By Plenary Sessions: Rain Epler

The political stance is deeply skeptical of the climate crisis narrative, stressing that it is driven more by economic interests and propaganda than by science. He/She sharply opposes the actions of the ruling coalition and the "champagne socialists," which, in his/her view, increase poverty while the political elite lives in luxury. The framing of climate policy is strongly value-driven and results-oriented, focusing on protecting profit and economic growth.

The political focus is on restricting the right to vote in local government elections solely to Estonian citizens. The speaker expresses strong support for this position and criticizes the government's/presenter's failure to submit a corresponding bill. The position is value-based, emphasizing the importance of citizenship as the basis for suffrage.

This political stance is sharply critical and performance-driven, focusing specifically on the government's failure to manage major projects (such as Rail Baltic) and its reliance on unrealistic budget forecasts. The speaker expresses profound concern over the nation's finances and the establishment of strategic priorities, demanding that the government provide realistic risk scenarios and demonstrate financial accountability. This position is strongly antagonistic towards the current government's policies, particularly regarding cost allocation.

A strong oppositional stance against the government's fiscal policy and lack of transparency, asserting that life in Estonia has gone "downhill" since 2021 (electricity +188%, food +49%). The key issues raised are the lack of control over the state budget and the inefficiency of government operations, accusing the government of living in a "parallel world" and indulging in fantasies. The political framework is heavily results-driven and critical, demanding that the nation's finances be put in order.

The political position is strongly value-driven and policy-critical, emphasizing the need to correct Estonia’s course following the US elections. The speaker forcefully opposes the prioritized development of renewable energy, climate hysteria, and the "woke agenda." Support is given to fossil fuels, nuclear energy, and the elimination of restrictions on free speech, viewing these developments as positive trends.

The most prominent topics are the restoration of the cap on land tax increases and the termination of state funding for elective abortions. The speaker is fiercely opposed to the government's tax policy, accusing the coalition of deceit and claiming Estonia is being governed by "Reds" who are harming citizens who are already struggling. The political framework is strongly value-based (honesty, protection of citizens) and focused on criticizing the government's actions.

The political focus is clearly on the car tax issue, where the speaker demands clarification regarding the original justifications for implementing the tax and its projected positive impact on Estonia's future development. He criticizes the actions of the government or the relevant committee concerning the handling of opposition bills and the absence of high-quality discussion. The position taken is heavily based on policy and procedural matters, calling into question both the necessity of the tax and the seriousness of the Isamaa party regarding its eventual abolition.

The political position is strongly opposed to the government’s current green transition policy, which is viewed as detrimental to European competitiveness. Emphasis is placed on the need to revise the policy in light of international events (the US presidential elections). The speaker demands a shift in direction, prioritizing stable and weather-independent energy sources instead of unstable wind and solar parks.

The political focus is on energy supply security and the competitiveness of electricity prices. The speaker criticizes the government's excessive optimism and calls for a serious long-term plan that would guarantee both supply and a competitive price. This stance is strongly oppositional and is aimed at evaluating the effectiveness of the government's activities.

The political stance is fiercely oppositional, centered on the inefficiency of the government’s activities since 2021. The speaker explicitly attributes the economic downturn, the widening budget deficit, and the increase in drug-related deaths directly to the Reform Party’s dominant role in the ruling coalition. The critique is primarily directed at the government’s poor track record and the tangible consequences of its policies, highlighting the persistent disconnect between reality and rhetoric.