Session Profile: Vadim Belobrovtsev

The political position is strongly opposed to stripping long-term residents (citizens of third countries/stateless persons) of their voting rights, stressing the negative impact this would have on integration and democracy. Furthermore, he opposes the draft legislation extending compulsory education, viewing it as the state shifting its problems onto local municipalities without adequate funding. His argumentation is both value-based (rule of law, compatriots) and politically pragmatic (impact analysis, burden on local government). He represents the stance of the Centre Party faction, proposing that the proceedings for the education bill be terminated.

The speaker demonstrates a strong grasp of integration policy, citing the complexities surrounding citizenship acquisition and referencing international best practices (specifically the Nordic countries). They possess a detailed understanding of the administrative burden and financial challenges faced by local municipalities (LMs) in the education sector, specifically analyzing the sustainability of European Social Fund (ESF+) financing. The argument is bolstered by extensive reliance on the views of recognized experts (such as Chancellor of Justice Ülle Madise and former KAPO Director Arnold Sinisalu) to underscore the absence of a security risk.

The rhetorical style is passionate, critical, and at times emotional, especially regarding the issue of suffrage, which he refers to as a "schizophrenic situation." He balances emotional appeals (compatriots, loyal residents) with thorough logical argumentation, drawing extensively on quotes from respected experts and former heads of state. He also employs procedural arguments concerning the correctness of the session's conduct, criticizing the chairman's actions. The style is formal, yet distinctly oppositional.

The speaker was highly active during the plenary session, participating in substantive debates (on voting rights and education) and raising several procedural questions concerning the conduct of the session and compliance with the rules of procedure. They posed questions to the rapporteurs and presented longer statements detailing the faction's position. All these appearances took place during a single day of the session.

The primary opponents are the initiators of the draft legislation (implicitly, the ruling coalition), whose competence regarding security and constitutional issues is being challenged. The criticism targets both political decisions (specifically, the removal of voting rights, which generates resentment) and procedural deficiencies (the absence of an impact assessment and funding in the education sector). He/She also criticizes the session chair for granting a colleague too much time and engaging in a discussion with them over a point of procedure.

The speaker, acting on behalf of the Estonian Centre Party faction, proposes suspending the proceedings of the education bill. He demonstrates collegiality by defending the right of a member of another faction (Heljo Pikhof) to ask a question. Cooperation with the government is lacking; instead, external apolitical authorities (the Chancellor of Justice, Sinisalu) are utilized to delegitimize the proposed legislation.

The focus is primarily national (covering the constitution and security) and international (European practices and ESF+ funding). Significant emphasis has been placed on the burden and financial needs of local governments (LGs) during the implementation of the education reform, specifically noting the requirement to cover costs for additional classrooms and public transportation. Reference is also made to the presidential speech delivered in Narva.

Economic views focus on the balance between the revenue base and expenditures of local governments. He criticizes the state for not increasing the revenue base of local governments while their cost base and responsibilities are growing, especially in the field of education. He prefers clear and sustainable state funding instead of temporary grants from the European Social Fund (ESF+). The need to fund additional support specialists and social sector workers is emphasized.

The speaker strongly defends the civil and political rights of long-term residents (non-citizens, Russian citizens), opposing their labeling as a security threat. He/She emphasizes that these people are loyal residents who pay taxes and raise children. In the field of education, he/she stresses the need to engage with young people who struggle to find their footing after basic school, but criticizes a solution that creates unmotivated youth and increases the burden on local municipalities.

The main legislative focus is the opposition to two specific bills: one concerning constitutional amendments aimed at restricting local voting rights, and the other regarding the extension of compulsory education. The speaker is a staunch opponent of these bills, citing insufficient impact assessments and inadequate funding. On behalf of the Centre Party faction, a motion is being put forward to suspend the second reading of the education bill.