Agenda Profile: Helle-Moonika Helme
Continuation of the second reading of the draft law amending the Child Protection Act and other laws (427 SE)
2024-12-03
15th Riigikogu, 4th session, plenary sitting
Political Position
The political focus is on opposing the amendment to the Child Protection Act (427 SE), particularly regarding the provision that would allow convicted pedophiles to return to working with children and have their criminal records expunged. The stance taken is extremely strong and value-based, accusing the bill's supporters of endangering children and serving the interests of perverts. The opposition to the bill is being framed as a fight against evil and corruption.
4 Speeches Analyzed
Topic Expertise
The speaker demonstrates detailed awareness of the specific provisions of the draft bill, particularly regarding the deletion of criminal records and the discretionary power of the Social Insurance Board official. Knowledge gained from the investigation of crimes against children is utilized, referencing the work of the PPA child protection group, international pedophilia networks, and previous media coverage of child rape cases.
4 Speeches Analyzed
Rhetorical Style
The rhetorical style is intensely combative, emotional, and moralistic, employing strong accusations and moral appeals (e.g., "crime against humanity," "desecrated bodies"). The speaker addresses the public directly and uses dramatic language to highlight the danger of the proposed bill, accusing opponents of outright lying and fostering evil.
4 Speeches Analyzed
Activity Patterns
The focus of the action centers on the ongoing second reading of Bill 427 SE in the Riigikogu chamber, referencing the earlier proceedings concerning the draft legislation approximately one month ago. The speaker also introduced procedural motions, requesting a recess prior to the vote so that the coalition could re-evaluate its stance.
4 Speeches Analyzed
Opposition Stance
The primary opponents are coalition MPs, the minister, and ministry officials, who are accused of deliberately forcing the bill through and lying. The criticism is intense and personal, suggesting that the opponents are either blind, manipulated, or involved in dirty dealings that serve the interests of perverts. Compromise is ruled out; they demand the bill be rejected.
4 Speeches Analyzed
Collaboration Style
The style of cooperation is completely lacking, focusing instead on opposing the coalition and the bill's supporters, who are being urged to reflect on whether they are "for pedophiles or for children." It is mentioned that EKRE members of parliament discovered the controversial paragraph, which suggests cooperation within their own faction.
4 Speeches Analyzed
Regional Focus
The focus is primarily at the national level, addressing Estonian legislation (the Child Protection Act) and domestic institutions (the Social Insurance Board, the PPA). A potential cross-border pedophile network is also mentioned, but this serves as context for the domestic threat.
4 Speeches Analyzed
Economic Views
Not enough data
4 Speeches Analyzed
Social Issues
At the core of social issues is the protection of children from sexual crimes and pedophilia, demanding absolute zero tolerance towards convicted offenders. It is emphasized that legislation must under no circumstances allow individuals who have committed crimes against children to gain access to work with children, prioritizing the safety of children above all else.
4 Speeches Analyzed
Legislative Focus
The legislative priority is the opposition and rejection of Bill 427 SE (Amendments to the Child Protection Act). The speaker is a strong opponent of the bill, focusing specifically on the section that would grant an official the right to allow individuals who have committed a crime against children to work with children.
4 Speeches Analyzed