Agenda Profile: Andrei Korobeinik
First reading of the Draft Act amending the Electricity Market Act and other acts (termination of universal service and ensuring security of supply) (Bill 351 SE)
2024-02-14
15th Riigikogu, 3rd session, plenary session
Political Position
The political position is strongly geared towards protecting vulnerable consumers (especially the elderly) within the context of the universal service. The speaker criticizes the government’s inaction and delay, which has resulted in a monthly financial loss for poorer citizens, totaling approximately 100,000 euros per month. There is a demand for the adoption of the opposition’s (Center Faction’s) earlier proposal, emphasizing both political efficacy and social responsibility.
3 Speeches Analyzed
Topic Expertise
The speaker demonstrates expertise regarding the amendments to the Electricity Market Act and the implementation of the universal service, citing specific financial figures (a difference of 5–10 euros, a monthly loss of 100,000 euros). Furthermore, they possess knowledge of the Riigikogu's procedural rules, requesting clarification on the procedure for conducting the sitting and the right to submit procedural questions.
3 Speeches Analyzed
Rhetorical Style
The rhetorical style is critical, direct, and accusatory, particularly when addressing the minister, referencing the lack of a response in the previous session. Both emotional appeals (comparing the elderly to victims of scam calls) and logical, data-based arguments regarding financial damage are employed. The speaker is also concerned about the violation of parliamentary procedure.
3 Speeches Analyzed
Activity Patterns
The speaker is active in parliamentary debates, frequently questioning the minister and raising points of order. They reference their previous involvement in handling the car tax bill and mention that the procedural matter has been under discussion for about three hours.
3 Speeches Analyzed
Opposition Stance
The speaker is clearly in opposition, criticizing Minister Kristen for failing to provide a substantive answer and for political inaction, which has resulted in financial damage to the less affluent. The core criticism targets the government's political prejudice, which prevents them from adopting sound proposals put forward by the opposition (the Center Faction).
3 Speeches Analyzed
Collaboration Style
The speaker emphasizes the need for cross-party cooperation, calling on the government to accept good proposals coming from the opposition (the Center Faction). They point out that the Center Faction made essentially the same proposal several months ago.
3 Speeches Analyzed
Regional Focus
Data missing.
3 Speeches Analyzed
Economic Views
Economic perspectives strongly emphasize social protection and financial support for vulnerable consumers, in contrast to the government's claim that universal service users are wealthy. State intervention is demanded to prevent monthly losses (100,000 euros per month) incurred by poorer individuals.
3 Speeches Analyzed
Social Issues
The primary social focus is on protecting the elderly, who are vulnerable due to complex market options and the rollout of automated services. The speaker notes that seniors view these proposals with skepticism, even comparing the situation to scam calls.
3 Speeches Analyzed
Legislative Focus
The legislative focus is on the proceedings for the Act amending the Electricity Market Act (concerning the termination of universal service and security of supply). The speaker is critical of the government’s actions and supports the earlier amendment proposal submitted by the Centre Faction. Additionally, a procedural question was raised concerning the procedure for handling the car tax bill.
3 Speeches Analyzed