By Plenary Sessions: Martin Helme

The economic views are strongly opposed to tax increases, especially concerning income tax and the taxation of pensions, and emphasize the detrimental effects of anti-business policies. Regarding the budget, irresponsible borrowing and the depletion of reserves are criticized, while simultaneously demanding cuts to funding for ideological NGOs and expenses related to the green transition. The speaker stresses the need to grow wealth, not stifle it through taxation.

No data available

Economic views are sharply critical of the current government's tax hikes and irresponsible borrowing, which have resulted in a prolonged economic recession. The speaker opposes the "green energy" policy, arguing that it leads to higher electricity costs, and stresses the necessity of fixing the nation's finances rather than doubling the debt burden. He criticizes the government's alleged counter-cyclical approach, pointing to massive overspending and excessive borrowing.

The speaker supports measures that increase economic freedom (such as the release of Second Pillar funds) and sharply criticizes the government’s fiscal management, which has led to a deep recession. The emphasis is on social justice and the livelihood of minimum-wage earners, demanding solutions targeted specifically at them.

Economic views center on criticizing government spending, deeming the savings achieved by closing the consulate general negligible and incomprehensible. It is argued that the government spends hundreds and thousands of times more elsewhere, which makes the savings argument unreliable.

Economic perspectives are critical of the current energy policy, which is deemed overly costly and inflationary. Emphasis is placed on the need to finance multi-billion-dollar projects, which will inevitably lead to severe tax hikes and higher electricity prices for consumers. This viewpoint advocates for protecting the consumer from excessive public expenditures.

The economic views expressed are strongly opposed to tax increases, arguing that they kill entrepreneurship and funnel money into the green transition instead of national defense. The speaker is also against the corporate support measure (€160 million), deeming it unreasonable and legalized corruption. It is stressed that the money is being taken from socially vital sectors (maternity benefits, extracurricular education) and handed over to businessmen close to the government.

Economic views strongly advocate for the inviolability of private property, standing in opposition to state intervention. The green transition is viewed as a neo-communist planned economy project whose goal is the largest redistribution of wealth and centralized governance in history.

Economic perspectives emphasize the necessity of protecting the Estonian populace from the negative impacts of the open market, particularly concerning the surge in real estate and land prices driven by foreign buyers. There is support for ensuring domestic economic accessibility and affordability, standing in opposition to the uncontrolled influx of foreign capital. Furthermore, criticism is leveled against government subsidy cuts, which directly impact the economic sustainability of families.

The speaker opposes immigration, viewing it as a mechanism for cost and wealth redistribution that suppresses labor prices and benefits only large corporations. He criticizes government spending, specifically calling the development of the defense industry a potentially corrupt financial scheme ("milking the taxpayer"). He prefers directing expenditures toward essential items necessary for defending his own territory, rather than purchasing the world's most expensive missiles.

Economic views are strongly fiscally conservative, criticizing the government's incessant overspending and the growth of national debt (2.4 billion in overspending). They oppose tax increases and question the sensibility of making cuts (at the expense of children and healthcare), demanding an explanation regarding the disappearance of subsidies, signed off by government members, into a "black hole."

Economic arguments center on protecting pensioners, sharply opposing amendments to the income tax law that reduce the disposable income available to retirees. The government is directly accused of attacking and cutting pensions.