By Plenary Sessions: Helle-Moonika Helme

The style of engagement is purely oppositional and critical, focusing on exposing the motives and actions of the ruling coalition (Social Democrats, Reform Party). There is a complete absence of any indication of a willingness to compromise; instead, the unconstitutionality and danger of the opposing side's actions are emphasized.

We have no data regarding their willingness to cooperate; the style is purely confrontational and focused on demanding answers from the government and exposing their actions.

Demonstrates cooperation with colleagues ("The wording of Raini and Martin's proposal") when submitting amendments, highlighting the superiority of their proposal compared to that of the committee. Overall, the style is rather confrontational towards the government, focusing on bringing their own proposals to a vote and seeking opposition rather than compromise.

Information regarding cooperation, willingness to compromise, or cross-party activity was not presented in the speeches. The speaker is acting more as a critical opponent, challenging the work of the committee and the substance of the draft legislation.

The style of cooperation is manifested in asking questions to the presenters of the draft bill (Evelin, Varro) to clarify the legal background and public opinion. The speaker attempts to clarify the actual content of the draft bill in order to prevent colleagues from voting incorrectly. There are no references to a willingness to compromise or cross-party cooperation.

The speaker points to previous similar cooperation with the Centre Party regarding the submission of proposals to lower the VAT on food products. Although the overall tone is oppositional, coalition members are urged to find the courage to support the draft bill, citing the potential for unified action to improve the public's well-being.

The speaker refers to cooperation with EKRE, jointly supporting the abolition of the motor vehicle tax. He expresses strong opposition to the government's policy and shows no openness to compromise concerning the existing tax law, demanding its full repeal.

The style of cooperation is virtually non-existent; although there is agreement on revoking the voting rights of citizens of aggressor states, this is immediately used to criticize the opposing side for having previously voted down similar bills. Emphasis is placed on preferring one's own "clean solution," and the minister is urged to take into account the opinions of local residents.

Information is lacking regarding cooperation or the willingness to compromise within the Riigikogu. However, the speaker demonstrates strong support for and defense of Hungary, viewing it as an EU partner that has dared to swim against the current.

There is too little data.