Agenda Profile: Anastassia Kovalenko-Kõlvart

The main topics include the transparency of Riigikogu proceedings and the prevention of interference; the interpellations that have been submitted, and the objection to linking bills. As an opposition representative, strong criticism has been directed at the government's legislation and tax changes, emphasizing the necessity for thorough assessments and legal scrutiny. As a parliamentary group (faction), they have highlighted their readiness to promote transparency, accountability, and the protection of legality, often focusing on raising procedural issues as the primary priority. The emphasis has often been on improving political decisions and encouraging participation in legislative work with the coalition through compromise, though the overall stance remains one of strong criticism toward the government's activities.

A thorough knowledge of law-based and administrative procedure is demonstrated: reference is made to topics concerning microchipping and the pet registry, as well as European Union law (e.g., the compliance of the car tax with the Lisbon Treaty, Article 110). Precise figures are presented (e.g., 21.9% interest rate, 21,000 signatures), and the administrative burden and new types of procedures are discussed. Who and when is being examined: the necessity of legal analyses, the legality of linking lines and paragraphs, and criticism regarding the lack of impact assessments for tax changes.

Emphatically formal and appropriate for the speaking context; combines fact-based argumentation and rhetorical questions, along with a critically toned address directed at the board and ministers. Frequently employs concrete examples and enumeration, while occasionally tending to emphasize procedural concerns and adopting a tone of distress or worry. Slightly sharp and direct, but generally maintains official expression.

Active participation in the parliamentary agenda: interpellations are presented, responses are called for via submissions, reference is made to the boundaries between the coalition and the opposition, and it is demanded that debates take place involving various committees. A recurring pattern emerges: the submission of questions, inquiries addressed to various ministers, and the shaping of intent through procedural steps (e.g., changing the lead committees, joint sessions). The schedule and the speed with which the sittings are organized are frequently noted during the debates.

A strong oppositional stance toward the government: criticism regarding tax, budgetary, and organizational decisions; an attempt to obstruct the rushed adoption of legislative acts. Comprehensive criticism includes: insufficient impact analysis, lack of transparency, and the restriction of parliamentary rights and debate. The opposition's profound commitment to achieving compromises and ensuring the democratic process remains under continuous control and accountability.

The process seeks a degree of cooperation and multi-directional dialogue, emphasizing the need for joint sessions and the involvement of both the legal and constitutional committees. However, intense friction between the coalition and the opposition is also evident, alongside a clear readiness to push through their own pre-submitted solutions. Trends suggest that cooperation is conditional and dependent on specific terms, and that finding coalition balance is a continuous part of the strategy.

Regionally, the focus is on issues concerning Tallinn and rural areas: specifically, the targeted use of Tallinn City Government funds, the co-financing of Tallinn Hospital, and the taxation and quality of life in rural regions. Attention is also paid to budgetary areas visible at the local municipality level and topics pertaining to regional investments.

The stance is critical of economic policy and generally skeptical of tax changes, offering definitive criticism of the proposed car tax and sugar tax, particularly regarding their environmental impact due to inadequate impact assessments. It demands transparency and the targeted allocation of funds within the state budget, while recommending alternative measures to bolster investments and social programs (such as funding for school sports and school meals). The position strongly advocates for competition and state budget transparency and is ready to scrutinize impact analyses.

Directs attention to social issues: children's health and longevity (support for school sports, free extracurricular activities, school lunch subsidies), loan points derived from insurance premiums for the special needs of disabled people, and animal welfare (pet register, microchipping). It emphasizes the protection of vulnerable groups and social measures, while being critical of the government's social policy in this section.

Main legislative priorities: motor vehicle tax and its compliance with EU law, issues concerning administrative procedures and fine systems, budget transparency and the separate itemization of expenditure declarations, and issues related to the Riigikogu rules of procedure and obstruction topics. Highlighted are interpellations to ministers, demands for instructions from the finance committees and the Chancellor of Justice, and proposals regarding the inadmissibility of linking amendments.