By Plenary Sessions: Rain Epler

The political stance advocates for increasing the flexibility and autonomy of local governments (LGs), viewing this as a positive step forward. However, the speaker criticizes the central government for maintaining a tight grip on the purse strings, holding the ultimate control over financial resources. The primary concern revolves around the implementation and clarity of the proposed bill, aiming to prevent arbitrary decision-making and mitigate risks in LG governance.

The political position is strongly oppositional, characterizing the government's draft legislation as poor and incompetent. The main stances focus on protecting domestic energy production and security, and opposing market consolidation, particularly when it comes at the expense of small businesses. It supports the direct election of the president and criticizes the government's climate goal-based policy, which effectively locks up mineral resources for 50 years.

The speaker’s positions are strongly opposed to the government’s policy in three areas: the prioritized development of renewable energy, which increases systemic risk and cost, and the EU climate targets (LULUCF). He/She also demands an exemption for Estonia from the quota-based distribution of refugees under the EU Migration Pact, citing the large number of Ukrainian war refugees. These positions are primarily policy- and results-driven, emphasizing economic damage and systemic risk.

The political platform is firmly against tax hikes (including car, property, and progressive income tax), stressing the importance of economic liberty and valuing diligence. Furthermore, there is robust opposition to the increasing control exerted by European Union technocrats over national budgets, which is seen as a threat to democracy and the role of the Riigikogu (Estonian Parliament). The speaker also casts doubt on the government's sincerity regarding the proposed tax relief bill, dismissing it as a potential pre-election stunt.

The speaker positions himself as a staunch opponent of the government’s fiscal policy and the green transition, accusing the coalition of dishonesty regarding the stabilization of state finances. He emphasizes the urgent necessity of reducing the budget deficit and national debt while simultaneously prioritizing national defense, although he criticizes the use of defense expenditures as a pretext for excessive borrowing. The political framework is heavily value-based, stressing the preservation of Estonian culture and opposing spending directed toward "green values."

The speaker positions himself as a critical interrogator of the Minister of Finance's ideological approach and decisions. He demands transparency in the government's budget process, specifically asking about the "crazy ideas" that were prevented and those that ultimately remained in the budget. Furthermore, he calls into question the minister's right to criticize the Institute of Economic Research and merchants, suggesting this stems from a desire to avoid "unpleasant phenomena."