Agenda Profile: Peeter Ernits
Second Reading of the Draft Act on Amendments to the Construction Act and Other Acts (Bill 655 SE)
2025-10-22
XV Riigikogu, 6th Session, Plenary Sitting
Political Position
The political position supports the general objective of the Gigabit Infrastructure Regulation (a faster and cheaper digital state), but is critical of the inadequate and rushed domestic implementation of Draft Law 655 SE. It is emphasized that crucial technical details, such as the distance of masts from the road and the width of the cable conduit, have remained unregulated or unclear. The political framework is strongly policy- and efficiency-based, comparing Estonian regulations with Nordic practices.
3 Speeches Analyzed
Topic Expertise
The speaker demonstrates technical expertise regarding telecommunications infrastructure topics, detailing the requirements for installing support masts (the 50-meter rule), cable depth, and the role of the building register. Specific terminology is used, such as "directly applicable regulation" and "conduit" (or "duct"), and Nordic practice is introduced for comparison. The expertise focuses on regulatory details that influence the speed and cost of construction.
3 Speeches Analyzed
Rhetorical Style
The rhetorical style is direct, interrogative, and critical, incorporating both rhetorical questions and colloquial expressions ("a burning issue," "handled a bit carelessly"). The tone is anxious and at times fault-finding, focusing on logical arguments and regulatory deficiencies. Irony is employed, for example, by suggesting that the weather conditions in Estonia are somehow worse than those in the Nordic countries.
3 Speeches Analyzed
Activity Patterns
The speaker has actively participated in the bill's discussions, citing previous lengthy debates during the first reading and repeated questions that have remained unanswered. This points to consistent and detailed intervention in the proceedings of this specific draft law.
3 Speeches Analyzed
Opposition Stance
The primary criticism is aimed at the ministry (the Digital Ministry) for the inadequate preparation of the draft bill, which is brief and vague, and at the Minister of Justice, who failed to answer technical questions during the first reading. The criticism is both procedural and policy-based, accusing the agencies of incompetence and of failing to regulate crucial details.
3 Speeches Analyzed
Collaboration Style
Insufficient data.
3 Speeches Analyzed
Regional Focus
The regional focus is international (comparing it with the Nordic countries and Sweden) and national, concentrating on the implementation of the European Union regulation in Estonia. Local governments are mentioned primarily as obstructive factors that prevent cables from being installed at a lower depth.
3 Speeches Analyzed
Economic Views
It supports economic efficiency and cost savings in infrastructure construction, citing the Swedish example of shallower cable trenching. The objective is to ensure more affordable services for residents by allowing other providers access to the building and avoiding repeated excavation.
3 Speeches Analyzed
Social Issues
There is not enough data.
3 Speeches Analyzed
Legislative Focus
The legislative focus centers on the national implementation of the European Union's Gigabit Infrastructure Regulation (Draft 655 SE). The speaker, acting as a critical reviewer, insists on the clear regulation of technical details—such as the width of cable conduits and the distance of poles from the road—in order to guarantee competition and the efficient construction of infrastructure.
3 Speeches Analyzed