Session Profile: Mihkel Lees
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary session
2025-06-04
Political Position
The political position is cautious and Europe-centric, emphasizing the need to wait for a common European Union decision regarding the abolition of daylight saving time in order to avoid rushing the Estonian legal framework—or, as the saying goes, "running ahead of the train." At the same time, it is acknowledged that changing the clocks can have a negative impact on people's health. S2 stresses the importance of a unified daylight saving time (or unified time standard) for the functioning of the internal market.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Topic Expertise
The speakers demonstrate strong expertise regarding the transposition of European Union directives into the Estonian legal framework, particularly concerning the regulation of daylight saving time. S2 provides a detailed description of the procedural steps and voting results of the Riigikogu Social Affairs Committee, also highlighting the positions of ministry experts (e.g., Ingrid Põldsaar, Triinu Sillamaa).
2 Speeches Analyzed
Rhetorical Style
The style is formal and businesslike. S1 employs cautious, legalistic argumentation framed as a question. S2 is primarily a neutral and detailed procedural rapporteur, focusing on facts, voting outcomes, and procedures, adding only a brief personal note regarding the stagnation of the European debate.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Activity Patterns
The course of action involves active participation in the work of the Social Affairs Committee, where the draft legislation was prepared during two sessions (May 19 and June 2). S2 acts as the representative of the lead committee during the plenary session, presenting a comprehensive overview of the committee's discussions and procedural decisions.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Opposition Stance
S1 is opposed to Estonia unilaterally ending the practice of changing clocks, emphasizing procedural and legal inconsistencies. S2 reports conflicting viewpoints within the committee, where Irja Lutsar proposed rejecting the bill and Riina Solman requested a revote on the procedural decisions, though no direct personal attack was made.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Collaboration Style
The style of cooperation is open to involving experts from the ministries (Ministry of Social Affairs, Ministry of Economic Affairs and Communications) in the work of the commission. Several procedural decisions were made by consensus within the commission, but a decision regarding the rejection of the draft legislation could not be reached due to the voting result of 5 in favor and 5 against.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Regional Focus
There is no regional focus; the emphasis is placed on international (European Union directives) and national legislation, highlighting the need for a common European solution.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Economic Views
The economic perspectives are implicit, emphasizing the necessity of applying a unified daylight saving time for the smooth functioning of the internal market within the European Union, which signals support for a unified and stable regulatory environment.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Social Issues
The main social issue addressed is the potential negative impact of changing the clocks on people's health, which was confirmed by experts from the Ministry of Social Affairs and was not directly disputed in the committee.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Legislative Focus
The legislative focus is currently on the bill submitted by Mr. Grünthal regarding the termination of the switch to daylight saving time. S2, the representative of the lead committee, is reporting on the handling of the bill, which concluded in the committee with a deadlock (a 5:5 tie) concerning the motion to reject the bill.
2 Speeches Analyzed