Session Profile: Helle-Moonika Helme

The political platform is strongly focused on supporting Estonian small producers and farmers, directly linking their survival to national food security. The speaker sharply criticizes the government's "madcap tax policy" and the Green Transition, arguing that both are destroying the agricultural sector. Significant attention is also paid to the issue of procedural violations within the Riigikogu (Parliament) and the protection of the Estonian language during local elections. Policy formation emphasizes a value-based approach (food security, language protection) alongside strong criticism of the government's operational inefficiency.

The presenter demonstrates expertise regarding the state of Estonian agriculture and the situation of small producers, citing examples of specific bankrupt farms (Pajumäe, Nopri) and the genuine dissatisfaction among farmers. They are familiar with the VAT policies on foodstuffs in European countries (referencing Italy and its 0% VAT rate) and demonstrate thorough knowledge of the procedural deadlines stipulated by the Riigikogu Rules of Procedure and Internal Rules Act.

The rhetorical style is combative, sharp, and direct, employing strong phrases such as "mad tax policy" and labeling the opposing side's arguments as "very, very arbitrary." The speaker draws upon both emotional examples (farm bankruptcies) and logical comparisons (VAT in other countries). He actively defends his right to intervene in the debate, citing the intense discussion culture of the Finnish parliament.

The speaker was highly active during the plenary session on February 21st, posing several consecutive questions covering economic, social, and procedural issues. This points to a high level of engagement with the parliament’s day-to-day work. In one address, they welcomed a colleague back from a flight.

The primary opposition is aimed at the government and the Reform Party, who face criticism regarding both their economic policy (specifically the tax burden and overall tax strategy) and violations of procedural order. Opponents are being accused of greed (specifically merchants) and of making arbitrary claims (such as the supposed impact of VAT on the consumer). The criticism is intense, focusing heavily on both policy substance and procedural matters, particularly concerning the VAT on food items and the proposed electoral rights bills.

Data is insufficient. The speaker is primarily engaged in questioning and challenging the presenters and chairpersons, rather than seeking cooperation or compromise.

The speaker has a clear regional focus, highlighting the struggles and bankruptcies faced by small producers in Võrumaa (where they originate), such as Nopri Farm. This demonstrates concern for the viability of rural entrepreneurship and food production, bringing the issues faced by local communities into the national debate.

The economic views are geared towards supporting small producers and consumers by reducing the VAT on foodstuffs, emphasizing that this is a matter of survival. The speaker fiercely criticizes the government's tax policy as "insane" and points out that the abolition of the tax hump removed a larger sum from the state budget than the proposed VAT reduction would cost.

The primary social issue is the protection of the Estonian language and the strengthening of the state language's position in local municipalities. The speaker strongly supports the proposal to allow only citizens of the Republic of Estonia to vote in local elections, directly linking this measure to Estonian language proficiency and the linguistic composition of the local councils.

The legislative focus centers on two draft bills: the reduction of VAT on foodstuffs and the restriction of suffrage in local elections exclusively to citizens. Furthermore, the speaker's priority is ensuring compliance with the Riigikogu's Rules of Procedure, having repeatedly questioned why the board has violated procedural deadlines and stalled the bill's progression to the plenary session.