Agenda Profile: Anastassia Kovalenko-Kõlvart

A representative of the Centre Party, whose core political position is opposition to the Social Democrats (SDs) and decisions formulated by the government. He emphasizes issues of corruption and transparency and deems the behavior of the Social Democrats, now in opposition, hypocritical. He stands against draft bill 519 SE (making a motion to discontinue and not supporting the bill) and links this to broader political decisions, for which he blames the opposing side's previous actions (abolition of child benefits, tax changes). He highlights the necessity of accountability and public debate and is prepared to involve other parties and interest groups for the sake of greater transparency.

Demonstrates a certain knowledge base regarding the mechanisms of parliamentary work (first and second reading, protocols, special committees) and the context of policy research (taxes, competition law, special car benefits/fringe benefits, and the positions of interest groups representing people with disabilities). The individual refers to specific topics (the car tax, changes to VAT and income tax, the Porto Franco case, the special committee on combating corruption) and uses examples related to these topics to substantiate their criticism.

The speaker is confrontational, argumentative, and aggressive; they use direct accusations and provocative language (including charges of moralizing, hypocrisy, and attacking), often employing exclamations and questions. They create an emotional impact, emphasize injustices and past actions, and use visual references during their speech, recommending public hearings to increase transparency.

There are several speeches scheduled for the same day (2025-05-07) within a session addressing the same topics; repeated emphasis on the discussion of the draft bill and the use of procedural motions; expresses readiness to extend the speech or take additional time (“I would take two minutes of extra time”). Highlights parliamentary procedural steps (first reading, procedural motions, public hearings).

The main line of attack is targeting the SDs and their political decisions; it identifies the SDs as acting against the views of the people, accuses them of hypocrisy, and calls into question their past decisions (child benefits, taxes, car tax special concessions). The speaker emphasizes that while in opposition, they pretend to be against these decisions, and seeks to contrast them with the coalition.

It shows readiness for a broad-based discussion and a cross-partisan approach (a public hearing regarding Porto Franco involving all political parties). It seeks to involve former and current Center Party members and coordinate the hearing of stakeholder opinions. It also refers to forms of cooperation (such as the invitation to join the special committee against corruption).

The focus is primarily on topics within the Tallinn region (Tallinn companies, Porto Franco, the mention of Mihhail Kõlvart), emphasizing the region's influence and the interests of residents and businesses in the context of localized decision-making. It references specific Tallinn city officials and local interests within the framework of the arguments.

Economically, it criticizes the tax adjustments and social support measures (child benefits, increases in VAT/income tax) previously implemented by the SD party, linking them directly to rising inequality. It does not present specific alternative economic policy proposals, but strongly emphasizes the necessity of transparency and control. The overall tone is critical of the economic decisions made to date.

It stresses the importance of the opinions of the Chamber of Persons with Disabilities and the professional views of interest groups, and criticizes the fact that these previously failed to capture the attention of all stakeholders. It expresses concern regarding the balance of social guarantees and the support provided to people with special needs. Furthermore, it highlights the issue of anti-corruption and questions of ethical responsibility.

The focus of the topic is the second reading of Bill 519 SE and the options for halting it (a motion to suspend/adjourn), as well as organizing a public hearing on the Porto Franco issue and involving special committees. The speaker positions themselves as being against the bill, emphasizing the need for increased transparency and debate, and notes that they are prepared to utilize parliamentary oversight measures.