Agenda Profile: Marek Reinaas
Continuation of the second reading of the draft law amending the Competition Act and, in connection therewith, amending other laws (609 SE)
2025-06-11
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary sitting
Political Position
The political stance is strongly supportive of the draft amendment to the Competition Act, highlighting the exceptional inclusiveness and democratic nature of its proceedings. Emphasis is placed on procedural correctness and the substantive necessity of the draft bill, particularly concerning the improvement of the operational capacity of the Competition Authority. The proposal by the Social Democratic Party faction to replace the draft entirely with the previously withdrawn text was rejected.
4 Speeches Analyzed
Topic Expertise
The speaker demonstrates profound expertise in legislative procedures, particularly concerning the work of the lead committee and the processing of proposed amendments. Technical terminology is employed, and detailed information is provided regarding the involved parties (e.g., the Estonian Bar Association, the Competition Authority) and the voting outcomes. The expertise further encompasses clarification of amendments to the Penal Code and related procedural matters.
4 Speeches Analyzed
Rhetorical Style
The speech is formal, explanatory, and procedural, characteristic of the role of a commission rapporteur presenting a detailed overview to the plenary. The emphasis lies on logical argumentation and the enumeration of facts, intended to demonstrate the broad scope of inclusion and the rigor of the procedure. Repeated emphasis is employed to stress that the process was "very inclusive" and "more than democratic."
4 Speeches Analyzed
Activity Patterns
The speaker is actively involved in legislative work, specifically coordinating steering committee meetings and working groups (dates mentioned: May 20, June 3, and June 5). This pattern of activity includes extensive consultation with more than 30 different organizations and institutions. The speech itself is a detailed report on past activities and proposes holding the final vote on June 17th.
4 Speeches Analyzed
Opposition Stance
The opposition focused on Amendment Proposal No. 1 submitted by the Social Democratic Party faction, which was clearly rejected by the leading committee (2 votes in favor, 6 against). Furthermore, the Legal Committee’s original Amendment Proposal No. 35 was also rejected, as the bill’s initiator presented an alternative that was substantively identical but formally superior.
4 Speeches Analyzed
Collaboration Style
The style of cooperation was open and compromise-driven, especially with the Ministry of Justice and Digital Affairs and the Competition Authority, whose proposals were widely taken into account. Emphasis was placed on the successful compromise reached with the Estonian Bar Association concerning issues related to the restriction of lawyers' rights. The scope of involvement was exceptionally broad, encompassing state institutions, courts, and professional associations alike.
4 Speeches Analyzed
Regional Focus
Insufficient data
4 Speeches Analyzed
Economic Views
Economic views center on regulatory efficiency, supporting the improvement of the Competition Authority's operational capacity through legislative amendments. Significant engagement and consideration are demonstrated regarding the interests of various economic organizations (e.g., the Chamber of Commerce and Industry, the Central Union of Employers, the Association of Small and Medium-sized Enterprises) in the shaping of regulations.
4 Speeches Analyzed
Social Issues
Insufficient data
4 Speeches Analyzed
Legislative Focus
The main legislative focus is the Draft Act on the Amendment of the Competition Act and related amendments to other acts (Bill 609 SE). The speaker, acting as the rapporteur for the lead committee, is a strong supporter and facilitator of the bill’s proceedings, emphasizing the adoption of 36 lead committee amendments, which improve the procedure and incorporate the proposals of the Competition Authority. The aim is to hold the final vote on June 17.
4 Speeches Analyzed