Large families
Session: 15th Riigikogu, 3rd sitting, information briefing
Date: 2024-02-21 14:50
Participating Politicians:
Total Speeches: 20
Membership: 15
Agenda Duration: 16m
AI Summaries: 20/20 Speeches (100.0%)
Analysis: Structured Analysis
Politicians Speaking Time
Politicians
Analysis
Summary
The agenda item addressed the responses provided by Social Protection Minister Signe Riisalo concerning the government's family policy and Estonia's demographic situation. The debate was initiated by Mart Maastik, who leveled sharp criticism regarding the reduction of benefits for large families, citing the Estonian Constitution and the issue of national preservation. Maastik stressed that a birth rate of 1.4 indicates a direct threat of extinction and accused the government of choosing an accelerated path toward extinction, contrasting the benefit cuts with the desire to increase foreign labor quotas. Minister Riisalo defended the government's decisions, explaining that the adjustment of benefits was necessary to reduce perceived societal inequality and ensure fairness in the distribution of taxpayer money. She emphasized that support for large families has, nonetheless, increased compared to 2022 (by 190 euros per month for families with three to six children and 290 euros per month for families with seven or more children). Riisalo refuted accusations that she considered children a burden, highlighting that financial support is not the sole "golden key" to resolving the demographic crisis. She referred to the broader need to create a family-friendly environment and mentioned a comprehensive analysis of family benefits due to be completed in the autumn. The debate was emotional, particularly during the intervention by Riina Solman, who accused the minister of using distorted statistics and pitting social groups against one another.
Decisions Made 1
No legislative or administrative decisions were taken regarding this agenda item, as it was merely a Riigikogu information session during which the minister fielded questions concerning government policy.
Most Active Speaker
The most active speaker was Mart Maastik (pid: gSTb3qmTMSY), who posed the initial question and two follow-up questions, centering the discussion on the preservation of the Estonian nation and the demographic crisis. Maastik represented the stance of the opposition (right-wing, national-conservative), sharply criticizing the government’s family policy as an act of national self-destruction. His main argument was that reducing benefits for large families and prioritizing foreign labor jeopardizes the survival of the Estonian nation. He was also the final speaker, attempting to correct the Minister’s notion that money is not a "golden key," by stressing that money provides families with the means to raise children.
Aseesimees Toomas Kivimägi
AI Summary
Toomas Kivimägi announces the start of the fourth agenda item and informs the assembly that the question has been addressed to the Minister of Social Protection, Signe Riisalo. The microphone is then handed over to colleague Mart Maastik to pose the question.
Mart Maastik
Profiling Fraktsiooni mittekuuluvad Riigikogu liikmedAI Summary
Maastik criticizes the government, saying that although the preamble of the constitution and independence require the preservation of the nation, language, and culture, the birth rate of 1.4 and the reduction of benefits for large families endanger Estonia's future, and increasing migration quotas could fill the country with migrants, rather than children.
Aseesimees Toomas Kivimägi
AI Summary
This is a short and polite request addressed to Signe Riisalo.
Sotsiaalkaitseminister Signe Riisalo
AI Summary
According to Riisalo, the separate allowance for large families in Estonia is differentiated, and support was increased between 2022 and 2024: families with three to six children receive an additional 190 euros per month, and families with seven or more children receive an additional 290 euros. He/she emphasizes that these benefits are financed by taxpayers and are distributed proportionally and fairly.
Aseesimees Toomas Kivimägi
AI Summary
Deputy Chairman Toomas Kivimägi thanked [the previous speaker/assembly] and requested that Mart Maastik ask a clarifying question.
Mart Maastik
Profiling Fraktsiooni mittekuuluvad Riigikogu liikmedAI Summary
Mart Maastik expresses concern over the demographic crisis, stresses the need for the preservation of the nation, language, and culture, and asks what single specific measure the government plans to implement to ensure this.
Aseesimees Toomas Kivimägi
AI Summary
This is a brief request addressed to Signe Riisalo.
Sotsiaalkaitseminister Signe Riisalo
AI Summary
According to Riisalo, promoting the sense of security for families and boosting the birth rate requires flexible support mechanisms. These mechanisms must enable both parents to participate in parental benefits, provide improved support for children and those with special needs, and necessitate strengthened cooperation among child protection services, healthcare, the Health Insurance Fund, the Unemployment Insurance Fund, and local governments.
Aseesimees Toomas Kivimägi
AI Summary
Deputy Speaker Toomas Kivimägi thanked [the speaker], noted that the time had expired, and asked Riina Solman to pose an additional question.
Riina Solman
Profiling Fraktsiooni mittekuuluvad Riigikogu liikmedAI Summary
Riina Solman asserts that the reduction of family benefits perpetuates a divisive narrative between small and large families. She points out that the draft legislation impacted 24,846 families and over 80,000 children (29% of all children), and she questions the basis for their statistics and calculations, requesting further information in writing.
Sotsiaalkaitseminister Signe Riisalo
AI Summary
Riisalo confirmed that he does not want to differentiate between family types or deem one family type superior to another. He stressed that family policy must be holistic, considering the needs of all families as well as the revenue generated by taxpayers. He also recalled the separate support provided to large families and the subsequent increase in that support, and affirmed that funds would only be allocated to the extent that taxpayer revenue allows.
Aseesimees Toomas Kivimägi
AI Summary
He concludes the consideration of this matter and asks Helle-Moonika Helme to address the Chair.
Helle-Moonika Helme
Profiling Eesti Konservatiivse Rahvaerakonna fraktsioonAI Summary
Helle-Moonika Helme drew the attention of the session chair to the fact that the minister had answered the question in English and had not translated the response, and she requested that it be emphasized, as a point of order, that Estonian must be spoken in the chamber.
Aseesimees Toomas Kivimägi
AI Summary
Vice-Chairman Toomas Kivimägi said that he is in principle in agreement with your comment.
Sotsiaalkaitseminister Signe Riisalo
AI Summary
Social Protection Minister Signe Riisalo apologized.
Aseesimees Toomas Kivimägi
AI Summary
Toomas Kivimägi said that although we sometimes tend to use words from other languages, he is completely in agreement in principle, and he said: 'Mart Maastik, please!'
Mart Maastik
Profiling Fraktsiooni mittekuuluvad Riigikogu liikmedAI Summary
Maastik emphasized that the goal is not to prove which option is better, but rather to demonstrate that the number of children is declining. Furthermore, although Kuldvõti is not money, it provides an opportunity for families who wish to have more children, given that half of the Estonian population consists of families with three or more children.
Aseesimees Toomas Kivimägi
AI Summary
Toomas Kivimägi stated that this cannot be deemed a procedural matter, and a right of reply is not provided for in this format. He therefore asked Riina Solman to address her question to the chair of the session, rather than offering a response speech or clarification regarding the ministers' positions.
Riina Solman
Profiling Fraktsiooni mittekuuluvad Riigikogu liikmedAI Summary
Riina Solman emphasized the need for a polite debate and asked the minister on what data she based the calculations regarding large families that were presented to the public, and where that data could be obtained.
Aseesimees Toomas Kivimägi
AI Summary
He/She highlights that we all think slightly differently, and the interpretation of a fact depends on our political viewpoint. The information session does not provide an opportunity for refutation, but during negotiations, you have the chance to overturn those positions in a counter-speech, and this is your time to utilize that.