Agenda Profile: Aleksei Jevgrafov
Draft Law Amending the Act on the Government of the Republic (523 SE) – First Reading
2024-12-12
15th Riigikogu, 4th session, plenary session
Political Position
The political position focuses heavily on the demand for transparency and equal treatment regarding the representation expenses of cabinet members, contrasting these costs with the publicly disclosed expense allowances received by members of the Riigikogu (Parliament). This stance is strongly opposed to the current situation, broadly linking the classification of representation expenses to the government’s overall poor performance and fiscal opaqueness. The argument is framed primarily around outcomes and values, emphasizing a fundamental lack of accountability.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Topic Expertise
The speaker demonstrates knowledge of the procedures for reimbursing the expenses of Riigikogu (Parliament) and government members, distinguishing between general expense reimbursements and representation costs. This expertise is evident in the desire for a comparative analysis (Baltic states) and in the reference to the former Minister of Finance's criticism regarding the lack of transparency in the state budget. The treatment of the topic is detailed and procedural.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Rhetorical Style
The rhetorical style is critical and challenging, employing formal language and specific forms of address ("Esteemed Presenter," "Dear Colleague"). The argumentation relies on logical appeals, highlighting unequal treatment and citing an authoritative source (the former Minister of Finance) to provide a broader characterization of the government's activities. Rhetorical questions are utilized to challenge the respondent's stance.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Activity Patterns
The speaker actively participated in the first reading of the bill, submitting two questions during that same session, which indicates a focus on a specific legislative topic. Data regarding other activity patterns (meetings, travel) is unavailable.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Opposition Stance
The primary criticism is aimed at members of the government and the government's activities as a whole, who stand accused of opacity and operating in an unclear manner. The criticism is both procedural (a lack of transparency) and outcome-based, citing the vague presentation of the state budget as a prime example. The intensity of the criticism is high, suggesting a systemic problem in the government's conduct.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Collaboration Style
The style of cooperation is demonstrated through the quoting of a colleague's (Aivar Sõerd) criticism to support the argument regarding the government's lack of transparency, thus utilizing the criticism of others to reinforce one's own position. There are no direct references to a readiness to compromise or to cross-party cooperation.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Regional Focus
The focus is primarily on national issues (government spending, expense reimbursements for the Riigikogu). There is also regional interest, requesting data on how corresponding processes are organized in Latvia and Lithuania in order to establish a comparative framework.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Economic Views
Economic perspectives heavily emphasize fiscal transparency and detailed accountability for public spending. The criticism centers on the ambiguity of the budget, requiring precise information regarding the purposes and recipients of allocated funds, thereby indicating a call for stricter fiscal discipline.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Social Issues
Not enough data.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Legislative Focus
The legislative focus is currently on Draft Bill 523 SE, an act amending the Government of the Republic Act, specifically addressing the transparency of representation costs incurred by members of the government. The speaker is taking on the role of a critical interrogator of the bill and an advocate demanding greater transparency, standing in opposition to the existing regulation.
2 Speeches Analyzed