By Plenary Sessions: Andrei Korobeinik
Total Sessions: 4
Fully Profiled: 4
2024-11-20
15th Riigikogu, 4th session, plenary sitting
The political focus is heavily centered on constitutional amendments, security, and the restriction of suffrage. The speaker is critical and inquisitive, questioning the actual security impact of the amendments (e.g., the shifting loyalty of Russian citizens) and demanding justification for the exclusion of Ukrainian and Moldovan citizens from voting rights. The stance is oriented towards a policy and value-based framework, emphasizing the necessity of clarifying the legislator's intent.
2024-11-13
15th Riigikogu, 4th session, plenary session.
The political position is strongly oppositional, focusing its criticism on the government’s handling of the economy (specifically, the policies of the Reform Party) and the social sector (citing budget cuts to mental health services). They also stress the necessity of improving the Riigikogu’s working procedures to ensure that all proposed amendments make it to the floor for a vote. The overall stance is primarily results-oriented and highly critical, directly attributing the current economic downturn to the government’s policies.
2024-11-07
15th Parliament, 4th sitting, plenary session
The political platform heavily focuses on mitigating the economic downturn and poverty, supporting the reduction of VAT on foodstuffs to 5% and the introduction of a bank tax. The speaker sharply criticizes the coalition’s policies, which, in their view, are driving the Estonian economy into a dead end and increasing poverty, particularly among pensioners. This policy is framed as an essential step for saving the Estonian economy, highlighting the country's negative economic performance within the European Union.
2024-11-04
15th Riigikogu, 4th session, plenary sitting
The speaker adopts a strong, results-driven position concerning public health crises, emphasizing the high incidence of overdose deaths and the gravity of this issue as a national concern. They also scrutinize the government's rationale for administrative cost savings, demanding clarification regarding the tangible economic benefit derived from closing the Lüganuse Unemployment Insurance Fund office. These positions are geared toward a critical assessment of state policy and actions.