Agenda Profile: Helle-Moonika Helme
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 speaker's main priorities are funding security and national defense, while criticizing previous austerity measures. He/She is strongly opposed to the green transition, labeling it infantile and costly, and demands that it be stopped immediately. The political framework is value-based, prioritizing the support of families and security, in direct opposition to the funding of social minority groups.
3 Speeches Analyzed
Topic Expertise
The speaker asserts authority over state budget priorities and the allocation of spending, focusing on security and criticism of social expenditures. He employs political rhetoric (e.g., "affordable national defense," "the utterly idiotic green transition") but provides no technical data or statistics to support his claims. A significant theme is also the shift in US foreign policy stances, which he views as a model for shaping Estonia's budget policy.
3 Speeches Analyzed
Rhetorical Style
The tone is highly confrontational, accusatory, and sharply critical, especially directed at the government and the Reform Party. Strong emotional and derogatory language is used (e.g., "utterly idiotic and nonsensical," "the bloated Ministry of Climate"). While the speaker demands a focus on the budget, they themselves rely on sharp value judgments and accusations instead of substance.
3 Speeches Analyzed
Activity Patterns
All speeches took place in the Riigikogu on November 13, 2024, during the second reading of the draft State Budget Act for 2025. The speaker actively participates in the budget debate, repeatedly raising questions and offering criticism. There is insufficient data regarding regularity, events, or travel outside of the Riigikogu session.
3 Speeches Analyzed
Opposition Stance
The main criticism is directed at the Reform Party and the government, accusing them of underfunding national defense and engaging in constant infighting. Strong opposition is also aimed at the Ministry of Climate and the "overpaid activists" associated with it. The criticism is both policy-based (the green transition) and procedural, demanding a restoration of the budget's focus.
3 Speeches Analyzed
Collaboration Style
The speaker's style is strictly oppositional and demanding, focusing on criticizing the government's actions and imposing alternative solutions. There is no reference to cooperation with colleagues, coalitions, or other political parties.
3 Speeches Analyzed
Regional Focus
The focus is clearly on national priorities (national defense, budget) and the international direction, especially monitoring US political attitudes. There is a complete lack of reference to local or regional industries, projects, or communities.
3 Speeches Analyzed
Economic Views
It supports strict budgetary discipline and demands that funds be directed toward security, rather than the "infantile" green transition. It opposes the funding of social advocacy organizations, emphasizing the need to support families and mothers' health insurance coverage. It demands the closure of the Ministry of Climate in order to save money.
3 Speeches Analyzed
Social Issues
The speaker is vehemently opposed to funding LGBT advocacy organizations from the state budget. He/She stresses that the state budget should not be involved in shaping public attitudes, and instead prioritizes families and social security for mothers. (S)he points to the shift in US attitudes on social issues as an example.
3 Speeches Analyzed
Legislative Focus
The primary focus is on the draft State Budget Act for 2025 (513 SE). The speaker is a staunch opponent of the bill, demanding amendments to the budget to cease funding for the green transition and certain social organizations. He proposes shutting down the Ministry of Climate to free up resources for security.
3 Speeches Analyzed