By Plenary Sessions: Lauri Laats

The main emphasis is on the criticism of tax policy and the oppositional stance: the planned increases in VAT (to 24% starting July 1st) and income tax, as well as the idea of abolishing the tax hump, are being critically reviewed. The position is strongly value-based and focuses on achieving a fairer burden and protecting the livelihood of the middle class and low-wage earners; it has been stressed that these changes will harm the economy and consumption and increase inequality. However, there is no indication of engagement with the government regarding seeking a compromise—the focus remains primarily on highlighting criticism and opposition.

The core position focuses on a comprehensive audit and structural reforms of the tax system in Estonia. There is a strong readiness to follow IMF recommendations, emphasizing that economic growth cannot stem solely from tax increases, but rather from the necessity of achieving fairer and more sustainable tax revenue. It agrees with the need to incorporate the taxation of capital, assets, and high dividend incomes, and stresses the sustainable financing of defense expenditures and public services. This approach is guided by robust, policy-based, and forward-looking debate, rather than the immediate implementation of short-term tax concessions.

These speeches reveal an oppositional trend: emphasis is placed on opening the economy and fostering international cooperation (especially with African countries, such as Botswana), while simultaneously criticizing the government's tax policy. Solidarity is supported, but it is stressed that this must be reflected fairly and reasonably, and they do not support an overabundance of promises. Amidst the complexities of these positions, the changing of promises has been criticized, and the impact of the cost of living on people has been highlighted.

Oppositional and ethical, focused on the vitality of rural areas and agriculture. It supports the continued financing of the European Union’s Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) and emphasizes the need to guarantee farmers a fair income, competitiveness, and the viability of rural regions. It is strongly critical of the government's tax policy and bureaucracy, stressing that the economy must be guided by a long-term plan and the defense of our interests in Brussels. The position is firmly politicized, and the goal is to influence the policy sector—not merely to react to stakeholders, but to establish a level playing field for farmers.

The most significant aspect is the criticism regarding the current form of CO2 trading and the green transition:— it is described as a redistribution market that harms the economy and competitiveness.— The need to review CO2 market mechanisms is emphasized, and the effectiveness of the green transition is doubted, citing Europe's faster action relative to global impacts.— National security and economic activity interests are brought forward, leading to a readiness to move towards reforms and potential referendums (e.g., on the topic of oil shale).— It is politically oriented, based on values and priorities, and seeks to balance environmental values with economic activity and security.

The primary focus is on budget transparency and conducting a thorough analysis. The stance is critical of the government’s plans, preferring to increase defense spending only when it is firmly justified. Simultaneously, there is concern regarding the guarantee of pension payments and energy stability. It advocates for a balanced approach, emphasizing that cuts should not be rushed from just one area; instead, the whole picture must be considered to find additional revenue streams. It recognizes the need for a broader vision that includes supporting digitalization and innovation, especially when budget cuts are implemented.

The core position is energy security and emphasizing national independence: promoting the retention of oil shale as a stable energy buffer, stressing the need for a popular mandate and the importance of a referendum on the oil shale issue. Criticism has been raised regarding the coalition's decisions directed toward the green transition and the need to propose amendments to ENMAK (Estonian National Development Plan for the Energy Sector) taking CO2 exposure into account; the strength is political, not merely technical, and strongly regional, preferring snap elections or a broad consultation regarding mandates. The faction emphasizes that the absence of a mandate and large-scale decisions necessitate the involvement of the public or a broad-based debate.

The opposition's stance towards the government emphasizes that the constitutional amendment restricting voting rights in local elections should not be maintained; they seek to restore broader suffrage and prioritize negotiations with allies. Furthermore, concerns have been raised regarding the implementation of the care reform and the impact of tax policy on the population's standard of living, highlighting the decline in purchasing power and the necessity of addressing funding issues. Ultimately, strong criticism is leveled against the transparency, cooperation, cost, and efficiency of the government's decisions.