Session Profile: Mati Raidma
Fifteenth Riigikogu, Third Session, Plenary Session.
2024-04-30
Political Position
The speaker strongly supports the draft bill aimed at aligning state fees with the actual costs of the procedures (the cost recovery principle). The political stance is policy-driven, emphasizing that state-provided services (such as expedited processing) should be charged as a benefit, alongside maintaining fiscal discipline. The speaker defends the sharp increases in fees, citing, for instance, the Police and Border Guard Board's (PPA) estimated prime cost for firearm permits, which even exceeds the new fee rate.
3 Speeches Analyzed
Topic Expertise
The speaker possesses deep expertise in the regulation of state fees and legislative procedure, particularly regarding identity documents, firearms permits, and vital statistics acts. They are proficient in technical terminology (cost-based principle, expedited procedure) and provide detailed examples, citing clarifications from ministry officials and cost calculations performed by the PPA (Police and Border Guard Board). Their role is to relay the knowledge of the committee and experts to the full assembly.
3 Speeches Analyzed
Rhetorical Style
The rhetorical style is formal and procedural, focusing on the neutral conveyance of the commission’s discussion and decisions. The speaker relies on logical arguments and quotes the responses of ministry experts, maintaining a calm and defensive tone when answering. In repeated answers to late questioners, he emphasizes that the answer has already been provided, which suggests a desire to be precise and avoid repetition.
3 Speeches Analyzed
Activity Patterns
The mode of operation involves representing the Steering Committee at the plenary session, where he/she submits a comprehensive report on the content and procedural decisions made during the previous committee meeting (April 16th). He/she is also actively involved in answering questions, repeatedly clarifying the responses that were provided in the committee.
3 Speeches Analyzed
Opposition Stance
The standoff is indirect, manifesting through the referencing of critical questions posed by colleagues (Pakosta, Kovalenko-Kõlvart) concerning the sharp rise in state fees. The criticism is immediately softened by presenting the ministry's policy- and cost-based justifications, for instance, explaining the high price of fast-track proceedings by pointing to their reduced duration.
3 Speeches Analyzed
Collaboration Style
The style of cooperation is open and procedure-centered, involving ministry officials and colleagues. The speaker reports in detail on the questions posed by other Riigikogu members and was appointed by consensus as the representative of the leading committee. He/She collaborates with representatives of the Ministry of the Interior, whose responses he/she conveys in the Riigikogu.
3 Speeches Analyzed
Regional Focus
No data available
3 Speeches Analyzed
Economic Views
Economic perspectives strongly endorse the cost principle for setting state levies, indicating fiscal discipline and the intent to avoid subsidizing public services. Expedited procedures are regarded as a highly taxed benefit, though it is recognized that exceptions apply to beneficiary groups.
3 Speeches Analyzed
Social Issues
The focus regarding social issues is on administrative procedures, such as birth registration, ID cards, and firearms licenses. Simultaneously, the preservation of social benefits is emphasized, mentioning that privileged groups receive a 50% discount when applying for an ID card. He/She explains that the regulations for the Estonian Defence League's firearms permits differ from those for civilian permits.
3 Speeches Analyzed
Legislative Focus
The legislative focus is currently on supporting and advancing the processing of the State Fees Bill, which covers citizenship, residence permits, and related documents. The presenter is the proponent of the draft legislation, having submitted motions to conclude the first reading and schedule the bill for the agenda, motions which successfully passed the committee vote (6 in favor, 3 opposed).
3 Speeches Analyzed