Session Profile: Lauri Laats
15th Riigikogu, 3rd session, plenary sitting
2024-04-17
Political Position
The main position is a critique of the draft legislation concerning the inclusion of e-voting and mobile voting; it stresses the use of paper ballots and internal oversight, and demands that the bill not be passed in its current form. The stance is strongly oppositional to the bill and highlights the necessity of stricter mechanisms to guarantee security and transparency. It also places minor emphasis on traditional electoral principles and the integrity of democratic processes.
8 Speeches Analyzed
Topic Expertise
It references legal frameworks (Paragraph 48, § 483) and the role of the State Electoral Service, utilizing the example of the Tallinn City Council for oversight. It demonstrates theoretical and legal knowledge regarding election security and control. It highlights that it is impossible to simultaneously verify the results of all voters using the integrated system.
8 Speeches Analyzed
Rhetorical Style
Speaks conversationally and persuasively, combining an emphasis on traditional values with technical references. They use examples and visual evidence (verification of paper ballots) and occasionally employ humor. The tone is critical, but they attempt to adhere to the established legal framework.
8 Speeches Analyzed
Activity Patterns
Participated in a lengthy plenary session on the same day, offered several separate reflections, and requested additional time; uses examples from the Tallinn City Council elections and the oversight of e-voting in several sections. Presents several extended arguments and appears to be actively leading discussions on election topics.
8 Speeches Analyzed
Opposition Stance
Stance: The draft bill has been criticized both for hindering the expansion of e-voting and due to security shortcomings. It characterizes the coalition's steps as obstructionism and emphasizes that the opposition has acted correctly within the procedural framework. It establishes the need to ensure oversight and transparency, rather than making compromises regarding the form of the bill.
8 Speeches Analyzed
Collaboration Style
Stresses adherence to rules and proper procedure within the Riigikogu; demonstrates a willingness to engage in debate with the opposing side, but is often critical of coalition initiatives. It highlights that the opposition has correctly submitted its proposals and emphasizes the need for oversight and transparency, rather than vague, unconditional cooperation.
8 Speeches Analyzed
Regional Focus
A strong focus is placed on Tallinn; using the example of the Tallinn City Council elections as the primary evidence, and referring to local elections to discuss the role and oversight of paper ballots. However, at the Riigikogu (Parliament) level, the main attention is on the security of the global electoral process.
8 Speeches Analyzed
Economic Views
The economy and budget are referenced as a side issue compared to more pressing matters; the speaker emphasizes that debates should center on the economy, the budget, and people's livelihoods, yet offers no concrete economic policy measures. The text draws a distinction between priority issues and the context of funding, using this as a rationale for avoiding focus on the current draft legislation concerning e-elections.
8 Speeches Analyzed
Social Issues
The viewpoints center on the integrity of the democratic process, the right of voters to verify their vote, and election security. Questions regarding additional controls and privacy within the voting process have been highlighted. Specific social or cultural topics are gradually being excluded; the primary focus remains the internal trust and oversight of the elections themselves.
8 Speeches Analyzed
Legislative Focus
The primary priority is the debate surrounding the second reading of Bill 344 SE and preventing its passage unless it guarantees the availability of paper ballots and robust oversight. It refers to specific legal frameworks and demands amendments to ensure security and control. It is categorically stressed that the entire electoral system requires both control and transparency, and therefore, the bill should not move forward in its present state.
8 Speeches Analyzed