Agenda Profile: Anastassia Kovalenko-Kõlvart
Inquiry Regarding Increasing the Decision-Making Authority of Municipalities Concerning the Establishment of Land Tax Rates (No. 777)
2025-09-15
15th Riigikogu, 6th sitting, plenary sitting
Political Position
The speaker is strongly opposed to the central government's increase of the land tax and the expansion of local government obligations; emphasizes the need to strengthen the decision-making power and autonomy of local authorities, and views state policy as a force exerting pressure on local levels. The speaker characterizes the current government's behavior as "hypocrisy" and calls for resistance, including appealing to the Supreme Court if necessary. Their position is strongly policy- and value-based, focusing on the defense of local governments and the representation of the people's interests at the local level.
1 Speeches Analyzed
Topic Expertise
The text addresses the complexity of local government financing and the impact of expenditures in the social, education, and care sectors; it provides examples, such as the costs associated with the care reform, school funding, and the resulting impact of the abolished free public transport. It also mentions aspects of the car tax and road construction funding, as well as tax changes in the general context, utilizing examples and terminology related to local financing and the overall tax burden.
1 Speeches Analyzed
Rhetorical Style
The speech is combative and emotional, often critical and accusatory; it uses direct quotes: "don't let yourselves be fooled," "Toompea politics must be kept separate from local governments." The speaker highlights the issues being raised and calls the audience to listen actively to current events, combining strong moral judgment and powerful rhetoric concerning impartiality.
1 Speeches Analyzed
Activity Patterns
Insufficient data
1 Speeches Analyzed
Opposition Stance
The criticism focuses on the government's policies and specific parties: the Social Democratic Party, the Reform Party, and Eesti 200. It names them responsible for the "tax circus" and accuses them of transitioning to "Toompea politics" (i.e., establishment politics). It emphasizes vehement rejection and strong confrontation, with no willingness to seek compromises with these groups in the current situation.
1 Speeches Analyzed
Collaboration Style
They mention previous cooperation (the bill was adopted with Reform and Eesti 200), but the current rhetoric points toward strong opposition. There is no clear indication of a readiness to cooperate on current issues; instead, the focus is primarily on local resistance and autonomy.
1 Speeches Analyzed
Regional Focus
The focus is on local governments and rural areas and their financing; it highlights the status and issues facing small municipalities and towns; Tallinn is mentioned as an example of an "arrogant leadership style"; and the entire framework should be analyzed within the context of central government influence.
1 Speeches Analyzed
Economic Views
In terms of economic policy, he opposes major tax hikes (including land tax, car tax, VAT, and income tax). He stresses that local municipalities have limits on their funding capabilities, and increased obligations should not result in additional taxes that increase the burden on citizens. He further points out that funding must be tied to existing accountability, and that current policy is worsening economic well-being.
1 Speeches Analyzed
Social Issues
Stresses the importance of funding social services and education and counters criticism that central government decisions impose additional costs on care and social policy; notes that people's ability to cope, their sense of security, and their trust may diminish if funds are distributed unfairly or the tax burden increases. It highlights the need for balanced funding to protect the quality of life for residents.
1 Speeches Analyzed
Legislative Focus
The legislative focus centers on increasing the decision-making authority of local governments in setting land tax rates (Query No. 777); it emphasizes the need to resist the central government's fiscal rigidity and, if necessary, to utilize the Supreme Court; it refers to potential legal proceedings before the Supreme Court, if required.
1 Speeches Analyzed