By Plenary Sessions: Varro Vooglaid

Information is scarce. The speaker is primarily engaged in sharp criticism of the government's policy and makes no reference to cooperation or willingness to compromise with other political forces.

The reference is made to a colleague and a benchmate, suggesting internal cooperation within their own parliamentary group, specifically by supporting the issue raised by the colleague. There is no indication of seeking compromise with the government or other political parties; the focus remains squarely on holding the government accountable.

Information regarding willingness to cooperate is unavailable; the speaker focuses on attacking the opposing side and addressing the chair of the session with procedural questions. Willingness to compromise is not evident, as they demand the complete cessation of government activity and the request for a new mandate.

Insufficient data.

There is insufficient information. The speaker mentions the Centre Party's proposal for amending the law as an acceptable alternative, which points to a willingness to support solutions put forward by other parties, provided they respect the constitution and offer adequate instruments for ensuring security.

Not enough data

Regarding cooperation, the need to involve the opposition in representative bodies is emphasized, proposing that of the Riigikogu members belonging to KHAN, one should be from the opposition and the other from the coalition. Closer cooperation with the judicial system is also demanded, requesting the Minister of Justice to seek an official assessment of the bill from the Supreme Court and other courts.

Regarding cooperation, there is no direct information available concerning domestic inter-party collaboration, but he/she welcomes the new Minister of the Interior's different stance on the firearms issue (assuming the rumors are true). He/She actively recommends studying and replicating the Finnish system, which is favorable to shooting culture, in order to avoid "reinventing the wheel."

Although critical, it proposes concrete four-tiered solutions that require cooperation among ministries, the Minister of Justice, parliamentary committees, and the Riigikogu Board. It also proposes offering supplementary training to all Riigikogu members to improve their ability to assess the constitutionality of draft legislation.

The speaker questions whether the current engagement process involves genuine cooperation, often dismissing it as mere "tokenism." They propose a solution: the country should establish an institution capable of providing evidence-based analyses and modeling at the request of various political groups, highlighting the need for improved analytical collaboration.

There is not enough data.

The speaker recommends cooperation with the Riigikogu Board and the heads of the committees to establish a standard under which draft legislation lacking constitutional analysis would be returned to the government. This indicates a desire to improve the parliament's internal procedural standards, but there is no information regarding cross-party political cooperation.