By Plenary Sessions: Aivar Kokk

It supports fiscal discipline, arguing that the budget deficit could be covered by scrapping the proposed changes to the income tax exemption. It criticizes government expenditure and demands transparency in the use of public funds. Furthermore, it highlights the economic benefits associated with high-quality transport links and questions the cost-effectiveness of the Rail Baltic project. Finally, it expresses a skeptical stance toward a rapid green transition, citing economic constraints.

It strongly supports free market principles and competition, arguing that energy sources should compete without requiring additional consumer subsidies. It criticizes the income tax reform as excessive expenditure and calls for a more thorough review of decisions related to the state budget. It emphasizes the necessity of equal treatment for entrepreneurs and the need to enhance state oversight.

Strongly criticizes tax increases and their impact on families earning below the average income. Supports targeted government funding for education and healthcare, demonstrating a readiness for public investment. Stresses the need for tax incentives for employers who promote employee health and shows an understanding of the complexity of fiscal policy.

It supports more cost-effective energy solutions, emphasizing the 80 million investment in pellet boilers compared to the 2 billion spent on other projects. It criticizes the situation where taxpayers are forced to subsidize wind and solar energy, while other generation methods have to pay for CO2 quotas. It claims that 2 billion euros have been taken directly from the pockets of businesses due to the activities of Elering.

The text strongly supports the protection of consumer interests within the energy sector, criticizing monopolistic profit-taking. It advocates for utilizing local resources (such as pellets) to identify economically efficient solutions. Furthermore, it stresses the impact of input costs on both economic growth and the overall business environment. This demonstrates a pragmatic approach: seeking out cheaper alternatives to costly technologies.

Strongly criticizes the economic management of the energy sector, highlighting the burden placed on end-users. It supports the protection of state investments in the biogas and biofuel sectors. Furthermore, it expresses concern over the rising cost of electricity and gas, demanding that Elering's profits be channeled in the interest of consumers.