Session Profile: Arvo Aller
The 15th Riigikogu, VI Session, Plenary Sitting
2025-10-15
Political Position
The political position is fiercely opposed to the European Union budget proposal, which is viewed as a threat to the sovereignty and fiscal independence of member states. This stance is value-driven, highlighting the dangers of centralization and the linking of ideological conditions (such as the 'green frenzy' or LGBTX issues) to financial disbursements. The speaker pessimistically asserts that the budget is "one big bubble" and that the negotiations are leading nowhere.
1 Speeches Analyzed
Topic Expertise
The speaker demonstrates proficiency regarding the structure of the European Union budget (restructuring of headings, activity-based disbursement) and agricultural policy (CAP, reduction of subsidies). Technical terms such as "basic income support" are used, and the impact of imposing additional levies on member states is analyzed. The budget is directly linked to issues of food security and regional stability.
1 Speeches Analyzed
Rhetorical Style
The rhetorical style is combative, critical, and pessimistic, employing strong negative language and name-calling (e.g., "green madness," "the ignoramuses"). The speaker stresses the logical consequences (a decline in food security and regional stability), but concludes with the emotional assertion that the negotiations are "one big sham." The tone is cautionary and deeply concerned.
1 Speeches Analyzed
Activity Patterns
Insufficient data.
1 Speeches Analyzed
Opposition Stance
The main opponent is the European Commission and the EU's central leadership, who are criticized for ideological conditionality and the stripping away of sovereignty. Domestic criticism is directed at the government, which is called "laymen" regarding agriculture and fails to take farmers into account. The criticism is policy- and value-based, and compromise is ruled out.
1 Speeches Analyzed
Collaboration Style
Insufficient data.
1 Speeches Analyzed
Regional Focus
The focus is on international topics (the EU budget), but this is directly related to Estonia's regional issues, especially the decrease in support for rural areas and agriculture. The danger to food security and the potential outflow of residents from rural areas is highlighted if engaging in agriculture becomes secondary.
1 Speeches Analyzed
Economic Views
The speaker is vehemently opposed to the introduction of new EU taxes, viewing this as both a loss of sovereignty and a reduction in member states' tax revenues. They advocate for supporting agriculture to guarantee food security and criticize taxes (such as usufruct fees and land taxes) that complicate farming operations. The preference is for national fiscal control and subsidies directed toward primary sectors.
1 Speeches Analyzed
Social Issues
Social issues are being treated as an example of ideological conditionality imposed by the European Commission. Specifically, the "non-fulfillment of LGBTX matters, their associated sensitivities, or related activities" is cited as grounds for suspending financial disbursements. This indicates opposition to linking social agendas with EU funding.
1 Speeches Analyzed
Legislative Focus
The main focus is on opposing and criticizing the European Union budget framework, warning about its negative consequences for Estonian agriculture and regional development. The speaker acts as a dissenter, rather than primarily as an initiator of new legislation.
1 Speeches Analyzed