By Plenary Sessions: Anastassia Kovalenko-Kõlvart

Three separate speeches took place on the same day (30.04.2024), discussing the increase of fines and state fees. The representative’s speeches are consistent, focusing on the explanatory memorandum and the impact of these measures on private individuals, and he/she is preparing the faction’s unified response (rejection). This demonstrates continuous participation in plenary sessions and consistent criticism of coalition policy.

Interpellations concerning the same topic (EU law, constitutional law) have been repeatedly presented; prior research and extensive procedural work (inquiries, questions to the Prime Minister, discussion of proposed amendments) have been cited; subsequent judicial or parliamentary action is promised, if necessary.

Focusing on a single plenary session while presiding, [the speaker] utilizes longer speeches and detailed examples; referencing the Tallinn City Council as a source of experience and practical examples concerning elections. It is emphasized that the opposition employs obstruction as a right to draw attention, and raises questions and provides examples regarding the risks of advance voting. This pattern of activity is evident across various speeches throughout a single session.

He/She posed a specific question during a plenary session and focuses on the transparency of funding and the promotion of youth sports. This gives the impression of standard parliamentary practice, involving questions and clarifications.

Mentions that a discussion will take place tomorrow in the Legal Affairs Committee; this demonstrates regular parliamentary oversight and active participation in controlling the process.

Three speeches were delivered on the same day during the Riigikogu plenary sessions, with each address highlighting the same critical points against the draft bill. These presentations demonstrate persistent opposition and a desire to force the withdrawal of the bill, referencing the roles of the police, the judiciary, and the legal system, along with prospective changes.

He/She is a highly active participant in the Q&A session; delivered three addresses on the same day, 10.04.2024; focused on tax policy and budgetary issues, and referenced previous warnings, demonstrating sustained engagement.

He spoke multiple times during the same session on April 9, 2024, and addressed the ministers. He requested additional time and put forward specific questions and proposals aimed at rejecting the draft legislation.

The individual was an active participant in the plenary sessions that day, delivering multiple speeches across various contexts (car tax, large families, children with special educational needs (SEN), and teachers' salaries). They referenced amendments debated in the Finance Committee and the ongoing discussion of the coalition agreement and budgetary issues. They frequently utilized references to local examples and emphasized the continuity of coalition-related debates.

It stresses that the issue was brought up in September, and the four months of subsequent discussions and the strike itself reflect a protracted, fruitless process. It highlights consistent involvement in the coalition talks, as well as regional complexities (Ida-Virumaa, Tallinn, Tartu). It points to the regular utilization of various groups and protests within the framework of the discussion.

In the context of Question Time, three addresses are delivered during the same day; [it] emphasizes the readiness to introduce and submit draft legislation (bank tax, digital tax) and refers to previous work and proposals; [this includes] frequent submission of questions to ministers.

It represents the consistent opposition leadership within the Riigikogu plenary session, citing the faction's legal analysis and its plan to appeal to the President to prevent the bill from being promulgated. It is trained to respond to developments; it seeks to influence public debate and pressure the government into taking swift action.

Highlighted is the consistent participation in plenary sessions and the submission of inquiries; this refers to several separate speeches within the framework of the same topic and the continuous monitoring of issues. It repeatedly references previous events (such as the teachers' strike, the gap between government promises and support measures) and emphasizes the need for ongoing reflection and the expectation of answers from the government.