By Plenary Sessions: Anastassia Kovalenko-Kõlvart

Clearly identifies the risks and deficiencies in the current legislation concerning the regulation of religious associations' activities; stresses the need to clarify which restrictions should be imposed and which gaps need to be filled, taking into account existing statutes and the Penal Code. The core question is whether, and what kind of, additional regulations are necessary, and whether the current mechanisms are sufficient.

The primary focus is strengthening the Riigikogu's role in the budget procedure and reviewing fundamental laws to ensure the legal enforceability of parliamentary decisions. The core of the discussion revolves around how budget amendments could remain within the competence of the Riigikogu and how to ensure complete transparency of expenditure and revenue lines. The drafting of the bill by the Centre Party faction and its discussion in the Finance Committee are of crucial importance.

The focus is on tax policy and the bank tax, as well as the transparency of parliamentary procedures and the organization of debates. The criticism details how no discussion took place in the committee and how information is presented prior to the public debate.

The central focus is the draft bill concerning the withdrawal of support for pensioners, alongside issues related to the state budget and tax services; emphasis is placed on the progress of the bill reviews and the necessity of clear answers from the government. The representative is critical, raising questions about alternative solutions and the allocation of funding, but does not submit direct alternative proposals.

It advocates for amending the Riigikogu's decision-making powers and the Budget Act such that all revenue and expenditure lines exceeding 500,000 euros are made visible. It stresses that the current draft bill is purely cosmetic and fails to address the underlying issues. Furthermore, it seeks to quickly place an alternative draft bill on the agenda and invite the ministers to the committee hearing.

We do not have sufficient data to specify a concrete priority regarding a draft law or a hearing topic. The text focuses on criticizing tax policy and general discussion, but fails to present clear legislative initiatives or goals.

The focus is on changes to tax legislation (VAT, income tax, fuel excise duty, and the proposed car tax) and shifts in social benefits. The speaker acts as a critic of political polarization, stressing the necessity of analyzing and debating the proposed legislative measures. While specific initiatives may not be offered, the importance of responsible fiscal policy is highlighted.

The main goal is to reject the draft bill during the first reading and protect the continuity of the existing legislation. He emphasizes that the procedure for amending the role of the Secretary of State and its educational requirements must be based on the letter of the law and constitutional requirements, rather than the appointment of political favorites. He informs that the draft bill has not been discussed sufficiently and sets a dangerous precedent if legal requirements are changed every time the prime minister is replaced.

The primary objective is to enhance state control and oversight regarding national aviation matters; it refers to utilizing the results of special audits and addressing questions to ministers and the session chair. The focus is on issues pertaining to the supervision of contract approvals and adherence to strategic targets; seeking tangible progress and accountability.

Legislative attention focuses on accelerating the procedures for interpellations and ensuring they reach the agenda, budget transparency, and monitoring the funding directed towards road infrastructure. There is no reference to specific legislative bills, but the need for better accountability is emphasized.