Agenda Profile: Vladimir Arhipov
Draft law amending the Emergency Situations Act (589 SE) - Second Reading
2025-04-23
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary session
Political Position
The speaker supports the amendments to the Emergency Situation Act despite acknowledging the sufficiency of the current law. They emphasize the importance of legislative clarity for the public, arguing that decisions should be made in parliament, not through departmental circulars. The speaker also criticizes the handling of the law concerning reservists' compensation, which was left unvoted upon and delegated to a narrow circle.
1 Speeches Analyzed
Topic Expertise
Demonstrates a strong understanding of the Emergency Situation Act, referencing specific sections (§38, §37 subsection 2) and the scope of their application. Exhibits knowledge in the fields of cybersecurity and risk management, including awareness of the limited number of specialists in Estonia. Uses precise legal terminology and shows familiarity with the structure of the Act.
1 Speeches Analyzed
Rhetorical Style
Uses an official but accessible tone, starting by thanking veterans to establish an emotional connection. It balances criticism with constructive proposals, acknowledging problems while still supporting the bill. It concludes with a positive note regarding the clarity of the legislation, demonstrating a conciliatory approach.
1 Speeches Analyzed
Activity Patterns
During the specified period, activity was limited to a single speech concerning the Emergency Situation Act. The structure of the speech indicates thorough preparation and prior analysis of the subject matter. There is insufficient data regarding regular patterns of public appearance.
1 Speeches Analyzed
Opposition Stance
The criticism of the current system is moderate, pointing out that the relevant agencies lack the necessary competence for oversight. Dissatisfaction is expressed regarding the handling of the reservists' compensation legislation, but a constructive tone is maintained. There are no personal attacks; the focus remains on highlighting systemic problems.
1 Speeches Analyzed
Collaboration Style
Demonstrates a willingness to cooperate by supporting the bill despite existing reservations. It emphasizes the support of the Centre Party faction and justifies this stance by citing the common good. It expresses a desire for improved legislation that would provide clarity serving the interests of all.
1 Speeches Analyzed
Regional Focus
Insufficient data.
1 Speeches Analyzed
Economic Views
Expresses concern regarding the scarcity of resources, noting that there is insufficient time or funding to outsource the necessary supervision/oversight. It emphasizes the shortage of specialists within Estonia and their resulting heavy workload, demonstrating a pragmatic approach to resource planning.
1 Speeches Analyzed
Social Issues
Not enough data.
1 Speeches Analyzed
Legislative Focus
It focuses on improving the Emergency Situation Act and increasing the clarity of the legislation. It supports the draft bill based on the principle that laws must be understandable to the public and decisions should be made in parliament. It criticizes the delegation of the reservists' law, stressing the parliament's role in crucial matters.
1 Speeches Analyzed