By Plenary Sessions: Anastassia Kovalenko-Kõlvart

The coalition is prepared to cooperate on the opposition's draft bill, and the Centre Party stresses the importance of cooperation, driven by the desire to reduce bureaucracy, demonstrating an approach centered on reform and collaboration. However, there is strong opposition to a bill that would create a centralized "super-database" via the Money Laundering and Terrorist Financing Prevention Act, potentially jeopardizing constitutional principles and individual rights. Given this conflict, emphasis is placed on adhering to constitutional limits and the necessity of holding an emergency debate and seeking the required consensus. (This is not a significant signal towards radical zero- or single-issue initiatives; the focus remains on the functioning of democracy and fostering cooperation.)

The speakers emphasize the protection of privacy and fundamental rights and are critical of the draft law, which expands the collection of police camera footage and data without a thorough threat assessment and proper oversight. The critical parties demand a thorough debate and direct coordination with the Chancellor of Justice and independent oversight; they are prepared to reject the bill during its first reading. Concern is also noted regarding the balance between taxation and the state's sense of security, and it is emphasized that the legal order must be guaranteed within the framework of the constitution.

The speaker expresses strong opposition to the creation of a centralized super-database, emphasizing that the state's core principle is not to consolidate data from all registers into a single, final view. This stance is distinctly policy-driven, centering on data protection, individual rights, and independent supervision. The speaker demands the termination of the draft legislation and a comprehensive debate. There is strong criticism regarding endangered privacy rights and potential profiling, alongside concerns about inherent risks and the lack of control.

Representing the Centre Party, he stresses the need to protect constitutional rights and uphold the views of the Chancellor of Justice. He is also strongly opposed to simplified administrative procedures and the expanding sanctioning powers of the Competition Authority. He emphasizes that tax and budget policy must be based on honest debate, and accuses the government and the Reform Party of deceiving the public with tax hikes. He positions himself as a defender of democracy and the rule of law, highlighting the necessity of keeping state governance within constitutional limits and preventing the development of a “punitive state.”

Supports increasing the state budget for the road network while highlighting the absence of a long-term plan. It criticizes the coalition agreement, stressing that isolated promises must be replaced by a comprehensive and sustainable funding structure. The stance is heavily focused on investment and results, concentrating on infrastructure's impact on the economy and public safety.

The main focus is the protection of constitutional rights and ensuring the legal clarity of the draft bill. The speaker emphasizes that the prohibition against self-incrimination in criminal proceedings derives from the Constitution, and the emphasis is placed on correctness and adherence to the position of the Chancellor of Justice. He asks whether this right extends to legal persons and whether the lack of such extension constitutes non-compliance with the Constitution, which indicates serious doubt regarding the draft legislation until clarity is achieved. Consequently, the position is moderate, focusing on the protection of rights and demanding legal clarity, rather than political confrontation.

The primary focus is on safeguarding civil rights and personal data protection within a democratic state governed by the rule of law, coupled with criticism directed at surveillance systems that were rushed into implementation and insufficiently regulated. [The subject] supports the decision to suspend the use of cameras until legal clarity is achieved, stressing the necessity of independent oversight and transparency. Family policy and the expansion of state aid to various local governments (specifically, free kindergartens) are also important, regarding which [the subject] is prepared for cooperation and a broader consensus. [The subject] is critical of the past conduct of the Social Democrats and the government, but is not destructive; rather, the approach is centered on finding solutions to problems.

Supports the draft amendment to the Traffic Act concerning the regulation of light personal transporters, small mopeds, and bicycles; emphasizes the importance of safety, public health, and maintaining the orderliness of the Tallinn urban environment, and sees the need for swift implementation and finding a consensual solution. It highlights the role of local governments in acquiring the right to impose restrictions and, keeping urban safety in mind, is prepared to contribute to making clarifications during the second reading. The focus demonstrates unified, practice-based, and relatively strong support, where both security and the organization of the cityscape are crucial.

The opposition's critical reception of the government's tax policy. It stresses that before the elections, promises were made not to raise taxes, yet hikes were later implemented, leaving payments reaching 24% in place. This deepens the general crisis of trust and exacerbates inequality. The focus is on restoring unity and public confidence, viewing the impact of the government's decisions within the context of security and trust as merely one element of a deeper underlying climate. The framing is primarily value-based and oriented toward performance oversight.

The main focus centers on the financing of Tallinn Airport and the demand for dividends. The representative is critical of the government's financing decisions, arguing that the termination of targeted funding and the required dividends are eroding the airport's profits and forcing fee increases. He emphasizes the need to revise the dividend policy and review the airport's financial structure to ensure the market can function properly.

The key themes are the effective implementation of the corporate liability provision and the establishment of precedent in judicial practice. The speaker is highly critical of the current practices of the prosecutor’s office and stresses that proceedings should only be initiated when the evidence is unambiguous. He/She expresses a desire to clarify the law and the need for greater specification, including considering the ministry’s proposals where necessary. The protection of victims and improving the responsiveness of victim support mechanisms are also important goals for him/her.