By Plenary Sessions: Aivar Sõerd
Total Sessions: 30
Fully Profiled: 30
2025-10-15
The 15th Riigikogu, VI Session, Plenary Sitting
The criticism is aimed at the priorities of the European Union's current budget period, which prioritize climate measures, such as ESG reporting and green awareness training. This is a policy-based opposition that stresses these measures are "of questionable value" and do not address issues of security and innovation.
2025-10-13
15th Riigikogu, 6th Session, Plenary Sitting
The opposition comes from colleagues (Diana Ingerainen, Riina Sikkut), who criticize the policy due to the growing deficit (0.7% of GDP) and the lack of economic efficiency, particularly concerning the timing of the dividend payout. The speaker conveys these criticisms neutrally, also highlighting the minister’s responses regarding tax competitiveness and stimulating the economy.
2025-10-09
15th Riigikogu, 6th Session, Plenary Sitting
While there is no direct confrontation, the speaker indirectly criticizes the economy's poor performance, specifically pointing to the decline in labor productivity for three consecutive years. The critique is policy-driven and centered on national economic indicators.
2025-10-08
The 15th Riigikogu, 6th Session, Plenary Sitting
The criticism is aimed at the activities of the ministries, specifically their use of incorrect methodology in making budget decisions, and also at the stringent provisions in the government's proposed bill regarding the validity of planning documents. The objection is procedural and substantive, not personal.
2025-10-06
The 15th Riigikogu, 6th Session, Plenary Sitting
No opposing viewpoints or criticism directed at political opponents were presented. The speaker stressed that the committee's decisions regarding placing the draft bill on the agenda and concluding the first reading were based on consensus.
2025-09-24
Fifteenth Riigikogu, sixth sitting, plenary sitting.
The lack of direct political opposition or criticism aimed at other parties stems from the fact that the commission's decisions were largely based on consensus. The Estonian Association of Real Estate Companies did raise a challenge concerning the statistical models used for collateral valuation. However, this was resolved not through confrontation, but via a meeting between the Ministry of Finance and the association, followed by the inclusion of an explanatory memorandum.
2025-09-18
15th Estonian Parliament, 6th sitting, plenary session.
The criticism is aimed at the investment policy of the management of the Bank of Estonia, specifically concerning the undervaluation of gold and the inadequate hedging of risks associated with dollar-denominated assets. The opposition is based on both policy and performance, emphasizing that gold has provided significantly better returns than other assets.
2025-06-11
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary sitting
The primary criticism is directed at the government concerning the lack of budget transparency and the ambiguity surrounding the funding sources for SKAIS. Furthermore, the speaker criticizes Isamaa for submitting an amendment proposal that was "completely generalized" and consequently non-compliant. The criticism is strictly policy and procedure based.
2025-06-05
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary session.
The criticism is aimed at the Chairman of the Economic Committee, who is being pressed for accountability and knowledge regarding the country's economic indicators. The opposition stems from the inadequacy of policy and performance monitoring, suggesting that the opposing party lacks knowledge of elementary strategic metrics.
2025-05-20
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary sitting
There is no direct opposition or criticism. While the questioner does express caution regarding the application of the statistical evaluation method, this was presented as a question directed at the Ministry of Finance, not as aggressive criticism.
2025-05-07
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary sitting
Strong opposition has been directed at the bill initiated by the EKRE faction, criticizing it both substantively and procedurally. The sharpest criticism targets the claim regarding rising energy prices that forms the basis of the bill, a claim which has been repeatedly labeled as false. Furthermore, opponents are accused of incomplete work, as there are no calculations showing how the proposed tax reduction would affect the additional revenue collected by the state budget.
2025-05-06
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary session
Criticism is directed at the Minister and the Ministry of Finance, whose responses regarding labor productivity are considered insufficient or evasive. The opposition is policy- and results-based, calling into question the government's economic success story if that success is merely driven by inflation. The intensity of the attack is moderate, focusing on demanding facts and accountability.
2025-04-23
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary session
There is no direct criticism of, or opposition to, other political forces. A second brief remark indicates a readiness to strictly limit the discussion to the topics addressed by the committee, avoiding extraneous questions.
2025-04-17
15th Estonian Parliament, 5th session, plenary session
Strong opposition is directed at EKRE and the Centre Party, criticizing their failure to act on lowering the VAT on foodstuffs during their time in government. The criticism is policy- and performance-based, highlighting that the opponents controlled both the Finance Minister portfolio and the Prime Minister position, yet the promised tax cuts were never implemented.
2025-04-09
15th Estonian Parliament, 5th session, plenary session
The opposition's stance involves sharp criticism of the bill’s initiators (Siim Pohlak), accusing them of making flawed assumptions (specifically, the expectation of rising interest rates) and poorly preparing the draft legislation. The criticism targets both political and legal incompetence, particularly regarding retroactive taxation and the incorrect adoption of Lithuanian practices. The speaker considers the bill completely obsolete (yesterday’s news).
2025-02-18
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary sitting
Strong opposition has been voiced against the initiators of the bill (the Center Party faction, Andrei Korobeinik), criticizing their proposal for being poorly thought out and factually incorrect regarding tax matters. The criticism is politically motivated, specifically refuting claims about banks being insufficiently taxed and dismissing the comparison drawn between the margins of casinos and banks. Opponents are being accused of incompetence, and are advised to educate themselves on the tax system and conduct a proper analysis.
2025-01-16
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary session
The confrontation is aimed at the initiator of the bill and the underlying government solution, which is deemed insufficient and non-transparent. The criticism is strictly substantive and procedural, focusing on the fact that the proposed solution does not clarify the budget, particularly regarding operating expenses.
2024-12-04
15th Estonian Parliament, 4th session, plenary sitting
The criticism is primarily aimed at the existing budgetary framework and the actions of the ministers, which allow them to bypass the Riigikogu (Parliament). Specifically, the Ministry of Education’s reallocation of 10 million euros is criticized, information about which was obtained via the press, pointing to a lack of transparency. The criticism is procedural and constitutional, not personal, and the individual deems the current system insufficiently transparent.
2024-11-13
15th Riigikogu, 4th session, plenary session.
The main criticism is directed at the methodological guidelines issued by the Ministry of Finance and the inability of ministries (e.g., the Ministry of Justice) to link expenditures with results. The criticism is strong and focuses on the inadequacy of the system and procedures, rather than on individuals. He/She also disputes the position of the chairman of the Finance Committee that the activity-based budget can be improved in the coming years.
2024-11-06
15th Riigikogu, 4th session, plenary sitting
The speaker opposes the state's activity-based budgeting system, criticizing its insufficient connection to practical application and the enormous cost to the taxpayer. The criticism is directed at the system's inefficiency and poor performance, not specific individuals, and the speaker supports the position of the Auditor General.
2024-10-22
15th Riigikogu, 4th session, plenary session
The opposition consists of the initiators of the draft bill, who are being criticized both for the policy (taxation based on temporary economic conditions) and the procedure (lack of analysis in the explanatory memorandum). The speaker rejects the claim of "skimming" bank profits as "obvious exaggeration." He warns that such tax experiments will deter foreign investors, citing Lithuania's experience.
2024-09-16
The 15th Riigikogu, 4th session, plenary sitting.
The criticism targets the government's inaction or lack of clarity concerning the relocation of the Ministry of the Interior, specifically noting that the budget decision remains unresolved. The core opposition revolves around policy implementation and the absence of fiscal discipline.
2024-07-29
15th Riigikogu, extraordinary session of the Riigikogu
The speaker is critical of the presenter's example contrasting investments, questioning the logic behind national prioritization. The objection is rooted in policy and values, demanding clarification as to why one type of investment is considered superior to another.
2024-06-05
15th Riigikogu, 3rd session, plenary sitting
The criticism is directed at the Ministry of Finance’s activities and the results of the pension reform, which is considered unsuccessful because people did not start investing themselves as expected. The opposition is fundamentally policy-based, focusing on the reform’s poor numerical indicators and the overall lack of results.
2024-05-30
15th Riigikogu, 3rd sitting, plenary sitting
The criticism is directed against the government's fiscal policy, as the pace of Estonia's debt growth is considered the absolute worst negative peak within the context of the Euro area. The opposition is policy-driven, focusing on the deterioration of the country's economic performance.
2024-05-08
15th Riigikogu, 3rd session, plenary session.
The opposition is aimed at the broader political inertia regarding the taxation of windfall profits in economic sectors other than banking. He dismisses questions about his distant past as Director General of the Tax Authority, deeming them irrelevant and inappropriate.
2024-05-02
15th Riigikogu, 3rd session, plenary session
The criticism is directed at the government (the minister) and public authorities (the Tax and Customs Board), focusing on procedural and political shortcomings. Specifically, the failure to submit the promised data (regarding administrative costs and the number of officials) is being faulted, which constitutes a procedural and policy-related controversy.
2024-03-19
15th Riigikogu, 3rd session, plenary session
The primary criticism is aimed at the inaction of the minister and the government regarding the healthcare sector. The criticism is purely policy- and procedure-driven, focusing on the system's inefficiency and its failure to address long-standing issues, such as the slow pace of getting medicines to market.
2024-03-06
15th Riigikogu, 3rd session, plenary session
The criticism is directed against the implementation method chosen by the government, not against individuals, focusing on the political risk posed by the potential loss of tax revenue to other countries. He/She raises questions and expresses doubts, but neither attacks nor rules out compromise, instead seeking technical clarity.
2024-01-24
15th Riigikogu, 3rd sitting, plenary session
The criticism is directed at procedural issues stemming from the transposition of European Union regulations and the inefficient administration of those regulations in Estonia. Specific political opponents or groups are not being criticized; rather, the emphasis is placed on a systemic flaw.