By Plenary Sessions: Peeter Ernits

The speakers demonstrated their knowledge of the Riigikogu's procedural rules, criticizing the draft bill's fast-track procedure and the danger it poses to the rule of law. Furthermore, the issue of security and hybrid attacks was raised, specifically targeting the paralysis of communication tools used by members of parliament.

The speaker expresses interest in risks associated with cybersecurity and artificial intelligence, specifically inquiring about voice imitation and fraud that could potentially target politicians such as Lauri Läänemets and Kristen Michal. Their primary demand for expertise centers on the impact analysis of legislation, repeatedly calling for specific calculations and data regarding the potential "terrible consequences" should security measures be lacking. The constitutional dimension is also briefly touched upon.

The subject matter expertise is limited to mentioning the e-voting model and international organizations (OECD). Data, technical terms, or deeper explanations that would indicate profound technical expertise are missing.

The speaker demonstrates authority in the media sector by criticizing the quality and ethical concerns surrounding the journalism of Delfi and Ekspress, referencing their past experience as an editor-in-chief and head of the journalists' union. They cite specific fine amounts (€400,000, €3,000 per day) and refer to constitutional articles and the positions held by the Chancellor of Justice, thereby emphasizing their expertise on the rule of law and data protection issues. Furthermore, they analyze the risks associated with using big databases and artificial intelligence within the context of a preventive state.

The speaker demonstrates detailed historical knowledge regarding the handling of the Waste Act, citing specific years (2017, 2019), individuals (Vakra, Palling), and the work done by the committee. They also possess knowledge concerning future legislative changes (the major war law) and the departure of the bill drafters. They inquire about the payment of fines in other countries, referencing international comparison.

The speaker demonstrates knowledge of the legislative procedure (readings, the status of amendments) and constitutional law (referencing Section 22). He/She uses financial data regarding the fine amounts (400,000 euros, 3,000 euros per day, 820,000 euros in total) and statistics (the percentage of misdemeanors under the Tokyo Convention is 0.0000023%) to support his arguments.

The expert knowledge clearly lies in the technical aspects of lawmaking and legislative drafting technique, utilizing specific terms such as "legislative drafting amendments" and "reference errors." They demonstrate a detailed understanding of how the precision of wording (e.g., "kindergarten" versus "preschool institution") directly impacts the provision of social services. The speaker uses the metaphor of tailoring and a suit to describe the fine art of crafting legislation.

The speaker demonstrates expertise in demographics and socio-economic realities, referencing seminars and presenting specific data regarding the lack of suitable partners for younger women (42% among those up to 29 years old). They also draw on their experience as a member of the Rural Affairs Committee, highlighting anecdotal but detailed examples of the decline in living standards (the cheap sausage party, changes in toilet usage). Furthermore, they touch upon security policy, labeling Estonia an "extremely warlike country."

The speaker demonstrates expertise in environmental law and financial instruments, citing a specific statute (§ 553 subsection 2) and addressing economic viability (noting that projects do not pay off). He demands science-based data ("measurement data") to justify even the logistical decisions of the Riigikogu (Estonian Parliament), such as the duration of speaking slots. Furthermore, he mentions his past membership on the Environment Committee, which adds significant weight to his views.

The presenter demonstrated a deep understanding of the beekeeping sector data, citing precise figures for the number of beekeepers and hives, as well as the specific subsidy amounts (e.g., 3,264 beekeepers, €800,000 versus €560,000). They addressed the issue within the context of food security and the distribution of grants, highlighting the demographic makeup of small-scale beekeepers (who are mostly retirees). Furthermore, the speaker was fully aware of the long-standing delay of the draft Beekeeping Act within the ministry.