Session Profile: Aleksei Jevgrafov
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary session
2025-02-12
Political Position
A strong opposition stance, focusing on government inefficiency and the waste of taxpayer money, particularly the allocation of 100 million euros to the Narva gas plant. The main issues are energy dependence, high electricity prices, and the need for transparency in government operations, supporting the formation of the Nordica investigative committee. The political framework is clearly results-oriented and critical of current decisions that contradict declared objectives.
4 Speeches Analyzed
Topic Expertise
Demonstrates knowledge of energy policy and economics, citing the rise in gas and coal prices and the risks associated with imported fossil fuels, based on expert opinions. Practical knowledge regarding the implementation of legislation at the local government level is also evident, highlighting resource shortages and the necessity of training officials. Reference is made to data from the Police and Border Guard Board concerning call-outs related to dangerous dogs.
4 Speeches Analyzed
Rhetorical Style
The style is predominantly critical, demanding, and skeptical, posing sharp questions to the prime minister regarding the rationale and transparency of the decisions. Logical appeals are employed, referencing media (Delfi) and expert opinions, as well as statistical data (PPA call-outs). The tone is direct, demanding accountability and the full disclosure of the truth concerning the Nordica case.
4 Speeches Analyzed
Activity Patterns
All speeches were delivered during a single plenary session (2025-02-12), which suggests active involvement in the discussions concerning issues and draft legislation during Riigikogu sessions. The pattern of activity focuses on detailed criticism of the government's actions and proposed bills. Data regarding other activities or communication patterns is unavailable.
4 Speeches Analyzed
Opposition Stance
Intense opposition is aimed squarely at the Prime Minister and the Reform Party, criticizing them both for their unfavorable energy policy and for evading responsibility in the Nordica saga. The criticism is political as well as procedural, accusing the government of squandering taxpayer money and prioritizing questionable schemes. The opposition is demanding an investigation into the government's activities and greater transparency.
4 Speeches Analyzed
Collaboration Style
A speaker clearly backs the draft resolution put forward by the EKRE faction to investigate Nordica's operations, signaling a readiness for cooperation among opposition factions. The focus of this cooperation is scrutinizing the government's activities and demanding transparency. There are no signs of compromise with the ruling coalition.
4 Speeches Analyzed
Regional Focus
A clear regional focus on Narva, which is mentioned both in the context of energy projects (the construction of the Narva gas plant) and the application of local government resources and law. One speaker uses the title "former Mayor of Narva" to affirm their authority.
4 Speeches Analyzed
Economic Views
Highly critical of government spending, specifically deeming the 100 million euro allocation for the gas plant a waste of taxpayer money. The statement stresses the need for affordable electricity prices and doubts the long-term economic viability of imported fossil fuels due to the volatile price of gas.
4 Speeches Analyzed
Social Issues
The focus is on public order and safety issues related to dangerous dogs and ensuring the safety of the officials carrying out oversight. The social topic is framed as a problem of practical law implementation and resources.
4 Speeches Analyzed
Legislative Focus
The priority is the formation of a Riigikogu investigative committee to examine the circumstances related to the termination of Nordica’s activities. Focus will also be placed on the feasibility of new laws, specifically questioning how local municipalities can realistically comply with the legislation using limited resources, and how they can ensure the safety of officials when encountering dangerous situations.
4 Speeches Analyzed