By Plenary Sessions: Annely Akkermann

Criticizes the Isamaa faction's proposed amendments as "doubly populist" and technically unfeasible. The speaker rejects accusations regarding budget errors, pointing out that the 2023 budget had also received support from the Isamaa faction. Nevertheless, a courteous and professional tone is maintained even when delivering criticism.

He/She criticizes the Isamaa faction's amendments, calling them vague and legally flawed. He/She further accuses opposition members of presenting populist proposals that lack concrete solutions. He/She stresses that the opposition is unable to specify exactly where funds should be saved, instead relying solely on general slogans.

The speaker does not express direct opposition to specific individuals or groups, but rather focuses on presenting systemic criticism regarding the inadequacy of the current regulation. The criticism is constructive and aimed at improving policy, not personal attacks.

He/She moderately challenges the opposition's criticism, arguing that the draft bill has shifted to become more favorable to the taxpayer. Specifically, he/she corrects Urmas Reinsalu's erroneous claims concerning the cumulation of the registration fee. He/She does not employ sharp rhetoric, choosing instead to focus on clarifying the facts and correcting falsehoods.

It notes the criticism by opposition member Aivar Kokk regarding the sufficiency of the austerity measures, but does not take a clear stance on whether this criticism is justified or unfounded. It treats the opposition's position neutrally, presenting it as a fact.

It criticizes the obstructionist tactics employed by the opposition parties (Isamaa, EKRE, Center Party), specifically mentioning the submission of 831 proposed amendments. It further accuses the opposition of a lack of constructiveness, asserting that they failed to agree on any alternatives even within their own factions. The text dismisses claims regarding the cumulative nature of the registration fee, labeling Urmas Reinsalu's statements as erroneous.

There is not enough data.