Agenda Profile: Annely Akkermann
Draft law amending the State Budget Act (511 SE) - Second Reading
2024-11-13
15th Riigikogu, 4th session, plenary session.
Political Position
The speaker strongly advocates for the performance-based state budget and defends the necessity of this reform. He/She stresses that the administrative presentation of the budget is not informative enough and does not facilitate strategic discussions. The speaker sharply criticizes those who previously supported the transition to performance-based budgeting but are now criticizing it.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Topic Expertise
The speaker demonstrates profound expertise in the area of the state budget, drawing on their experience serving on the Special Committee for State Budget Control between 2011 and 2015. They cite precise historical facts, name specific individuals and years, and clarify technical terminology. The speaker exhibits a comprehensive grasp of the methodology used for budget presentation and how it has evolved.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Rhetorical Style
The speaker employs a fact-based, analytical approach, drawing on historical examples and specific data. The style is explanatory and pedagogical, though it also incorporates a critical tone directed at opponents. They utilize structured argumentation and clarification of terminology to substantiate their positions.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Activity Patterns
The address highlights the speaker's active involvement in the Select Committee on State Budget Control across multiple periods (2011–2015 and subsequently). He mentions reviewing minutes and transcripts, as well as analyzing various reports. Furthermore, the speaker refers to the work of the Finance Committee concerning future plans.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Opposition Stance
The speaker sharply criticizes those politicians who previously supported the transition to activity-based budgeting but are now criticizing it. He expresses astonishment at their contradictory behavior and specifically names Aivar Sõerd as a constant critic of the methodology. The criticism is principled and fact-based.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Collaboration Style
The speaker demonstrates a willingness to cooperate, mentioning the Finance Committee's joint work on improving the 2026 budget. He/She acknowledges the views of the National Audit Office and refers to a conversation held with Regina Vällik. However, he/she maintains a critical attitude towards contradictory standpoints.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Regional Focus
There is not enough data.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Economic Views
The speaker supports transparent and strategic budget planning, stressing the need to discuss the necessity and scope of various activities. They advocate for a budget presentation format that would allow us to evaluate whether a specific activity should be scaled back, expanded, or eliminated entirely.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Social Issues
There is not enough data.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Legislative Focus
The speaker is focusing on state budget legislation and its improvement. He/She supports making the 2025 budget more detailed and plans to continue this work by clarifying the 2026 budget. The speaker stresses the importance of adhering to legal deadlines and defends the current procedural rules.
2 Speeches Analyzed