Agenda Profile: Andrei Korobeinik
Inquiry regarding the mobile application eesti.ee (no 674)
2025-01-27
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary session
Political Position
The political position is strongly critical of the government's development of the e-state and its management of digital services, emphasizing stagnation and the failure to achieve the goals of the "Personal State" promised by the coalition. The criticism is results-based, focusing on poor project outcomes (e.g., a 2.6/5 rating) and the decline in the e-state's reputation. The speaker demands the restoration of Estonia's e-state reputation and a greater focus on developing the digital sector.
3 Speeches Analyzed
Topic Expertise
The speaker demonstrates competence in digital governance and mobile application development, utilizing specific terminology such as "product owner" and referencing the average Google Play rating (2.6/5). They are aware of the level of Estonian artificial intelligence investments within the European Union and draw detailed comparisons with Ukraine's Diia application. Furthermore, they possess knowledge of IT project pricing, noting that the cost for a truly excellent design is in the tens of thousands, not hundreds of thousands, of euros.
3 Speeches Analyzed
Rhetorical Style
The rhetorical style is critical and concerned, emphasizing the stagnation and loss of standing of the Estonian e-state. Both logical arguments (expenditures vs. results, ratings) and emotional appeal (a sense of embarrassment regarding the services) are utilized, while simultaneously maintaining a polite and appreciative tone toward the minister. The speaker employs a historical comparison (the early days of smartphones) and references previous digital leaders (Ilves, Viik) to underscore the current situation.
3 Speeches Analyzed
Activity Patterns
The course of action is limited to submitting an interpellation to the Riigikogu on January 27, 2025, focusing on a specific digital service problem.
3 Speeches Analyzed
Opposition Stance
The criticism targets the public sector's inefficient project management and results, particularly concerning the weak output of the Ukraine cooperation project (nearly a million euros). Although the formal inquiry is addressed to the minister, it is emphasized that the problem is systemic and related to a lack of accountability (the absence of a product owner). The intensity of the criticism is strong because the money spent and the results achieved are in stark contrast.
3 Speeches Analyzed
Collaboration Style
The speaker is critical of the digital cooperation between Estonia and Ukraine, arguing that despite the significant expenditure, the results are not reflected in the quality of the mobile application. He/She advocates for learning from successful foreign models (such as Ukraine's Diia), but criticizes the implementation of the existing cooperation.
3 Speeches Analyzed
Regional Focus
The focus is on the national reputation of the e-state and international comparisons, highlighting Estonia's position in artificial intelligence investments within the European Union (third place from the bottom). The application is also compared to Diia, Ukraine's digital solution.
3 Speeches Analyzed
Economic Views
Economic perspectives emphasize the critical evaluation of public sector spending and the need to increase investments in artificial intelligence development, while simultaneously reducing overall public sector expenditures. A strong focus is placed on cost-benefit proportionality, criticizing the spending of hundreds of thousands of euros to acquire a substandard product.
3 Speeches Analyzed
Social Issues
Social issues are being addressed within the context of digital service accessibility and the proactive state model, stressing that the state should be handling the bulk of the work. The aim is to prevent a situation where applying for benefits is psychologically difficult or embarrassing for people.
3 Speeches Analyzed
Legislative Focus
The legislative focus centers on monitoring the outcomes and expenditures of existing digital projects (via parliamentary inquiry), calling for improved project management and a clearer definition of accountability. Specific new pieces of legislation are not mentioned; rather, emphasis is placed on the necessity of changing the approach to how project objectives are defined.
3 Speeches Analyzed