Agenda Profile: Helle-Moonika Helme
First Reading of the Draft Act on the Ratification of the Agreement between the Republic of Estonia and the Kingdom of Sweden concerning the Execution of Kingdom of Sweden Prison Sentences in the Republic of Estonia (682 SE)
2025-11-04
The 15th Riigikogu, 6th Session, Plenary Sitting
Political Position
The political position is strongly opposed to the agreement between Estonia and Sweden concerning the enforcement of prison sentences (682 SE). Criticism is aimed at the government's actions and motives, accusing them of deceiving the public and rushing the bill through in order to obtain a "blank check" for leasing out prisons. The argument is strongly results-oriented, stressing that the government is wasting the Riigikogu's working time discussing a bill that lacks any support.
7 Speeches Analyzed
Topic Expertise
Demonstrates knowledge of the procedural hurdles to ratifying an international treaty, citing the lack of support from the Swedish Parliament and the potential necessity of amending the Swedish Constitution. It demands access to the threat assessment that forms the basis of the draft bill, criticizing its unavailability to Parliament. Furthermore, it questions the government's authority to negotiate with the opposition of a foreign state.
7 Speeches Analyzed
Rhetorical Style
The rhetorical style is highly combative, accusatory, and sharp, employing direct accusations aimed at the minister—that he is lying, misleading, and spouting "meaningless marketing fluff." Rhetorical questions are used repeatedly to underscore the futility of the bill and the wasting of parliamentary time. The tone is categorical, demanding accountability and clarity.
7 Speeches Analyzed
Activity Patterns
Very active participation during the first reading of the draft bill, submitting repeated questions and procedural motions. Focuses on challenging the minister's responses and demands the committee withdraw the bill to ensure proper procedure. Emphasizes the importance of the transcript for the purpose of the minister's future accountability.
7 Speeches Analyzed
Opposition Stance
The primary confrontation is aimed at the government and the bill's rapporteur (the minister), who stand accused of misleading Parliament and the public. The criticism is both political (the hidden objective being to secure a "blank cheque") and procedural (the absence of a threat assessment and the commission's improper functioning). The intensity of the attacks is high, suggesting that the minister should be held accountable for any negative repercussions in the future.
7 Speeches Analyzed
Collaboration Style
Cooperation is not evident; instead, the commission is demanding the withdrawal of the draft bill and the suspension of proceedings due to missing documentation. They refuse to process the bill in good faith and are challenging the government’s alleged agreement with the Swedish opposition.
7 Speeches Analyzed
Regional Focus
The focus is on the international level, addressing the agreement between the Republic of Estonia and the Kingdom of Sweden. Analysis is conducted of the internal political situation within the Swedish parliament and the necessity of amending the constitution. Local or regional Estonian topics are not included.
7 Speeches Analyzed
Economic Views
Not enough data
7 Speeches Analyzed
Social Issues
The focus is placed on public safety issues, with concerns being raised that the transfer of prisoners could lead to an increase in crime and victims down the line. It is stressed that the minister must be held accountable for these risks.
7 Speeches Analyzed
Legislative Focus
The primary legislative focus is on opposing the draft resolution (682 SE) concerning the ratification of the agreement between the Republic of Estonia and the Kingdom of Sweden on the enforcement of custodial sentences. Emphasis is placed on the necessity of adhering to the correct procedural process, demanding the submission of a threat assessment and the correction of the committee’s operational errors.
7 Speeches Analyzed