Agenda Profile: Helle-Moonika Helme
Inquiry Regarding the Continuation of Service as Prime Minister (No. 728)
2025-04-14
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary sitting
Political Position
The most prominent stance is a strong opposition to the legitimacy of both the prime minister and the government, repeatedly citing constitutional violations and the absence of a legitimate mandate. Politically, the focus is on aggressively criticizing tax increases (20 new taxes) and the development of wind farms, all while defending the interests of local residents. The underlying political framework is strongly rooted in values (the rule of law) and performance (economic failure).
5 Speeches Analyzed
Topic Expertise
The speaker demonstrates expertise on issues of constitutional order, referencing a specific roadmap and Jüri Adams' views on the procedure for forming the government. Detailed aspects of taxation (the budgetary impact of abolishing the tax hump is 500–700 million) and energy policy (developers' business risks, state subsidies) are also addressed.
5 Speeches Analyzed
Rhetorical Style
The style is extremely aggressive, accusatory, and ironic, refusing to address the Prime Minister by his title and accusing him of giving an arrogant response. Strong emotional appeals and vivid metaphors are used (e.g., "from the ivory tower," "you don't pave potholes with propaganda"), labeling opponents ("liberal terror," "flying circus").
5 Speeches Analyzed
Activity Patterns
The speeches were presented within the framework of a Riigikogu inquiry, which indicates active participation in the parliament's oversight mechanisms. The speaker also mentions the previous raising of the topic (constitutional legitimacy) during the information hour.
5 Speeches Analyzed
Opposition Stance
The primary adversary is the Reform Party and its leader, Kristen Michal. His actions are being labeled illegitimate, and he is accused of constantly haranguing the Estonian people. The criticism is intense, encompassing both alleged constitutional violations and political attacks (regarding taxation and wind farms), with developers being branded as "money laundering mills." Compromise is ruled out, as the argument is that one cannot tolerate illegitimate activity.
5 Speeches Analyzed
Collaboration Style
The cooperative approach is directed towards like-minded opposition forces and constitutional experts whose positions regarding legitimacy are supported. The speaker makes positive reference to the issues raised by previous speakers, but there is a complete absence of any indication of a willingness to compromise with the government.
5 Speeches Analyzed
Regional Focus
Significant attention is being paid to local governments and landowners across Estonia who are concerned about the destruction of their living environment due to the construction of wind farms. The right of local residents to protest and demand answers from developers is being protected.
5 Speeches Analyzed
Economic Views
Economic views are strongly opposed to tax hikes, criticizing the introduction of 20 new taxes. It is argued that the abolition of the tax hump will backfire on the state at the expense of the poorer population, and that the government's propaganda claiming "more money in your pocket" is the biggest lie. They also oppose the state's plan to distribute billions of euros of the Estonian people's money to developers (companies with low capital).
5 Speeches Analyzed
Social Issues
Acute social issues are being raised, criticizing the Minister of Social Affairs for their inaction regarding cases of starvation and rape of elderly people suffering from dementia in nursing homes owned by members of the Reform Party. This is being contrasted with the minister's focus on trivial regulations (checking hand towels).
5 Speeches Analyzed
Legislative Focus
The primary legislative focus centers on constitutional legitimacy and upholding the principles of the rule of law. There is opposition to the Ministry of Climate's proposals to infringe upon landowners' rights by cutting the compensation paid for land used for infrastructure by up to 50%, with critics labeling the move as nationalization.
5 Speeches Analyzed