By Months: Vladimir Arhipov

The speaker consistently adopts an anti-government stance, strongly criticizing tax increases and labeling them a "tax spree." They are particularly sharp in their opposition to excise duty hikes, the VAT increase, and new taxes, arguing that these measures harm the poorest citizens and alienate the populace from the government. Furthermore, they support holding public referendums on crucial issues, such as the fate of the Estonia Theatre.

The speaker consistently takes an oppositional stance on government policy, strongly criticizing tax increases, benefit cuts, and the expansion of bureaucracy. They are particularly sharp in their opposition to restricting voting rights for non-citizens, labeling this the weakening of democracy and a security threat. Furthermore, they actively support lowering the VAT for the catering sector and demand a more targeted social policy aimed at supporting vulnerable groups.

The speaker heavily focuses on the welfare and social issues concerning pensioners, demanding concrete solutions from the government to improve their quality of life. They support investments in regional development, particularly road construction and the Rail Baltic project. Representing the Centre Party faction, the speaker adopts a critical stance toward the government's policies, especially regarding the reduction of social benefits.

The speaker consistently takes a pragmatic approach, strongly backing investments in national defense and the fulfillment of NATO commitments, but criticizing the government’s austerity measures affecting education and pensioners. They express moderate concern regarding bureaucratic procedures, particularly in the context of education reform, and support granting greater decision-making power to local municipalities. The speaker stresses the need for a balanced regional policy that does not disadvantage wealthier regions while simultaneously supporting poorer ones.

The speaker adopted a clearly adversarial position regarding the government's tax practices, strongly criticizing the redistribution of the land tax and the introduction of a car tax. He voiced consistent opposition to the expansion of bureaucracy and supported the autonomy of local municipalities. The speaker even likened the state's actions to collectivization, which underscores his strong ideological opposition to centralized control.