Agenda Profile: Annely Akkermann
First Reading of the Draft Act amending the State Budget Act (391 SE)
2024-03-12
15th Riigikogu, 3rd plenary sitting
Political Position
The speaker strongly supports increasing the budgetary independence of constitutional institutions, emphasizing the need to reduce the influence of the executive branch on their financing. The views expressed are clearly institutional and constitutional, focusing on the separation of powers and the foundations of a democratic rule of law. The speaker presents a compromise approach, acknowledging both the need for autonomy of constitutional institutions and the government's obligations in budget preparation.
3 Speeches Analyzed
Topic Expertise
The speaker demonstrates deep proficiency in the fields of budget processes, constitutional law, and parliamentary procedure. They utilize precise technical terminology such as "activity-based budgeting," "classic budget," and "real estate investment management plan process," and reference specific sections of the law. They demonstrate thorough knowledge of the Riigikogu's rules of procedure and budgetary processes, based on over ten years of experience.
3 Speeches Analyzed
Rhetorical Style
The style of discourse is formal, structured, and explanatory, focusing on facts and procedures. It employs logical argumentation, sequentially presenting the substance and rationale behind the legal amendments. The style is cooperative and consensus-driven, emphasizing the identification of compromises and the lengthy consultation process. Emotional elements are absent; technical and legal discourse dominates.
3 Speeches Analyzed
Activity Patterns
The speaker referred to intense activity—several meetings, written consultations, and sessions of working groups and committees. Specific dates were mentioned: October 24 (a joint session), February 20, and March 4 (Finance Committee sessions). He/She emphasized the lengthy procedural process and the systematic approach taken in drafting the legislation.
3 Speeches Analyzed
Opposition Stance
A direct stance of opposition is not evident, but the speaker indirectly criticizes the current system where constitutional institutions must hold budget negotiations with the very entities they control. He/She mentions lagging salaries and a lack of autonomy as problems, but presents this as constructive criticism, not an attack.
3 Speeches Analyzed
Collaboration Style
The speaker strongly emphasizes cooperation—mentioning collaboration with representatives of constitutional institutions, a joint session of the Finance and Constitutional Committees, and consensus decisions. The approach is clearly cooperative, seeking compromises between various parties and following the best parliamentary practices.
3 Speeches Analyzed
Regional Focus
There is not enough data.
3 Speeches Analyzed
Economic Views
The speaker supports responsible fiscal policy, stressing the necessity of operating within the state's means and maintaining budget balance. He/She mentions the need to consider the summer economic forecast and the public sector salary survey. The speaker demonstrates an understanding of the flexibility inherent in activity-based budgeting and its impact on wage formation across various sectors.
3 Speeches Analyzed
Social Issues
There is not enough data.
3 Speeches Analyzed
Legislative Focus
The speaker is focused on amending the State Budget Act with the goal of strengthening the budgetary rights of constitutional institutions. They initiate and steer a specific legislative bill that proposes amendments to three sections of the State Budget Act. They emphasize the importance of timely procedure and strict adherence to all formalities as stipulated by the Riigikogu Rules of Procedure Act.
3 Speeches Analyzed