By Plenary Sessions: Andres Metsoja

The opposition targets the initiators of the draft legislation and the car tax policy, which is considered politically unsound and likely to generate inequality. The criticism is rooted in policy, focusing on weak solutions concerning property rights and the unfair effect of the tax. Compromise is ruled out since the faction does not support the bill as a whole.

The primary opposition is focused on the government’s draft Subsoil Act, which is criticized for violating the principles of the rule of law and unfairly treating the private sector. The criticism is both political and procedural, accusing the state of abandoning businesses to bear the costs and business risks alone, while simultaneously creating market distortions in favor of the state-owned company (Enefit) when allocating oil shale resources.

The opposition is centered on strongly criticizing the quality of the government's policy and legislation, particularly concerning the motor vehicle tax and amendments to the Waste Act. The criticism targets both the political dimension (the unfairness of the MVT) and the procedural level (a vague legal framework, insufficient protection of property rights). Furthermore, it criticizes the state's attempt to offer assistance only after the unfair tax has already been imposed.

The criticism is aimed at the state budget handling process and the responsible authorities who fail to meet agreements and unexpectedly end up with large surplus sums. The criticism is procedural and non-partisan, focusing on the lack of transparency and accountability within public administration.