By Plenary Sessions: Vladimir Arhipov

The speaker focuses primarily on strengthening the crisis management capacity of local authorities and issues related to financing the cultural sector. He strongly supports increasing funding for local government crisis managers, arguing that the current net sum of 500 euros is insufficient. In the cultural sphere, he expresses concern over salary cuts for employees and demands a public referendum be held regarding the fate of the Estonia Theatre, supporting the Center Party's proposal.

The speaker strongly advocates for increased government transparency, particularly regarding the public disclosure of representation costs. They adopt a distinctly critical stance toward the government's fiscal policy, highlighting unwarranted budget cuts and the overall lack of clarity in the budget. Furthermore, they indicate moderate support for the opposition member's transparency improvement initiative.

The Speaker adopts a distinctly oppositional stance concerning the government's economic policy, heavily criticizing the continuation of the so-called "tax hike frenzy." Regarding the sale of Operail, concerns are expressed over both the valuation (price) and security aspects. These positions are clearly contrary to the government's decisions and underscore the deterioration of the public's situation.

The speaker supports the implementation of an attendance monitoring system for members of the Riigikogu, drawing a comparison to the evaluation systems used in schools and higher education institutions. While the stance is moderately supportive, it also raises a critical question regarding the system's overall effectiveness.

The speaker adopts a clearly critical stance on mining, drawing on personal experience from the Maardu Phosphorite era. They express strong concern over environmental pollution and skepticism about the ability of new technologies to prevent the problems encountered previously. Regarding the issue of Syrian refugees, the speaker seeks clarification on the government's position but does not disclose their own stance.

The speaker clearly takes an opposition stance against the government's tax hikes, strongly criticizing the excise duty increases on alcohol, tobacco, and fuel, as well as the so-called security tax. They emphasize that these taxes primarily harm the poorer segments of the population and call them PR stunts designed solely to fill the state treasury. The speaker claims that the government hasn't passed "a single decent law" and demands transparency regarding the true objectives of the tax increases.

The speaker adopts a clear position regarding social cohesion and integration, criticizing the government's inconsistent approach. He/She firmly supports the preservation of suffrage for all members of society and calls into question the government's rhetoric about societal unity when, simultaneously, people may be disenfranchised.

He articulates strong opposition to the government’s tax policy, particularly the increase in excise duties and the introduction of new taxes. He argues that this tax policy is driving a wedge between the state and the people, alienating citizens from the government. He supports more proactive state investments, especially focusing on road construction during the economic crisis.