Session Profile: Anti Allas
15th Riigikogu, 3rd session, plenary sitting
2024-03-20
Political Position
The speaker strongly opposes the draft bill to abolish expense compensations for Riigikogu members, deeming it populist and detrimental to the Riigikogu's reputation. He emphasizes the necessity of reimbursing essential work-related expenditures and supports, based on regional policy considerations, directing funds toward rural areas and covering the travel costs of members from further away. The political framework is geared toward protecting institutions and ensuring the quality of policy.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Topic Expertise
The speaker is an expert on the Riigikogu Members' Status Act and the regulation governing expense compensation. They clearly differentiate between the substance of the legal provision and the authority of the Riigikogu Board when setting expense categories. They point to the specific necessity of travel expenses, research and expert analyses, and representation costs required to perform the work of the Riigikogu. They propose procedural solutions (amending the Board's internal rules) rather than changing the law itself.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Rhetorical Style
The style is analytical, yet sharply critical, utilizing strong expressions such as "populist froth" and "populist spectacle." The speaker employs rhetorical questions, Biblical phrases ("Which of you is without sin..."), and concrete examples (e.g., bottomless tanks) to discredit the motives of their opponents. He/She balances this emotional attack with a legal explanation detailing the differences between law and order.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Activity Patterns
The speaker is active during the plenary session, both posing questions and delivering longer speeches, which demonstrates a deep engagement with the topic under discussion. He/She also refers to participation in committee debates, where he/she questioned the rapporteur about the actual goals of the draft bill.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Opposition Stance
The primary conflict centers on the EKRE faction, whose proposed bill has been branded as populist and hypocritical. The criticism is aimed directly at specific individuals, citing the high expense allowances claimed by EKRE members (Martin Helme and Rain Epler) and previous scandals (such as the notorious "bottomless car tanks" incident). The speaker accuses the opposition of deceiving the public and destroying the reputation of the Riigikogu.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Collaboration Style
The speaker agrees with the points raised by the previous speaker, Hendrik Johannes Terras, and highlights the constructive cooperation within the committee. The committee reached a consensus regarding the necessity of certain expenditure items and the potential elimination of others (such as car leasing). He/She is open to compromises that ensure reasonable fiscal prudence.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Regional Focus
The speaker focuses on regional policy, supporting the allocation of funds to rural areas and emphasizing regional equity. He/She argues that reimbursing the direct travel costs of representatives hailing from distant areas (Võru, Hiiumaa) is necessary so that they do not end up paying significantly more than representatives who live close to the capital.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Economic Views
Economic views focus on frugal and sensible spending, stressing that essential work-related expenses must be reimbursed to ensure that job duties can be performed. He/She is open to eliminating certain expense items (such as car leasing) given the difficult economic climate, but emphasizes the need for careful deliberation.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Social Issues
Insufficient data.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Legislative Focus
The legislative focus is on retaining Section 30 of the Riigikogu Member Status Act, opposing the draft bill aimed at its repeal. The priority is maintaining the basis for reimbursing necessary work-related expenses, proposing as an alternative amending the rules of the Riigikogu Board to eliminate problematic expenditure categories.
2 Speeches Analyzed