Agenda Profile: Andrei Korobeinik
Inquiry regarding the conflict between the motor vehicle tax and the Constitution and European Union law (No. 623)
2024-04-29
15th Riigikogu, 3rd session, plenary session
Political Position
The speaker places emphasis on parliamentary procedural rules and the quality of the debate, criticizing the evolution of the culture of managing the session. The substantive political stance is critical of the government's approach to tax hikes, stressing the necessity of a comprehensive fiscal plan and national consensus. The political framework is primarily procedural and critical of the government's actions.
4 Speeches Analyzed
Topic Expertise
The speaker demonstrates familiarity with parliamentary procedural rules and stresses the right to raise points of order. Knowledge concerning economic policy (tax increases, improving public finances) is primarily shown through quoting the views of former Prime Minister Andrus Ansip, focusing on the themes of engagement and trust. No direct technical data or statistics are utilized.
4 Speeches Analyzed
Rhetorical Style
The style is critical and ironic, particularly when addressing the chair on procedural issues ("the culture of chairing the session is developing daily"). The speaker uses external authorities (ex-Prime Minister Ansip) to support their arguments and emphasizes the logical necessity of having a comprehensive plan. Humor and collaboration with a colleague (laughter) are noticeable while the question is being asked.
4 Speeches Analyzed
Activity Patterns
The speaker is active during parliamentary sessions, raising both procedural questions and substantive inquiries. He/She actively participates in the debate, referencing the events of the previous agenda item and the questions posed by other colleagues.
4 Speeches Analyzed
Opposition Stance
The primary criticism is aimed at the Reform Party, criticizing both the management of the sitting and the tax hike policy. The criticism targets the political approach (specifically, the lack of inclusion) and the procedures. The speaker also speculates about internal tensions that have emerged within the Reform Party.
4 Speeches Analyzed
Collaboration Style
The speaker collaborates with members of their faction, demonstrating good rapport (laughing together with Lauri Laats) and referencing the previous work of a colleague (Anastassia Kovalenko-Kõlvart). They use the positions of other politicians (Ansip) to support their arguments, seeking consensus on the overall plan.
4 Speeches Analyzed
Regional Focus
South Estonia is mentioned in a context where the public's understanding of government policies is insufficient. This points to an awareness of the importance of regional sentiments and the necessity of ensuring the widespread acceptability of policies across the entire country.
4 Speeches Analyzed
Economic Views
The speaker is critical of the government's approach to raising taxes, stressing that the lack of inclusion leads to a loss of public understanding. He advocates for the position that improving the country's finances requires developing a comprehensive plan that enjoys broad national consensus.
4 Speeches Analyzed
Social Issues
Insufficient data.
4 Speeches Analyzed
Legislative Focus
The focus is on the interpellation concerning the conflict between the motor vehicle tax and the Constitution and European Union law, and, more broadly, challenging the government's financial strategy. The speaker concentrates on parliamentary work procedures and the government's responsibility for ensuring a high-quality debate.
4 Speeches Analyzed