Agenda Profile: Evelin Poolamets
Draft Law on the Organisation of Research and Development and Innovation (554 SE) - First Reading
2025-02-26
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary session
Political Position
The political position is aimed at the critical analysis of the details of the Research and Development Act draft. Strong emphasis is placed on the necessity of preventing conflicts of interest when handling research ethics, and questions are raised regarding the social risks associated with the independent participation of minors in studies. The focus is policy-driven and cautious, seeking clarification regarding the potential negative consequences of the draft legislation.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Topic Expertise
The speaker demonstrates detailed knowledge of the provisions of the draft Research and Development Act, referencing specific sections (section 4) and financial limitations (up to 3000 euros). The expertise focuses on the mechanisms for processing research ethics and the regulations governing the participation of minors in studies. Technical questions are raised concerning limitations on different types of research (clinical trials versus social studies).
2 Speeches Analyzed
Rhetorical Style
The rhetorical style is formal and interrogative, addressing the minister respectfully ("Dear Minister"). Logical appeals are employed, focusing on highlighting the potential risks associated with the draft bill's provisions (conflict of interest, unequal access). The speaker quotes the provisions of the draft bill and demands justification for these specific stipulations (for example, concerning the age limit).
2 Speeches Analyzed
Activity Patterns
The activity patterns demonstrate active participation in the Riigikogu session on February 26, 2025, by consecutively submitting two detailed questions during the first reading of the draft legislation. This pattern is aimed at the rapid and critical scrutiny of specific statutory provisions during the course of the session.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Opposition Stance
The opposition is focused on the critical examination of specific provisions and mechanisms within the draft bill, rather than outright comprehensive rejection. The criticism is policy-driven, raising questions about the mitigation of ethical and social risks, particularly concerning paid services and the evaluation of minors' maturity.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Collaboration Style
Not enough data.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Regional Focus
Not enough data.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Economic Views
Economic concerns revolve around the fee-based mechanism (up to 3000 euros) for processing research ethics procedures. It is feared that this could create a conflict of interest or make the resolution of ethical issues unequally accessible to researchers, citing concerns regarding accessibility and equity.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Social Issues
The social focus is on the protection and rights of minors (15-year-olds) participating in scientific research. Questions are being raised about whether the draft legislation ensures adequate maturity and protection for these young people, particularly in situations where parental consent is absent. Furthermore, emphasis is placed on ensuring equal access to research ethics for all scientists.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Legislative Focus
The legislative focus is on scrutinizing the details of the Draft Act on the Organization of Research, Development, and Innovation (Bill 554 SE). The priority is to ensure the transparency of ethical oversight and the adequacy of regulations governing the participation of minors, while acting as a critical scrutinizer of the draft legislation.
2 Speeches Analyzed