Question Regarding the Financing of Cultural Buildings of National Significance (No. 600)
Session: 15th Estonian Parliament, 3rd session, plenary session
Date: 2024-03-11 17:08
Participating Politicians:
Total Speeches: 34
Membership: 15
Agenda Duration: 46m
AI Summaries: 34/34 Speeches (100.0%)
Analysis: Structured Analysis
Politicians Speaking Time
Politicians
Analysis
Summary
The Riigikogu debated the interpellation submitted by Priit Sibul, Tõnis Mölder, Mart Maastik, Helir-Valdor Seeder, Urmas Reinsalu, and Riina Solman concerning the amendment of the funding procedure for cultural buildings of national importance. Central to the interpellation was the concern that the planned amendments to the Cultural Endowment Act and the Gambling Tax Act would create a parallel funding system, delegating the Riigikogu's decision-making authority to the Minister of Culture and the Council of the Cultural Endowment. The new procedure would allow for the addition of supplementary objects to the list (primarily the new ERR television building) without reopening the ranking of the five priority objects previously approved by the Riigikogu.
Auditor General Janar Holm confirmed in his response that the proposed amendment would indeed create a cultural object with a status different from existing ones, and that from the perspective of procedural economy, it would have been simpler to add the ERR television building directly to the list approved by the Riigikogu. The question of the expedient use of public funds was also raised in connection with the establishment of the Tallinn film campus and the Jõhvi international film studio complex. The Auditor General drew attention to the fact that the Ministry of Culture had not been involved in the decision-making process for the Jõhvi project, nor had it analyzed the economic justification and competitive impact of establishing two film campuses.
Decisions Made 1
The agenda item was considered in the form of an interpellation, and no votes or decisions were adopted.
Most Active Speaker
The most active politician was Priit Sibul, the representative of the interpellators, who submitted the query and participated in the negotiations, sharply criticizing the proposed funding scheme as the creation of a "back door." Sibul represented the opposition's stance, calling into question the delegation of Parliament's decision-making authority and the reasonable use of public funds, especially concerning the two film studio projects.
Esimees Lauri Hussar
AI Summary
The first item on the agenda addresses the interpellation submitted on February 7th regarding the financing of cultural buildings of national importance, which was presented by Priit Sibul, Tõnis Mölder, Mart Maastik, Helir-Valdor Seeder, Urmas Reinsalu, and Riina Solman.
Priit Sibul
Profiling Isamaa fraktsioonAI Summary
Priit Sibul stressed that supplementing the list of nationally important cultural objects and organizing their financing raises questions regarding transparency, oversight, and adherence to parliamentary intent, particularly if the decision-making authority is granted to the minister, and the funding for the film campuses planned concurrently in Tallinn and Jõhvi might be allocated between the two projects.
Esimees Lauri Hussar
AI Summary
Speaker Lauri Hussar invited State Auditor General Janar Holm to the Riigikogu podium to respond to an interpellation.
Riigikontrolör Janar Holm
AI Summary
According to the assessment of the National Audit Office, additional funding for cultural construction must not impede the completion of nationally important cultural buildings approved by the Riigikogu, and this process must take place transparently under parliamentary control. Before moving forward with the Jõhvi film campus project, a thorough analysis must be conducted, and the funding sources and areas of responsibility must be clarified.
Esimees Lauri Hussar
AI Summary
Chairman Lauri Hussar gives thanks and announces that there are several questions, and asks Tõnis Lukas to respond.
Tõnis Lukas
Profiling Isamaa fraktsioonAI Summary
He notes that the financing of the Ida-Viru County film campus is not directly relevant to the draft bill and should not interfere with decisions already made by the Riigikogu. He expresses hope that duplication and burdening the state will be avoided, and highlights that, according to the Cultural Endowment’s analysis, there are no funds available for the subsequent projects. Finally, he asks whether the Culture Committee possesses a substantive right of veto during the processing of the Minister of Culture’s proposal.
Riigikontrolör Janar Holm
AI Summary
The approval of the Culture Committee is a prerequisite for advancing to the Council of the Cultural Endowment of Estonia; the inclusion of a seventh or eighth object is contained within the draft bill, and if it is adopted, it will be possible to add these structures, provided it is practically feasible, and it must be noted that the addition of a supplementary cultural object will, in the future, remove the Riigikogu’s ability to independently add further objects to the list approved by the Riigikogu.
Esimees Lauri Hussar
AI Summary
The speaker invites Signe Kivi.
Signe Kivi
Profiling Eesti Reformierakonna fraktsioonAI Summary
Signe Kivi points out that funding an additional cultural project via the Cultural Endowment would have necessitated making the entire list public, which would likely have infringed upon the rights of those whose applications were rejected.
Riigikontrolör Janar Holm
AI Summary
Auditor General Janar Holm said that the Riigikogu had the opportunity to announce a new round and make the right decision, including adding a new project, but the current course of action is going a different way, with the Riigikogu giving the Minister of Culture guidelines for the construction of the Estonian Public Broadcasting TV house. This would have been simpler if it had been clearly listed and thoroughly discussed; however, the Riigikogu still has the option to choose that path.
Esimees Lauri Hussar
AI Summary
The address is a brief request to invite Helir-Valdor Seeder to speak.
Helir-Valdor Seeder
Profiling Isamaa fraktsioonAI Summary
Helir-Valdor Seeder criticized the Riigikogu's decision, calling it impractical and legally problematic. He stated that it creates a two-stage procedure for handling issues of national importance and limits the options available to the plenary hall, and he questioned whether such a practice is reasonable in terms of state efficiency and the use of public funds.
Esimees Lauri Hussar
AI Summary
The Call says that your time has come.
Helir-Valdor Seeder
Profiling Isamaa fraktsioonAI Summary
He apologizes and stresses that the seventh, eighth, and ninth facilities are also open, and while it is not just a matter of money, if the first one cannot be realized, then this is entirely likely.
Riigikontrolör Janar Holm
AI Summary
I repeat once more that from the position of the Auditor General, I do not want to give assessments of justification, because the solution is the choice of the Riigikogu, but according to him, this is the creation of a parallel system. And indeed, there is value in the fact that the Riigikogu has defined the meaning of an object of national importance since 1996, and now the decision-making power is shifting to another level—as a choice made by the plenary session.
Esimees Lauri Hussar
AI Summary
Chairman Lauri Hussar calls upon Mart Maastik to speak.
Mart Maastik
Profiling Fraktsiooni mittekuuluvad Riigikogu liikmedAI Summary
Mart Maastik stated that the supplementary project must not jeopardize the completion of other cultural sites of national importance, and since construction costs are rising and resources are limited, they should consider rolling the funds over to the next year to wait for a project that can currently be built to completion.
Riigikontrolör Janar Holm
AI Summary
Auditor General Janar Holm said that the explanatory memorandum noted accumulated funds that would be sensible to use for objects requiring investment, and presented two options: holding the money based on the fifth list, or putting it into circulation as quickly as possible in order to quickly create cultural value and prevent the money from diminishing.
Esimees Lauri Hussar
AI Summary
Priit Sibul is invited onto the stage at the beginning of the address.
Priit Sibul
Profiling Isamaa fraktsioonAI Summary
Priit Sibul is asking whether the proposal, which was discussed in the Culture Committee, to include the national broadcaster's TV complex on the list, sets a precedent that creates justified expectations for other sites. Furthermore, he questions whether using alternative routes (or 'backdoor methods') to handle this will cause problems for those who are excluded.
Riigikontrolör Janar Holm
AI Summary
State Auditor Holm noted that because the situation has changed, there is no continuing legitimate expectation regarding the previous process. Furthermore, the Riigikogu must and is able to justify the choice to add a single object (such as the national broadcaster's TV building), even though the explanatory memorandum provides the Minister of Culture with guidelines, not a finally binding instruction.
Esimees Lauri Hussar
AI Summary
Chairman Lauri Hussar thanked his colleague Signe Kivi, confirmed that during the time allotted for interpellations, every Riigikogu member may ask one oral question and participate in the ensuing debates, informed the chamber that there were no further questions for the Auditor General, and opened the debates, inviting Priit Sibul, the representative of the interpellators, to the rostrum.
Priit Sibul
Profiling Isamaa fraktsioonAI Summary
Priit Sibul emphasized that the inclusion of the National Broadcasting House on the list of cultural objects should be decided by the parliament itself, and the planning of funding and timing must be meticulous before the law is approved, ensuring that taxpayer money is utilized judiciously.
Esimees Lauri Hussar
AI Summary
The Chairman thanks the previous speaker and asks that Tõnis Lukas be invited next to the Riigikogu rostrum.
Tõnis Lukas
Profiling Isamaa fraktsioonAI Summary
Referring to the general agreement on the cultural objects bill among all factions, it is stressed that while the new competition might bypass previous applications, the ERR building is urgently needed, and therefore, additional time is being requested to make a decision.
Esimees Lauri Hussar
AI Summary
Chairman Lauri Hussar requests three minutes of extra time.
Tõnis Lukas
Profiling Isamaa fraktsioonAI Summary
Should the law be approved, the decision will proceed through the same procedure, via the Minister of Culture and the Riigikogu Culture Committee, ensuring no alternative route is created. Furthermore, based on data from the Cultural Endowment, there are sufficient funds for both current and near-future projects, making the construction of the ERR studio complex probable.
Esimees Lauri Hussar
AI Summary
The Chairman thanked the participants, closed the discussion and the first item on the agenda, and before proceeding to the second item, announced that Rain Epler had his hand raised with a question regarding the procedure for conducting the session.
Rain Epler
Profiling Fraktsiooni mittekuuluvad Riigikogu liikmedAI Summary
Rain Epler brought up the issue, noting that the interpellation submitted to the Minister of Climate on January 17th is still unanswered, and the deadline for the information system, March 7th, has already passed. He criticized the Riigikogu leadership's approach of only responding when it is convenient for them, arguing that this negatively affects the work of the Riigikogu.
Esimees Lauri Hussar
AI Summary
Chairman Lauri Hussar stated that the sheer volume of interpellations and their subsequent withdrawal complicates the planning of the Riigikogu's work and agenda. This is because an interpellation necessitates an agreement between the minister and the member posing the question. However, he noted that previous withdrawn interpellations had reached the agenda in a timely manner, and he hopes that the current interpellation will also be scheduled soon.
Rain Epler
Profiling Fraktsiooni mittekuuluvad Riigikogu liikmedAI Summary
Rain Epler emphasizes that the deadline for the interpellation, March 7th, has passed and the absence of the ministry is preventing a response. He requests that this interpellation be addressed under a short agenda, citing the Supreme Court's position that the rights of the members of parliament must not be restricted.
Esimees Lauri Hussar
AI Summary
Chairman Lauri Hussar promised that the interpellations would soon be taken up, as the obstacles that had arisen over the past year have significantly diminished, and all interpellations will be proceeded with in accordance with the Rules of Procedure and Internal Rules Act.
Martin Helme
Profiling Eesti Konservatiivse Rahvaerakonna fraktsioonAI Summary
Martin Helme said that there is no barrier and the law must be followed. He added that this week’s agenda consists solely of EKRE’s proposals to the government and draft legislation—there is nothing else, that is their only job.
Esimees Lauri Hussar
AI Summary
Chairman Lauri Hussar thanked his colleague and noted that the point raised was more of a comment than a procedural question. He then announced that tomorrow at ten o’clock, the first reading of the Act amending the Electronic Communications Act and the Nature Conservation Act, initiated by the National Defence Committee, will take place, and attendance is essential.