Agenda Profile: Andrei Korobeinik
First reading of the draft law amending the Income Tax Act and the Defence Service Act, and the draft law amending the Income Tax Act (509 SE)
2024-10-15
15th Estonian Parliament, 4th session, plenary session
Political Position
The political stance is strongly opposed to the economic policies of the government (the Reform Party), emphasizing that Estonia's economic recession is due to failed domestic policy, not Putin's actions. The speaker vehemently opposes collecting money from the poor to benefit the wealthy, focusing on the inhumanity and failed outcomes of the policy. The criticism is aimed squarely at the government's actions and results, demanding that they look in the mirror and stop blaming others.
3 Speeches Analyzed
Topic Expertise
The speaker demonstrates knowledge in the field of macroeconomics by comparing Estonia’s economic recession (three years, the only EU country) with other European Union member states. They are also familiar with specific budgetary measures, such as the cancellation of student scholarships and benefits for single pensioners, and the implementation of the car tax. Furthermore, they question the government’s repeated explanations regarding the causes of the economic downturn.
3 Speeches Analyzed
Rhetorical Style
The rhetorical style is combative, critical, and emotionally charged, employing strong moral language ("robs them," "is not humane policy"). The text utilizes sarcasm (regarding birth rates) and rhetorical questions, along with references to other politicians (Medvedev, Ansip). The appeal targets both economic arguments and the emotional defense of vulnerable groups.
3 Speeches Analyzed
Activity Patterns
The speaker participated in the Riigikogu session—which addressed the first reading of the bill to amend the Income Tax Act—by submitting questions and delivering a speech. There is insufficient data concerning the frequency of appearances, meetings, or travel.
3 Speeches Analyzed
Opposition Stance
The main adversary is the government, specifically the Reform Party and ministers Jürgen Ligi and Kristen Michal. The criticism is intense and policy-driven, accusing the government of failed economic policy and "robbing" the less affluent. Compromise is ruled out, as the speaker vows not to support next year's budget.
3 Speeches Analyzed
Collaboration Style
The style of cooperation is restricted solely to agreeing with one colleague (Annely) regarding the thoroughness of the Finance Minister's report. There is no evidence of broader cross-party cooperation or a willingness to compromise.
3 Speeches Analyzed
Regional Focus
The speaker highlights a regional problem, criticizing the car tax for its negative impact on rural residents who will soon be unable to take their children to school. The main focus, however, remains on national economic policy and its social repercussions.
3 Speeches Analyzed
Economic Views
Economic views are strongly focused on social justice, and they vigorously oppose the abolition of the tax hump, which collects money from the poor to subsidize the rich. During a crisis, the state must support people who are struggling, rather than taking their last penny. He/She criticizes specific cuts, such as the elimination of student scholarships and benefits for single pensioners.
3 Speeches Analyzed
Social Issues
Regarding social problems, emphasis is placed on the negative impact of the government’s economic policy on the birth rate, as people are afraid to have children due to an uncertain standard of living. Support for vulnerable groups, such as students and single pensioners, is defended, as the elimination of these benefits is considered inhumane.
3 Speeches Analyzed
Legislative Focus
The legislative focus is on the opposition to the draft act amending the Income Tax Act and the Military Service Act (509 SE), and the related budget. The speaker is against the budget and the principle of abolishing the tax hump, but supports postponing the implementation of this specific concession. He promises not to support next year's budget.
3 Speeches Analyzed