Agenda Profile: Hanah Lahe
Draft Law Amending the Hunting Act (444 SE) – First Reading
2024-10-08
15th Riigikogu, 4th session, plenary session
Political Position
The political position is one of strong opposition to the draft amendment of the Hunting Act (444 SE), as it is insufficiently justified and would lead to the loss of earmarked revenue for the state. This opposition is policy- and results-based, emphasizing that the fee for hunting rights is essential for promoting the field of hunting. The rejection of the draft bill was supported unanimously.
1 Speeches Analyzed
Topic Expertise
The presenter demonstrates expertise regarding hunting regulations and legislative procedures, offering a detailed introduction to the discussion held by the Environment Committee. Specific statistical data from the Ministry of Climate is utilized concerning the number of hunters (12,000), the proportion of pensioners (27%), and the potential loss to the state budget (32,400 euros). Furthermore, a clear distinction is drawn between hunting and fishing, emphasizing the complexity involved in becoming a certified hunter.
1 Speeches Analyzed
Rhetorical Style
The style of the discourse is formal, procedural, and analytical, focusing on the neutral presentation of the environmental commission's work and conclusions. Emphasis is placed on logical argumentation, facts, and data, strictly avoiding emotional appeals. The speaker presents questions and answers in a structured manner to demonstrate the deficiencies of the draft bill.
1 Speeches Analyzed
Activity Patterns
The course of action is related to legislative committee work, involving acting as a rapporteur when presenting the results of the Environmental Committee discussions to the Riigikogu. Meetings with the initiator of the draft bill and experts from the Ministry of Climate are noted, which indicates a thorough procedure.
1 Speeches Analyzed
Opposition Stance
The opposition is directed at the initiator of the bill (Kalle Grünthal) and the content of the bill itself, which is being criticized for insufficient justification and a lack of comprehensive answers. The criticism is both procedural and policy-based, as the purpose and necessity of the bill could not be explained.
1 Speeches Analyzed
Collaboration Style
The style of cooperation is consensus-based, emphasizing that the Environmental Committee proposed to reject the draft bill by consensus. This cooperation also involves engaging ministry experts (Advisor of the Biodiversity Protection Department of the Ministry of Climate) to obtain necessary input and expertise.
1 Speeches Analyzed
Regional Focus
There is not enough data
1 Speeches Analyzed
Economic Views
The economic perspective emphasizes fiscal responsibility and the necessity of preserving earmarked revenue. There is opposition to the loss of revenue (32,400 euros) designated for the promotion of hunting, supporting the principle that the fee for hunting rights is essential for the sector's interests.
1 Speeches Analyzed
Social Issues
The discussion covers social aspects concerning the potential exemption of elderly and disabled individuals from the hunting license fee. A question is raised regarding whether older hunters have issues utilizing the digital environment, even though the final conclusion favors keeping the fee.
1 Speeches Analyzed
Legislative Focus
The legislative focus is currently centered on rejecting the draft bill to amend the Hunting Act (444 SE), where we are operating as both a strong opponent and a procedural oversight body for the proposal. The priority is to ensure that all draft legislation is adequately justified and does not negatively impact the state's earmarked revenue.
1 Speeches Analyzed