By Plenary Sessions: Rain Epler

There is not enough data.

There is a lack of willingness to cooperate; the speaker uses references to a report led by their party colleague (the Kiili Report) to substantiate their criticism of the government, but the overall style is strictly confrontational. Reference is made to a consensus proposal from the Riigikogu National Defence Committee, which the government failed to implement.

There is no sign of a direct willingness to compromise with the government; rather, they are demanding that ministers change their positions. When speaking of cooperation, the speaker refers to the National Defence Committee report, which was compiled by the committee led by party colleague Meelis Kiili, using it to support their security arguments.

There is insufficient data. The speaker focuses on criticizing the coalition and posing questions, referring only to other colleagues (Leo, Marek, Annely, Toomas) in the context of asking those questions.

There is too little data.

The collaborative style is open to summarizing the arguments of colleagues (Vooglaid, Grünthal) who share similar viewpoints and aligning with their concerns. A proposal is made to the Board to involve the Legal Department of the Riigikogu (Parliament) to resolve procedural issues and to take a 15-minute recess.

The party demonstrates a willingness to support the bill due to its social objective, even though it originates from the opposition, and urges others to support it. However, the style of cooperation remains highly conditional and critical of the opposition party (the Social Democrats), using the debate over the bill as a platform to condemn their past actions.