Agenda Profile: Kalle Grünthal
Second reading of the draft law on the 2025 state budget (513 SE)
2024-11-13
15th Riigikogu, 4th session, plenary session.
Political Position
The political stance is vehemently opposed to the 2025 state budget draft, which is deemed unconstitutional and destructive to Estonia. The most contentious issues are the rising tax burden (car and property tax) and the government's illegal budget procedure. This position is strongly rooted in values and results-oriented, accusing the government of seizing the people's assets. Finally, parliamentary options are declared exhausted, and the public is called upon to launch a general strike.
4 Speeches Analyzed
Topic Expertise
The speaker demonstrates expertise regarding the legal and procedural aspects of the budget process, citing criticism from the Auditor General and the Chancellor of Justice. Specifically, they highlight the lack of numerical transparency in the budget, rendering it incomprehensible even to professional accountants. Furthermore, the speaker is knowledgeable about the legislative process, criticizing the rejection of proposed amendments and the obstruction of submitting substantive proposals.
4 Speeches Analyzed
Rhetorical Style
The rhetorical style is extremely combative, urgent, and dramatic, escalating from procedural criticism to a direct address to the people of Estonia. Strong emotional appeals and negative metaphors are employed, such as "Potemkin village" and "to repair a pocket watch with a blacksmith's hammer." The speech culminates in a radical call for a general strike, citing the prevalence of sneering and ridicule within the parliament.
4 Speeches Analyzed
Activity Patterns
The speaker has been active during the second reading of the state budget, repeatedly raising questions regarding the government’s procedural actions. They are using the Riigikogu podium as a platform to deliver broader political messages to the public and to trade unions. This pattern of behavior indicates a readiness to leverage parliamentary work to incite civil disobedience outside the legislature.
4 Speeches Analyzed
Opposition Stance
The main confrontation is with the governing coalition and the Reform Party, who are accused of pursuing financial policies that are destroying Estonia and of breaking the law. The criticism is intense, focusing both on illegal budgetary procedures and on taxes that reduce the income of the population. Members of the government are being called "bunglers," and compromise is ruled out, as the speaker declares that parliamentary options have been exhausted.
4 Speeches Analyzed
Collaboration Style
The speaker shows support for the constructive proposals of other opposition parties (EKRE, Isamaa), proposals which have been ridiculed by the government. The main focus of cooperation is directed outside the Riigikogu, calling upon trade unions, railway workers, entrepreneurs, and other working groups to unite for a general strike.
4 Speeches Analyzed
Regional Focus
The focus is clearly national, addressing the destruction of the Estonian economy, the income levels of the populace, and new nationwide taxes (such as car and property taxes). The international context is also mentioned, referring to Estonia as a test state designated by Brussels for testing the limits of sanctions and taxation.
4 Speeches Analyzed
Economic Views
The economic platform is fiercely anti-tax, particularly regarding vehicle and property taxes, which are viewed as reducing people's incomes and attacking private property. The current fiscal policy is described as destructive to Estonia, leading businesses into bankruptcy. A lawful and transparent budgetary process is demanded.
4 Speeches Analyzed
Social Issues
There is insufficient data.
4 Speeches Analyzed
Legislative Focus
The legislative focus is currently on opposing the 2025 state budget draft bill (513 SE) and highlighting its procedural flaws. The speaker is a staunch opponent of the draft, accusing the government of illegally restricting the ability of Riigikogu members to submit substantive amendments by keeping the figures secret until the third reading.
4 Speeches Analyzed