Agenda Profile: Anastassia Kovalenko-Kõlvart

The Centre Party is strongly opposed to the car tax, placing constitutional legality at the core of its argument. The party’s position emphasizes that the car tax lacks specific exemptions for large families and people with disabilities, which makes its legitimacy problematic within the modern legal environment. They demand the repeal of the car tax or, at the very least, the establishment of special allowances and compensation for large families and people with disabilities. The statement stresses that the coalition’s conduct is flawed, and the fight will be continued both in parliament and in the courts. The ultimate goal is to restore justice and legality, and, if necessary, to maintain influence even after future elections.

The speaker introduces the constitutional context (Article 28 of the Constitution) and refers to the positions of the Supreme Court and the Chancellor of Justice, demonstrating attention to rights and procedure. Terms such as "procedural aspect" are used, and legal analysis and court rulings are mentioned, which confirm the absence of distinctions and require constitutional compliance regarding the car tax. Knowledge of constitutionality and the submission of administrative law applications are highlighted.

The rhetoric is entirely directive and legally judicious, yet simultaneously emotionally expressive and repeatedly focused on the interests of children and people with disabilities. It raises questions about inequality and the violation of the principle of equal lawfulness, employing strong statements and repetitions ("the car tax is unfair," "in conflict with the constitution"). The tone is confrontational, but systematic, relying on legal facts and principles, not merely emotions.

The speech reflects ongoing engagement in the debate concerning this issue, including previous appeals and legal actions. Appeals have been submitted to the Supreme Court and the Chancellor of Justice, alongside a pledge to continue the fight both in parliaments and in court. The text mentions restrictions related to the adoption of draft legislation and amendments, as well as a willingness to cooperate with stakeholders in parliament, though these proposals were ignored. Furthermore, reference is made to a plan to compensate families with children should they come to power in Tallinn, and the subsequent submission of a relevant draft bill.

The attack targets the coalition and the Reform Party: they are accused of obstruction, deviation from principles and competence, and failing to pass crucial amendments that would protect specific interests and minority rights. The coalition’s mechanisms, which restrict the public’s voice in parliament, are also criticized in a hasty and forceful tone. The intensity is high, and initially, there was no room for compromise.

The focus is on cooperation with stakeholders and other parliamentary factions, specifically naming the Chamber of Disabled People, associations representing large families, and Riigikogu support groups. While instances of cooperation are highlighted, criticism has also surfaced that the coalition ignored proposed amendments and was unwilling to address them. There is a demonstrated readiness to jointly advance issues related to autism and social inclusion, but ultimately, cooperation remains challenging and the outcome is insufficient.

The background is established, focusing on Tallinn and rural areas. It is reported that the impact of the car tax varies regionally, and families, particularly those with special needs, may find it harder to cope in rural areas. The discussion highlights proposed compensation packages for Tallinn and solutions for rural areas, alongside criticism concerning the introduction of fares for public transport in the counties. Regional attention is therefore central—the goal being to balance both urbanization and the regional socio-economic impact.

Criticism directed at the economic environment: against motorization and the way the tax collection system is organized, which involves what is being called quadruple taxation and which adds to the cost of living for both family and consumer expenses. It is argued that the increases in VAT and fuel tax, along with the registration fee and annual tax, create a significant burden, while the draft legislation does not provide similar tax relief for banks' excessive profits. [The critic/group] desires the implementation of compensation and support funds for families, as well as tools that mitigate the impact; they emphasize that investments in road construction have been insufficient.

The focus is on social issues: the continuing status of disabled people and large families as special wards of the state, and the impact of the car tax on their standard of living and their ability to continue traveling by car. Emphasis is placed on the increased risk of poverty and the inequality generated by these taxes. Waivers or compensation are being requested, and it is stressed that the coalition has failed to uphold social justice.

The legislative focus centers on amending or repealing the motor vehicle tax law, encompassing the submission of new bills and the review of proposed amendments. Specific mention is made of procedural violations within the Riigikogu and the restriction of minority rights, with the directives from the Chancellor of Justice and the Supreme Court also being key points of attention. The ultimate goal is either the complete abolition of the car tax or the creation of specific exemptions, and, if required, enhancing public interests and social safeguards through both parliamentary processes and court proceedings.