Agenda Profile: Rene Kokk
Draft law amending the State Budget Act (520 SE) - First Reading
2025-01-16
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary session
Political Position
The politician strongly opposes the existing State Budget Basic Law and the proposed activity-based state budget, calling on the government to declare the whole thing a failure. The stance is forceful and focuses on the system's inefficiency and the necessity of reverting to previous practices. His framework is clearly policy-driven, emphasizing systemic flaws and a complete lack of oversight.
1 Speeches Analyzed
Topic Expertise
The speaker demonstrates expertise in the details of the state budget and financial errors, citing as an example the 100.4 million euro duplicate entry in the 2023 budget under the Ministry of Economic Affairs and Communications (MKM) line item. He/She uses technical examples (e.g., the nine figures related to Rail Baltic) to highlight the flaws in the activity-based budgeting methodology. This points to strong competence in the field of fiscal management and budgetary processes.
1 Speeches Analyzed
Rhetorical Style
The rhetorical style is critical and logical, relying on concrete financial examples to prove the system's flaws. The tone is decisive, stressing the urgency of the issue and issuing a direct call to the government to deem the project a failure. The speech concludes with a challenging rhetorical question aimed at the commission's representative.
1 Speeches Analyzed
Activity Patterns
Only one speech was delivered at the Riigikogu session during the first reading of the bill concerning the amendment of the State Budget Act. Data regarding other activity patterns is insufficient.
1 Speeches Analyzed
Opposition Stance
The criticism is directed at the actions of the government and the ministries (the Ministry of Finance, MKM), faulting them for major budgetary errors and an inability to detect them. The opposition is political and procedural, demanding that the current budgeting system be declared a failure. Furthermore, it calls into question the majority position of the committee regarding the rejection of the draft bill.
1 Speeches Analyzed
Collaboration Style
The speaker agrees with the previous rapporteur concerning the need to review the State Budget Basic Act. However, the speaker is simultaneously prepared to oppose the committee's stance, which suggests a willingness to support similar viewpoints while anticipating institutional resistance.
1 Speeches Analyzed
Regional Focus
The focus is on the national level, addressing the fundamentals of the State Budget Act and the activities of central government ministries (MKM, Ministry of Finance). Rail Baltic is mentioned, but only in the context of errors in the national budget.
1 Speeches Analyzed
Economic Views
The speaker emphasizes the need for fiscal discipline and transparency, criticizing the current budgetary system for major errors (such as double entries) and a lack of oversight. Preference is given to earlier, more reliable budgeting methods that would ensure better control over the state budget.
1 Speeches Analyzed
Social Issues
There is not enough data.
1 Speeches Analyzed
Legislative Focus
The primary legislative focus is the draft bill amending the State Budget Act (520 SE) and the review of the State Budget Basic Act. The speaker strongly supports the necessity of changing the foundations of budgeting, criticizing the current activity-based system and backing the draft bill that calls for a systemic change.
1 Speeches Analyzed