Agenda Profile: Anastassia Kovalenko-Kõlvart

The representative of the Centre Party faction firmly advocates for strengthening the role of the Riigikogu and increasing the transparency of the state budget. He emphasizes that a minister should not hold sole power when making final decisions, and the Ministry of Finance's current approach jeopardizes parliamentary oversight—a move that contradicts the critical and constitutional framework. This stance is clearly in opposition to the coalition's current budget decision. It is a strongly oppositional position, rooted in core values centered on policy and legislative creation, and aims to restore parliamentary control.

The speaker demonstrates knowledge of the state budget procedure and its constitutional differentiation, employing terms such as the State Budget Act, amendment proposals, and delegation to the executive power, while also referencing criticism from the Auditor General and the Chancellor of Justice. A strong connection to the themes of budget transparency and Riigikogu oversight shows an understanding of the roles and limits of the institutions. The text constantly refers to specific procedural and legal contours.

The style of discourse is formal, critical, and focused on the argument; it employs the form of questions and official references (State Comptroller, Chancellor of Justice) to highlight shortcomings and elicit responses. The documentary tone helps to emphasize the reframing of the situation—the gap between the importance of the budget procedure and the coalition's promises. The text also contains effective rhetoric that unites facts and values.

The address prompted a description of two meetings held on the same day, demonstrating active involvement in parliamentary discussions. It references the Finance Committee and the reactions of the presiding officer. Furthermore, it represents the Centre Party faction and introduces its own draft legislation, illustrating consistent activity and regularity over time. The second address highlights the management of parliamentary procedures, and its emphasis is notably bold and direct.

Highly confrontational: critical of the government and the Minister of Finance, describing the draft bill as "useless" and "a sham," and emphasizing that control must remain with the Riigikogu (Parliament). The intensity is high, with the focus being on ensuring parliamentary control and preventing the excessive use of power through separate ministerial decisions.

It demonstrates a readiness to participate in the debate and directly solicit the Prime Minister's position, as well as to submit the Center Party faction's own draft bill. This indicates strong debating competence and shows that opportunities for cooperation must be found through parliamentary dialogue, although specific commitments regarding compromises with the coalition have not been explicitly outlined.

Not enough data

It emphasizes budget transparency and the control of the Riigikogu (Estonian Parliament) as central components of economic policy; it does not represent specific positions on tax, taxation, or growth policy; the focus is on institutional centralization and transparency.

Insufficient data

The primary focus is directed at the legislation governing the state budget process: increasing the transparency of the budget framework law, examining the impact of proposed amendments, defining the roles of Riigikogu decisions, and restricting ministerial powers. [The subject] demonstrates initiative by submitting its own draft bill and stresses the restoration of parliamentary decision-making authority and the democratic operation of procedures.