Agenda Profile: Andrei Korobeinik
Second Reading of the Motor Vehicle Tax Bill (364 UA)
2024-07-29
15th Riigikogu, extraordinary session of the Riigikogu
Political Position
The political position is strongly against the car tax bill, stressing that it is a governance failure that will worsen the economic situation and increase social inequality. The criticism is framed both ethically and practically (based on values and outcomes), defending poorer population groups, such as people with disabilities, large families, and rural residents. The speaker claims that the tax takes money from the poorest, making them even poorer. The Center Party faction will certainly not support the bill.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Topic Expertise
The speaker demonstrates expertise in the field of social benefits, citing specific benefit amounts (e.g., 49 euros and 11 cents) and their increases in cents (e.g., 90 cents per month or 10–79 cents). He/She contrasts these sums with the potential magnitude of the car tax (in thousands of euros). Furthermore, he/she is familiar with the deadlines for laws coming into effect (half a year) and the constitutional considerations concerning people with disabilities and large families.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Rhetorical Style
The rhetorical style is combative, critical, and urgent, employing strong moral judgments, such as calling the coalition's subsidy rhetoric a "hypocritical approach." The speaker balances logical arguments (the duration of the recession and legal violations) with emotional appeals, focusing on the difficult plight of rural residents and people with disabilities. He/She uses rhetorical questions and references previous political statements (Kristen Michal, Kaja Kallas).
2 Speeches Analyzed
Activity Patterns
The speaker actively participated in the second reading of the draft bill, delivering two speeches that day, one of which followed up on a topic raised by another colleague. He/She notes the low participation of other members of parliament in the chamber, highlighting his/her own active presence in the legislative process. The speaking style is focused on details and procedural questions.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Opposition Stance
The primary adversary is the ruling coalition, particularly the Reform Party, which stands accused of economic decline and management failures that have relegated the Estonian economy to the bottom of the European rankings. The criticism covers both policy issues (unequal taxation) and procedural matters (violating the deadline for the law to take effect). Compromise is out of the question, and the faction has filed a lawsuit and is also encouraging car owners to take legal action to protect their rights.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Collaboration Style
A collaborative style is evident with opposition partners, positively referencing topics raised by colleague Martin Helme and continuing his line of reasoning. No compromise is sought with the coalition; instead, the faction’s unified opposition to the bill is emphasized. The speaker hopes for intervention by the President or the Chancellor of Justice, which suggests a desire to find a solution outside the coalition.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Regional Focus
The emphasis is on rural residents for whom a car is a necessity, not a luxury, citing, for example, a village in Pärnu County where public transportation is minimal. The focus is national, but it stresses the need to consider regional differences in tax policy, as moving from the countryside to the city is another blow to the economy.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Economic Views
Economic perspectives are strongly opposed to tax hikes, particularly when they disproportionately affect the poor, arguing that such measures worsen the overall economic situation and deepen inequality. It is asserted that the economy cannot grow if funds are being extracted from the most vulnerable populations. Furthermore, returning money through subsidies is deemed unacceptable because it fails to offset the damage caused by the car tax.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Social Issues
Regarding social issues, the protection of people with disabilities and large families is prioritized, stressing that these groups are under the special care of the state according to the constitution. The speaker severely criticizes the rise in benefits measured in cents, considering it an inadequate and hypocritical solution to the harm caused by the car tax.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Legislative Focus
The legislative focus is on opposing the draft Motor Vehicle Tax Act (364 UA), highlighting both substantive and procedural errors. Particular emphasis is placed on the violation of the deadline for the law's entry into force and the unequal treatment afforded to disabled persons and large families. The parliamentary group has taken the initiative to appeal to the Supreme Court and encourages vehicle owners to pursue legal action.
2 Speeches Analyzed