By Plenary Sessions: Andrei Korobeinik

The speaker is demonstrating procedural solidarity with the Isamaa faction by criticizing the commission's double standards and the limitation placed on their proposed amendments. No willingness to compromise with the coalition has been expressed, as the supplementary budget is deemed irreparable.

The Center Faction has submitted substantive amendments (e.g., car tax concessions), but these have been rejected by the coalition, indicating a lack of cooperation. Although the faction supports one minor bill (concerning debt bondage), it emphasizes that this does not constitute support for the government, but is merely "a small step in the right direction."

The style of cooperation in this context is notably absent and confrontational, focusing primarily on refuting the claims made by coalition partners (especially the Social Democrats). While there is a reference to Isamaa's alternative budget, there are no direct mentions of cross-factional collaboration or a willingness to compromise.

The speaker demonstrates cooperation within their faction (referencing the Centre Faction's amendments) and seeks to defend the deputy's right to vote on substantive, non-mutually exclusive amendments. He/she is uncompromising toward the governing coalition, calling for the rejection of the draft legislation and the termination of the government's work.

The style of cooperation is evident internally within the faction, noting that the Centre Faction and apparently some other factions do not support the draft bill. There is no information regarding cooperation or willingness to compromise with the coalition parties; the style is purely confrontational.

The collaborative approach emphasizes the necessity of broader involvement in policy formulation, requiring that the debate extend beyond the inner circle of Eesti 200 to include coalition partners and the opposition in the Riigikogu. This signals a demand for more transparent and inclusive policy-making.