By Plenary Sessions: Anastassia Kovalenko-Kõlvart

Criticism of the accelerated legislative process and the highlighting of the importance of constitutionality and impact analysis. The representative is value-based and central to the defense of the rule of law, emphasizing the need for thorough debate, an inclusive process, and clear justifications. He/She stresses that urgency must not be used as a justification for violating standard legislative practices, and calls upon the ministry and the Riigikogu to act responsibly.

The primary political stance, at minimum, involves criticizing the government’s education policy and stressing the state’s responsibility for guaranteeing teachers’ salary levels. They emphasize that the base funding for salaries must come from the state budget, not solely from local government budgets, and a strong counter-argument is made against “demagogic narratives”—the position is broad in scope and focused on independent oversight. There is a clear emphasis on the need to take real steps and assume responsibility, rather than merely searching for culprits; satisfaction with the alleged lack of funding is low.

It emphasizes the crucial role of the knowledge-based economy and the integrated development of education, higher education institutions, and science. Adopting a critical tone, it condemns the government’s plans to reallocate funding to address teachers’ salaries, stressing that this undermines the entire system. It demands specific goals, a broad, cross-party consensus, and an investment strategy for education and science based on solid evidence (1.5% of GDP for higher education, 3% for research and development, 2% sourced from the private sector). It views investments as the primary driver of economic growth and advocates for a comprehensive, long-term political agreement, rather than short-term cuts.

The speaker focuses on amendments to the Income Tax Act and emphasizes the 30 different draft amendments to the Income Tax Act presented by his faction as being very good and necessary, although due to their similarity, only the income tax rate itself differs. He expresses the pragmatic goal of finding the optimal income tax rate and securing corresponding support from the coalition, stressing that this represents a policy-driven reform direction. At the same time, he notes that the coalition has voted these proposals down on previous occasions, which points to a challenge in finding consensus and the need for better coordination.

Education is the state's primary responsibility, and the teachers' salary fund must be covered by the state budget; this is the government's chief priority. The representative stresses the need for a unified, collaborative, and compromise-driven approach within the coalition in order to prevent a teachers' strike.

The main focus is on monuments and the issues addressed by the draft bill, as well as the protection of the independence of judicial institutions. He/She notes that the coalition apparently did not wish to support the EKRE bill, and expresses a desire to see clear future plans. Furthermore, he/she emphasizes preserving the independence of the prosecutor’s office and fears risks of influence arising via the Ministry of Justice; the position is critical, but not directly regarding support for the bill that was initially confirmed. Not enough data to determine broader party support.

The presenter adopts a critical and notably incomplete stance regarding the coalition's plans. They stress the need to reassess the significance of the language reform in education, questioning whether a unified Estonian-language school implies a single system or separate school systems, and highlighting the necessity of clear definitions. The position is oriented more pragmatically and is values-driven, rather than being strictly politically fixed.

The speaker highlights a legal loophole and a documentation issue concerning civil status procedures, identifying inter-ministerial cooperation and the development of regulatory improvements as the necessary solutions. They emphasize that addressing this gap is a priority, demanding practical fixes rather than ideological conflict. The position is pragmatic and policy-driven, prioritizing system enhancement over political decision-making.

Emphasis is placed on the issues concerning the ratification of the amendments to the ESM Treaty; the position is neutral and issue-oriented, reflecting neither a clear side nor opposition. The representative stresses the importance of the reform and seeks Italy's rationale and next steps.

The speaker is in opposition and critical of the government’s economic policy, focusing on opposing tax increases and the need to review budget decisions. He/She emphasizes that the tax policy is being used merely to collect revenue and does not support economic revitalization, demanding instead investments and measures that promote economic growth. Furthermore, he/she argues that the redistribution policy inherent in regional politics does not make local governments wealthier and requires changes and clearer investment priorities.

The most prominent topics are the streamlining of the income tax base and the financing of local governments; emphasis is placed on the state’s role in funding education and acting as a bridge between local governments and the central government. He/She is critical of the current approach and is quite keen on securing additional resources, while stressing central funding and cooperation with local authorities, rather than focusing on accusations. He/She does not appear to be moving toward radical change, but instead seeks to emphasize the necessity of responsibility and partnership.