Agenda Profile: Kalle Grünthal
Interpellation regarding the state's plan to end compensation to farmers for damages caused by geese (No. 582)
2024-09-09
15th Riigikogu, 4th session, plenary session
Political Position
The political focus is currently on supporting farmers and ensuring food security. The speaker strongly opposes the government's plan to cease compensation for damage caused by geese, stressing that this jeopardizes the sustainability of agricultural businesses. The issue is being framed from a national security (food security) perspective, which, in their estimation, will be a highly relevant topic next year. This stance is deeply rooted in policy and values, highlighting the state's obligation to guarantee the continuation of food production.
1 Speeches Analyzed
Topic Expertise
The speaker demonstrates expertise in hunting and wildlife damage prevention, drawing upon 40 years of experience as a hunter. This experience serves to confirm the ineffectiveness of current deterrence measures. Furthermore, the speaker shows awareness of European Parliament-level discussions concerning food security, specifically referencing comments made by Riho Terras.
1 Speeches Analyzed
Rhetorical Style
The speaker's style is straightforward, urgent, and authoritative, starting by emphasizing personal experience. They use logical argumentation, directly linking the withdrawal of subsidies to the loss of food security. The speaker also expresses a certain impatience, stating that they will not waste time discussing ineffective measures, and concludes with a demanding question intended to secure the minister's consent.
1 Speeches Analyzed
Activity Patterns
The speaker references Riho Terras's discussion concerning the European Parliament and food security, which took place in August. Other activity patterns, frequency of appearances, or travel remain unclear due to a lack of data.
1 Speeches Analyzed
Opposition Stance
The opposition is directed against the policy of the government/minister concerning the termination of subsidies for farmers, which is being justified by the alleged lack of financial resources. The criticism is policy-based, emphasizing that this decision will lead to the cessation of business operations for entrepreneurs and threatens food security. The speaker rejects the effectiveness of the deterrent measures cited by the minister.
1 Speeches Analyzed
Collaboration Style
The speaker is seeking the minister's agreement with their position ("Do you agree with me?"), which indicates a desire for the government to change its policy and find the necessary funds in the budget. There is no information regarding cooperation with other colleagues or political parties.
1 Speeches Analyzed
Regional Focus
The focus is at the national level, addressing issues of the state budget and food security, which are of nationwide importance. Although the topic directly concerns agriculture, no specific region or local community has been mentioned.
1 Speeches Analyzed
Economic Views
The speaker advocates for state intervention and subsidies, calling for funds to be allocated from the national budget to support farmers. This economic perspective stresses that financial resources are essential for businesses to continue operating and for ensuring food security. He prioritizes the viability of agriculture over budgetary restrictions.
1 Speeches Analyzed
Social Issues
There is not enough data.
1 Speeches Analyzed
Legislative Focus
The legislative focus centers on challenging the government's budgetary decision regarding the termination of compensation for damage caused by wildfowl (Interpellation No. 582). The speaker, acting as the challenger, demands that a state budget solution be found to continue the support payments, thereby preventing a loss of food security.
1 Speeches Analyzed