Session Profile: Arvo Aller
15th Riigikogu, 4th session, plenary sitting
2024-11-20
Political Position
The political focus centers on amending the constitution, with the aim of restricting voting rights primarily to citizens of the Republic of Estonia—a measure supported as a common objective. Furthermore, the speaker stresses a firm procedural position, criticizing the coalition's failure to account for the willingness to compromise and advance parallel drafts of legislation to achieve the best possible outcome. The stances are strongly value-based (citizenship) and procedural (due process).
2 Speeches Analyzed
Topic Expertise
The speaker demonstrates expertise in legislative procedures, particularly in the processing of constitutional amendment bills and committee work. They are proficient in terminology such as comparative analysis, the stages between readings, and voting thresholds (e.g., 51 votes). Furthermore, they are well-versed in the requirements for initiating bills and the rights afforded to a member of the Riigikogu.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Rhetorical Style
The rhetorical style is analytical and procedurally focused, employing formal address when speaking to the chair and the presenter. The tone is critical of the Social Democrats and the coalition, concentrating on logical arguments and procedural failures. The speaker poses questions that challenge the opposing side's rhetoric and procedural decisions.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Activity Patterns
The speaker is active in plenary sessions, participating in multiple debates on the same day concerning constitutional amendments. He/She is aware of the discussions held in the committee and refers to them in his/her speeches.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Opposition Stance
The main targets of criticism are the Social Democrats (regarding their rhetoric and their demand for comparative analysis) and the coalition parties. The coalition is sharply criticized for its procedural rigidity, as they failed to consider the willingness of the initiators of the second bill to compromise and did not advance both bills equally. The criticism is aimed at procedural and political choices.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Collaboration Style
The speaker stresses the crucial importance of being willing to compromise, pointing out that the initiators of the second draft bill (Isamaa and EKRE) were prepared to negotiate and make amendments. He criticizes the coalition for its inability to cooperate, noting that they failed to seize the opportunity to advance both bills in order to find the best solution. He sees potential for collaboration, provided it results in improved legislation.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Regional Focus
There is not enough data.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Economic Views
Insufficient data
2 Speeches Analyzed
Social Issues
The primary social issue is suffrage, with the speaker supporting the stance that voting rights should be restricted primarily to citizens of the Republic of Estonia. He/She also requests an opinion on the potential impact that granting voting rights to European Union citizens would have on the draft legislation.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Legislative Focus
The legislative focus is currently on the draft constitutional amendments concerning the restriction of voting rights. The speaker is acting as both a procedural critic and a supporter, wanting the process to lead to the best possible bill, and demanding the equal advancement of the two parallel drafts. He/She is also interested in supplementing the bill (for instance, by including EU citizens).
2 Speeches Analyzed