Session Profile: Urmas Reinsalu

The speaker represents the Isamaa party’s strong opposition stance, focusing on the issues of economic recession, inflation, and the lack of transparency in the state budget. He strongly opposes the ruling coalition’s tax hike policy (the VAT increase and the 'tax hump' income tax reform), deeming it a mistake that will only deepen the economic downturn. The political framework is heavily results-driven, highlighting the government's failure to resolve existential security and economic questions, while simultaneously presenting a fiscally responsible alternative budget.

The speaker demonstrates profound expertise in public finance and budgetary procedures, utilizing specific figures (e.g., the 1.6 billion euro procurement for provisions, a 50% inflation forecast, the 300 million euro target for reducing administrative costs). In their argumentation, they rely on critical assessments from the National Audit Office, the Chancellor of Justice, Eurostat, and financial analysts (e.g., Toomik), particularly concerning the lack of budget transparency and the failure of performance-based budgeting. Furthermore, their detailed knowledge of defense expenditures and social policy (family benefits, nursing homes) is specifically highlighted.

The speaker’s style is predominantly combative, critical, and insistent, accusing the governing coalition of "astounding arrogance, superiority, and smugness" and violating parliamentary rules of procedure. He employs numerous logical arguments and factual references, but interweaves them with emotional appeals concerning the livelihood and security of the Estonian people. The rhetoric is formal, yet incorporates sharp expressions (e.g., "hocus pocus," "legal fig leaf," "a tail-wagging parliament") and repeatedly emphasizes the theme of the nullification of Isamaa’s alternative proposal.

The speaker was extremely active during the plenary session, participating intensely in the budget debate, repeatedly raising procedural questions to the Chair and the presenters, and demanding answers regarding the blocking of the Isamaa party's amendments. Their contributions were lengthy and highly detailed, focusing both on substantive policy choices and deficiencies in the parliament's operational procedures.

The main opponents are the governing coalition and the parliamentary majority, who are criticized both for their political choices (tax hikes, exacerbating the recession) and for procedural violations. The speaker accuses the majority of blocking Isamaa's alternative budget and breaking the law, which he views as political revenge and an undermining of democracy. Separately, the government is criticized for threatening to zero out the funding for the Estonian Union of Pensioners' Associations, deeming this humiliating retaliation.

The speaker is ready in principle to support technical draft legislation (e.g., the amendment to the Land Register Act) and calls upon the ruling coalition for dialogue and the search for common ground, but only on the condition that the government abandons its misguided budget choices. He emphasizes that Isamaa, upon coming to power, will not stoop to the current coalition's level of canceling out political alternatives.

The speaker's focus is largely national and strategic, covering the Estonian economy, security, and demography. On a regional level, the necessity of directing external funding towards the development of major highways is mentioned.

The speaker is strongly fiscally conservative, opposing new tax increases (VAT, the tax hump) and demanding a swift reduction of government spending by 300 million euros. He criticizes the government's policies for fueling inflation and stifling economic growth. In his view, budgetary policy should be focused on jump-starting the economy and controlling inflation, rather than on trivial expenditures (such as cargo bike subsidies or RMK parties/events).

In the social sector, the speaker focuses on the demographic crisis and family security, demanding a moratorium on any initiatives to cut child and family benefits. They defend the interests of the elderly, criticizing plans to make savings at the expense of nursing home residents, and condemning the defunding of the Estonian Association of Pensioners' Unions.

The speaker's main legislative priorities are Isamaa’s alternative budget (including cuts to administrative costs and the cancellation of planned tax increases) and tasking the government with the 1.6 billion euro defense procurement via a draft resolution of the Riigikogu. Furthermore, he demands amendments to the State Budget Basic Act to ensure cost-based transparency and the itemization of subsidies by legal entity.