By Months: Aivar Sõerd
Total Months: 16
Fully Profiled: 16
10.2025
8 Speeches
There are no direct adversaries or criticized groups; the focus is on the political challenge of striking a balance between protecting investors and reducing the administrative burden. The speaker is not expressing opposition to any particular side, but rather clarifying the complexity inherent in regulatory decisions.
09.2025
6 Speeches
Direct criticism is leveled against the Bank of Estonia’s investment strategy, arguing that the gold allocation is too small relative to global trends. In the legislative context, it addresses the concerns of interest groups (such as the Association of Real Estate Firms), but instead of opposing the draft legislation itself, it seeks consensual amendments. The criticism is policy-driven and focuses on the effectiveness of asset management.
06.2025
2 Speeches
The dispute targets both the actions of the government (lack of data, vague budget sources) and the draft legislation put forward by the opposition party Isamaa. Isamaa's proposed amendment was criticized on procedural grounds because it was deemed "completely general" and failed to meet the necessary requirements. The criticism is primarily based on policy and procedure.
05.2025
12 Speeches
The speaker is strongly opposed to Bill 594 (tax cuts), initiated by the EKRE faction, criticizing it both factually (specifically, the false claim regarding the steep increase in energy prices) and fiscally (the projected loss of 85–200 million euros in budget revenue). The criticism is policy-driven and intense, also highlighting the opponents' past failures to act (namely, their failure to lower VAT while they were in government).
04.2025
14 Speeches
The main confrontation involves EKRE and the proposed bank special tax bill, which is being slammed as superficial, flawed, and completely outdated. Critics accuse the opposition of blindly copying practices from other countries (specifically Lithuania), without taking into account the unique characteristics of the Estonian tax system. The criticism is intense and centers on both political and procedural deficiencies.
02.2025
9 Speeches
The primary opposition is directed at the initiators of Bill 535 (Andrei Korobeinik). Their claims (such as exempting banks from taxation or the comparison involving casinos) are being categorically refuted. The criticism is based on both policy and procedure, highlighting the initiators' inadequate analysis and the lack of clarity regarding the implementation of the new tax. The opponents' assertions are being labeled as arbitrary.
01.2025
3 Speeches
The opposition is directed at the presenter of the draft bill (the "rapporteur") and the budget classification solution proposed by the government. The criticism is strictly procedural and substantive, accusing the proposal of lacking transparency and insufficient thoroughness, especially regarding management expenses.
12.2024
8 Speeches
The criticism is primarily aimed at the existing budgetary framework and the granting of excessive powers to the executive branch (ministers) when redirecting funds within the program. Specifically, the actions of the Minister of Education and Research regarding the transfer of 10 million euros are being criticized—a transfer that only became known through the press (Postimees). The criticism is procedural and appeals to constitutional legality.
11.2024
6 Speeches
The main opposition is directed against the activity-based budgeting system and its methodology, which are considered ineffective, expensive, and useless in practice. The criticism is policy- and procedure-based, accusing the system of creating artificial and inadequate metrics that are not linked to real expenditures. The intensity of the criticism is high, proposing the complete replacement of the system.
10.2024
13 Speeches
The primary opposition targets the initiators of the bank tax bill, criticizing both the delay in presenting the draft and the lack of proper analysis in the explanatory memorandum. The criticism is policy-driven, warning that a tax experiment of this nature (similar to the one in Lithuania) creates tax risk for foreign investors and drives them away, thereby undermining Estonia's appeal. Furthermore, it rejects the argument that failing to tax the current temporarily favorable economic climate constitutes "looting," dismissing the term as an exaggeration.
09.2024
1 Speeches
The opposition is focused on the government’s inaction or lack of clarity concerning the relocation of the Ministry of the Interior, a matter tied to the proceedings of the previous supplementary budget. The criticism is both procedural and policy-driven, stressing the necessity of continuing cost-saving measures.
07.2024
1 Speeches
The opposition is directed at the logic presented by the rapporteur and the criteria discussed in the commission concerning the valuation of investments and the contrasting of local governments (richer versus poorer). The criticism is based purely on policy and procedure.
06.2024
2 Speeches
The criticism targets the Ministry of Finance's actions and assessments concerning the results of the pension reform, casting doubt on the policy's success because only a small number of those who exited the scheme began investing independently. The opposition is policy-driven and centers on the reform's poorer-than-anticipated effectiveness.
05.2024
12 Speeches
The criticism is aimed at the government and the minister due to the poor preparation and lack of transparency surrounding the new tax bills, particularly regarding administrative costs. The critic faults them for failing to send responses and for basing the drafts on outdated data. Furthermore, the critic questions the government's willingness to tax windfall profits in economic sectors other than banking.
03.2024
4 Speeches
The opposition is aimed at the political approach of the minister (or ministers), particularly concerning healthcare financing, where he/she disagrees that simply adding more money will solve all the problems. The criticism is policy- and procedure-based, calling into question the efficacy of the solutions chosen by the government (e.g., the risk of losing tax revenue when utilizing an exemption).
01.2024
1 Speeches
The criticism is directed at the procedure for transposing European Union legal acts, which generates unnecessary bureaucracy and costs. No direct political opponent is being criticized; instead, the minister is being pressed for solutions to the administrative burden problem, emphasizing the procedural inefficiency.