By Plenary Sessions: Anastassia Kovalenko-Kõlvart

Key themes include the procedure for amending the Churches and Congregations Act and general cooperation. The approach is measured and collaborative; emphasis is placed on the importance of consensus and procedural economy, as well as the willingness to support opposition proposals, provided they enhance transparency and efficiency.

A strong focus on easing consumer prices and supporting local producers, exemplified by the proposal to lower the VAT rate for local producers to 9% and criticism directed at the government's plan to increase VAT. These positions are geared toward policy and social impacts, highlighting the vulnerability of pensioners and families and the necessity of price controls. This demonstrates a desire to influence specific changes in tax arrangements and competitiveness, rather than relying solely on rhetoric.

The most crucial points concern the Tallinn city government's decision to limit the number of polling stations, which is viewed as a corresponding restriction of freedom. He/She expresses strong opposition to the decision, framing it as an encroachment upon the principles of free elections, and emphasizing the importance of voting without coercion or obstruction. This stance is policy-driven and value-oriented, aiming to preserve the freedom to choose voting methods, including the option of a paper ballot.

The central focus is the criticism of the Social Democrats' tax policy: opposition to the proposed car tax, the increase of VAT to 24%, and the increase of income tax to 24%, as well as opposition to tax recommendations that include taxing income starting from the first euro (with the exception of pensioners). The position emphasizes that the government has damaged people's livelihoods and proposes suggestions and open discussion regarding local mechanisms, such as lowering the VAT on foodstuffs. Final conclusion: oppositional, yet pragmatic—stressing the need for public welfare and tax transparency, and ready to consider certain ideas related to negotiations with the coalition.

The speech emphasizes the accountability of the legal system and the protection of victims; it expresses strong criticism regarding the actions of the Prosecutor's Office and demands explanations and potential steps to initiate criminal proceedings against associated legal entities. The aforementioned lack of victim protection is cited as a problem that needs to be remedied. There is insufficient data to define broader partisan or ideological trends.

The speaker is strongly opposed to the government’s tax policy: he demands clarification on the temporary or permanent nature of the VAT and income tax, and stresses that the current tax model undermines residents' livelihoods and the nation's will to defend itself. He promises government reform and improved transparency, and describes the current coalition as an Excel spreadsheet dependent on people, which merely displays a target goal. In this plan, the positive direction involves abandoning or modifying the current budget allocation and focusing on social and security objectives through a responsible budget.

The speech raises the constitutionality of the car tax as its central issue, stressing the absence of specific exemptions for disabled individuals and large families. The speaker characterizes the car tax as being in conflict with the constitution, seeing real dangers that could force people to give up essential vehicles. The position is strongly opposed to the car tax and underscores the necessity of implementing exemptions. Furthermore, it is noted that cases have already been filed in administrative court, and the legal and constitutional framework is highlighted as the foundation for the primary arguments.

The representative of the Centre Party, speaking at the parliamentary session on April 9, 2025, took a strong stance against the car tax, asserting a position that upholds constitutional and social justice. He/She emphasized that the car tax unfairly burdens large families, people with special needs, and residents of rural areas, suggesting the necessity of either withdrawing or amending the tax. Concurrently, he/she criticized the general tax policy (VAT, fuel excise duty) as excessively draining for families. The framing of the argument is policy- and value-based, and the representative pledged to utilize legal remedies and protection derived from international standards, including appealing to the Supreme Courts if necessary. Furthermore, he/she expressed readiness for broader cooperation with the opposition and for considering compensatory measures (for instance, in Tallinn).

The core stance involves a critical assessment of the government's proposed repurchase of Enefit Green, coupled with a strong emphasis on the need for greater accountability and transparency. The speaker questions whether the initial decision to go public (IPO) and the state's partial privatization were adequately considered, suggesting that a different approach might have been warranted, particularly given the risks inherent in those past decisions. Furthermore, attention is drawn to the potential impact of tax increases and the necessity of parliamentary oversight. The speaker stresses the government's responsibility for its decisions. Crucially, the style is focused on resolving issues and demanding oversight, moving beyond mere political rhetoric.

The main topics are the representation of women and their inclusion in company management bodies. He/She is critical of the regulatory directive and is seeking effective solutions, not merely those that offer superficial impact. He/She emphasizes the need for concrete measures at the national level.