Agenda Profile: Helle-Moonika Helme

The political stance is strongly opposed to the draft amendment of the Liquid Fuel Act, which mandates the addition of bio-additives to aviation fuel. The primary concerns revolve around flight safety, particularly if the proportion of additives increases in the future, and the economic well-being of the populace due to the resulting increase in airfare prices. This position is value-driven, emphasizing that legislation must be crafted for the benefit of the people, not merely to satisfy EU directives. Opposition to the draft bill is viewed as resistance against ideological components being imposed without regard for practical considerations.

The speaker demonstrates knowledge regarding the history of blending biofuels into vehicle fuels and is familiar with the mixing percentages stipulated in the draft legislation (2% currently, 6% by 2030, and 70% by 2050). Emphasis is placed on technical risks, such as engine failure and aviation safety, and the fuel feedstock is mentioned (e.g., fuel derived from palm oil). The expertise is primarily utilized to highlight safety risks and draw historical analogies.

The rhetorical style is sharp, critical, and forceful, accusing the ministry of ignoring the concerns of the populace and engaging in ideological imposition. Strong emotional appeals are employed, referencing the danger of planes crashing and people being essentially turned into serfs due to the rising cost of airfare. Logical arguments are grounded in historical examples (car fuel additives) and future-oriented forecasts (price hikes, decline in safety).

The records show participation in the first reading of the draft amendment to the Liquid Fuel Act in May 2025, where repeated questions and comments were presented. The speaker is an active critic of the legislative process. Data concerning other activities is unavailable.

The main opponent is the drafter of the bill—the minister or the ministry—who is sharply criticized for ignoring people's concerns and imposing purely ideological components. The criticism is procedural, as the ministry refuses to calculate the impact of the rise in air ticket prices, and value-based, since the bill only serves EU directives.

Insufficient data

The focus is on international requirements (Euro directives) and the national aviation sector; there are no references to specific local regions or communities. Concern is raised by the international fuel supply chain and the origin of the raw material (palm oil).

Economic perspectives are strongly opposed to regulation if it leads to significant price increases and restricts people's purchasing power (e.g., rising flight ticket prices). Market-based solutions are preferred, based on the belief that aviation companies would have independently used biofuels if it were economically viable. Biofuels are considered significantly more expensive, which harms consumers.

The social issue being addressed is the accessibility and affordability of air travel, arguing that rising costs will effectively restrict people's freedom of movement. Public safety is also emphasized, citing potential air accidents due to fuel quality. These social concerns are being used as the primary argument against the proposed bill.

The legislative focus is currently on opposing the draft amendment act to the Liquid Fuel Act (Bill 622 SE). The speaker is a strong opponent of the bill, focusing on the safety and economic consequences of its implementation. The procedure used to draft the bill is being criticized because it fails to account for the impact on human life.