Agenda Profile: Anastassia Kovalenko-Kõlvart

An opposition speaker who focuses on criticizing tax policy and highlighting the impact of costs to society. There is a strong stance against the government's tax policy (including VAT hikes) and the fundamental taxation mandated by the European Union directive. Simultaneously, they refer to previous coalition agreements and the Reform Party's earlier support for the directive, which subjects the current position to moderate or strong criticism and necessitates an explanation of why it was adopted under those previous circumstances. The framing is typically based on arguments concerning political and economic consequences and equitable distribution, rather than solely on macroeconomic assessment.

It emphasizes knowledge of taxation and European Union directives, utilizing precise references (VAT increases, the directive, the vote of April 25, 2023, the coalition agreement, the Chancellor of Justice, constitutional review, and appeals to the administrative court). It demonstrates a knowledgeable background in legal jurisdictions and the parliamentary process, referring to specific documents and procedures.

The tone is combative and accusatory; the delivery employs rhetorical questions and a direct personal address (“Esteemed Prime Minister!”). It draws upon both emotional and fact-based arguments, utilizing specific examples (ferry logistics, protocols, court proceedings), and maintains a relatively formal style with minimal narrative content.

Two speeches were delivered on the same day (March 26, 2025), focusing on the same cluster of issues: taxation, the European directive, and the car tax. Reference is made to previous events (the vote on April 25, 2023, the coalition agreement, the Chancellor of Justice) and mentions proceedings (the administrative court, submissions/appeals). This demonstrates consistent participation in parliamentary debates and the utilization of legal protection channels.

The main points of criticism are directed at the governing coalition (especially the Social Democrats and the Reform Party regarding their recent decisions), the vehicle registration tax system (or car card tax arrangement), and new taxes. Arguments against all of these are being debated based on both specific policies and procedural decisions; the criticism is strong and intense, but at the same time, there is a demand for explanations and legal legitimacy (constitutionality). The intense focus is on decisions stemming from the taxes and the actions of the coalition.

Focuses on the continuous, consistent position of its party (the Centre Party) and the context of the coalition agreement. It demonstrates a readiness to utilize legal channels and administrative courts to achieve its objectives (two appeals filed with the administrative court to overturn the car tax). Little attention is paid to broad partnership; instead, it emphasizes individual consensus and subsequent options for compromise (when mentioned), citing the coalition agreement as the source.

Not enough data

Economically critical of the government's tax policy, emphasizing that tax burdens (including VAT hikes) strain families and reduce purchasing power. At the level of opposition, they seek to preserve certain concessions and exemptions (for people with disabilities, large families), which have been brought forward as arguments regarding the proposed car tax. They are critical of the potential or partial implementation of the European Union directive and stress the impact on people's livelihoods.

It focuses on social issues and the prevention of inequality: protecting the livelihood of families, considering the special needs of people with disabilities, supporting large families, and promoting general social justice. Specifically, it argues that the car tax and the reduction of general tax exemptions negatively affect these groups; advocating for the protection of specific age groups and the necessity of ensuring constitutional continuity.

The primary objectives are the abolition or a comprehensive revision of the car tax, and the review of tax policy under democratic oversight. This points to a deep, fundamental dispute (regarding constitutionality and exemptions for people with disabilities) and involves actively utilizing legal protection channels (appeals to the administrative court, constitutional review proceedings). Furthermore, it stresses the necessity of clarifying or revoking European Union directive-based taxation.