AI Profiling: Arvo Aller

The political stance has remained consistently and vigorously oppositional throughout the entire period under review, framing the government's actions as a "steamroller" and incompetent economic management. The central issue is the government's tax policy (opposition to all new taxes and increases, including the car tax, VAT, and income tax), demanding a reduction in the tax burden to improve the public's standard of living. In addition to economic criticism, the focus areas include national and regional security (opposing the closure of institutions in border regions), the demographic crisis, and strong opposition to policies regarding the green transition and the easing of citizenship requirements. The criticism is strongly results-oriented, accusing the government of short-sightedness, and simultaneously value-based, emphasizing the protection of the Estonian people and rural life.

The politician's expertise is extraordinarily profound and sustained, focusing primarily on the technical details of agriculture and food security, regional policy (particularly concerning Ida-Virumaa and infrastructure), and taxation. He/She demonstrates authority in legislative procedures and administrative law, repeatedly referencing draft law numbers, deficiencies in explanatory memoranda, EU directives, and founding treaties. Arguments are consistently bolstered by specific terminology, concrete financial data, and statistics (e.g., losses, cormorant population figures, declining birth rates), which indicates a thorough familiarity with nuances related to economic, environmental, and national defense matters.

The rhetorical style is consistently combative, sharp, and penetrating, aimed at the systematic criticism and labeling of the government's actions, often employing strong, emotive phrases such as "green madness," "steamroller," and "anti-people." The speaker skillfully balances logical and procedural argumentation (referencing economic data, deficiencies in explanatory notes, and constitutional contradictions) with powerful emotional appeals, focusing on the livelihood struggles faced by rural residents, families, and pensioners. Key techniques include repeated rhetorical questions, irony, direct accusations of lying or incompetence, and challenging opponents even on a personal level, all of which lend the style a high degree of confrontational intensity.

The politician's operational profile is exceptionally active and consistent, involving participation in Riigikogu sessions almost every sitting day throughout the entire analyzed period (2024–2025). Their activity is systematically geared toward opposition oversight, evidenced by repeated interpellations, deep scrutiny of the details of government bills, and intensive questioning of ministers during both information sessions and legislative debates. Beyond legislative duties, they are also active in political maneuvers, such as motions of no confidence and running for positions on the Riigikogu Board, thus confirming their central and visible role in the work of the parliament.

The speaker has maintained a consistently intense opposition throughout the entire period, primarily attacking the government and the coalition parties (Reform Party, Eesti 200, Social Democrats). The criticism is systematically twofold: it focuses both on political decisions (especially tax hikes, budget cuts, and the neglect of regional policy) and procedural violations, such as the absence of impact assessments, breaches of constitutionality, and the use of the "steamroller" tactic. Beyond this policy- and procedure-centric criticism, opponents are repeatedly accused of incompetence, lack of transparency, and ethical misconduct (e.g., corruption scandals and nursing home incidents). The opposition’s stance is uncompromising, manifesting in demands for accountability and proposals to reject bills at the first reading.

The politician's cooperation style is strongly faction-based, demonstrating consistent and close collaboration with EKRE colleagues when submitting draft legislation and interpellations. At the same time, he/she is pragmatically open to cross-party cooperation with other opposition parties (the Centre Party, Isamaa) to achieve specific political goals, such as tax reductions and regional issues. Relations with the governing coalition are predominantly confrontational and supervisory, with the cooperation style often described as virtually non-existent, criticizing the coalition's reluctance to take opposition proposals into account. A willingness to compromise is rarely expressed and is conditional, offering the coalition "assistance" only if they support the opposition's initiatives.

The politician's regional focus is extremely strong and consistent, concentrating predominantly on Ida-Virumaa (Jõhvi, Narva, Toila), viewing it both as a socio-economic crisis hotspot and a border area critical for national security. All rural areas and peripheral regions are consistently defended against the negative impact of Tallinn-centric policies (such as the proposed car tax, centralization of services, and school closures). Specific issues include the transition of oil shale energy, infrastructure (roads, internet), support for agriculture and fisheries, and the demand to increase the revenue base for local municipalities. Regional problems are often connected to broader issues of national defense and food security, underscoring the necessity of state presence in border counties.

The politician's economic views are strongly fiscally conservative and oriented towards tax cuts, primarily advocating for reducing the VAT on foodstuffs to 5% to stimulate consumption, alleviate inflation, and ensure food security. They consistently oppose all new taxes (including the car tax, excises, and land tax) and the growth of bureaucracy, viewing these measures as deepening the recession and damaging private enterprise and property rights. He/She is critical of large state subsidies and the expense of the green transition, demanding the relaxation of CO2 quotas to boost competitiveness and prioritizing the employment of Estonian residents over cheap foreign labor. Overall, they support improving the business environment and economic certainty, contrasting sharply with the government's budget-centric approach.

The politician's social profile is strongly conservative and nationalistic, prioritizing internal and border security and strict control over immigration. They directly link the activities of foreign labor and Russian citizens to security threats, demanding preference for Estonian residents in the job market. A central and recurring theme is the demographic crisis, which they propose solving through pro-natalist family policies and the defense of traditional family values. They sharply oppose the redefinition of marriage and the concepts of gender neutrality and social gender in education and legislation. In the field of education, emphasis is placed on creating a unified Estonian-language school system, preserving rural schools, and restoring discipline in physical education. Simultaneously, they demand greater state responsibility for the protection of vulnerable groups (children, pensioners, and nursing home residents) and ensuring the regional availability of social services. Although security is a priority, the speaker expresses deep concern about the restriction of personal freedoms and the emergence of a state surveillance society, opposing unlimited government powers during crises and warning against digital ID solutions.

The politician's legislative focus was predominantly directed toward the critical opposition of government tax hikes (including the car tax, security tax, and VAT) and draft legislation that weakens regional policy (such as the closure of courthouses and the creation of new agencies), frequently demanding the rejection of the bills or the termination of their legislative process. Recurring themes also included strengthening national preparedness, restricting voting rights, and opposing laws that increase bureaucracy (for example, agricultural subsidies and the crisis situation act). He primarily operates as a critical reviewer and opponent, being a rare initiator (mainly on issues concerning tax cuts and security), and constantly emphasizes the deficiencies in the correctness of lawmaking, the transparency of procedures, and the quality of impact analyses.