Agenda Profile: Tanel Kiik
Continuation of the second reading of the draft law amending the Competition Act and, in connection therewith, amending other laws (609 SE)
2025-06-11
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary sitting
Political Position
The speaker inquires about the amendments to the Competition Act and asserts that these changes primarily serve business interests. Furthermore, they accuse the government of unfair treatment, noting that the oversight of corporations is significantly laxer than that applied to private individuals.
Topic Expertise
Demonstrates a thorough understanding of competition law and the market situation in Estonia. It refers to specific sectors, such as the pharmaceutical market and the fuel industry, where oligopolistic structures are evident. It demonstrates knowledge of the legal framework and its impact on corporate liability compared to that of private individuals.
Rhetorical Style
The speaker employs combative and confrontational rhetoric, clearly setting themselves up as the government's adversary. They utilize emotional tactics, such as the "front line" metaphor and direct personal challenges, explicitly asking who is the stronger authority in the field of competition law—the minister or Kaja Kallas. The rhetoric is populist, stressing the defense of "the Estonian people" and "fair competition," while simultaneously accusing the government of caving in to business interests.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Activity Patterns
He posed questions concerning competition law and equity, specifically addressing the problem of differential treatment between businesses and private individuals. He demonstrated an interest in the balance of the legal system.
Opposition Stance
He criticized the government's amendments to the competition law, arguing that they served narrow business interests. He accused the government of unfair treatment of businesses and private individuals.
Collaboration Style
The speaker demonstrates a clear willingness to cooperate with the Social Democrats, mentioning that they support the same version of the Competition Act. At the same time, he adopts a completely confrontational stance towards the government, using "we on one side, you on the other" rhetoric. No willingness to cooperate with the government is evident; rather, ideological opposition is emphasized.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Regional Focus
Criticizes changes to the competition law that affect oligopolistic markets, such as the pharmaceutical and fuel sectors. Emphasizes the need to ensure fair competition throughout Estonia.
Economic Views
They criticized the amendments to the Competition Act, arguing that they served specific business interests. They supported ensuring fairer competition and spoke out against the promotion of an oligopolistic market.
Social Issues
Not enough data is available. The speaker focuses exclusively on issues of competition law and economic policy; social topics such as education, immigration, or civil rights are not addressed.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Legislative Focus
Criticizes the amendments to the Competition Act, claiming they serve corporate interests and create a situation where the oversight of companies is significantly more lenient than that applied to private individuals. This is linked to the Pihlakodu case, where proceedings were initiated against a private individual, but the company's liability remained unclear.