By Plenary Sessions: Aivar Kokk

The political position is directed towards the analysis of the draft bill’s details and practical applicability, focusing on the costs of installing infrastructure (cable conduits) and the access conditions for other undertakings. The stance is moderately critical, emphasizing that installing an empty conduit is pointless without clear rules governing its use. The focus is policy-driven, demanding regulatory clarity and economic expediency.

The political position centers on the transparency of the state budget and the quality of its preparation. The speaker severely criticizes the discrepancies in VAT revenue forecasts and demands a detailed breakdown of the revenues derived from the electricity and heating sectors. This is strongly procedural and results-based criticism directed at the government, emphasizing that the revenue side is "practically opaque."

The political stance is strongly critical of the detailed and unreasonable political advertising transparency requirements imposed by the European Union, especially those concerning small items such as pens and business cards. While transparency is supported for large campaign expenditures, the regulation of minor details is deemed "absurd" and excessive bureaucracy. The political framework is aimed at protecting Estonian sovereignty and demanding common sense in the face of Brussels' regulations.

A strong opposition stance, focusing on the lack of transparency and accountability in the government's financial decisions, particularly concerning the allocation of large sums through various funds. The politician stresses the necessity of preventing an increase in the tax burden (specifically opposing the 24% income tax rate) and sharply criticizes the coalition's past and current budget decisions. His framework is primarily procedural and results-oriented, calling for improved budget clarity and the limitation of ministerial authority.

The political stance is one of strong opposition, calling the proposed state budget "such a terrible budget" and dismissing the ministers' responses as "weak." The primary criticism targets tax hikes and borrowing, which allegedly benefit only high-income earners, rather than those with lower incomes. The political framework is heavily results-oriented, emphasizing the economic growth-boosting decisions made by the previous coalition (Isamaa, Center Party, EKRE). It is proposed that the draft budget be rejected during the first reading.

The most prominent issue is the government's fiscal policy and the national debt burden. The speaker strongly opposes the policies of the Reform Party, criticizing the largest debt load in history, the repayment of which stretches all the way to 2070. This stance advocates for cost reduction and austerity measures during tough times, effectively calling the government's financial management into question.

A strong and principled opposition to the motor vehicle tax, which is considered hostile and unnecessary, with the Isamaa Party promising to repeal it no later than 2027. The political focus is directed at criticizing the government's tax hikes (over 50 decisions) and the financing of the income tax exemption for high earners. This position is clearly value-based, protecting the interests of families and pensioners against the tax burden.