Session Profile: Andrei Korobeinik
15th Estonian Parliament, 4th session, plenary sitting
2024-12-04
Political Position
The political position focuses heavily on state budget transparency, ministerial accountability, and preserving the Riigikogu’s control over the executive branch. The speaker opposes the increased authority granted to ministers under the new budget framework law to modify expenditures, deeming this action unconstitutional. There is exceptional criticism regarding the designation "security tax," arguing that the name does not reflect its actual purpose of covering the budget deficit. The political framework employed is primarily procedural and critical of the government’s actions.
8 Speeches Analyzed
Topic Expertise
The speaker demonstrates profound expertise regarding the state budget process, the operations of the Finance Committee, and matters of constitutional jurisdiction. Technical terms such as "budget baseline law" and "return of the reserve" are employed. Awareness of specific financial phenomena is demonstrated, including the drop in Euribor and the effect of previous tax legislation on the budget.
8 Speeches Analyzed
Rhetorical Style
The rhetorical style is sharp, critical, and at times sarcastic, especially regarding the naming of taxes (with the suggestion to call the tax the "Reform Party Incompetence Tax"). Direct and challenging questions are employed to dispute the opposing side's positions, and the necessity of honesty before the public is underscored. The style is formal, yet it incorporates emotional elements, such as the expression of shock concerning a colleague's vote.
8 Speeches Analyzed
Activity Patterns
The speaker is highly active during the session, raising multiple questions and points of view in a short timeframe concerning the budget, taxation, and parliamentary procedure. Active participation in the work of the Finance Committee is also noted, where significant time has been dedicated and meetings with ministers have taken place.
8 Speeches Analyzed
Opposition Stance
A strong oppositional stance, particularly aimed at the Minister of the Interior and the Reform Party. The criticism targets both the ministers' lack of accountability (specifically, their failure to participate in the committee) and their political incompetence (evidenced by the budget deficit and the incorrect naming of the tax). The speaker also criticizes the session chair for violating democratic principles by issuing voting guidelines.
8 Speeches Analyzed
Collaboration Style
The current style of cooperation is rather confrontational, posing pointed questions both to coalition colleagues (Aivar, Annely) and to the presiding officer of the session. Reference is made to previous failed cooperation, where the coalition did not support the draft bill proposed by the speaker's faction, which would have helped prevent the budget deficit.
8 Speeches Analyzed
Regional Focus
None. The focus is entirely on national fiscal policy, budget transparency, and parliamentary procedure.
8 Speeches Analyzed
Economic Views
Supports strict fiscal discipline and demands honesty regarding tax objectives, opposing the use of the security tax to plug the general budget hole. It criticizes the government’s actions, which have resulted in a large budget deficit. It seeks greater control for the Riigikogu over changes in expenditures.
8 Speeches Analyzed
Social Issues
Social issues are only mentioned within the context of the budget (specifically, the use of the security tax to cover social expenditures), but the speaker fails to express any concrete positions on social policy matters.
8 Speeches Analyzed
Legislative Focus
The main legislative focus centers on amendments to the state budget and the basic budget law, measures which the speaker strongly opposes because they increase the authority of the ministers. Significant emphasis is also placed on adhering to parliamentary procedure and democratic principles, as well as holding ministers accountable before the committee.
8 Speeches Analyzed