Agenda Profile: Andrei Korobeinik
Third Reading of the Draft Law on the State Supplementary Budget for 2024 (Bill 456 SE)
2024-06-19
15th Riigikogu, 3rd session, extra plenary sitting
Political Position
The political position is one of strong opposition to the government's proposed negative supplementary budget, which is deemed completely misguided and an attack on both national security and socially vulnerable groups. The Centre faction refuses to support the draft legislation, arguing that it fails to address the billion-euro deficit. They further highlight the government's economic incompetence and its failure to deliver on promises. The primary focus remains firmly on criticizing the government's overall performance and economic policy.
4 Speeches Analyzed
Topic Expertise
The speaker demonstrates expertise in macroeconomics, tax policy, and budgetary procedure, highlighting specific figures (e.g., 100 million euros in the Ministry of Economic Affairs and Communications (MKM)) and drawing comparisons. Particular emphasis is placed on the potential revenue from the bank tax (half a billion) and the consequences of abolishing the tax hump. Statistical data is utilized regarding the competitiveness of Estonia and Lithuania, as well as the poverty risk faced by pensioners.
4 Speeches Analyzed
Rhetorical Style
The style is sharply critical and combative, employing strong accusations directed at the government, such as "lied right to our faces" and "totally unreasonable." The ironic "squirrel" metaphor is used to characterize the economic policy of the Reform Party. The appeals are a mixture of logical economic data and an emotional emphasis on the impact of the cuts on vulnerable groups.
4 Speeches Analyzed
Activity Patterns
The speaker is active during important legislative debates, posing repeated questions and delivering a comprehensive closing address during the third reading of the supplementary budget. This pattern of activity demonstrates a focus on both the procedural and substantive arguments taking place on the floor of the parliament.
4 Speeches Analyzed
Opposition Stance
The main opponent is the Reform Party, which is being blamed for the economic downturn and incompetence, along with the entire coalition for its deceptive security policy. Criticism is aimed both at the policies (cuts, tax reform) and the parliamentary procedure (specifically, the committee's decision regarding Isamaa’s proposals). Compromise is ruled out, as the Centre Faction believes the supplementary budget is irreparably flawed.
4 Speeches Analyzed
Collaboration Style
The speaker defends the rights of other opposition factions (Isamaa) to participate in the lawmaking process, criticizing the committee’s decision to limit the submission of amendments. It is also noted that the coalition side (Aivar Sõerd) conceded the issue of budget opaqueness, but the overall tone adopted is hostile toward the coalition.
4 Speeches Analyzed
Regional Focus
The focus is on national economic and security issues (the budget deficit, the police agency). Strong international comparisons are heavily utilized, specifically citing Lithuania’s economic competitiveness and tax policy as examples to illustrate Estonia’s economic decline.
4 Speeches Analyzed
Economic Views
It supports increasing state revenue through a bank tax, which would bring in half a billion euros, thereby opposing the government's policy. It objects to the abolition of the tax hump and the taxation of pensions, arguing that this increases the risk of poverty and is unreasonable in the context of the state budget deficit. It prefers lower labor taxes, citing Lithuania's competitiveness.
4 Speeches Analyzed
Social Issues
Strong opposition to cuts affecting socially vulnerable groups, such as children with special needs and pensioners. It is emphasized that the poverty risk for pensioners is almost three times higher than the European Union average, and cuts that further exacerbate this risk are being criticized.
4 Speeches Analyzed
Legislative Focus
The primary focus is on opposing the supplementary budget (Bill 456 SE) and defending the legislative rights of members of parliament (MPs) against restrictions imposed by the committee. It supports the Centre Faction’s previous bank tax bill as an alternative source of revenue. It criticizes the coalition (Eesti 200) for its failure to deliver on promises regarding the zero budget and the long-term plan.
4 Speeches Analyzed