Agenda Profile: Anastassia Kovalenko-Kõlvart

An opposition representative from the Centre Party, who is critical of the government's budget and tax policy. He highlights the deteriorating situation of families and the most vulnerable groups, arguing that the tightening of taxes and rising prices directly contradict their interests. He stresses that the state's priorities should be focused on ensuring people’s ability to cope financially and investing in the IT and artificial intelligence sectors, instead of using the budget to burden those with low incomes. He characterizes the budget as a political decision that exacerbates inequality and erodes public trust in the state.

Uses specific data and institutions in economic discussions: forecasts from the Estonian Institute of Economic Research and the IMF, as well as figures such as changes in VAT and income tax rates and doctor’s visit fees. It refers to studies detailing the decline in consumer confidence and financial indicators concerning the budget. It clearly demonstrates the effect of the budget procedure, economic expenditures, and service prices on efficiency.

The tone is highly combative and critical, utilizing emotional and personal appeals and rhetorical questions. It highlights current leaks, references, and cleverly presented figures (e.g., "honest numbers"), and employs comparisons (Louis XIV) and phrases that allude to democratic resistance, in order to build a strong opposition against the Minister of Finance and the government. The style is often fast-paced and wittily charged, mixing data with evidence.

Delivered an oral presentation during the state budget debate in November 2024; emphasizes having repeatedly submitted a question to the Minister regarding family subsistence. References previous debates in the Tallinn City Council and asserts that opposition amendments were previously approved according to "good practice," but the current government fails to follow this. The focus remains on continuous participation and the submission of questions within the context of the budget.

Key Opposition Stance: characterized by strong criticism of the government’s budget. The main points of criticism are tax hikes, the social burden placed on vulnerable groups, and the lack of investment in the IT/AI sector. The Opposition firmly rejects the economic policies of the Reform Party and the coalition, stressing that the budget will exacerbate inequality and fail to stimulate economic growth. The budget is not supported (by the Center Party/Keskerakond), which instead presents alternative priorities and specific criticisms.

The party is seeking cooperation but did not promise extensive collaboration: it shows readiness to work together on the opposition’s proposed amendments, but suggests the coalition needs to be more open and transparent. It notes that in the past, the Tallinn City Council cooperated on some opposition amendments, but the current government has failed to uphold this practice. While recommending the principles of bipartisanship, the party stresses the need for rigorous criticism and effective control over the state budget.

It emphasizes both national and rural issues, specifically mentioning a large family living in the countryside and the increases in VAT and income tax, which particularly affect lower-income citizens. The text also references the context of the Tallinn City Council as an example of a previous opportunity for cooperation. The overall goal is to draw attention to the coping mechanisms and well-being of both rural and urban residents, alongside the country's broader digital development.

The economic policy critic argues that tax increases will not boost the economy and will likely increase inequality instead. They stress that economic growth must stem from improved domestic demand and stimulating the purchasing power of the workforce. The critic also slams the postponement of IT and artificial intelligence investments, noting that this undermines the country’s competitiveness. The goal now, they conclude, should be fostering consumer confidence and social justice, not simply maximizing tax collection.

Social justice and the protection of vulnerable groups: emphasizes the deterioration of families' livelihoods and the deepening of inequality; notes that resources obtained from taxes do not help the vulnerable, and the costs of treatment, medication, and doctor visits severely impact them. It criticizes the government’s attitude, which suggests that “the state will manage,” and stresses that the state's priorities should be the welfare of its people and equal opportunities.

The main focus is the second reading of Draft Bill 513 SE and the associated budget projections. It is highlighted that detailed data is currently being planned, meaning comprehensive data is not yet available. The speaker/group opposes the budget and stresses that tax and price changes disproportionately burden the most vulnerable. The need to direct investments toward the IT sector and artificial intelligence development is emphasized, along with the necessity for cooperation between the opposition and the parliament, but there is no indication of support for the current draft bill.