Agenda Profile: Evelin Poolamets
Continuation of the second reading of the draft law amending the Child Protection Act and other laws (427 SE)
2024-12-03
15th Riigikogu, 4th session, plenary sitting
Political Position
The political focus is centered on the safety and protection of children, prioritizing this over measures aimed at reducing administrative burden and improving legal clarity. The speaker is strongly opposed to the government's proposed bill (427 SE), arguing that it removes safeguards that could potentially allow pedophiles to work in children's institutions again. This position is clearly value-based, emphasizing that putting children's safety at risk is unacceptable.
1 Speeches Analyzed
Topic Expertise
The speaker demonstrates expertise in child protection legislation and the mechanisms for managing criminal records, specifically referencing the role of the Social Insurance Board in lifting these restrictions. Concrete data is utilized regarding cases of child sexual abuse in Estonia, including statistics pertaining to the Eastern Prefecture as of November 2024. Emphasis is placed on understanding the unique vulnerability of children's institutions (including children's homes and care facilities).
1 Speeches Analyzed
Rhetorical Style
The rhetorical style is urgent, serious, and emotional, appealing to the morality and duty of the Riigikogu members toward children. Both logical arguments (analysis of the law's shortcomings) and powerful emotional appeals are employed, questioning whether they are prepared to risk the safety of even a single child. The address is formal and focuses on contrasting priorities (bureaucracy versus child protection).
1 Speeches Analyzed
Activity Patterns
Insufficient data.
1 Speeches Analyzed
Opposition Stance
The opposition is directed at the bill presented by the government, criticizing the fact that the changes are being called technical, even though they endanger children's safety. The criticism is policy-based, calling into question the government's priorities, which appear to favor reducing administrative burden over protecting children.
1 Speeches Analyzed
Collaboration Style
The speaker is urging all members of the Riigikogu to consider the flaws in the draft bill and not support it, demanding better solutions instead. There is no mention of direct cooperation or willingness to compromise with other factions; instead, the focus is on demanding unified opposition.
1 Speeches Analyzed
Regional Focus
The focus is clearly at the national level, addressing core issues concerning the welfare and legislation affecting Estonian children. The mention of cases from the East Prefecture is used solely to illustrate the scope of the problem nationwide, not as a regional priority.
1 Speeches Analyzed
Economic Views
Economic considerations are absent, but the speaker devalues the goal of reducing the administrative burden when it conflicts with child protection. This indicates a readiness to accept greater bureaucracy for the sake of social safety.
1 Speeches Analyzed
Social Issues
The primary social issue is child safety, the prevention of sexual abuse, and the protection of vulnerable children in care institutions. The speaker stresses the critical state of child welfare in Estonia, pointing also to the high suicide rate among young people, and calls for the strengthening of safety measures.
1 Speeches Analyzed
Legislative Focus
The legislative focus is currently on the opposition to Bill 427 SE (the Draft Act on Amendments to the Child Protection Act and Other Acts) during its second reading. The speaker is a strong opponent, calling for the rejection of the draft legislation and demanding that the welfare of children be placed at the core of the legislative process.
1 Speeches Analyzed