishment. Additionally, he champions the freedom of parliamentary debate and the right of deputies to ask questions, criticizing the interference of the session chair.

The political stance centers on the efficiency of state governance and administration. The speaker voices concern that discussions could drag on, stressing the necessity of quickly moving toward concrete decisions and actions. This position is distinctly results-oriented and stands in opposition to bureaucratic inertia.

The political stance centers on criticizing the work of the justice system and the Prosecutor’s Office, specifically questioning the timing and motives behind initiating misdemeanor proceedings, thereby suggesting potential political bias. The speaker demands transparency and accountability from state agencies, primarily utilizing an institutional performance assessment framework.

The political stance is fiercely opposed to European technocrats and centralized power, emphasizing the necessity of popular will and direct democracy. It supports referendums as a tool to prevent widespread street protests. It demands government accountability and the closing of legislative loopholes concerning security controls, citing the case of Prime Minister Kaja Kallas, which resulted in "great indignation" among the public.

The political position is strongly oppositional, focusing on resistance to the government's tax increases, especially the car tax, which is seen as a burden on rural residents and families with children. These views are deeply value-based, broadly opposing the ideological aims of the green transition, which are considered restrictive of private property and prosperity. Furthermore, the actions of the Riigikogu Board are criticized for limiting the rights of deputies and disregarding procedural rules.

The political focus centers on Estonia’s competitiveness and energy policy, delivering a strong critique of the government’s current direction. The speaker vigorously supports securing dispatchable capacities (nuclear energy and oil shale) and opposes prioritizing the development of weather-dependent energy sources. The political framework is clearly results-oriented, stressing investment certainty and sound economic logic. He criticizes the government’s reasoning—that consumption should be created first, and only then should energy be produced to meet it—calling this an upside-down narrative.

The political focus is on long-term responsibility and the transparency of financial mechanisms, particularly in ensuring the end-of-life obligations for renewable energy, which should be comparable to the obligations of the fossil fuel and nuclear energy sectors. Concern is expressed that wind and solar energy receive subsidies, while other sectors contribute immediately to waste management. Also important are avoiding reputational damage to the state (aviation) and the financial sustainability of the Health Insurance Fund. The political framework is strongly policy-driven and focuses on ensuring performance in the long term.

The most salient topic is energy policy, where the speaker sharply criticizes the emphasis on renewable energy, which, in his assessment, is driving up costs. He demands that the government provide a concrete goal and vision for Estonian electricity prices relative to Finland over a ten-year perspective. His framework is policy- and results-based, stressing the importance of dispatchable capacity and citing the success of French nuclear power. The political stance is strongly opposed to the government's current direction.

The speaker is vehemently opposed to the government's energy policy, particularly the prioritization of wind and solar energy development, deeming it the wrong path. They are a strong advocate for nuclear power, seeing it as the only solution for ensuring energy security and industrial development. The political stance is framed by concerns over security, economic viability, and a critical view regarding the government's fulfillment of its international obligations (e.g., its failure to join the nuclear declaration).

The political focus centers on sharp criticism of the government's economic policy and opposition to tax hikes. The speaker strongly supports the temporary bank tax proposed by EKRE on extraordinary profits, viewing it as a necessary measure during these difficult times. Simultaneously, there is opposition to new taxes that disproportionately affect families with children and rural residents, such as the proposed car tax and the elimination of the income tax exemption. The political framework is heavily performance-driven, highlighting the government's failure to manage the current economic hardships.