Session Profile: Andrei Korobeinik
15th Riigikogu, 3rd sitting, plenary session
2024-06-10
Political Position
The political stance is one of strong opposition to the government's supplementary budget, which is deemed socially unjust and economically short-sighted. The main points of criticism are the cuts affecting internal security (PPA) and services for children with special needs, as well as the deepening of the economic recession. The political framework is clearly results-oriented, accusing the government of incompetence in state management and possessing a "payday loan mentality."
4 Speeches Analyzed
Topic Expertise
The speaker demonstrates expertise in state budget and macroeconomic topics, citing specific cut items (PPA vehicles, special welfare services, EAS investments). Numerical estimates are employed (e.g., 20–30 million in losses resulting from the EAS cuts), and Estonia's position in the EU recession ranking is referenced. Additionally, three concrete alternative budget rescue measures are put forward.
4 Speeches Analyzed
Rhetorical Style
The rhetorical style is sharply confrontational and at times emotionally charged, employing strong accusations directed at the government (e.g., "the SMS-loan mentality"). Vivid analogies are used (a beer-consuming family member) and references are made to well-known politicians (Andrus Ansip) to underscore the government's incompetence. The speaker focuses on directly refuting the opponents' claims, accusing them of lying ("Priit lied").
4 Speeches Analyzed
Activity Patterns
The MP was highly active during the plenary session debate on the supplementary budget, repeatedly posing questions, delivering an extended address, and submitting a motion to adjourn on behalf of their parliamentary group. These behavioral patterns suggest a strong focus on the current legislative process and continuous critique of the government's activities.
4 Speeches Analyzed
Opposition Stance
The primary conflict is aimed at the ruling coalition, particularly the Reform Party and the Minister of Finance, who stand accused of economic decline and incompetence. The criticism is twofold—both policy-based (concerning cuts and tax policy) and results-oriented—with opponents being accused of lying and damaging the long-term interests of the state. The lack of willingness to compromise is evident, confirmed by the proposal to adjourn the sitting.
4 Speeches Analyzed
Collaboration Style
The style of cooperation in this context is notably absent and confrontational, focusing primarily on refuting the claims made by coalition partners (especially the Social Democrats). While there is a reference to Isamaa's alternative budget, there are no direct mentions of cross-factional collaboration or a willingness to compromise.
4 Speeches Analyzed
Regional Focus
The focus is clearly national and macroeconomic, covering the state budget, internal security, and the position of the Estonian economy within the European Union. Border construction with Russia is mentioned, but there are no references to specific local or regional projects or communities.
4 Speeches Analyzed
Economic Views
The economic outlook is focused on solving structural problems and ensuring long-term growth, in contrast to short-term cuts that diminish future revenue (EAS). Support is given to more progressive tax solutions, such as retaining the progressive tax bracket (the 'tax hump') aimed at higher earners, and implementing a special profit tax for banks. Furthermore, reducing the number of public sector officials is seen as a solution, rather than relying on budgetary cuts.
4 Speeches Analyzed
Social Issues
In social policy, strong emphasis is placed on protecting vulnerable groups, opposing cuts to welfare services for children with special needs and the imposition of income tax on the average pension. Internal security is treated as a crucial security issue, criticizing the reduction of the Police and Border Guard Board (PPA) budget and the failure to fund the construction of the border.
4 Speeches Analyzed
Legislative Focus
The legislative focus is resisting and rejecting the supplementary budget, a stance which is also supported by a proposal to filibuster the proceedings. The priority is highlighting alternative budget-saving measures (such as a special windfall tax on banks and maintaining the current tax bracket structure). The speaker is primarily a vocal opponent of bills initiated by the government.
4 Speeches Analyzed