By Plenary Sessions: Arvo Aller

The political position is strongly oppositional and results-oriented, arguing that the government's development strategy is "rotten" and focuses on consequences rather than underlying causes. Key points of emphasis include the lack of regional balance, the disregard for food security, and the harm inflicted upon rural life through tax hikes (car tax, income tax, and VAT) and the reduction of subsidies. The speaker accuses the ruling coalition of pursuing a deliberate policy that exacerbates regional marginalization.

The political stance centers on criticizing the government's actions and transparency in the realm of national defense and security. The speaker casts doubt on the actual substance of cooperation with allies, dismissing it as mere rhetoric, and demands concrete results and metrics (e.g., the number of ships inspected). The criticism is strong and aimed directly at the government's performance and accountability.

Insufficient information.

The political platform is strongly opposed to tax increases, particularly concerning the land tax, which he/she believes damages agricultural producers and jeopardizes food security. He/She criticizes the government's inertia and past procedural errors in passing legislation, demanding a more substantive approach. He/She highlights EKRE's role in reducing land tax rates in local municipalities, thereby establishing a clear counter-position to the government's overall tax policy. The political focus is centered on supporting agriculture and addressing regional issues.

The speaker expresses strong opposition to the government's legislative work, particularly concerning the crisis management bill, which aims to merge three existing laws. This position is strongly value-based, focusing on the fear of the government gaining "unlimited authority" to restrict people's movement and seize property during a crisis situation. Furthermore, criticism is directed at the government's inability to fulfill its promise to reduce bureaucracy, as well as its incompetence in international relations (citing the incidents involving the US and Lithuanian ministers).

The political stance is highly critical of the government's actions, focusing specifically on poor planning and a lack of accountability. The speaker stresses the necessity of correcting previous decisions based on the National Audit Office's report and demands that those responsible (the Chancellor, the Minister, and the head of RKIK) be identified in connection with the "bare cupboard." This position is strongly focused on evaluating the efficacy of the government's performance.

The political stance is vehemently opposed to the tightening of beekeeping subsidy conditions, which excludes small-scale producers with fewer than 16 bee colonies. This approach is policy- and results-driven, emphasizing the negative impact of these cuts on the agricultural sector and producer cooperation. The speaker stresses the importance of making subsidies accessible to all beekeepers, regardless of the number of hives they maintain.

This is a strong opposition politician who focuses on holding the government accountable and highlighting the failure to deliver on coalition agreement promises, particularly concerning regional policy. Stants is highly critical, demanding explanations from the Prime Minister and cabinet ministers regarding the impact of tax hikes and planned budget cuts. Their political stance targets both the government’s operational decisions (cuts, taxes) and the broader political culture (procedural rules).