Eesti Reformierakonna fraktsioon
57
Deputies
100%
Cohesion
22.4%
Inactivity %
99.6%
Attendance %
0
Bills initiated
0
Questions & requests
For · 51%Against · 29%Abstained · 20%
Cohesion is the faction's average party loyalty — how often its members vote with the group's majority stance on policy votes.
| # | Deputy | Policy votes | Inactivity % | Attendance % | Party loyalty % |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Eerik-Niiles Kross | 1858 |
59.0%
|
100.0%
|
98.6%
|
| 2 | Marko Mihkelson | 1858 |
49.5%
|
100.0%
|
99.8%
|
| 3 | Johannes Kert | 550 |
47.1%
|
100.0%
|
97.9%
|
| 4 | Keit Pentus-Rosimannus | 537 |
41.7%
|
100.0%
|
99.4%
|
| 5 | Ivi Eenmaa | 1319 |
37.9%
|
100.0%
|
99.4%
|
| 6 | Kalle Palling | 51 |
37.3%
|
100.0%
|
100.0%
|
| 7 | Jürgen Ligi | 1858 |
37.0%
|
100.0%
|
98.1%
|
| 8 | Yoko Alender | 1858 |
36.7%
|
100.0%
|
99.8%
|
| 9 | Kalle Laanet | 918 |
36.6%
|
100.0%
|
99.1%
|
| 10 | Ülle Rajasalu | 714 |
35.8%
|
91.2%
|
100.0%
|
| 11 | Annely Akkermann | 1547 |
35.5%
|
83.3%
|
99.7%
|
| 12 | Taavi Rõivas | 507 |
32.9%
|
100.0%
|
99.1%
|
| 13 | Liina Kersna | 918 |
32.1%
|
100.0%
|
100.0%
|
| 14 | Valdo Randpere | 1855 |
32.0%
|
100.0%
|
98.8%
|
| 15 | Toomas Kivimägi | 1858 |
31.5%
|
100.0%
|
99.4%
|
| 16 | Erkki Keldo | 1858 |
31.3%
|
100.0%
|
99.8%
|
| 17 | Vilja Toomast | 1858 |
30.2%
|
100.0%
|
99.9%
|
| 18 | Heidy Purga | 1858 |
30.1%
|
100.0%
|
99.8%
|
| 19 | Hele Everaus | 1855 |
29.4%
|
100.0%
|
99.1%
|
| 20 | Kristen Michal | 1858 |
29.2%
|
100.0%
|
99.7%
|
| 21 | Hanno Pevkur | 1479 |
27.9%
|
100.0%
|
99.8%
|
| 22 | Heiki Kranich | 1855 |
27.4%
|
100.0%
|
99.5%
|
| 23 | Siim Kallas | 1858 |
26.8%
|
100.0%
|
99.6%
|
| 24 | Mati Raidma | 1319 |
25.8%
|
100.0%
|
99.8%
|
| 25 | Õnne Pillak | 1319 |
25.7%
|
100.0%
|
99.8%
|
| 26 | Mart Võrklaev | 1807 |
25.7%
|
100.0%
|
99.7%
|
| 27 | Margit Sutrop | 1322 |
24.9%
|
100.0%
|
99.4%
|
| 28 | Maris Lauri | 918 |
24.7%
|
100.0%
|
99.7%
|
| 29 | Urmas Kruuse | 539 |
24.1%
|
100.0%
|
98.8%
|
| 30 | Kaja Kallas | 539 |
23.9%
|
100.0%
|
99.0%
|
| 31 | Marko Torm | 1348 |
23.7%
|
100.0%
|
99.9%
|
| 32 | Signe Kivi | 1858 |
23.6%
|
100.0%
|
99.9%
|
| 33 | Signe Riisalo | 528 |
23.1%
|
100.0%
|
99.3%
|
| 34 | Ants Laaneots | 1858 |
22.0%
|
100.0%
|
99.4%
|
| 35 | Kristina Šmigun-Vähi | 1858 |
19.7%
|
100.0%
|
99.8%
|
| 36 | Timo Suslov | 1322 |
18.8%
|
100.0%
|
100.0%
|
| 37 | Jüri Jaanson | 1855 |
18.3%
|
100.0%
|
99.0%
|
| 38 | Toomas Järveoja | 1319 |
17.6%
|
100.0%
|
99.9%
|
| 39 | Andres Sutt | 918 |
17.1%
|
100.0%
|
99.9%
|
| 40 | Madis Milling | 1072 |
16.7%
|
100.0%
|
98.3%
|
| 41 | Andrus Seeme | 1858 |
16.6%
|
100.0%
|
99.7%
|
| 42 | Aivar Sõerd | 1858 |
16.1%
|
100.0%
|
99.9%
|
| 43 | Urve Tiidus | 1855 |
14.7%
|
100.0%
|
99.5%
|
| 44 | Tiiu Aro | 926 |
14.5%
|
100.0%
|
99.6%
|
| 45 | Aivar Viidik | 940 |
14.1%
|
100.0%
|
100.0%
|
| 46 | Sulev Kannimäe | 1319 |
12.7%
|
100.0%
|
100.0%
|
| 47 | Meelis Kiili | 3 |
0.0%
|
100.0%
|
100.0%
|
| 48 | Pipi-Liis Siemann | 3 |
0.0%
|
100.0%
|
100.0%
|
| 49 | Eero Merilind | 3 |
0.0%
|
100.0%
|
100.0%
|
| 50 | Mario Kadastik | 3 |
0.0%
|
100.0%
|
100.0%
|
| 51 | Pärtel-Peeter Pere | 3 |
0.0%
|
100.0%
|
100.0%
|
| 52 | Arto Aas | 11 |
0.0%
|
100.0%
|
100.0%
|
| 53 | Luisa Värk | 3 |
0.0%
|
100.0%
|
100.0%
|
| 54 | Kristo Enn Vaga | 3 |
0.0%
|
100.0%
|
100.0%
|
| 55 | Karmen Joller | 3 |
0.0%
|
100.0%
|
100.0%
|
| 56 | Anti Haugas | 3 |
0.0%
|
100.0%
|
100.0%
|
| 57 | Maido Ruusmann | 3 |
0.0%
|
100.0%
|
100.0%
|
How is this calculated?
“Inactivity” measures how often a deputy did not cast a For or Against vote on motions they could have voted on — whether absent, or present but not registering, abstaining, or not pressing. A non-vote is not neutral: a motion passes only with a majority of For votes, so being present yet not voting effectively withholds support — counting, in practice, the same as a vote against. Attendance shows how often a deputy at least registered for the sitting.
Party loyalty is the share of a deputy's ballots cast with their faction's majority stance, over the policy votes they took part in.