Agenda Profile: Arvo Aller
First Reading of the Draft Act on the Amendment of the Penal Code and the Amendment of Other Related Acts (Increasing the Fine Unit) (Bill 415 SE)
2024-04-30
Fifteenth Riigikogu, Third Session, Plenary Session.
Political Position
The political position is strongly against the draft bill (increasing the fine unit), criticizing the government’s actions as the continuation of "the same steamroller" that ignores impact analyses. The criticism is primarily procedural and outcome-based, highlighting deficiencies in the preparation of the legislation and potential negative consequences. The bill is opposed because it increases the workload of the courts and could create an incentive for enforcement officials to drag out proceedings in order to secure higher fines.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Topic Expertise
The speaker demonstrates expertise in legislative procedures, referencing the absence of the Intent to Develop, the coordination table, and impact analyses. Knowledge of the nuances of applying budgetary law is also shown, specifically by inquiring about the accounting of fine revenues across different budget years. To support the argumentation, specific institutional feedback (Viru County Court) is cited regarding the increase in the courts' workload.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Rhetorical Style
The rhetorical style is critical and questioning, employing a negative metaphor ("the steamroller") to characterize the government's actions. The speech is formal and focuses on logical and procedural appeals, raising hypothetical questions regarding the potential negative consequences of implementing the law. The tone is concerned and demanding, emphasizing the need for a flexible approach to fine rates.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Activity Patterns
The speaker is actively engaged in the legislative debate, participating in the first reading of the bill by raising detailed questions. He notes that he is not a member of the relevant committee, suggesting that his input primarily occurs during the plenary session. This pattern of activity demonstrates a focus on both the substantive and procedural critique of draft legislation.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Opposition Stance
The primary criticism is directed at the government and the bill's sponsor, who are accused of procedural unfairness and ignoring the opinions of interest groups. It is specifically highlighted that in the consultation table, the majority of opinions were marked "disregarded," including warnings issued by the judiciary. The criticism is strong and focuses on poor governance practices and a lack of transparency.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Collaboration Style
The style of collaboration is oppositional and interrogative, focusing on highlighting the flaws of the draft bill. As a sign of cooperation, references are made to criticism presented by third parties (the Viru County Court) to strengthen their arguments against the government. There is no information regarding the search for cross-party compromise.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Regional Focus
The general focus is on national legislation and budgetary issues, but the speaker cites the opinion of a specific regional institution—the Viru County Court—to support their arguments. This indicates an awareness of the regional courts' concerns regarding the bill's impact.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Economic Views
Economic views pertain to fiscal implementation, calling into question the budgetary justification for revenue generated from fines and inquiring about the accuracy of revenue accounting across different fiscal years. Concern is expressed that raising fines is merely a tool for patching budget holes rather than a decision rooted in legal policy.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Social Issues
The social impact of penal policy is discussed, emphasizing that higher fines affect individuals' financial standing and increase their motivation to contest the penalties. The speaker advocates for a reasonable and flexible approach to setting fine rates to avoid an unjustified increase in the courts' workload.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Legislative Focus
The legislative focus is centered on opposing the draft bill to amend the Penal Code (specifically, increasing the fine unit). The speaker is acting as a strong opponent, demanding improved legislative quality, the submission of impact assessments, and that the views of stakeholders be considered.
2 Speeches Analyzed