Session Profile: Ants Frosch
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary meeting
2025-02-13
Political Position
The political stance is one of strong opposition, accusing the ruling coalition of ignoring and showing contempt for the work of democratic institutions. Its core positions are value-based, demanding the exclusion of voting rights for non-citizens at both the local and national levels, and emphasizing the necessity of power being exercised by Estonian citizens. It sharply criticizes the functioning of local democracy and the flaws in the electoral system, viewing these issues as holding back Estonian democracy.
6 Speeches Analyzed
Topic Expertise
The speaker demonstrates expertise in electoral laws and democratic procedures, detailing both constitutional amendments and the shortcomings of the local elections law (electoral coalitions, the d'Hondt method). He/She is aware of international election observation, referring to the regularity of OSCE ODIHR missions in Estonia as an "alarm bell." Furthermore, he/she demonstrates knowledge of ethical issues and conflicts of interest in local government.
6 Speeches Analyzed
Rhetorical Style
The rhetorical style is sharp, critical, and at times confrontational, particularly when addressing the governing coalition and the Social Democrats. The speaker employs strong emotional language (e.g., "I am embarrassed," "very disturbed") and accuses their opponents of putting words in their mouth. They emphasize the importance of their stance and the necessity of tackling these issues, even using popular expressions (e.g., "The dog yelps that the stone hit").
6 Speeches Analyzed
Activity Patterns
The speaker is active during the plenary session, participating both in the debate on the bill and in procedural disputes, and requests additional time to present his views. He refers to recent events (the work of the Riigikogu the previous day) and meetings (the OSCE ODIHR mission in Tallinn).
6 Speeches Analyzed
Opposition Stance
The main confrontation is directed against the ruling coalition, who are criticized for ignoring the work of a democratic institution. Separately, the Social Democratic Party and Tanel Kiik are criticized, accused of demagoguery and putting words in people's mouths. The criticism is intense and touches upon both policy (suffrage, e-elections) and ethical behavior at the local level ("food chains").
6 Speeches Analyzed
Collaboration Style
Cooperation is visible in supporting other colleagues (a reference to colleague Seeder concerning draft law 544), demonstrating a readiness to support technical and essential bills. However, the speaker is uncompromising and sharply critical toward the government coalition, emphasizing that problems cannot simply be pushed off the table.
6 Speeches Analyzed
Regional Focus
The speaker concentrates heavily on local-level problems and the functioning of democracy in municipalities. Specifically, they provide examples concerning Narva (corruption and established "food chains" [patronage networks]) and Elva municipality (issues with residency identification and the council being taken over by the "Tartu Varangians").
6 Speeches Analyzed
Economic Views
Insufficient data
6 Speeches Analyzed
Social Issues
The primary social question revolves around citizenship and suffrage. The speaker adopts a firm stance that only Estonian citizens should be permitted to vote, deeming the alternative highly risky. He also discusses ethical issues within local municipalities, specifically conflicts of interest (like a school director heading the education committee) and corruption, which he refers to as "food chains."
6 Speeches Analyzed
Legislative Focus
The speaker supports Bill 544, stressing its necessity and technical nature. His/Her main legislative priorities include amending the constitution to exclude voting rights for stateless persons, and reforming the local elections law to abolish electoral alliances and the d'Hondt method. He/She also demands that the e-voting system either be fixed or abandoned entirely.
6 Speeches Analyzed