First Reading of the Draft Act on the Amendment of the Estonian Public Broadcasting Act (165 SE)
Session: 15th Riigikogu, 3rd session, plenary session
Date: 2024-02-21 19:26
Participating Politicians:
Total Speeches: 19
Membership: 15
Agenda Duration: 33m
AI Summaries: 19/19 Speeches (100.0%)
Analysis: Structured Analysis
Politicians Speaking Time
Politicians
Analysis
Summary
The agenda item concerned the first reading of Draft Act 165 on the amendment of the Estonian Public Broadcasting Act, initiated by Riigikogu members Kalle Grünthal and Alar Laneman. The initiator of the draft act, Kalle Grünthal (pid: WeJj4SPnuVY), presented a thorough critique of ERR's activities and management structure, focusing primarily on alleged political imbalance. As examples, Grünthal highlighted bias in the coverage of the US elections, the disregard for the topic of traditional family values, and journalistic accusation prior to a court decision (referencing the Anna Levandi case). He also demanded the guarantee of the right to reply and the reform of ERR's management structure, including the tightening of rules regarding the remuneration and recall of board members, and the abolition of the position of ethics advisor.
Heljo Pikhof (pid: esBgu3geNjw), the chair of the lead committee, the Cultural Affairs Committee, presented the position of the Ministry of Culture, according to which the ministry is preparing its own comprehensive draft of the ERR Act, which should be completed in the spring of 2024. The Ministry did not support Draft Act 165, arguing that ERR is politically balanced according to media studies and that the right to reply already exists in the Media Services Act. At the same time, the Ministry agreed that the principles for electing the ERR Council are outdated and need to be changed to reduce political bias in favor of experts. During the debate, the issue of violating the deadlines for processing the draft act was also raised, to which the session chairman, Toomas Kivimägi, responded by referring to the general backlog of draft acts caused by obstruction.
Decisions Made 1
The Riigikogu voted in favor of the leading committee's proposal to reject Bill 165 during its first reading. Forty-one members of the Riigikogu voted for the proposal, with 14 voting against. The bill was subsequently dropped from the legislative procedure.
Most Active Speaker
The most active speaker was the initiator of the draft bill, Kalle Grünthal. As an opposition politician (EKRE), he used his presentation time to launch a thorough critique regarding the alleged political bias and internal management structural flaws within the Estonian Public Broadcasting (ERR). He presented detailed examples of ERR’s activities which, in his view, violate the principles of balance and impartiality. In addition to substantively introducing the bill, Grünthal also criticized the coalition’s policy on processing opposition bills, citing leaked information that Kaja Kallas has forbidden giving a positive outcome to any opposition-proposed legislation.
Aseesimees Toomas Kivimägi
AI Summary
Toomas Kivimägi announced the continuation of the agenda and introduced the fourteenth item on the agenda—the first reading of Draft Act 165 on the Amendment of the Estonian Public Broadcasting Act—and invited colleague Kalle Grünthal to serve as the rapporteur.
Kalle Grünthal
Profiling Fraktsiooni mittekuuluvad Riigikogu liikmedAI Summary
Kalle Grünthal claimed that the draft bill amending the Estonian Public Broadcasting Act aims to ensure political balance within ERR, increase the right of reply, and enhance management transparency. Furthermore, he recommended abolishing the position of ethics advisor and replacing it with an editorial chief editor, as well as changing the rules governing the recall and remuneration of the board.
Aseesimees Toomas Kivimägi
AI Summary
Toomas Kivimägi offered his thanks and explained that he had been chairing for several hours and had not mistreated anyone, but due to a technical failure of the aircraft, the chairman’s arrival schedule had changed. Although there is no confirmation of arrival at 7:00 PM, he is capable of managing the situation and will take a break if necessary. He now asks the steering committee to have Heljo Pikhof, Chairman of the Culture Committee, take the floor at the Riigikogu podium.
Heljo Pikhof
Profiling Sotsiaaldemokraatliku Erakonna fraktsioonAI Summary
Heljo Pikhof's address centered on the Ministry of Culture's plan to present the media bill in the spring of 2024. She stressed the necessity of providing information in two languages, the crucial role of ETV+ for the Russian-speaking population, the need to strengthen media impartiality and ethics, and the regulation of the ERR council. The commission subsequently decided to add the bill to the plenary agenda by October, though the option of rejecting the draft was also discussed.
Aseesimees Toomas Kivimägi
AI Summary
Deputy Speaker Toomas Kivimägi thanked [the previous speaker/the assembly] and invited Helle-Moonika Helme to ask questions.
Helle-Moonika Helme
Profiling Eesti Konservatiivse Rahvaerakonna fraktsioonAI Summary
Helme questioned why the draft bill, the processing deadlines for which have clearly been missed, has only now reached the plenary hall, and who obstructed the process, noting that the rules of procedure and order of business demand rapid consideration.
Heljo Pikhof
Profiling Sotsiaaldemokraatliku Erakonna fraktsioonAI Summary
Heljo Pikhof, speaking as the committee’s representative, stated that the draft legislation was immediately forwarded to the Riigikogu Board. However, the Board has been somewhat overwhelmed by the sheer volume of bills, and consequently, several haven't made it to the floor in time. She couldn't provide the precise reason, but noted that perhaps it was Tuesday when you were absent from the chamber.
Aseesimees Toomas Kivimägi
AI Summary
Deputy Chairman Toomas Kivimägi calls upon Evelin Poolamets.
Evelin Poolamets
Profiling Fraktsiooni mittekuuluvad Riigikogu liikmedAI Summary
Evelin Poolamets asks the Chair of the session and the Rapporteur whether ERR is politically balanced, and whether any studies have been conducted on this matter, or how that balance is measured.
Heljo Pikhof
Profiling Sotsiaaldemokraatliku Erakonna fraktsioonAI Summary
Jõesaar, a representative of the Ministry of Culture, said that the issue has been investigated and balance has been ensured.
Aseesimees Toomas Kivimägi
AI Summary
The Deputy Chairman thanked the audience and requested Jaak Valge to ask more questions.
Jaak Valge
Profiling Fraktsiooni mittekuuluvad Riigikogu liikmedAI Summary
Jaak Valge asks for clarification regarding ERR's impartiality, referencing a 2020 study conducted before the planned marriage referendum. The results of that study indicated approximately 80% of the content had a left-liberal leaning and 20% a national-conservative leaning. He is now asking which new study has refuted those figures.
Heljo Pikhof
Profiling Sotsiaaldemokraatliku Erakonna fraktsioonAI Summary
He/She complains that unfortunately, he/she has not yet read the study being discussed, and asks for it to be read to him/her.
Aseesimees Toomas Kivimägi
AI Summary
The Deputy Speaker thanked everyone, announced that there were no further questions, and Helle-Moonika Helme addressed a question to the Chair of the session.
Helle-Moonika Helme
Profiling Eesti Konservatiivse Rahvaerakonna fraktsioonAI Summary
Helle-Moonika Helme asks Toomas why the board decided to violate the Riigikogu's Rules of Procedure concerning this draft bill, and she requests an explanation as to why the bill has reached the Plenary Hall and why the procedural process has been breached.
Aseesimees Toomas Kivimägi
AI Summary
He stated that he could not comment on the chronology of the specific draft bill because a very large volume of bills and interpellations could not be processed within the required deadlines. The Supreme Court has ruled that the effective functioning of parliament is a legitimate objective and the abuse of members' rights is not a protected interest, and consequently, it has not been realistic to process these matters within the set time limits. The final procedural question concerned Kalle Grünthal.
Kalle Grünthal
Profiling Fraktsiooni mittekuuluvad Riigikogu liikmedAI Summary
Kalle Grünthal expresses astonishment over the reference to the Supreme Court ruling and asks whether this means that the bill he submitted was obstructionist, or that he is no longer permitted to submit draft legislation as a member of the Riigikogu.
Aseesimees Toomas Kivimägi
AI Summary
In conclusion, the speaker emphasizes that a single bill on its own is certainly not obstructionist, and obstruction is rather considered the amending of a large number of similar bills. Therefore, we decided to address the bills sequentially, and the leading committee wishes to reject Bill 165 during the first reading and proceed to a vote.
Aseesimees Toomas Kivimägi
AI Summary
Deputy Speaker Toomas Kivimägi announced that the Riigikogu had rejected Bill 165 during its first reading, with 41 votes for, 14 against, and 0 abstentions, resulting in the bill being dropped from the proceedings.