‹
Economy and redistribution
46
vs. you
›
Closer to lower taxes — redistribution is more targeted than universal, and broad services are not the main emphasis.
Position 5: Lower taxes and broader services balance for you — some money stays with people, some funds accessible public services, without an extreme either way.
More
In practice this means looking for a compromise on each budget line: cutting a tax here, keeping a proven service there. This approach is often politically workable, but it requires constantly revisiting what the state should and should not pay for. The result is usually gradual adjustment to circumstances rather than sweeping reform.
Lower taxes, less redistribution
Higher redistribution, broader public services
Change on this axis since 22 Sep 2026
‹
Public finance
46
vs. you
›
Budget balance still leads, but selected investment is allowed if it does not break the whole.
Position 5: You mix balance and selective investment — save where you can, spend only on clearly chosen projects, without an extreme deficit.
More
This approach requires being able to say which projects go first and which wait, and to defend that choice. The upside is flexibility: save in good years, invest more in bad ones. The risk is that without a clear rule the budget easily drifts one way or the other under the pressure of the moment.
Priority on a balanced budget
Investment and spending even at a deficit
Change on this axis since 22 Sep 2026
‹
Housing
70
vs. you
›
Public construction and market rules already sit strongly beside private developers.
Position 7: Public building and tenant protection weigh more: municipal flats, limits on speculation, less reliance on developers alone.
More
This approach protects people who rising rents would otherwise push out of the centre, and gives them more security. The council, however, would need to spend more on building and managing flats. This view usually goes with limits on short-term tourist lets, taxes on empty homes, or a municipal right of first refusal on land.
Private construction and looser rules
Public construction and market regulation
Change on this axis since 22 Sep 2026
‹
Climate and energy
3
vs. you
›
Energy price and a pace households and firms can bear come first — emissions goals move more slowly.
Position 0: The electricity and heat bill is absolute priority — keep coal and cheap sources longer; costly green obligations for households are off the table.
More
Low-income households and energy-intensive industry would welcome it most, as their costs would not rise. The price may be slower modernisation of the energy sector, poorer air in coal regions, and having to catch up on changes all at once later. This view usually also means caution about European climate rules and a push to negotiate exemptions.
Short-term price and slower change
Faster emissions cuts
Change on this axis since 22 Sep 2026
‹
European integration
7
vs. you
›
Key decisions are preferred at home — shared EU policies are treated cautiously.
Position 1: National room clearly comes first: tax, farming and migration more in Prague than in Brussels; shared policies only where they must.
More
This approach preserves the ability to fit rules to local conditions, for example in supporting farmers or setting business taxes. On the other hand, it can be harder to make headway in EU negotiations when a country repeatedly stands aside. This view usually also leads to insisting that major EU changes require unanimity.
More decision-making at national level
More shared decision-making in the EU
Change on this axis since 22 Sep 2026
‹
Defence and security
8
vs. you
›
Military commitments and spending stay low — collective defence is not a top budget priority.
Position 1: Military spending stays low; new foreign missions and large weapons buys feel like a burden, not a priority.
More
The savings show up mainly in big contracts — aircraft, armoured vehicles or radars — which would be postponed or cancelled. Civilian ministries and local councils could gain, for example for fire-service equipment or flood protection. The risk is ageing equipment, and catching up later tends to cost more. It also usually means reluctance to send troops abroad.
Lower military commitments and spending
Stronger collective defence and higher spending
Change on this axis since 22 Sep 2026
‹
Migration and integration
8
vs. you
›
Admission of foreigners is framed with stricter rules and lower numbers rather than more open gates.
Position 1: Admission is clearly restrictive: low quotas, hard visa conditions and few new places; integration only for those already inside.
More
Authorities would focus mainly on screening and returns rather than expanding programmes. Towns would have fewer new residents needing school places or housing, but there could be gaps in construction, healthcare or social care. Families of foreigners already living here could find reunification harder.
Restrictive admission of foreigners
More open admission with integration support
Change on this axis since 22 Sep 2026
‹
Social values
22
vs. you
›
It leans on traditional rules and institutions — changes in the name of individual autonomy are treated cautiously.
Position 2: Traditional rules and institutions — for example caution about changes to family law or the public role of churches.
More
In policy this leads to prioritising families with children and protecting established forms of partnership in law and in tax relief. For some people this means security and a clear framework; for others, such as same-sex couples, less equal treatment. It often comes with caution on issues like changing gender in documents or sex education in schools.
Traditional rules and institutions
Greater individual autonomy and equal rights
Change on this axis since 22 Sep 2026
‹
Education
44
vs. you
›
Public schools remain, but the emphasis is more on choice and differentiated paths than uniform equal access.
Position 4: The public network stays the base; selectivity and private schools are a supplement, without a hard push for fully equal funding.
More
The municipality or region would keep good catchment schools, while selective and private places exist mainly for those who want them. The upside is a secure basic network plus room for choice; critics may point out that gaps between schools remain. It usually comes with caution toward big funding reforms.
Smaller state role, selectivity, and private alternatives
Strong public schooling and equal access
Change on this axis since 22 Sep 2026
