Agenda Profile: Andres Metsoja
First Reading of the Draft Act on Amending the Atmospheric Air Protection Act (393 SE)
2024-03-20
15th Riigikogu, 3rd session, plenary sitting
Political Position
The speaker supports the original idea of the draft legislation, which stems from the input of the Chancellor of Justice, but expresses strong concern regarding the ambiguity of the provision. The central issue is the procedural complexity involved in granting exceptions to local governments concerning noise target values and coordinating these exceptions with the Health Board. The political framework is rather policy- and procedure-focused, emphasizing clarity in implementation.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Topic Expertise
The speaker demonstrates knowledge of administrative law and environmental health regulations, using specific terminology such as "target value in the context of noise" and "coordination phase." Particular emphasis is placed on the draft bill's impact on the planning phase and the role of the Chancellor of Justice in the legislative process. This knowledge is applied using practical examples (a rooster) to test the boundaries of the law.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Rhetorical Style
The style is in two parts: first, it is analytical and inquisitive, focusing on legal clarity and the complexity inherent in the work of public officials. The second part employs an anecdotal and humorous approach (the rooster saga in Pärnu) to illustrate the practical limits of the law and the difficulty of defining noise. The overall tone is factual and businesslike, yet contains a touch of irony.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Activity Patterns
Based on the data, the speaker addressed the session twice, focusing on the specifics of the draft legislation and practical implementation questions. Previous interaction with the session chair concerning the Pärnu Nature House was noted, indicating engagement extending beyond the scope of the current proceedings.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Opposition Stance
There is no direct opposition to specific political groups; the criticism is aimed at the ambiguity of the draft's provisions and the complexity of administrative procedures (Local Authorities vs. the Health Board). The speaker focuses more on the inherent logical flaws of the law itself rather than attacking political opponents.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Collaboration Style
The speaker refers to the input provided by the Chancellor of Justice as the basis for the draft bill, thereby demonstrating respect for institutional contributions. Previous cooperation with the session chair in resolving a regional matter (the Pärnu Nature House) is also mentioned, which indicates an openness to collaboration.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Regional Focus
The speaker introduces a specific regional focus, referencing the city of Pärnu and the noise issue that arose there concerning the nature house and a rooster. This regional example is being used to test the practical application of the law in an urban environment and to broaden the definition of noise.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Economic Views
Insufficient data.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Social Issues
It addresses social issues through the lens of environmental noise, focusing on protecting the quality of life and public health in urban areas. Specific attention is also drawn to the conflict between the definition of natural sounds (such as a rooster) and urban noise, and the necessity of regulating this distinction.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Legislative Focus
The main legislative focus is on the draft amendment (Bill 393 SE) to the Atmospheric Air Protection Act, specifically concerning the regulation of noise target values and exemptions. The speaker's role is that of a critical interrogator, demanding clarity regarding the legislative procedure for coordination between the Local Authorities and the Health Board.
2 Speeches Analyzed