By Agendas: Tõnis Mölder

The style of cooperation is consensual and open, emphasizing that the committee’s decisions regarding the processing of the draft bill and the conclusion of the first reading were made by consensus. He/She works closely with the minister and officials and anticipates substantive discussion with various factions and interest groups between the readings.

The style of cooperation is pragmatic and procedural, focusing on clarifying the details. The speaker is open to solutions, inquiring about incentives for renewable energy projects. If necessary, a written response will be requested from ministry officials, which demonstrates a desire for a thorough exchange of information.

The speaker acknowledges the Minister's presence and considers it important for the debate, which indicates a readiness for dialogue with the executive branch during the handling of the draft legislation. Cooperation with other political parties is not evident.

The speaker emphasizes the cooperation within the committee, citing the consensus decisions made during the processing of the draft bill and its referral for a vote. This collaboration involved both committee members from various factions and representatives of the ministry who were invited to present the government's official positions. He also refers to the necessity of waiting for the negotiations with the committee to conclude before Estonia's positions can be formulated.

The style of cooperation is dialogical, involving direct communication with the minister and seeking confirmation of institutional support for the draft legislation. Furthermore, this cooperation is reflected in the continuation of themes from previous committee discussions and in referencing colleagues' questions.

The style of cooperation is respectful and constructive, as the speaker acknowledges the validity of the previous speaker's (Mr. Laats) claim regarding the reintroduction of the idea in 2015. The objective is shared factual accuracy.

The style of cooperation is inquisitive and constructive, calling upon the minister to either mitigate or refute the criticism that has been presented. This demonstrates a readiness for debates and the acceptance of clarifications.

Data is scarce.

The speaker strongly emphasizes the necessity of cooperation and openness to compromise in order to find "a reasonable compromise and good wording" for the two similar draft bills. He/She stresses that amending the constitution requires "a very broad consensus" and that the Estonian state, rather than political points, must be the beneficiary.

The speaker adopts the role of an adversarial interrogator, demanding explanations and accountability from the bill's initiators. There are no indications of seeking compromise or cross-party cooperation; the focus is entirely on highlighting the bill's deficiencies.

Insufficient data

Insufficient data.

The style of cooperation is formal and focused on maintaining a dialogue with the Minister within the framework of oversight, requiring answers concerning the activities of the Competition Authority. There is no data regarding cooperation with other members or factions of the Riigikogu.

The need for broad-based participation in drafting development plans is emphasized, referencing the involvement process initiated by the minister. The speaker assumes that the development plan is a cross-policy document, which should ensure a holistic view of the state's directions and be more lasting than the decisions made by the government coalition.

The collaborative style is evident in the submission of the inquiry, which was prepared jointly with colleague Jaak Aab. The speaker emphasizes that the issue concerns several ministries (the Ministry of Social Affairs, the Ministry of Finance), but their focus remains on the administrative area of the Ministry of the Interior.

The speaker is open to national analysis and wider debate, deeming it essential. However, the prerequisite for cooperation is that decisions must be based on national interests, not private ones, which suggests a cautious approach. Direct cooperation with other political forces is not mentioned.