Agenda Profile: Andres Metsoja
Second reading of the draft law amending the Subsoil Act (435 SE)
2024-12-11
15th Riigikogu, 4th session, plenary session
Political Position
The political position is strongly opposed to draft bill 435 SE, labeling it bad and fundamentally unacceptable. The focus is on defending the principles of the rule of law, particularly the principle of legitimate expectation, which the speaker assesses the draft bill threatens. The political framework is a blend of legal analysis and economic justice, stressing that a compelling objective does not override legitimate expectation.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Topic Expertise
The speaker demonstrates thorough expertise in the areas of legal considerations, legitimate expectation, and administrative procedures, referencing the established positions of the Supreme Court and the Chancellor of Justice. Furthermore, they possess detailed knowledge regarding the regulation of the oil shale energy sector, market liberalization, and the objectives of supply security (specifically, dispatchable energy). They utilize analysis originating from the Legal and Analysis Department of the Chancellery of the Riigikogu (Parliament) and cite examples related to the annulment of the Rail Baltic planning.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Rhetorical Style
The rhetorical style is critical, analytical, and formal, relying primarily on logical and legal arguments. References are made to legislation and case law to highlight the fundamental error in the draft bill regarding its disregard for legitimate expectation. The style is comparative, drawing parallels with the construction of wind farms and Rail Baltic to illustrate the issues of business risk and lost profits.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Activity Patterns
The scope of activity was limited to two speeches delivered during the Riigikogu session on December 11 and the submission of a proposal by the Isamaa faction to suspend the reading of the draft bill. The speaker requested additional time from the session chair to present their positions.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Opposition Stance
The primary opponents are the bill's initiators (the government or the ministry), who face criticism for subverting the principles of the rule of law and for the unjust treatment of the private sector. The criticism targets both the underlying policy and the procedural aspects, specifically citing the preferential treatment given to the state-owned company Enefit in the allocation of oil shale resources. The speaker contends that the bill is designed to corner private market participants, a move that is neither fair nor sensible.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Collaboration Style
The approach to cooperation is faction-based, with the Isamaa faction submitting a motion on its behalf to suspend the reading of the bill. There is no evidence of cross-party cooperation or willingness to compromise regarding this specific bill, as the draft legislation is considered fundamentally unacceptable.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Regional Focus
The regional focus is directed towards major national projects (Rail Baltic) and the nationwide management of subsurface resources, particularly in the context of oil shale and offshore wind farms. Attention is concentrated on issues concerning Estonia's energy supply security and the achievement of climate goals at the national level.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Economic Views
Economic perspectives emphasize the principles of a market economy, equal competition among market participants, and the protection of private sector costs against state intervention. Criticism is leveled against the unfair allocation of the oil shale resource in favor of the state-owned company (Enefit), and there is a demand for the consideration of business risk and legitimate expectation. The draft legislation is criticized for leaving the costs entirely to be borne by the private sector.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Social Issues
Not enough data
2 Speeches Analyzed
Legislative Focus
The legislative focus is on strongly opposing Draft Bill 435 SE (Draft Act on Supplementing the Geological Resources Act) and initiating the interruption of its second reading. The subject of the bill is the suspension of mining permit procedures, which is linked to climate goals and the future Climate Act, the failure to adopt which is cited as a source of uncertainty.
2 Speeches Analyzed