Agenda Profile: Kalle Laanet
Draft law amending the Holiday and Commemoration Day Act (453 SE) – first reading
2024-11-11
15th Riigikogu, 4th session, plenary session
Political Position
The most important topic was the draft act on amending the Holidays and Commemoration Days Act (453 SE), which concerned additional rest days and the shifting of holidays. The government and the majority of the Constitutional Committee (4:2) opposed the immediate adoption of the draft, citing unknown economic impacts and preferring to review the entire system simultaneously. Helir-Valdor Seeder moderately supported the idea but strongly emphasized compliance with the Riigikogu Rules of Procedure and Internal Rules Act concerning procedural deadlines.
1 Speeches Analyzed
Topic Expertise
Expertise was demonstrated in the knowledge of legislative procedural norms, especially regarding the seven-working-week deadline for reaching the Riigikogu Plenary Session (Seeder). The representative of the Ministry of Justice demonstrated knowledge in the field of budget and labor law, emphasizing the need to assess costs (state budget and lost revenue in the private sector) and the impact on employees with averaged working time.
1 Speeches Analyzed
Rhetorical Style
The reporting style is highly formal, procedural, and analytical, focusing on the neutral summarization of the discussions and voting results that took place within the committee. The tone is objective and fact-based, referencing government positions and legislative requirements, while avoiding emotional appeals.
1 Speeches Analyzed
Activity Patterns
The operational pattern centered on internal legislative work, specifically the detailed reporting of the discussions and decisions made during the session of the Constitutional Affairs Committee. This activity included the involvement of experts (from the Ministry of Justice) and internal committee debates regarding procedural issues.
1 Speeches Analyzed
Opposition Stance
The main opposition, coming from the majority of the government and the committee, was directed against the immediate adoption of the proposal put forward by the bill's initiators (Ms. Poolamets). The criticism was policy- and procedural-based, emphasizing the lack of an impact analysis in the bill's explanatory memorandum and insufficient clarification regarding its application to employees working with aggregated working time.
1 Speeches Analyzed
Collaboration Style
The cooperation took place within the framework of the commission, incorporating dialogue between the members and a representative of the Ministry of Justice. The proposal by the commission chairman (Terras) to await a comprehensive analysis and view the system as a cohesive whole was also supported by Timo Suslov, thereby demonstrating procedural consistency.
1 Speeches Analyzed
Regional Focus
Insufficient data.
1 Speeches Analyzed
Economic Views
Economic viewpoints emphasized fiscal responsibility and the necessity of quantifying the budgetary impact of legislative changes. The government's position highlighted that an additional day off would result in costs to the state budget and lost revenue in both the public and private sectors.
1 Speeches Analyzed
Social Issues
The social topic under discussion was the structure of national holidays and their impact on employees’ days off. Special emphasis was placed on the need to ensure an equal effect for those employees whose days off are not Saturday and Sunday (those working summarized working time), in order to guarantee social justice.
1 Speeches Analyzed
Legislative Focus
The legislative focus was on the draft bill (453 SE) amending the Law on Holidays and Important Dates. During its processing, emphasis was placed on procedural correctness and adherence to deadlines. The majority of the committee preferred to reject the bill in order to await a thorough analysis and review the entire holiday system as a whole.
1 Speeches Analyzed