Agenda Profile: Evelin Poolamets
Draft law amending the Family Benefits Act and other laws (507 SE) – first reading
2024-10-14
15th Estonian Parliament, 4th session, plenary sitting
Political Position
The political position is strongly opposed to the amendment to the Family Benefits Act, which ceases the payment of health insurance for parents raising up to two children once the youngest child turns three years old. This stance is value-driven, emphasizing the "unprecedented and cruel" impact of the change on women's health and employment. The speaker demands a thorough analysis of the policy's consequences and considers alternative solutions, such as extending the insurance until the child reaches the age of five or six.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Topic Expertise
The speaker demonstrates expertise at the intersection of social insurance, health insurance, and labor law, highlighting employers' reluctance to hire mothers of small children. This expertise is manifested in a demand for comprehensive impact analyses that would address the direct consequences of losing health insurance on the worsening of chronic diseases and general health impairments. Specific emphasis is placed on the effect of these health impairments on women's future fertility.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Rhetorical Style
The rhetorical style is sharp, accusatory, and emotional, utilizing strong phrases such as "unprecedented and cruel." The speaker poses a series of hypothetical yet concrete questions to highlight the negative social and health consequences of the change, focusing on an ethical appeal. The style is formal, but the tone is urgent and demanding, particularly regarding the unanswered questions.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Activity Patterns
The pattern of activity is limited to two consecutive questions posed to the minister during the Riigikogu session. These questions took place on a single day and focused on the same bill. This indicates active participation in the first reading of the specific draft law. There is no data regarding other appearances or the frequency of activity.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Opposition Stance
The primary opposition is aimed directly at the government and/or the minister responsible for the amendment to the Family Benefits Act. The criticism is intense and multifaceted, covering both procedural deficiencies (specifically, the lack of an impact assessment) and the ethical harm caused by the policy itself. Instead of seeking a compromise, the demand is for answers and the serious consideration of alternative solutions.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Collaboration Style
There is no information regarding willingness to cooperate or compromise, as the statements were presented as direct and critical questions to the minister. The focus is on holding the opposing side accountable and highlighting shortcomings.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Regional Focus
The focus is entirely at the level of national social security and healthcare policy. There are no specific references to local regions, industries, or international issues.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Economic Views
Economic views stress the need to maintain social protection measures (like health insurance payments) for parents of young children in order to alleviate the disadvantages they face in the labor market. The speaker highlights that employers are not hiring women with small children, which demonstrates concern over both the labor force and social security.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Social Issues
The main social issue concerns the health and well-being of young mothers, highlighting the impact that the loss of health insurance has on the exacerbation of chronic illnesses and future fertility. The speaker strongly advocates for the protection of mothers' social security and health, criticizing the government's actions as cruel.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Legislative Focus
The legislative focus is on opposing the draft Act (507 SE) amending the Family Benefits Act and other related acts, and demanding its modification. The speaker is acting as an opponent, demanding an analysis of the draft’s consequences and offering alternative solutions, such as extending insurance coverage until the child reaches the age of five or six.
2 Speeches Analyzed