Agenda Profile: Lauri Laats

The opposition’s stance regarding the current coalition’s taxes and fiscal competence. The speaker compares the tax increases to the resulting decline in purchasing power, the shrinking size of the food basket, and the rising cost of essential services that burden the public, while emphasizing the necessity of cutting costs and reducing bureaucracy. This position includes a clear defense of the interests of families and citizens. The plans envision a selective reallocation of funding for the proposed measures (e.g., lowering VAT on foodstuffs) and the future implementation of broader social policies, should the Centre Party gain governmental power. The primary focus is placed on solving the problem by boosting the economy and increasing incomes, rather than relying on empty promises.

Statistical and budget citations are being used in the argument: a comparison of shopping basket totals between the first quarter of 2018 and the first quarter of 2025, along with the increase in food prices (>40%), which exacerbates the perception of the shopping basket "shrinking." It points to the car tax and excessive bureaucracy as issues in budget formulation, and also addresses the question of kindergarten revenues. This demonstrates a strong economic policy knowledge base, focusing on factors observable in real figures and in budget execution.

A fiery, combative, and direct style; it uses statistics and concrete examples to demonstrate a contrasting truth. The presentation involves continuous audience engagement (e.g., “Good people…”, “check the statistics!”), utilizes emotional points (family livelihoods, the shrinking grocery basket), and enriches the text with numerous references intended to invite opponents and the audience toward persuasion.

A single day in parliament featuring speeches and separate presentations; the appearances are consecutive on the same day (in the context of the second reading of Draft Act 651 SE). It refers to previous proposals and direct debate, and utilizes subsequent references like “in addition” and “three minutes extra,” which demonstrates continued active participation and a management area sensitive to time constraints.

A critical stance on the current government's policy: the main targets are tax hikes, cuts to kindergarten subsidies, and the closure of regional transport offices. It is stressed that these measures harm families and neglect regional needs, and that the figures presented do not reflect reality. The confrontation is intense but non-personal; the criticism is political in nature, not directed at individuals.

Presenting a strictly oppositional argument while highlighting possibilities for future cooperation. However, in the current context, no readiness is shown for local or national coalition partnerships. Nevertheless, it is mentioned that a broad nationwide program (such as free kindergartens) can be implemented if the Center Party comes to power. Procedurally, it is emphasized that cooperation is dependent on the coalition, and independent proposals for improving the budget are offered as an alternative.

At the regional level, attention is concentrated on Tallinn and the issue of rural transportation. County transport is often referred to as a discarded or defunct service, highlighting the specific need for people in rural areas to travel between schools, kindergartens, and workplaces. Concerning Tallinn's subsidies and services, there is a clear preference for expanding free kindergarten places within Tallinn, with the eventual goal of national implementation. The prioritization of regionalized attention and the differentiation of needs across various regions is paramount.

Positions on economic policy: opposition to tax hikes and the limitation of budgetary expenditures; emphasis is placed on preserving purchasing power and reducing the actual financial burden associated with the cost of the food basket. We support the review of tax amendments and the lowering of VAT on foodstuffs; we are prepared to consider social investment (e.g., free kindergartens) as a tool for improving long-term well-being, provided this is implemented in a manner that does not increase governing costs.

The focus is on family well-being, the availability of kindergarten spots, and changes to child support payments. Criticism is leveled against cuts to kindergarten subsidies, and the necessity of increasing access to free basic education, secondary education, and potentially higher education is stressed. Emphasis is also placed on maintaining the affordability of the food basket for families, alongside highlighting shortcomings in childcare and school supplies.

The primary emphasis is on the state budget draft 651 SE and related transpositions, the car tax, and comparing issues concerning VAT on meals. Proposals are being raised (such as lowering VAT on foodstuffs, exempting kindergarten fees in Tallinn and more broadly), and amendments to the drafts and the failure of the supplementary budget reading are promised if bureaucracy emerges. The focus is placed directly on budget and tax policy questions and the assessment of their impact.