First reading of the Bill on the Amendment of the European Parliament Election Act (lowering the voting and candidacy age) (414 SE)
Session: 15th Riigikogu, 3rd session, plenary session
Date: 2024-05-30 01:21
Participating Politicians:
Total Speeches: 38
Membership: 15
Agenda Duration: 58m
AI Summaries: 38/38 Speeches (100.0%)
Analysis: Structured Analysis
Politicians Speaking Time
Politicians
Analysis
Summary
The Riigikogu debated the first reading of the bill to amend the European Parliament Election Act (Draft 414), which aims to lower the voting age from 18 to 16 and the candidacy age from 21 to 18. The initiator of the bill, Hanah Lahe, emphasized in her presentation that lowering the voting and candidacy ages has been successful in Estonia (referencing local elections) and would help increase youth representation and trust in the state. She refuted arguments regarding the instability and immaturity of young people, noting that age is not a determinant of competence.
During the debate, conservative factions (EKRE and Isamaa) criticized the bill, viewing it as a populist distraction and a cynical move ahead of the elections. Jaak Valge (EKRE) highlighted that the age of reaching adulthood has increased in Europe and that young people's voting preferences are more unstable. Urmas Reinsalu (Isamaa) called the bill hypocritical, referencing the coalition's plans to restrict young people's decision-making rights in other areas (e.g., tanning salons, tattoos, compulsory schooling until age 18). The Social Democrats (Raimond Kaljulaid) and Eesti 200 (Irja Lutsar) supported the bill, emphasizing that young people are already capable of making major life decisions and that the readiness to participate in politics does not depend on age. The lead committee, the Constitutional Committee, proposed concluding the first reading. The proposal by the EKRE faction to reject the bill was voted down.
Decisions Made 3
The Riigikogu rejected the proposal by the EKRE faction to vote down Draft Bill 414 during the first reading (4 votes in favor, 48 against, 0 abstentions).
The first reading of Bill 414 was concluded.
The deadline for submitting amendment proposals was set for June 12, 2024, at 17:15.
Most Active Speaker
Hanah Lahe, the bill's rapporteur, delivered a comprehensive and confident overview of its objectives and justifications, addressing numerous questions concerning the maturity and responsibility of young people. Her position is liberal.
Aseesimees Toomas Kivimägi
AI Summary
The Riigikogu is holding the first reading of Draft Act No. 414 on Amendments to the European Parliament Election Act, which lowers the voting and candidacy age, and the rapporteur is Hanah Lahe.
Hanah Lahe
Profiling Fraktsiooni mittekuuluvad Riigikogu liikmedAI Summary
Hanah Lahe emphasized the importance of greater democratic participation among young people and subsequently proposed lowering the voting and candidacy age for elections to the European Parliament and the Riigikogu. She argued that this measure would boost youth representation and strengthen democracy in Estonia.
Aseesimees Toomas Kivimägi
AI Summary
Vice-Chairman Toomas Kivimägi thanks the presenter and notes that Kalle Grünthal identified one questionable point in your presentation, and asks Grünthal to provide clarification on it.
Kalle Grünthal
Profiling Fraktsiooni mittekuuluvad Riigikogu liikmedAI Summary
Kalle Grünthal is raising the question of why the minimum age for presidential candidates in the Republic of Estonia is set at 40 years. He is requesting a justification, taking into account that significantly lower age restrictions apply in other sectors, and addressing the concern often cited regarding maturity and life experience.
Hanah Lahe
Profiling Fraktsiooni mittekuuluvad Riigikogu liikmedAI Summary
Hanah Lahe notes that the assessment of maturity is rather a political agreement; age limits have changed over time—previously 25 and 40, now 16–18 in local elections, and 18–21 in Riigikogu (parliamentary) and European Parliament elections—and this indicates the maturation and more progressive development of society.
Aseesimees Toomas Kivimägi
AI Summary
Deputy Speaker Toomas Kivimägi asked Kalle Grünthal to ask the second question.
Kalle Grünthal
Profiling Fraktsiooni mittekuuluvad Riigikogu liikmedAI Summary
Kalle Grünthal, while offering thanks, asks why an age limit of 40+ has been set for presidential candidates, emphasizes that the reasons lie in life experience and maturity and are also described in the constitutional commentaries, and asks whether his position and comments are incorrect.
Hanah Lahe
Profiling Fraktsiooni mittekuuluvad Riigikogu liikmedAI Summary
Hanah Lahe said that there are no studies confirming that a person is mature at age 40, and she emphasized that the brain develops until approximately age 25, and that the age of majority being 18 is a political agreement, not a scientific fact.
Aseesimees Toomas Kivimägi
AI Summary
The speech praised the audience's confidence as an honor, and finally, Juku-Kalle Raid was asked to pose one more question.
Juku-Kalle Raid
Profiling Eesti 200 fraktsioonAI Summary
Juku-Kalle Raid said that he supports voting rights for 16-year-olds, but believes that criminal liability should align with that age, and that 16-year-olds should face the same responsibility as adults, given that responsibility currently begins at 18.
Hanah Lahe
Profiling Fraktsiooni mittekuuluvad Riigikogu liikmedAI Summary
He said that age-related obligations in Estonia are vaguely defined and that the topic requires discussion, a point which the Chancellor of Justice has also referenced. However, he didn't dare to give a specific answer right now, as he is not an expert in that field.
Aseesimees Toomas Kivimägi
AI Summary
Toomas Kivimägi praised Hanah's self-confidence, noting that while substantive arguments could be debated, he now urged everyone to listen to the positions and decisions of the leading committee. He then mentioned that Hendrik Johannes Terras, the Chairman of the Constitutional Committee, was at the podium.
Hendrik Johannes Terras
AI Summary
The committee concluded the first reading and determined that lowering the voting age for European Parliament elections to 16 requires thorough consideration, further investigation, and a broader debate, during which both supporting arguments and objections, as well as the question of youth maturity, were raised; the resulting vote was 5 in favor and 2 against, and the deadline for submitting amendments is 10 working days.
Aseesimees Toomas Kivimägi
AI Summary
Vice-Chairman Toomas Kivimägi thanks the rapporteur, announces that there are no questions, and asks Priit Lomp to pose a question, noting simultaneously that he is impatient.
Priit Lomp
AI Summary
Priit Lomp asks why the deadline for amendments to one bill initiated by members of the Riigikogu was five days, and for the second one, which is currently under procedure, ten, and why he thinks the bill to lower the voting age for youth should be given more time than the previous one concerning nuclear energy.
Hendrik Johannes Terras
AI Summary
Hendrik Johannes Terras stated that the question actually concerned the previous draft bill, was based on the ten working days stipulated in the law, and he could not say on what grounds the chairman of the Environmental Committee was operating.
Aseesimees Toomas Kivimägi
AI Summary
Thank you very much. The questioning period is concluded. I now open the debates, and on behalf of the EKRE faction, I invite the esteemed Jaak Valge to the Riigikogu rostrum.
Jaak Valge
Profiling Fraktsiooni mittekuuluvad Riigikogu liikmedAI Summary
Jaak Valge stated that while he shares the confidence of the bill's rapporteur, the substance of the draft legislation is unconvincing, and he recommended continuing the discussion and inviting experts—political and social scientists, biologists, and demographers—not just officials, to the committee. This is necessary to improve the unconvincing nature of the explanatory memorandum and to discuss the influence of youth and the role of conservatives, while simultaneously emphasizing that lowering the voting age is a responsible decision, which depends on the historically established norm of 18 years for legal majority and the future of the state.
Aseesimees Toomas Kivimägi
AI Summary
Toomas Kivimägi confirms that the listeners definitely deserve three extra minutes.
Jaak Valge
Profiling Fraktsiooni mittekuuluvad Riigikogu liikmedAI Summary
Jaak Valge argues that the age of majority has increased in Europe, and younger demographics are politically more volatile. Consequently, the voting age should not be lowered. He adds that if we wish to enhance society's impact on politics, citizens should be granted the right to initiate a referendum.
Aseesimees Toomas Kivimägi
AI Summary
Toomas Kivimägi thanks his colleague for the empathy and dissent expressed in the presentation, stating that the substance is solid. Following this, he adds some political color from Urmas Reinsalu on behalf of the Isamaa faction.
Urmas Reinsalu
Profiling Isamaa fraktsioonAI Summary
Urmas Reinsalu says he will take three extra minutes.
Aseesimees Toomas Kivimägi
AI Summary
The speech lasts a total of eight minutes.
Urmas Reinsalu
Profiling Isamaa fraktsioonAI Summary
Urmas Reinsalu stated that Isamaa does not support this bill, citing both the procedural style and the substantive logic. He described the bill as hypocritical and manipulative, arguing that it restricts the ability of young people to make choices. Consequently, the coalition must seek consensus and adhere to the constitutional interpretation.
Aseesimees Toomas Kivimägi
AI Summary
Toomas Kivimägi thanks his colleague and asks Raimond Kaljulaid to take the floor on behalf of the Social Democratic Party faction.
Raimond Kaljulaid
Profiling Sotsiaaldemokraatliku Erakonna fraktsioonAI Summary
Raimond Kaljulaid pointed out that age limits across different laws are completely inconsistent, and emphasized that the Social Democratic Party supports changing the voting age and intends to proceed with it during the first reading.
Aseesimees Toomas Kivimägi
AI Summary
The speaker thanked the participants for the marks and gave all the debaters top marks (fives), after which Irja Lutsar was heard on behalf of the Eesti 200 faction, requesting three minutes of extra time.
Irja Lutsar
Profiling Eesti 200 fraktsioonAI Summary
Irja Lutsar advocates lowering the voting age to 16 and lowering the age of candidacy to 18, confirming that 16-year-olds are capable of making decisions and are responsible, and that young people are interested in public life and deserve to be trusted.
Aseesimees Toomas Kivimägi
AI Summary
Toomas Kivimägi thanked everyone, noted the substance of the address, and announced that Raimond Kaljulaid had invited Urmas Reinsalu to give a response speech and granted Urmas Reinsalu permission to deliver it.
Urmas Reinsalu
Profiling Isamaa fraktsioonAI Summary
Urmas Reinsalu claims that previous statements constitute populist distraction tactics and the handing out of cheap political candy aimed at young people. He emphasizes that youth face real concerns, such as free education, the car tax, and driving licenses for 16-year-olds, and calls for addressing substantive constitutional law issues and considering granting 16-year-olds both active and passive suffrage, while noting that anyone under 18 is still legally a child.
Aseesimees Toomas Kivimägi
AI Summary
Toomas Kivimägi thanks the audience and says he doesn't know whether his address is an initial statement or a response, and then asks Hanah Laht to take the floor.
Hanah Lahe
Profiling Fraktsiooni mittekuuluvad Riigikogu liikmedAI Summary
Hanah Lahe asks the Chair if he has any idea which young people Mr. Urmas Reinsalu is speaking for.
Aseesimees Toomas Kivimägi
AI Summary
Toomas Kivimägi thanked his colleague and said that although there are differing opinions, the debate has been substantive and well-argued, and he made an exceptional assessment today, which he does not intend to repeat in the future, and emphasized that nobody spoke idly, and Irja Lutsar has the right to reply.
Irja Lutsar
Profiling Eesti 200 fraktsioonAI Summary
Irja Lutsar thanks the speaker and notes that her name was apparently not mentioned, and she asks Urmas Reinsalu: if his last address wasn't populism, then what exactly is populism?
Aseesimees Toomas Kivimägi
AI Summary
Deputy Chairman Toomas Kivimägi thanked his colleagues, concluded the discussions, and posed a question to the presiding officer of the session, Kalle Grünthal.
Kalle Grünthal
Profiling Fraktsiooni mittekuuluvad Riigikogu liikmedAI Summary
Grünthal raised a controversial claim towards the end: he was told that Irja Lutsar's name had been mentioned for a rebuttal, but Lutsar confirmed that the name was not mentioned, and said that Irja pointed her finger at him.
Aseesimees Toomas Kivimägi
AI Summary
Toomas Kivimägi points out that although the responsible committee wishes to conclude the first reading of Bill 414, the EKRE faction has put forward a motion to reject Bill 414 at the first reading, and preparations for the vote are currently underway.
Aseesimees Toomas Kivimägi
AI Summary
Four members of the Riigikogu voted in favor of the proposal, 48 voted against, and there were 0 abstentions; the proposal failed to gain support; the first reading of Draft Bill 414 is concluded; the deadline for submitting amendments is 17:15 on June 12th of the current year, and the processing of this agenda item is concluded.