Agenda Profile: Martin Helme
Second reading of the draft law on the 2025 state budget (513 SE)
2024-11-13
15th Riigikogu, 4th session, plenary session.
Political Position
The political position is fiercely opposed to the government's 2025 budget draft, which is considered to cause tax increases, economic recession, and the impoverishment of the population. The focus is placed on the government's poor performance and the resistance to the liberal agenda, referencing a "kaporatuur coup d'état." The budget itself is labeled as corrupt and destructive to Estonia's competitiveness.
10 Speeches Analyzed
Topic Expertise
The speaker demonstrates expertise in macroeconomic and state budget processes, utilizing specific statistical data to illustrate inflation and the rising cost of living. He/She presents detailed percentages (e.g., a 48.7% increase in food prices, a 187% increase in electricity costs) since the beginning of 2021. Furthermore, the speaker is familiar with the budget implementation methodologies of previous governments, explaining his/her role in introducing the activity-based budget.
10 Speeches Analyzed
Rhetorical Style
The rhetorical style is highly combative, accusatory, and dramatic, employing powerful metaphors (e.g., referring to the budget as "filth") and leveling accusations of simulating democracy. The speaker balances statistical data with emotional appeals, highlighting the nation's impoverishment and misery. Furthermore, he/she makes direct accusations that the prime minister is presenting false claims and spreading fake news.
10 Speeches Analyzed
Activity Patterns
The speaker played an active role in the second reading of the state budget, delivering lengthy, substantive speeches on November 13th and submitting several amendments for a vote on November 14th. He referenced his prior activity as Minister of Finance and the budget forecasts prepared at the end of 2023.
10 Speeches Analyzed
Opposition Stance
The primary opposition is aimed at the Reform Party-led government and the liberal regime, who stand accused of economic destruction and forcing through an unmandated agenda. The criticism is intense, spanning from substantive political issues (tax hikes) to procedural dishonesty (simulating parliamentary debate and discarding the rules of procedure entirely). Opponents are also accused of misrepresenting historical facts (e.g., concerning the Paris Climate Agreement).
10 Speeches Analyzed
Collaboration Style
The spirit of cooperation is completely absent; the speaker views the parliamentary process as the coalition's "sham" and "simulation of democracy," which the opposition should not play along with. Emphasis is placed on the opposition's duty to stand up for their voters and show that they have not given up.
10 Speeches Analyzed
Regional Focus
The focus is on the national economic situation, inflation, and the impoverishment of the population across Estonia. International climate packages ("Fit for 55") and agreements (the Paris Climate Agreement) are also addressed. There is no focus on specific regional or local issues.
10 Speeches Analyzed
Economic Views
His economic views are firmly opposed to tax hikes and government spending, which he believes deepen the recession and destroy Estonia's competitiveness. He advocates for fiscal responsibility, citing the balanced budgets drafted during his time in government (2019/2020). He sharply criticizes inflation, arguing that it has impoverished people because increases in wages and pensions have failed to compensate for the rise in prices.
10 Speeches Analyzed
Social Issues
On the subject of social issues, the speaker highlighted opposition to the state funding of LGTBT+QQ activities. He/She made a concrete proposal for the removal of a 3 million euro sum from the budget, calling it an ideologically important proposal.
10 Speeches Analyzed
Legislative Focus
The primary legislative objective is either rejecting the draft 2025 state budget or halting the legislative process entirely. The speaker is an active opponent, proposing amendments targeting both the substance of the budget (for example, removing funding for social programs) and the procedural aspects. They criticize the government's practice of retroactively smoothing out budget expenditures late in the following year.
10 Speeches Analyzed