By Plenary Sessions: Andrei Korobeinik

Total Sessions: 4

Fully Profiled: 4

2025-02-19
15th Estonian Parliament, 5th session, plenary sitting
The political focus centers on the importance of local representation and consulting with constituents during the legislative process. The speaker stresses that the representative must be accountable to their voters, directly questioning whether the decision taken (voting in favor of the draft bill) was in line with the mandates of the Haabersti constituents. The activity is aimed more at monitoring the representative’s performance (it is performance-driven) than at the substance of the policy itself.
2025-02-18
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary sitting
The political position centers on strong support for implementing a bank tax, viewing it as a political choice for filling the budget and reducing social inequality. The speaker sharply criticizes the government's economic policy, which, in their estimation, has led to a three-year recession and is being managed based on "faith" rather than performance metrics. Key issues also include opposition to the car tax and the necessity of lowering VAT on food, emphasizing that the Centre Party is fulfilling its programmatic promises.
2025-02-11
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary sitting
The political stance is strongly oppositional, focusing on the accountability of the government (specifically the Foreign Minister and the Prime Minister). The speaker demands clarity in foreign policy (regarding the legitimacy of the Georgian government) and actively supports the initiative for a vote of no confidence against the Prime Minister. They maintain focus on the government’s performance and democratic values, while criticizing the stigmatization of voters.
2025-02-10
15th Riigikogu, 5th sitting, plenary session
The political focus is on strong, results-oriented criticism of the Reform Party's economic policy, emphasizing the duration of Estonia's recession (the second longest globally, after Haiti). The speaker opposes the government’s approach, characterizing it as a policy driven by blind faith rather than measurable metrics. This stance is strongly oppositional, demanding the clear definition of economic policy goals and performance indicators.