Agenda Profile: Martin Helme
Continuation of the first reading of the Draft Act (682 SE) on the Ratification of the Agreement between the Republic of Estonia and the Kingdom of Sweden concerning the Execution of Prison Sentences of the Kingdom of Sweden in the Republic of Estonia
2025-11-05
15th Riigikogu, 6th Session, Plenary Sitting
Political Position
Both speakers oppose the ratification of the agreement concerning the enforcement of Swedish prison sentences, deeming it unethical and fundamentally wrong. This political stance is strongly rooted in values and outcomes, focusing on the perceived loss of national dignity and the government’s failure to guarantee the safety of its citizens. The Reform Party is considered the greatest security threat to the Estonian state and the city of Tartu.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Topic Expertise
The speakers demonstrate knowledge of legislative procedure by challenging the bill's voting requirement (51 votes due to budgetary impact, referencing Article 50). A second speaker demonstrates authority on security and migration topics, linking Swedish prisoners to the failure of multiculturalism and the rise of crime in Estonia. References are made to empirical evidence from elsewhere in the world, although specific data is not presented.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Rhetorical Style
The rhetorical style is highly combative, sharp, and emotional, employing strong negative labeling and accusations (e.g., "cynically lying," "failed government"). Appeals focus on morality and a sense of threat (the dignity of the state, the security of Tartu residents), emphasizing the government's failure to ensure core functions. Simple and direct language is used, aimed at mobilizing voters.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Activity Patterns
Speaker 1 refers to active participation in parliamentary work, citing the instance of asking Michal a question on the topic during the information hour. Other activity patterns, such as the frequency of speeches or meetings, are not evident from the data.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Opposition Stance
The main opponent is the Reform Party, which is accused of running the country into the ground, lying to voters, and acting as a security threat. Criticism is also aimed at Minister of Justice Liisa Pakosta, who is held responsible for the emptying of prisons and the resulting presence of criminals on the streets. The opposition is absolute, demanding the immediate rejection of the draft bill and promising to repeal it later.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Collaboration Style
The data clearly indicates a purely oppositional style, showing a complete lack of willingness to cooperate. Speaker 2 holds the governing coalition (the Reform Party, Eesti 200, and the Social Democrats) responsible for their collective failure, also noting Isamaa’s earlier cooperation with the Reform Party.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Regional Focus
Regionally, there is a strong focus on the city of Tartu and its residents, who are considered directly threatened by the agreement, with the Reform Party being named as Tartu's biggest security threat. Internationally, emphasis is placed on the consequences of Sweden's failed immigration policy, specifically highlighting the ethnic origin of Swedish prisoners.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Economic Views
The economic arguments have taken a back seat and are deemed unworthy, as the state shouldn't sell its dignity for "paltry sums." It is stressed that the agreement involves a budgetary impact (costs), which requires 51 votes, rather than generating revenue.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Social Issues
Security and immigration dominate the social issues landscape, emphasizing the need to keep criminals behind bars. There is strong opposition to allowing an excess of Muslim immigration into Estonia, which is associated with the failure of Swedish multiculturalism and the rise in serious crimes (murder, rape, pedophilia). Security deficiencies related to the Istanbul Convention (referred to as the "pervert pact") and the Tapja-Tarmo case are also cited.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Legislative Focus
The main legislative focus is the rejection of Bill 682 SE (the Swedish prisoner agreement) at the first reading. Significant emphasis is also placed on the correctness of the legislative procedure, requiring the implementation of 51 votes due to the budgetary impact. Furthermore, there is a promise to repeal this agreement, the car tax, and the Istanbul Convention in the future.
2 Speeches Analyzed